Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan -- Print Summary All
delogosmall.gif (3443 bytes) Iowa Department of Education iowa_flag_new.gif (1508 bytes)

School Year:    
F o r m:    
  District:  0540     Name:  BCLUW Comm School District
Division of PK-12 Education
Print Summary All 2010-2011
District allowed to certify on or after: 9/1/2011
District certification due date: 9/15/2011
Five-Year Site Visit Plan within 2009-2010 -- 2013-2014
 
CSIP Answers Cannot Be Changed.
The entire certification process has been completed for this district.
CSIP answers have been automatically ported over to a future year to be modified.

CSIP answers have been started for a newer school year, this year's answers can no longer be changed or certified.

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan
I. What do data tell us about our student-learning needs?
The district collects the following required data: (LRDA1)
  •  Trend line and subgroup data for ITBS/ITED reading and mathematics at grades 4, 8, and 11
  •  Trend line data for ITBS/ITED science for grades 4, 8 and 11
  •  Graduation rate
  •  Grade 7-12 dropout percentages (aggregate and by subgroup)
  •  Percentage of graduates planning to pursue postsecondary education
  •  Percentage of graduates completing the core curriculum (4 years of English, 3 years each of mathematics, science, and social studies)
  •  Career and technical education (CTE) student data (e.g., 11th grade participants’ proficiency in reading and mathematics, program completers, and occupational competency)
  •  Percentage of high school students achieving a score or status on a measure indicating probable postsecondary success. Our district uses the American College Test (ACT).
  •  Trend line data from the Iowa Youth Survey (grades 6, 8, and 11) (SDF1, SDF3, and SDF4)
  •  A comprehensive, community-wide needs assessment which includes input from stakeholders (completed once every five-years) (LC3)
  •    Compass (grade 11)
  •  Scholastic Reading Inventory (grades 2-8)
  •  CoGAT (grade 4)
  •  GATES McGinniety (k-2)
  •  Building Tomorrow Survey
  •  Data from the Measurement of Academic Progress (grades 3 through 11)
  •  Participation rates for required district-wide assessments (grades 3-8, 11)
  •  Aggregate and subgroup attendance data (grades K-12)
  •  Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literary Skills (DIBELS) data (grades K-3)

These data have been used to establish trend lines, which are updated annually and reported in our Annual Progress Report (APR). Using National Percentile Rank (NPR) information from the ITBS and ITED assessments, we also monitor the progress of each peer group over time in the areas of reading comprehension, mathematics, and science. (LRDA1)

The BCLUW district believes that the required measures of academic achievement stated above do not provide a complete picture of its students’ learning needs. In support of this belief, we asked ourselves this: “To what questions do we want the answers?” through our local DDL process and proceeded to collect and analyze information on a variety of other indicators including the following:
  •  Basic Educational Data Survey (BEDS) data (e.g., course offerings and enrollment information by course/gender)
  •  ITBS/ITED data for other grade levels and subject areas (grades 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, & 10)
  •  Student work/course grades (grades 7-12)
  •  Student discipline data (e.g., office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions) (grades 5-12) (SDF1, SDF3)
  •  Student participation in the district’s breakfast and lunch program (grades K-12)
  •  Referrals to General Education Intervention teams (grades K-12)
District Leadership Team (DLT)
The superintendent convenes a District Leadership Team (DLT) that meets at least four times per year. The team is comprised of representative teachers from each building, the principals, and AEA267. This group reviews information from Building Leadership Teams (BLTs) and collects and analyzes district-level data District level ITBS/ITED data). In addition, information regarding the implementation of actions and activities to support current district goals is collected and analyzed to help identify future student learning and program needs. The DLT ensures that the action plans designed to meet district goals include specific outcomes for each activity designed to support the proposed actions. Implementation data on these activities is also collected and analyzed by the DLT. These data, along with implementation data from state and federal programs and services, are incorporated into annual conversations about supports for established student needs, adjustments to actions, programs and services, and progress toward district goals.

Building Leadership Team (BLT)
Each building in the district has a BLT that is responsible for keeping their building abreast of DLT work. Each BLT consists of two to three teachers, and the principal meets on a regular basis. Members examine ITBS/ITED item analysis information and frequency data (e.g., the number of special education students and low socioeconomic students scoring at or below the 40th percentile), as well as building specific indicator data (e.g., other grade level assessments, discipline data, graduation rate, TAG participation/performance and attendance). This information is then shared and discussed with the rest of the building staff during faculty meetings.

Stakeholder Groups
District and building information reviewed by the DLT and BLTs is shared with various stakeholder groups, including the BCLUW school board, BCLUW School Improvement Advisory Committee (SIAC), BCLUW Parent Educator Partnership (PEP), district patrons, students, and various community organizations.

The SIAC studies and discusses data from the DLT and summarizes the findings. The SIAC then makes recommendations to the board regarding district-wide prioritized needs, possible adjustments to CSIP goals, and the programs and services provided to students. The BCLUW school board makes decisions based on these recommendations.
Through analysis of district and building data and comparisons with the state’s student performance trajectories, the following was learned: (LRDA1, LRDA2, LRDA3, and LRDA4)
  •  All trend lines on the ITBS and ITED assessments show performance above the state trajectory in reading and mathematics. (grades 4, 8, 11)
  •  One hundred percent of our students participated in all district-wide assessments. (grades K-11)
  •  Kindergarten DIBELS results on phoneme segmentation show 91% are in the highest performance (established) category.
  •  First grade DIBELS results on oral reading fluency show 85% are in the highest performance (established) category.
  •  Trend line data for middle school students indicate that student performance is increasing over time in reading and math. (grades 6-8)
  •  Performance (proficiency) of students with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) is above the state average of students with IEP''''s in reading and math. (grades 4, 8, & 11)
  •  The percent of fourth, eighth and eleventh grade low socioeconomic students in reading and math performing at or above the proficient level is above the state average. (grades 4, 8, 11)
  •  Graduation rates are high for the general population students.
  •  The percentage of high school seniors completing the core (4 years of English and 3 years each of mathematics, science, and social studies) is 88.4% of the 2006 graduates.
  •  There were 63 % of secondary students and in 2007 47.4% reduced from 77 % of 4th grade students reporting that other students tease them on the 2004 Building Tomorrows survey. (SDF2, SDF4)
  •  In 2004, 33% of students in grade 11 reported at least occasional use of alcohol. (SDF2, SDF4)

Spring of 2007, the district distributed a comprehensive needs assessment survey to a sampling of parents. Through analysis ofthe survey data, the district learned the following: (LC3)
  •  84% of Parents agreed that the school expects quality work of its students.
  •  93% of Parents agreed that they felt welcome at their child’s school.
  •  89% of parents reported that they agreed that the schools were safe. (SDF4)
  •  Students reported that they found what they learned in school was relevant to real life was low for the high school.
  •  Students from both the high school and middle school reported that self-directed learning was low.
Based on the data reviewed, we developed the following list of prioritized student needs: (LC4)
  •  Improve Reading Comprehension in all content areas grades k-12 as measured by standardized assessments.
  •  Improve academic performance in math as measured by standardized assessments.
  •  Improve academic performance in science as measured by standardized assessments.During the spring and fall of 2003 the building and district leadership teams looked carefully at the district standards and benchmarks and the district-wide tests that measured the reading and math standards and benchmarks. After examining the data, the leadership teams decided that reading comprehension was the area in need of most immediate attention.   In the fall of 2003 all of the teachers in grades 3-12 met together to work through the ITAP process. They met in grade level groupings and went through the questions on the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, our local grade level/course assessments, and the Work Keys tests. The teachers used the Alignment-Checking Matrix completing the comparison of cognitive level of each question to the cognitive level of each grade level benchmark under each of the district standards. Each test and subtest that addressed any of our district standards and benchmarks in the areas of reading/language, math, and science were examined.

