Central Intermediate School

School Information
School Name: Central Intermediate School
District Name: Central District #51
School Address: 1301 Eagle Avenue, Washington, IL 61571
School Phone: 309.444.3943
School Fax: 309.444.3414
Principal: Brian Hoelscher
Principal email:  bhoelscher@central51.net
Web Address: http://www.central51.net

School Demographics
Number of Students: 528
Percent Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch: 11.4%
Percent of Limited English Proficient: 0%
Percent of Special Education: 9%
Racial/Ethnic Percentages:
-White—93%
-Black—0.1%
-Hispanic—0.8%
-Asian/Pacific Islander—2.3%
-Other—3.8%

Student Achievement Data

Percentage of Students Passing: Central Intermediate/State of IL

All grades	Math	Reading	Writing
2007-08	94/80	91/81	90/64
2008-09	94/82	91/84	79/70
2009-10	94/86	90/74	90/77

Grade distribution for first nine weeks 2008-10

All grades (in %)	A	B	C	D	F
2008	56.4	23.6	13.5	5.3	1.3
2009	63.3	22.0	10.9	2.9	0.9
2010	66.8	22.1	8.8	1.7	0.6

Grade distribution midterm of second nine weeks 2008-10

All grades (in %)	A	B	C	D	F
2008-09	49.8	28.0	15.6	3.4	3.2
2009-10	60.1	23.2	11.4	3.2	2.1
2010-11	63.9	23.0	9.8	2.2	1.2

Please feel free to comment on any aspect of the data that you feel is particularly significant.

Central Intermediate School has been making overall gains in ISAT scores.  We have had 90% or more of our students meeting or exceeding state standards since 2005.  In the 2007-2008 school year, we began the process of changing the culture from one of covering material to one of learning material.    We were able to make a jump in the first year of implementation from 91% meet/exceed to 93% meet/exceed and we have maintained that for the 2009 and 2010 testing.    When one looks at the individual grade levels, we are making gains throughout the school in working with individual students to improve student achievement.  This effort is illustrated clearly by the scores in Math, Reading and Writing in the 8th Grade.   Math M/E percentages were: 2008: 95%, 2009: 95%, and 2010: 97%.  Reading M/E percentages were: 2008: 95%, 2009: 97%, and 2010: 97%.  Writing M/E percentages were: 2008: 92% (up from 85% in 2007), 2009: 95%, and 2010: 93%.  In Math and Reading, only 3 students in 8th Grade did not meet.  Only one of those students was a student with an IEP.  This level of learning is truly significant. 

The local data is also painting a picture of improved learning.  The first nine weeks grade distributions from 2008-2010 show that the percentage of our students receiving an A or a B has increased steadily over time—from 80% in 2008 to 85.3% in 2009 to 88.9% in 2010.  During the same time period, the percentage of students with C’s, D’s, and F’s all declined.  The 2010 Second Nine Weeks Midterm grade distribution included above shows the very same trend.  What makes this significant is that grades have become more accurate depictions of student learning.  We eliminated the zero and frivolous extra credit. We no longer allowed teachers to take points off for late work and allow students to reconnect with material they did not understand and redo the work if they can display knowledge.  These, coupled with a more balanced assessment system in which we utilize more formative assessment to monitor student progress, have made a significant difference in student learning at Central Intermediate School.

Please present any additional information that indicates your efforts to build a professional learning community have had a positive impact upon students and/or teachers.

The change in culture has opened up the channels of collaboration at grade levels and allowed time for Fundamental Learning areas meet to align curriculum.  At the beginning of the 09-10 school year, we modeled Anthony Muhammad’s “learning Centers” to refocus our staff meetings.  As a staff, we studied research and developed a common base knowledge of what works in education.  This knowledge base allowed us to move forward and side step many common concerns that arise in any change process.  The research data was clear about what was effective and the staff began to make the necessary changes to their classrooms.  This process was powerful in changing our school to a culture of learning.  When we make any decision, especially school-wide decisions, we must always ask if the decision will positively affect student learning.  You often hear questions such as “Does that trump learning?” during group discussions.

In year three of the process, I took a survey of the students to get their perceptions of what we are doing.  The results were better than we ever expected:
88.3%--Central challenges me academically
84.6%--Central teachers focused on my learning and worked with me to make sure I learned the material
87.2%--Central Teachers made me a better student by making me do my assignments
79.6%--Central Teachers helped me to better learn the curriculum by giving me the opportunity to review material I didn’t understand and retest.
92.3%--My overall experience at Central was positive

Please elaborate strategies you have found to be effective in the following areas:

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

Teachers utilize common assessments to assess students’ progress in all subjects.  After each assessment, teachers identify areas of concern or celebration and give timely, specific feedback.   Teachers conference with the student to reteach and retest the material.   Teachers discuss the results of their assessments with their FLA and Grade Level Teams for ideas and activities that could aid in student mastery.

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

At the end of each school year, assessment data from the current school year is passed to the next grades’ teachers.  At that time, teachers conference about the students receiving interventions for reading and math as well as students who have difficulties in other subjects, have issues with organization.  At the beginning of the next school year, teachers will begin interventions with those students who previously received individual help.  In the fall, all students are given their first benchmark test.  After this test, Student data is reviewed at grade level with the Reading specialist and students are identified for extra reading and math interventions.

Students who are struggling with homework completion pass through more restrictive measures to make sure the work gets done.  Teachers begin by bringing students in before school, during activity period, or during lunch, then students receive after school homework detentions, and, finally, students who do not have their work completed by Friday morning come in for Saturday Supervised Study.  The principal comes in to staff SSS and it is a great time for him to develop a working relationship with the more difficult students in the building.   Students who are chronically late or students that are failing to understand concepts in a subject area are referred to structured study hall during the school day.  Here they receive one-on-one assistance and are reminded to stay focused on what they need to get accomplished.   A devoted intervention period was placed in the schedule to provide the time to reach all students who require help in all subjects.  In our previous schedule intervention time was placed in the Enrichment period which contained Health, Computers, foreign language, and advanced P.E.    Students were required to take Health so this required students to be out of intervention time for nine weeks.  Also, we found that students and parents were beginning to resent intervention time due to the fact that the students were not able to attend elective classes they wanted to attend and felt they needed such as computers and foreign language.  We made the decision to place all enrichment classes into an Arts Block—Band/Choir, Art, Advanced P.E., Dance, and placed Intervention time in its own period so all students can have interventions.  This is a time for reinforcing and reteaching as well as for enriching our curriculum.    Foreign language is placed with interventions for those not receiving interventions at that time and, because we have the online Rosetta Stone program, our intervention students can still access foreign language at any time during the school day or at home.

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

As stated above, we built the capacity of teachers to work in collaborative teams first by building a common base of knowledge and a common vocabulary.  This allows teachers to professionally discuss issues utilizing the ideas and data from the research.  We have discussed in leadership how team meetings should be run.   Leadership team members have done a great job of setting norms, focusing on student learning, and redirecting fundamentalist behavior.  Our teams have made learning their focus and enjoy looking at the data in order to make decisions regarding student learning.  This has made the most difference in terms of helping our teachers feel like professionals.

List any Awards and Recognition Garnered by Your School

--2008, 2009, 2010   Excellence Award for Exemplary Academic Performance on the Illinois Learning Standards

--SchoolSearch Bright Star Award

--Illinois State Board of Education Certificate of Financial Recognition