The math, language, and science teachers compared their standards and benchmarks to the recommended core S&B from the Iowa Department of Education. Additions were made where necessary to the local S&B to see that we had complete coverage at the district level.

In the spring of 2004, the district joined the Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium (MISIC) and adopted the Measurement of Academic Performance (MAP) test. As a result, all reading, math and science staff aligned existing standards and benchmarks to those from MISIC. In addition K-2 teachers looked at the alignment between test questions and district benchmarks using the DIBELS, QRI, and Gates-MacGinitie assessments.

Focusing on reading comprehension, the building leadership teams met together and examined all of the teaching/learning skills that comprised reading comprehension and again looked at the standardized test data for these sub-skills. After identifying these skills, research was reviewed that focused on improving the various areas of reading comprehension. After the review of literature, the leadership teams narrowed the field to three research-based practices that were the best match for our shown needs, and selected the one that we decided should help us achieve the most growth in reading comprehension, Thinking Maps.

After further examination of Thinking Maps it was adopted as a district-wide initiative for all K-12 staff in all curricular areas. This was the focus of all inservice activities during the 2004-05 school year . During 2005-2006 school year staff were trained and implemented the Read Aloud strategy in all content areas with the focus on improving reading comprehension. During the 2006-2007 school years we trained staff in the Think Aloud strategies and continued implementation of Thinking Maps and Read Alouds. We will continue implementation of Thinking Maps and Aloud strategies during the 2007-2008 school year with the desire to improve reading comprehension.   For the 2010-11 school year, BCLUW received a series of training from Dr. James Davis on The Iowa Writing Project, intended to support classroom use of reading and writing strategies. In addition, BCLUW elementary is receiving training in KU writing strategies for the 2011-12 school year. K-12 staff have also received training in the 2010-11 and 2011-12 school years on using technology to promote differentiated instruction.

R4 initiatives have been started in the high school and middle school in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 respectively . The intent of this initiative is to improve the rigor and relevance of classroom instruction which addresses the identified need reported by students to make school more relevant to the real world. Strengthening relationships between students and school is an important part of this initiative also.



...

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan
II. What do/will we do to meet student-learning needs?
Based upon recommendations of the District Leadership Team and the School Improvement Advisory Committee (SIAC), the school board has adopted district goals aligned with student needs. (LC5)
District Student Learning Goals
BCLUW’s student learning goals are the general expectations for all its graduates. Students graduating from BCLUW Community School District will be able to do the following: (LC6)

  •  Contribute to a caring, safe and respectful environment
  •  Communicate effectively
  •  Recognize, understand, and appreciate differences
  •  Be an effective problem solver
  •  Develop positive relationships and work collaboratively
  •  Develop into a responsible, self-motivated learners



District Long-Range Goals
BCLUW’s long-range goals define the desired targets to be reached over an extended period of time. These long-range goals serve two purposes: 1) to meet locally determined student needs goals and 2) to address state and federal student accountability.

Goal 1:    All K-12 students will achieve at high levels in reading comprehension, prepared for success beyond high school. (LRG1, MCGF3, AR6, EIG1)
   
The following indicators will measure district progress with Goal 1:
1a. Percentage of students who score at the proficient level or above (41st percentile or above using national norms) on the ITBS Reading Comprehension Test in grades 3 through 8 and the ITED Reading Comprehension Test in grade 11, including data disaggregated by subgroup.
1b. Percentage of students in grades 2-3 who are independent readers at grade level on the DIBELS.

Goal 2:     All K-12 students will achieve at high levels in mathematics, prepared for success beyond high school. (LRG2, LRG3, AR6, EIG1)
   
The following indicators will measure district progress with Goal 2:
2a. Percentage of students who score at the proficient level or above (41st percentile or above using national norms) on the ITBS Mathematics Total Test in grades 3 through 8 and the ITED Mathematics Test in grade 11, including data disaggregated by subgroup.
2b. Percentage of students in grades 4, 8, and 11 who achieve at the proficient level or above on the NWEA MAP Test.

Goal 3:     All K-12 students will achieve at high levels in science, prepared for success beyond high school. (LRG3, MCGF3, AR6, EIG1)

The following indicators will measure district progress with Goal 3:
3a. Percentage of students who score at the proficient level or above (41st percentile or above using national norms) on the ITBS Science Test in grades 5 and 8 and the ITED Science Test in grade 11, including data disaggregated by subgroup.
3b. Percentage of students in grades 4, 8, and 11 who achieve at the proficient level or above on the NWEA Map Test.

Goal 4:    All K-12 students will use technology in developing proficiency in reading, mathematics, and science. (FTP1)

    The following indicator will measure district progress with Goal 4:
4a. The indicators identified for Goals 1, 2, and 3.
4b. Percentage of students participating in NWEA Map Testing

       

Goal 5:     All students will feel safe at and connected to school.

The following indicators will measure district progress with goal 5:
5a. Attendance rate as measured by the average daily attendance data calculated and reported on the Certified Annual Report (CAR).
5b. Graduation rate as calculated by the Iowa Department of Education using data from the spring BEDS report.
5c. Percentage of the student body in middle and high school that receive discipline referrals (i.e., office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions). (SDF5, SDF6, SDF7)
5d. Percentage of students in grades 4-12 that report that they have used alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs on the AEA267 Building Tomorrow: Culture and Climate Partnership Survey. (SDF5, SDF6, SDF7).
The stakeholders impacted by our goals should have a voice in determining how to meet them. As a result, the BCLUW District Leadership Team and the SIAC will continue to identify stakeholder groups most directly impacted, and they will meet to determine actions and strategies to meet the goals. Our district will continue to use the Iowa Professional Development Model process to develop its District Career Development Plan and an action research design to guide conversations and assist making goal progress. As actions are developed by the district leadership teams to support each goal, implementation plans will be developed at the appropriate levels to provide K-12 system alignment of efforts.1. Instructional Strategies Currently Used in the District
  •  Thinking Maps (k-12)
Implemented 1/04, selected from SBR, through the content network, supported with peer-coaching
  •  Reading in the Content Area (k-12)
  •  Leveled math groups (6-12)
  •  Daily Oral Language (2-8)
  •  Standards-Based Instruction
  •  KU Strategies for Language Arts (6-8)
  •  Read Alouds, Think Alouds (K-12)
  •  Second Chance Reading (5-12)
Iowa Core - Characteristics of Effective Instruction (K-12)

  •  R4 (5-12)
Adoption of Full Option Science System to enhance scientific inquiry (5-8)


2. Instructional Programs/Services Supports Currently Used in the District
  •  District Career Development Plan (Professional Development Program K-12)
  •  At-risk Program/Services (K-12)
  •  Gifted and Talented Program/Services (TAG) (3-12)
  •  Special Education Program/Services (preK-12)
  •  Mentoring and Induction Program
  •  Alternative High School (9-12)
  •    General Education Intervention Team (preK-12)
  •  Student service partnerships (e.g., community health services) (preK-12)
  •  Technology-based reading program
  •  Perkins: Vocational and Technical Education Programs (9-12)
  •  Tech Prep Dual Credit Courses
  •  Title I, Part A: Reading Program/Services (1-4)
  •  Title II, Part D: Technology Usage
  •  Title III, Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students (K-12)
  •  Title IV: Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program/Services

3. System-wide Management Supports Currently Used in the District
  •  Peer Coaching
  •  Lighthouse –Iowa Association of School Boards
  •  Resource allocation (e.g., financial and personnel)
  •  Technology (e.g., data management system and infrastructure)
  •  Policy development
  •  Personnel evaluation systems (includes administrators, teachers, and paraeducators)
  •  Curriculum development
  •  Iowa Technical Adequacy Project (ITAP) (curriculum/assessment alignment)
  •  Leadership for CSIP implementation
  •  AEA267 Marshalltown Region Consultants
  •  Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium (MISIC)Using an action research process facilitated through the Lighthouse Project, we considered the available research base and local student data. Through the study of local student data by board, administration, district leadership team, teachers, and community members, it was determined by each independent group that a major focus should be the improvement of reading comprehension at all grade levels. The research of literature on best practice reading strategies was reviewed by the district leadership team. The DLT narrowed strategies down to five strategies before selecting Thinking Maps as the initial strategy for implementation. We relied upon the Iowa Content Area Networks, the AEA, and IASB experts to access information about practices supported by scientifically-based research. Following the same research process additional strategies of Read Alouds and Think Alouds to improve reading comprehension.

Current Practices Supported by Research and/or Local Data. The district has determined that research and/or local student data support the implementation of Thinking Maps related to the goal areas and all content areas. This practice includes the following: Circle Map (defining in context); Bubble Map (describing qualities); Double Bubble (comparing and contrasting); Tree Map (classifying); Brace Map (part-whole); Flow Map (sequencing); Multi-Flow Map (cause and effect); Bridge Map (analogies). Peer-coaching was implemented. Bi-weekly data is collected from each peer-coaching group in the form of: number of times teachers and students are using Read Alouds and Think Alouds ; student and teacher artifacts are collected to create a building reference portfolio; and team logs are collected to document the use of peer-coaching. Questions, comments and concerns from team logs are used by the DLT to determine the direction of the next professional development.
               
Research Needed. The District Leadership Team will establish timelines within the next five years for further areas of study to evaluate math and science.

Program/Services Current Practice. The administrators, teachers, board, and community will continue to use the DDL process to determine progress toward improvement in reading comprehension and future initiatives. This data will determine program effectiveness relative to CSIP and other program goals.

Curriculum/Assessment Alignment. We have developed standards and benchmarks in all content areas. We have focused on aligning our reading and mathematics curriculum, both vertically and horizontally. We completed an alignment review of our curriculum and district-wide assessments during 2002, and 2003 using the Iowa Technical Adequacy (ITAP) process. In the fall of 2003 all of the teachers in grades 3-12 met together to complete the ITAP process. They met in grade level groupings and went through the questions on the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, our local grade level/course assessments, and the Work Keys tests. The teachers used the Alignment-Checking Matrix completing the comparison of cognitive level of each question to the cognitive level of each grade level benchmark under each of the district standards. Each test and subtest that aligned with our district standards and benchmarks in the areas of reading/language, math, and science were examined.

The math, language, and science teachers compared their standards and benchmarks to the recommended core S&B from the Iowa Department of Education. Additions were made where necessary to the local S&B to see that we had complete coverage at the district level.

In the spring of 2004, the district adopted the Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium (MISIC) Measures of Academic Performance (MAP) test. As a result, all reading, math and science staff aligned existing standards and benchmarks to those from MISIC.

For the 2011-12 school year, BCLUW staff K - 12 will begin the Iowa Core iCAT curriculum alignment process.


Instructional Strategy Decisions. In review of our instructional practices, it became apparent that we have some practices with a documented research base, some practices with a weak research base, and some practices with no research base. Within the next five years, we must continue to address the following two issues:
1) The discontinuation of practices that are not supported by research or have not produced evidence of contributing to positive student results, and
2)     The consistent implementation of strategies that are research-based and/or have contributed to gains in student achievement.

Thinking Maps. In the process of considering possible gaps in reading and mathematics practices, we studied the area of reading comprehension. Research on the use of Thinking Maps is documented to show improvement in all k-12 curriculum areas. Knowing that Thinking Maps have a research base, we are implementing Thinking Maps with fidelity through a research proven peer-coaching process. We reviewed the literature base and are confident that Thinking Maps are well grounded in the literature. We are examining implementation data and find evidence the strategies are being implemented at all levels.



Read and Think Alouds. We also studied research related to Alouds. The research base on Alouds is well documented. We have studied the literature and these strategies were implemented beginning the 2005-06 school year.

Mathematics Instruction. In the process of identifying an area of need, mathematics was considered behind reading comprehension. Thinking Maps were selected for their impact on reading comprehension. We believe reading comprehension crosses all discipline areas. If improvement in mathematics is not observed through data collection, then mathematics instruction may become the next area that we begin to study the research to select strategies to improve mathematics instruction.In the middle school, the E2T2 initiative focused problem based instructional tasks to improve instruction in the classroom.
1.Implement the district career development plan (professional development program). (AMN1, AMN2, IEI1, PERK1, SPED1, TQ7) Our district career development plan describes district-level professional development efforts aligned with prioritized student needs. In reading, the professional development target will be reading comprehension. In mathematics, the emphasis will be on problem solving. The selection of the professional development target was based on student data and compared to staff perceptions. Teacher practices were also studied to help identify professional development needs. This aligns with long range goals #1, #2, and #4.(PD6, TQ1, TQ2) The plan describes a cycle in which professional development efforts will be targeted at student learning and sustained until student gains are acquired. At least 80 percent of professional development time and resources in 2008-2009 will focus on maintaining the integrity of Alouds implementation. (TQ3, TQ4, FTP3, LEP1) The board has approved additional staff development early outs. Staff development will continue to utilize both part and full day staff development to improve student achievement as identified through the Iowa Professional Development Model.
      Research-based Strategies. Our district leadership team reviewed research on the strategies to improve reading comprehension and found three strategies that have resulted in significant student achievement gains: Thinking Maps, Reciprocal Teaching, and Think Alouds. We applied and will continue to use, the following federal criteria to determine if a program/strategy has a quality research base: a) Evidence of positive student results demonstrated by research that employed systematic empirical methods and b) The research was described in studies that demonstrated the use of rigorous, systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid knowledge relevant to education activities and programs. (PD5, SDF9)
    Participation. All teachers will be engaged in training, including those responsible for Title I, Special Education, At-Risk, ELL, and Gifted and Talented. The principals and central office staff will also be actively involved. We will work with the AEA to ensure that we are following the Iowa Professional Development model. (PERK1, SPED1, LEP1, TQ8) Peer-coaching was implemented. Bi-weekly data is collected from each peer-coaching group in the form of: number of times teachers and students are using Alouds; student and teacher artifacts are collected to create a building reference portfolio; and team logs are collected to document the use of peer-coaching. Questions, comments and concerns from team logs are used by the DLT to determine the direction of the next professional development.
    Professional Development Content. Beginning with 2003-2004 school year, professional instructional staff will implement the following instructional strategies: (FTP2, FTP4, FTP5) a) Thinking Maps b)Technology Integration c) Alouds
    All staff members will continue to implement the IPDM by studying their student performance data and implementation data, while working on selected strategies, currently Alouds. Peer Coaching groups review the Aloud strategies, discuss, and share with their peers the results from student performance using the Alouds.
    Alignment with the IA Teaching Standards. These prof. dev. actions align directly with the following IA Teaching Standards and Criteria: (TQ5) Standard 1-Demonstrates ability to enhance academic performance and support for implementation of the school district’s student achievement goals (1a, 1b&1c) Standard 2-Demonstrates competence in content knowledge(2a, 2b&2d) Standard 3-Demonstrates competence in planning and preparation for instruction(3a, 3b, 3d&3e) Standard 4-Uses strategies to deliver instruction that meet the multiple learning needs of students(4a, 4b&4f) Standard 7-Professional development(7a, 7b, 7c&7d) Standard 8-Fulfills professional responsibilities established by the school district(8c&8e)
    Prof. Dev. Learning Opportunities. Implementation of the district career development plan will involve these components for each strategy: (TQ8): Common training sessions on four and one half inservice days during the school year and one early release day meeting per month for learning opportunities (theory presentations, reading literature, discussions); Bi-monthly meetings of the professional development team (planning next building meeting; collecting, organizing, and analyzing data; practicing demonstrations, narrowing focus, reviewing research-based strategies); Teachers working in peer coaching teams on a bi-weekly basis; Building level meetings (observing demonstrations, working with data, developing lessons, reviewing theory)
    Prof. Dev. Providers. AEA267 consultants will serve as the professional development provider for the district. The DE accredits this provider. (TQ6)
2. Enhance instructional materials and resources: Update curriculum mapping in all areas.(AMN3) Use a materials/curriculum review process before adoption of new teaching materials
3. Provide supports that will address ELL students’ achievement: Implement annual identification of ELL students as necessary. Implement programs and support services as necessary to increase language proficiency and academic achievement. (AR7) AEA 267 ELL consultant will provide services as necessary
4.Provide supports that will address Career and Technical Ed. students’ achievement in reading and mathematics: Integrate reading and mathematics skill development into the career and technical education curriculum.(PERK1) Implementation of Thinking Maps and Alouds will provide support for reading comprehension. Maintain accurate ITED records for reading and math that will identify needs in reading and math.
5. District will provide professional development activities for all classroom teachers to address the needs of talented and gifted students.
Actions for CSIP Goal 5: 1) Support students and families in order to increase student participation, attendance, and graduation. Institute a follow-up procedure with parents at the elementary and middle school, when absenteeism is occurring. For chronic absenteeism provide a family interview and follow-up support that may include a truancy referral to law enforcement when needed. Provide for Alt. Sch. for h. s. students to increase graduation rates. Provide opportunities for dual credit in career and technical programs through IVCCD. 2) Create a learning environment that is safe, supportive, and conducive to learning (a culture of achievement and respect). Implement Character Counts! at the elementary and middle school to respond to student bullying issues. Continued teaching and implementation of the Success 4 behavior expectations in the elementary school. Promote career and technical programs through IVCCD.We will devise implementation plans for the actions previously described for CSIP goals 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Implementation plans will address the following components:
  •  Clear expectations at the district, building, and classroom levels.
  •  Baseline data for each action, if available
  •  Resources to support each action including timelines, personnel, and budget (including state and federal programs support as necessary)
  •  Specific implementation outcomes for action steps
  •  Persons responsible for oversight of implementation
  •  Evaluation of action implementation effectiveness

...

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan
III. How do/will we know that student learning has changed?
BCLUW will use multiple data sources to determine if student learning has changed, including a combination of district-wide standardized assessments, grade level and classroom assessments, and perceptual data (e.g., surveys). The District Leadership Team will ensure that data from these assessment measures are collected, analyzed, and shared with the various stakeholder groups as outlined in Question 1B. The district will continue to ensure that all students enrolled at the specified grade level are included in district-wide assessments. (DWAP1)

Monitoring Progress with Long-Range CSIP Goals
As stated previously (see Question #2A), BCLUW will monitor progress on its long-range goals through analysis of aggregate and disaggregated trend line data from the following sources:
  •  ITBS reading comprehension, science and mathematics total tests at grades 3-8 (Goals #1 to #4)
  •  ITED reading comprehension, mathematics, and science tests at grade 11. (Goal #1 to #4)
  •  3 (Goal #1) (DWAP6) (DWAP3) ( DWAP4)
  •  MAP mathematics tests at grades 3-11 (Goal #2) (DWAP7)
  •  MAP science assessment at grades 3- 11 (Goal #3) (DWAP8)
  •  Attendance data from district’s student information management system (Goal #5)
  •  District graduation data as calculated by the Iowa Department of Education (based on the spring BEDS report) (Goal #5)
  •  The percentage of the students in grades 4-12 that reports having used alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs as reported through the AEA 267 Building Tomorrow Culture and Climate Culture Survey (Goal #5)
  •  The percentage of the middle school and high school student body that receives a discipline referral (i.e., office referral, suspension, and/or expulsion) (Goal #5)

Alignment of Standards and Assessments—Iowa Technical Adequacy Project (ITAP)
To make certain that the assessments used to monitor progress on long-range achievement goals are aligned with the district’s curriculum, BCLUW completed the Iowa Technical Adequacy Project (ITAP) process for the ITBS, ITED, DIBELS, and MAP. Through completion of the ITAP process, the district found that it was necessary to revisit its reading, mathematics and science standards and benchmarks. The district discovered that corrections needed to be made to ensure that all the core state recommended standards and benchmarks were met. In addtion, the district joined the MISIC consortium for the MAP testing, part of this process included matching the district standards and benchmarks to the MISIC standards and benchmarks. Actions to correct these issues were completed by May 2004.

Student Indicator Data Used for Evaluation of Programs and Services
The same student indicator data used to measure progress with CSIP goals will also be used to help inform decisions regarding the effectiveness of the following programs and services provided by BCLUW:
  •  Professional development for teachers and principals (e.g., District Career Development Plan and Title II, Part A)
  •  Supplemental reading services for eligible students (e.g., Title I, Part A)
  •  Use of technology to improve student achievement (e.g., Title II, Part D)
  •  Programs and services to assist English Language Learners (Title III, Part A)
  •  Drug and violence prevention program (Title IV, Part A)
  •  Early Intervention program for grades K-3
  •  K-12 at-risk program
  •  K-12 gifted and talented (TAG) program
  •  Special education services
  •  Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs
  •  Pre-K special education services and 4 year old pre-school

Note: More specific details regarding BCLUW’s program/service evaluation process are included in the next section of the CSIP.

Additional Data Gathering and Analysis
To help provide a more complete picture of student learning needs, BCLUW will continue to monitor the following data sources:
  •  All data points included in the district’s Annual Progress Report (APR).
  •  The percentage of students who participate in district-wide assessment
  •  The percentage of students in the lowest (at-risk or deficit) category on DIBELS in grades K-3 . (DWAP3, DWAP4, DWAP6)
  •  Student performance on the MAP reading assessment at grades 3-11 will continue to be monitored and expanded. (DWAP6)
  •  Annual cohort performance from grade 3 through grade 8 as measured by the ITBS in the areas of reading, mathematics, and science.
  •  Career and technical education student data from the end-of-year program report (Perkins report)
  •  The percentage of students indicating a safe learning environment and that other students treat them with respect as reported through the AEA 267 Building Tomorrow Culture and Climate Culture Survey
  •  IDEA Proficiency Test (IPT) for English Language Learners and/or Language Assessment Scale (LAS) to measure ELL students’ English proficiency (LEP2)
  •  NWEA MAP testing data grades 3-11 in science, math, reading, and language arts.

Future Data Collecting
  • 
  •  Additional data will be collected as deemed necessary by the district leadership team and School Improvement advisory committee.

...

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan
IV. How will we evaluate our programs and services to ensure improved student learning?
Goal-Oriented Approach to Program Evaluation
BCLUW has adopted a goal-oriented approach to formally evaluate the programs and services it offers to meet prioritized student needs as identified in its CSIP. (ECSIP1) This goal-oriented approach to program evaluation includes the following components:
  •  Identification of programs that contribute to progress with CSIP goals (program expectations)
  •  Identification of any additional program goals (program expectations)
  •  Identification of variables which affect performance
  •  Identification of the indicators by which program effectiveness will be judged relative to performance
  •  Development of procedures for collecting information about performance
  •  Collection of performance data
  •  Comparison of the information regarding performance with the expected CSIP/program goals
  •  Communication of results of the comparison to appropriate audiences

BCLUW will use a combination of formative and summative evaluation processes within the program evaluation process. (TQ12) The district will also determine the frequency of the formative and summative evaluation processes for each of the programs/services by two factors: 1) legal mandates and 2) local data. At a minimum, an in-depth formal summative evaluation for all of the programs that BCLUW incorporates into its CSIP will occur within a five-year rotation. Note: BCLUW will submit, as required, any annual evaluation/reporting data for state and federal programs.

In-Depth Program Evaluation Rotation
Professional Development Program (District Career Development Plan)-Annually, beginning in 2005 (TQ9)
Special Education Programs and Services-Every three years, beginning in 2005 (ESPE1, ESPE2)
Title II, Part A (Class size reduction)-Annually, beginning in 2005 (TPTR1)
Title I, Part A (Parent Involvement)-Annually, beginning in 2005 (TITL1)
At-risk Program-Every three years, beginning in 2005 (AR4)
Title II, Part D (E2T2)-Every two years, beginning in 2006 (FTP6)
Title IV(Safe and Drug Free Schools)-Every three years, beginning in 2006 (SDF10)
Mentoring and Induction Program-Every three years, beginning in 2006 (TQ9)
Perkins (Vocational/Career and Technical Education Programs)-Every five years, beginning in 2006 (PERK2, PERK3)
Title III (Language Instruction for LEP Students)    Every two years, beginning in 2008 (LEP3)
Talented and Gifted Program-yearly (GT2)

BCLUW will collect formative evaluation data for each program. Progress toward meeting program/service expectations will be reported to the District Leadership Team, the Board of Education, and the SIAC.
CSIP Indicator Data to Measure Program Effectiveness
BCLUW will evaluate the effectiveness of the majority of its instructional programs and services, at least partially, through examination of the indicator data, disaggregated by program participants, for each of the goals listed in its CSIP Constant Conversation Question #2. Current data would be sufficient, at this time, to assist in determining the effectiveness of the following programs:
  •  Professional Development Program (district career development plan) (TQ11)
  •  At-Risk Program (AR4)
  •  Perkins (Vocational/Career and Technical Education Programs) (PERK2, PERK3)
  •  Mentoring and Induction Program (TQ9)
  •  Special Education Programs and Services (ESPE2)
  •  Title I, Part A (Parental Involvement Program) (TITL1)
  •  Title II, Part A (Class size reduction) (TPTR1)
  •  Title II, Part D (E2T2) (FTP6)
  •  Title III (Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students Program) (LEP3)
  •  Title IV (Safe and Drug Free Schools) (SDF10)
  •  Talented and Gifted program (GT2)

Additional Indicator Data to Measure Program Effectiveness
The district decided that it needs additional information to determine the effectiveness of some of its programs. In addition to the indicator data associated with the CSIP goals listed in BCLUW’s Constant Conversation #2, the district will also collect, analyze, and use the following data to inform effectiveness with the following programs:

Professional Development Program and Title II, Part A (TQ9, TQ10, TQ11, TQ12, TPTR1)
  •  Percentage of faculty responsible for instruction who participate in district and building career development opportunities
  •  Percentage of K-12 teachers who accurately use the strategies as measured by observations and implementation logs
  •  Percentage of K-12 teachers who document technology training
  •  Percentage of K-3 students who are independent at grade level on the DIBELS (TQ11)
  •  Percentage of 3-11 students who improve on NWEA’s Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) Test (TQ11, TQ12)



Gifted and Talented Program (GT2)
Rather than judging the effectiveness of its gifted and talented program through CSIP goal indicators since BCLUW does not believe that disaggregating its district-wide assessment data by gifted and talented student participants provides meaningful information, BCLUW is going to use the following indicator to determine the effectiveness of its gifted and talented program:
  •  Percentage of all students participating in the gifted and talented program who meet goals in their individualized learning plans

Perkins (Vocational/Career and Technical Education Programs (PERK2, PERK3)
  •  Percentage of all career and tech students by special population subgroups in career and technical programs who are proficient in occupational skills
  •  Percentage of graduates including special populations by special population who were program concentrators who receive a high school diploma or equivalent
  •  Percentage of senior program completers by subgroups who participate in career and technical programs who indicate their intention to continue their education, non-military employment, or military employment

Mentoring and Induction Program (TQ9)
  •  Percentage of beginning teachers participating in the mentoring and induction program who meet goals of the district career development plan, as appropriate to their teaching assignment
  •  All beginning teachers will have mentors for two years as required by the Teacher Quality Bill.

Special Education Programs and Services (ESPE1)
  •  Percentage of all students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) who meet their IEP goals

Title I, Part A, Parental Involvement (TITL1)
  •  Percentage of parents who participate in the annual meeting for the parental involvement compact in improving the academic quality of schools served under Title 1, Part A

Title III (LEP3)
  •  Percentage of ELL students who are proficient in English

...

Planning Assurances
Verified The LEA/agency will allocate Title I funds to eligible attendance areas on the basis of the total number of children from low-income families in each area or schools in accordance with Section 1113.
Verified The LEA shall provide students enrolled in a school identified under Section 1116(c) the option to transfer to another public school with the LEA, including a public school charter that has not been identified under Section 1116 (c).
Verified The local education agency (LEA) informs eligible schools and parents of school-wide program authority and the ability of such schools to consolidate funds from Federal, State, and local sources. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA/agency will work in consultation with schools as the schools develop the schools’ plans pursuant to section 1114 and assist schools as the schools implement such plans or undertake activities pursuant to section 1115 so that each school can make adequate yearly progress toward meeting the State student academic achievement standards. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA/agency will fulfill such agency’s school improvement responsibilities.
Verified The LEA/agency will take into account the experience of model programs for the educationally disadvantaged, and the findings of relevant scientifically based research indicating that services may be most effective if focused on students in the earliest grades at schools that receive funds under this part. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA/agency, if choosing to use funds under this part to provide early childhood development services to low-income children below the age of compulsory school attendance, ensure that such services comply with the performance standards established under section 641A(a) of the Head Start Act. Head Start Act, 42 USC 9831
Verified The LEA/agency will inform eligible schools of the local educational agency’s authority to obtain waivers on the school’s behalf under title IX and inform waivers under the Education Flexibility Partnership Act of 1999. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA/agency will coordinate and collaborate, to the extent feasible and necessary as determined by the local educational agency, with the State educational agency and other agencies providing services to children, youth, and families with respect to a school in school improvement, corrective action, or restructuring. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Funds received under this part will be used only for programs and projects, including the acquisition of equipment, in accordance with section 1306. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Funds received under this part will be used only to coordinate such programs and projects with similar programs and projects within the State and in other States, as well as with other Federal programs that can benefit migratory children and their families. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Such programs and projects will be carried out in a manner consistent with the objectives of section 1114, subsections (b) and (d) of section 1115, subsections (b) and (c) of section 112,0A, and part I. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified In the planning and carrying out such programs and projects, there has been and will be, adequate provision for addressing the unmet education needs of preschool migratory children. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Migrant Education programs and projects will be determined, where feasible, using the same approaches and standards that will be used to assess the performance of students, school, and local educational agencies under Title. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified To the extent feasible, such programs and projects will provide for advocacy and outreach activities for migratory children and their families, including informing such children and families of, or helping such children and families gain access to, other education, health, nutrition, and social services. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified To the extent feasible, such programs and projects will provide for the integration of information technology into educational and related programs. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified To the extent feasible, such programs and projects will provide for programs to facilitate the transition of secondary school students to post-secondary education or employment. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The State will assist the Secretary in determining the number of migratory children in the State. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified A needs assessment has been conducted and is available for review that a) Involved teachers in its development b) Considered the means teachers require to learn content knowledge and teaching skills that will provide students the opportunity to meet challenging academic achievement standards, c) Considered the means principals require to learn the instructional leadership skills that will provide students the opportunity to meet challenging academic achievement standards. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Activities have been identified and a description is available for review that - Denotes the involvement of teachers, principals, paraprofessionals, other relevant school personnel and parents collaboration in planning; Aligns professional development activities with curricula and programs that link with academic content standards, academic achievement standards, and assessments the results of which correlate with ITBS/ITED; Demonstrates the selection was based on review of scientifically based research and why the activities are expected to improve student achievement; Explains how a substantial, measurable, and positive impact will be made on student academic achievement and, where applicable, will reduce the achievement gap that separates low-income and minority students from others. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified A description will be made available to teachers and principals explaining how the professional development activities will ensure the needs of teachers and principals will be met; will provide training to enable teachers to teach and address the needs of students with different learning styles, improve student behavior in the classroom, involve parents in their child’s education and/or understand the use of data and assessments to improve classroom practice and student learning; will be part of the district’s effort to ensure highly qualified staff. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Resources have been targeted on schools that have the lowest proportion of highly qualified teachers; have the largest class size; or, are identified for school improvement under the provisions of Title I, Part A. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Mentoring and Induction: Goals for the program. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(a)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: Process for the selection of mentors Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(b)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A mentor training process that addresses mentor needs and reflects a clear understanding of the role of the mentor. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(c)(2)
Verified That, in the expenditures for professional development the requirements of private school children and teacher participation have been adhered to. The specific stipulations in No Child Left Behind include equitable services and benefits that are, in the aggregate, no less than the services and benefits provided through the same funding sources in 2001- 2002; private school official consultation during the design and development of services; written justification by public school officials when private school officials disagree with the professional development design. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A mentor training process that results in the mentor’s understanding of the personal and professional needs of new teachers. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(c)(3)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A mentor training process that provides the mentor with an understanding of the district expectations for beginning teacher competencies based on the Iowa teaching standards. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(c)(4)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A mentor training process that facilitates the mentor’s ability to provide guidance and support to new teachers. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(c)(5)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A supportive organizational structure for beginning teachers which includes activities that provide access and opportunities for interaction for mentor and for beginning teachers that includes released time for mentors and beginning teachers to plan. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(d)(1)(1)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A supportive organizational structure for beginning teachers which includes activities that provide access and opportunities for interaction for mentor and beginning teachers that provide demonstration of classroom practices. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(d)(1)(2)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A supportive organizational structure for beginning teachers which includes activities that provide access and opportunities for interaction for mentor and beginning teachers to observe teaching. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(d)(1)(3)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A supportive organizational structure for beginning teachers which includes activities that provide access and opportunities for interaction for mentor and beginning teachers to provide feedback. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(d)(1)(4)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A supportive organizational structure for beginning teachers which shall include a selection process of who will be in the mentoring/beginning teacher partnership. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(d)(2)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: The process for dissolving mentor and teacher partnerships. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(f)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: A plan that reflects the needs of the beginning teacher employed by the district. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(2)(g)
Verified Mentoring and Induction: The school district has a process for how information about the district’s Beginning Teacher Induction and Mentoring program will be provided to interested stakeholders. Teacher Quality Program 281—IAC 83.3(e)(3)
Verified The LEA/agency and the delinquent facility ensure that funded educational programs are coordinated with the student’s home school. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The funded delinquent facility will notify the LEA of the youth served is identified as in appropriate need of special education services while in the facility. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA/agency and delinquent facility, where feasible, will provide transition assistance to help the youth stay in school, including coordination of services for the family, counseling, assistance in accessing drug and alcohol abuse prevention programs, tutoring, and family counseling. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The delinquent facility will work to ensure that teachers and other qualified staff are trained to work with children with disabilities and other students with special needs, taking into consideration the unique needs of such children and students. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA/agency and the delinquent facility will work to ensure that educational programs provided are related to assisting students that meet high educational standards. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Parents will be involved, where feasible, in efforts to improve the educational achievement of their children and prevent the further involvement of such children in delinquent activities. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Coordinate services and programs with other services and programs provided to delinquent youth (e.g., WIA & LEA activities under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974; local businesses). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified Funds generated by a school district under Iowa Code 257.46 shall be utilized exclusively for a school district’s gifted and talented program. Iowa Code section 257.46
Verified Any unused funds of the gifted and talented program at the end of the budget year will be carried over to the subsequent budget year to the gifted and talented program. Iowa Code section 257.46
Verified To the extent possible, the School Improvement Advisory Committee membership includes persons from diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds, a balance of men and women, and persons with disabilities. 281 – IAC 12,.2
Verified Subpart 4 of the Educational Technology legislation incorporates into the ESEA the requirements of the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA). These provisions require LEAs to certify, under certain circumstances, that schools have adopted and are enforcing Internet safety policies. As a condition of participating in the Educational Technology program, LEAs must submit a CIPA certification form to the SEA. The CIPA requirements in the ESEA apply with respect to elementary or secondary schools that do not receive e-rate discounts and for which Ed Tech funds are used to purchase computers used to access the Internet, or to pay the direct costs associated with accessing the Internet. The CIPA requirements in the ESEA do not apply to schools that receive e-rate discounts. (These schools are governed by other CIPA provisions and must submit their CIPA certification to the Federal Communications Commission.) Title II, Part D, Enhancing Education Through Technology
Verified Each Educational Technology recipient must use at least 25 percent of its funds to provide ongoing, sustained, and intensive, high-quality professional development. (This requirement applies to both formula and competitive grant funds.) The recipient must provide professional development in the integration of advanced technologies, including emerging technologies, into curricula and instruction and in using those technologies to create new learning environments. However, the professional development requirement does not apply if the Educational Technology recipient demonstrates, to the satisfaction of its SEA, that it already provides, to all teachers in core academic subjects such professional development, which is based on a review of relevant research. Title II, Part D, Enhancing Education Through Technology
Verified The Educational Technology application contains a description of the process and accountability measures that the applicant will use to evaluate the extent to which activities funded under the program are effective in integrating technology into curricula and instruction, increasing the ability of teachers to teach, and enabling students to reach challenging State academic standards. Title II, Part D, Enhancing Education Through Technology
Verified The LEA will provide alternatives for dropouts and potential dropouts as required in Iowa Code section 280.19A.
Verified The LEA has a staff utilization plan for at-risk allowable growth. Programs for Returning Dropouts and Dropout Prevention Iowa Code section 257.38(4)
Verified Qualified personnel deliver the at-risk allowable growth program. Programs for Returning Dropouts and Dropout Prevention Iowa Code section 257.38(7)
Verified The LEA has a staff in-service education design for its returning dropouts and dropout prevention program. Iowa Code 257.38(3)
Verified If Title V funds are expended for any of the areas designated as appropriate for use, the LEA/agency assures that the funds are used to enhance student achievement. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110
Verified The LEA assures the Iowa Department of Education that the LEA conducted a needs assessment and based all relevant elements in this application upon the needs assessment as required by the various entitlement programs represented within. [Section 212,2(b)] [Section 5133(b)] [Section 1111(b)(3)]
Verified The LEA assures that federal funds will be used to supplement, and not supplant, programs that are state or locally funded or funded by other federal programs.[ Section 1706]
Verified The LEA assures that representatives of eligible private schools within the LEA have engaged in meaningful consultation with the district in the development of this application and in determining the allocation of funds that support services to eligible private school students. The applicant agency will maintain records, which document private involvement and impact of programs at private sites. All private schools have been given an invitation to participate in programs for which they are eligible. [Section 212,2 (11)] [Section 5142] [Section 5133 (5)] [Section112,0]
Verified The LEA assures that all stakeholders, including parents, have been consulted with, and were involved in, the planning, design, and review of this application and that those parents listed as members of the Consolidated Planning Committee have actively participated in the application development and review process. [Section 212,2(2)] [Section 3116(c)(5)]
Verified The LEA assures that services, materials, and equipment provided to private school students will be secular, neutral, and non-ideological in nature. [Section 9501 (2)]
Verified The LEA assures that materials and equipment provided to public and private schools will be labeled according to the funding entitlement.
Verified The LEA assures that it will account for the need for equitable access to, and equitable participation by both public and private, in all programs for students, teachers, administrators, and other program beneficiaries. Further, the LEA will address barriers that impede equitable access and participation, including barriers related to sex, race, color, national origin, disability, and age (General Education Provisions Act, Section 427).
Verified The LEA assures that it will disaggregate data by sex, by each major racial and ethnic group, by English proficiency status, by migrant status, by students with disabilities as compared to nondisabled students, and by economically disadvantaged students as compared to students who are not economically disadvantaged.
Verified An Area or a local education agency (LEA) that applies for and receives E2T2 funds must provide assurance that its project contains all the content and professional development elements as laid out in the NCLB Title II part D. It must also assure that children enrolled in private schools, as well as their teachers and other educational personnel, with an opportunity to participate in the program on an equitable basis. To accomplish this, an AEA or LEA seeking E2T2 monies must engage in a timely and meaningful manner consultation with appropriate private school officials during the design and development of a E2T2 project. The consultation should address how the needs of the private school children would be identified, the services that would be offered, how and where those services would be provided, and service assessment. The consultation should also address the opportunities of private school teachers and other educational personnel to participate in professional development activities. The LEA assures that Private schools will implement activities funded by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 in accordance with program regulations. Each local educational agency shall maintain in the agency's records and provide to the state educational agency involved a written affirmation signed by officials of each participating private school that the consultation required by this Section has occurred. If such officials do not provide such affirmation within a reasonable period of time, the local educational agency shall forward the documentation that such consultation has taken place to the State educational agency.
Verified Mentoring and Induction, Beginning Administrators: The district assures that it has a beginning administrator mentoring and induction plan that describes the following components: support system for the beginning administrator, program organizational and collaborative structures, budget, including a narrative that describes the sustainability of the program and program evaluation. Mentoring and Induction Beginning Administrators Program HF 2792, 256.7 [Subsection 21] — 2007 IAC 284A,.2
Verified Anti-harassment and anti-bullying: The school/school district assures that it has an anti-harassment and anti-bullying policy in board policy and is integrated into the comprehensive school improvement plan under SF 61, 256.7 [subsection 21] and shall report data collected under SF 61, 256.7 [subsection 6].
Verified Certification of Compliance with NCLB Religious Expression: The District has no policy that prevents or otherwise denies participation in constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary or secondary schools pursuant to guidance of the Secretary of the United States Department of Education with respect to No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, [Section 7904]
Verified The district assures it provides a system for delivering instructional services including a full continuum of services and placements to address the needs of eligible individuals aged 3 to 21, and shall provide for the following:
* The provision of specially designed instruction and related activities through:
- cooperative efforts of special education teachers and general education teachers in the general education classroom; and/or
- on a limited basis by a special education teacher; and/or
- consultation with a general education teacher.
* The provision of accommodations and modifications to the general education environment and program, including settings and programs for eligible individuals aged 3 through 5
* The provision of specially designed instruction to eligible individuals with similar special education instructional needs organized according to the type of curriculum and instruction to be provided, and the severity of the educational needs of the eligible individuals served.
IAC 281-41.408(2)a
Verified The district assures that, by July 1, 2009, and every CSIP revision cycle thereafter, it will have taken the following actions concerning the District Developed Service Delivery Plan:
* Approval by the school board of the development of a plan for organizing and providing special education services.
* Development of the delivery system by a group of individuals that includes parents of eligible individuals, special education and general education teachers, administrators, and at least one AEA representative. The AEA representative will be selected by the AEA Special Education Director.
* Verification by the AEA Special Education Director will verify that the delivery system is in compliance with the Iowa Administrative Rules of Special Education prior to the school board adoption.
* Plan was available for public comment for 30 days prior to adoption.
* Approval by the school board of the plan prior to implementation.
IAC 281-41.408(2)c
Verified The District Developed Service Delivery Plan will be described in writing and will include the following components by July 1, 2009, and every CSIP revision cycle thereafter:
* A description of how services will be organized and provided to eligible individuals, consistent with the requirements of the Iowa Administrative Rules of Special Education and the provisions described in 41.408(2)a
* A description of how the caseloads of special education teachers will be determined and regularly monitored to ensure that the IEPs of eligible individuals are able to be fully implemented.
* A description of the procedures a special education teacher can use to resolve caseload concerns. The procedures will provide timelines for the resolution of a concern and identify the person to whom a teacher reports a concern. The procedures will also identify the person or persons who are responsible for reviewing a concern and making a decision, including any corrective actions.
* A description of the process that will be used to evaluate the system’s effectiveness.
* A description of how the delivery system will meet the targets identified in the state’s performance plan.
* A description of how the delivery system will address needs identified by the state in any determination made under the Iowa Administrative Rules of Special Education.
IAC 281-41.408(2)b

...

Other Requirements
Verified Content standards for reading for all grade levels of students who attend the school/school district. Accountability for Student Achievement 281—IAC 12.8(1)(c)(2)
1) Uses the general skills and strategies of the writing process to write for a variety of purposes and audiences. 2) Uses the grammatical and mechanical conventions of written language. 3) Uses a variety of print and non-print resources to locate and gather information. 4) Uses the general skills and strategies of the reading process. 5) Reads, interprets, and responses to a variety of literary and informational text. 6) Uses speaking and listening strategies for a variety of purposes.
Verified Content standards for mathematics for all grade levels of students who attend the school/school district. Accountability for Student Achievement 281—IAC 12.8(1)(c)(2)
1) Use a variety of strategies in the problem solving process. 2) Understand and apply basic and advanced properties of the concepts of numbers. 3) Use basic and advanced procedures while performing the process of computation. 4) Understand and apply basic and advanced properties of the concepts of measurement. 5) Understand and apply basic and advanced properties of the concepts of geometry. 6) Understand and apply basic and advanced concepts of statistics and data analysis. 7) Understand and apply basic and advanced concepts of probability. 8) Understand and apply basic and advanced properties of functions and algebra.
Verified Content standards for science for all grade levels of students who attend the school/school district. Accountability for Student Achievement 281—IAC 12.8(1)(c)(2)
1) Understand and apply the skills of scientific inquiry. 2) Understand and apply scientific concepts, principles, and theories pertaining to the earth and the universe. 3) Understand and apply concepts, principles and theories pertaining to life and its interactions. 4) Understand and apply concepts and theories pertaining to matter, it's composition, and the forces that govern it. 5) Learn how scientific knowledge develops and changes over time. 6) Understand personal and societal changes and responsibilities that effect health, world resources, and the earth's environment.
Verified At-Risk Allowable Growth: Activities and cooperative arrangements with other service agencies and service groups and strategies for parental involvement to meet the needs of at-risk students.Iowa Code subsection 257.38(11)
Activities include small group counseling, General Education Intervention teams and individual counseling by staff to assist at-risk students. K-12 staff are assigned to make contact with parents and students to enhance student success by following up on daily classroom assignments and preparation for tests. Contracted services through Grundy County Health Services provide on site nursing services to provide support for at-risk students. Elementary after school homework support by teachers as well as summer school programs for k-8 students are also designed to assist at-risk students. Intensive assistance and small-group study hall for at-risk students at the high school is utilized. An online credit recovery program for at-risk students is available to high school students. All of the above programs/services are designed to help at-risk students and to better communicate with parents about the academic status of their students.
Verified Technology: A description of how the applicant will encourage the development and utilization of innovative strategies for the delivery of specialized or rigorous academic courses and curricula through the use of technology, including distance learning technologies, particularly for those areas that would not otherwise have access to such courses and curricula due to geographical isolation or insufficient resources. Title II, Part D, Section 2414(b)(8)
We will be participating in activities coordinated by the Cedar Run E2T2 Consortium. These activities will all center on strengthening research-based strategies with the integration of technology tools. The consortium’s web site will serve as a resource for digital support material (e.g. on-line databases, streaming video) for the strategies and curricula that align with the professional development activities of the consortium. Consortium professional development activities will incorporate ICN and on-line learning activities that will be structured for both collaborative and individual learning environments. High school provides online college and AP classes to students meeting certain academic criteria. The high school has adopted a one laptop per student initiative and all k-12 staff have received training from Apple on integration of technology. Students have access to online courses through the Iowa Distance Learning program and Iowa Valley Community College. An online credit recovery program for at-risk students is available to high school students.
Verified Technology: A description of the supporting resources (such as services, software, other electronically delivered learning materials, and print resources) that will be acquired to ensure successful and effective uses of technology. Title II, Part D, Section 2414(b)(12)
We will be participating in activities coordinated by the Cedar Run E2T2 Consortium. Many of these activities will be designed to raise participants’ awareness of existing support services. The consortium’s professional development plan includes integration of supporting resources such as on-line services (e.g. Iowa AEA Online, e-services from professional organizations), templates, tool software, instructional software, equipment, and print resources. Elementary and middle school have implemented the Reading Counts! program utilizing computers. All high school students have been issued laptops with software to enhance education. All teachers and 8-12 students have access to Google Apps for collaboration. Wikis and blogs on an Apple Server have been implemented to increase writing by students to strengthen literacy. The high school employs Studywiz Spark and Moodle as content-delivery / hybrid learning systems.
Verified Technology: A description of how the applicant will ensure the effective use of technology to promote parental involvement and increase communication with parents, including a description of how parents will be informed of the technology being applied in their child's education so that the parents are able to reinforce at home the instruction their child receives at school. Title II, Part D, Section 2414(b)(9)
We will be participating in activities coordinated by the Cedar Run E2T2 Consortium. Consortium resources will be available to support electronic survey development to promote and increase parent and community input and involvement in decision-making processes. Consortium resources will also be used to encourage and support communication to parents via district and classroom web pages. The development of web pages as an informational tool and as an instructional tool in the classroom and at home is addressed in the consortium’s professional development activities where appropriate. Parents have online access to teacher lesson plans and student assignment scores and grades. Staff have begun implementing websites to get more information to parents.
Verified Technology: A description of how programs will be developed, where applicable, in collaboration with adult literacy service providers, to maximize the use of technology. Title II, Part D, Section 2414(b)(10)
We will be participating in activities coordinated by the Cedar Run E2T2 Consortium. The consortium has a communication plan for communicating E2T2 projects and progress with area adult literacy service providers when appropriate and for identifying effective practices, technology tools, and resources offered by these services providers.

District Information
Authorized Agency BCLUW Comm School District
610 East Center St
Conrad, Iowa 50621

AEA: AEA 267 (district filed under aea control code 9207)
CSIP Coordinator
Name: Ben Petty
Title: Superintendent
Telephone: 641 - 366 - 2819 Extension:
FAX: 641 - 366 - 2175
Email: bpetty@bcluw.k12.ia.us
Year Site Visit Scheduled 2007
Certified Dates District: 9/13/2011 11:13:47 AM
Readers: 9/30/2011 11:33:40 AM
State: 9/30/2011 11:34:18 AM

Annual Comprehensive School Improvement Plan (CSIP)
Current Date and Time: 11/15/2011 2:40:05 PM
(REFRESHING WEB PAGE UPDATES DATE AND TIME)