Bartley Elementary School
- School District: Fulton Public Schools
- School Address: 603 S. Business 54 , Fulton, MO 65251, US
- School Phone: 573-590-8300
- School Fax: 573-590-8390
- Principal: Connie Epperson
- Contact E-Mail: email@example.com
- Web Address: http://www.fulton58.org/vnews/display.v/SEC/Bartley%20Elementary
- Number of Students: 264
- Percent Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch: 51%
- Percent of Limited English Proficient: 1.1%
- Percent of Special Education: 13%
- White: 86.7%
- Black: 1.9%
- Hispanic: 2.7%
- Asian: 0%
- Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander: 0%
- American Indian or Alaska Native: 0%
- Multiracial: 8.7%
- Other: 0%
In 2012 we began our PLC training. This training provided our building with a systematic process for change. When we began the PLC process, our state test (MAP) scores were not where we wanted them to be. Over 50 percent of our students scored at the basic or below basic level and we knew that immediate change was necessary. What became evident after year two of training, was that our building MAP scores began to show an increased level of proficiency, particularly as it related to the state average scores. When we first started training, we realized that our work was not cohesively connected. We determined that any building goals we developed needed to focus K-5 not just 3-5. Even students not taking the MAP test had some of the same Math and ELA goals as the upper grades. We developed building goals focused on our greatest needs. As a school, we decided that the students in our school were “ALL” of our responsibility and not just the responsibility of the classroom teacher. Students in K-2 needed to have goals to help prepare them for grades 3-5. Additionally, we developed an intervention system that looked at specific student needs. We went from a Reading Recovery model to a Title I school-wide building model. This allowed us to intervene with more students and thus led us into a new RtI model. However, we realized we could not intervene with 50% or greater of our students, as indicated by our MAP scores in 2012. This led to systemic changes in our Tier I instruction. Tier I instruction had to be implemented with fidelity in all classrooms. Teachers needed to assess students formally and informally during instruction to ensure that all students were achieving. These formal and informal assessments were created by individual teachers, building grade level teams and district grade level teams. Additional help was provided as needed by other staff members including Reading Interventionists and colleagues from our building and other schools. Teachers also attended the Powerful Learning Conference and participated in breakout sessions which helped them create these assessments. Further training was provided through professional development in our district. If students were not achieving, reteaching had to be done. The grade level team analyzed the results of the assessments together and planned further instruction in areas of deficit. Small groups of students were formed and additional instruction was provided to remediate the areas of deficit. Further, they discussed enrichment activities for students who mastered the assessed concepts. These students were provided with learning activities to extend the concepts being assessed. The grade level teachers brought the results of the assessments and further instruction to their Data Team Meetings and discussed further action to be taken with the data team. Feedback became an integral part of instruction, empowering students to assess and take responsibility for their own learning. We also made changes to our Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions. We implemented an RTI program that involved all staff and students. Classroom teachers, special education teachers and interventionists met on a regular basis to assign students to intervention groups. Not only did our intervention groups serve students who needed intensive or strategic support, we served groups who needed support in core instruction and groups who needed enrichment. Special education teachers and interventionists provided Tier 3 instruction. These significant changes have led us to not only improved MAP scores but also to a more connected building. We view each student as “our” student and we all own their struggles or their success.
Our mission statement, “We are ONE on a quest for excellence at Bartley School”, is at the center of educational decisions we make within our community. Each year, we revisit our mission statement, as well as our vision statement to ensure we are constantly striving to reach our academic goals and our mission. The level of teamwork, commitment, and responsibility for not only our students’ learning but our own learning is integral to our success. We have truly cultivated a team of data decision makers who work collectively to create a path of success for each child.
1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.
Utilizing Google Classroom, all classroom teachers provide evidence for the four corollary questions by using data binders, S.M.A.R.T. goal data displays, goal setting charts, and rubrics. Data is visually transparent to everyone entering Bartley Elementary. When we analyze each of the four corollary questions, we break it down to specifically include evidence of student learning. At the beginning, middle, and end of each school year, we use DIBELS as a benchmark screener for all students kindergarten through fifth grade. Each data team meets with the reading interventionists to analyze the data results to create a plan for our response to intervention (RTI). Bi-monthly, data teams meet to provide and analyze the data that drives our instruction and identifies students in need of additional interventions. Accelerated Reading and Accelerated Math goals are established for grades one through five. These goals are displayed so that students can see their progress.
2. Creating systems of intervention to provide students with additional time and support for learning.
Our building has a very strategic plan in place for intervention. Students are benchmark tested three times during the year. After benchmark testing, grade level data teams meet, analyze data, determine appropriate intervention groups, and discuss future instruction. Our reading specialists lead these meetings. Our decision making model for intervention connects students with the types of intervention needed to improve deficit skills or conversely, to push students to higher levels of thinking that exceed benchmark expectation. We have a school-wide system for recording benchmark and progress monitoring data available to staff. Our building utilizes DIBELS, STAR Reading and Math, DRA, and Running Records. Professional development is provided for staff to enhance their instructional strategies in order to provide targeted, meaningful intervention. Within our intervention groups, progress monitoring is done weekly or biweekly depending on the intensity of the intervention. Individual intervention groups are fluid and allow for changes on a six to eight week schedule if needed. In order to maximize the use of our specialists and other staff for intervention time, we have separate times for intervention by grade level throughout the day. In addition to classroom teachers, intervention groups are led by the reading interventionists, the special education teachers, the building tutors, the building instructional aide, the P.E. teacher, and certified paraprofessionals. The size of our building, only two teachers per grade level, means that we need to include as many other staff members as possible. We ask other staff members to join the intervention team based on their availability throughout the school day. Training and materials are provided to the additional staff members who provide intervention. This allows for smaller, more targeted groups. Students are placed in the groups most appropriate to their individual needs, and students are shared across the grade level. Additionally, we have a built in intervention time for math, mainly focusing on fact fluency. However, we also utilize Accelerated Math for students to practice appropriate math content and standards. This allows us to modify grade level objectives depending on their level of mastery. Our intervention time for both Reading and Math focus on corollary questions 3 and 4.
3. Building teacher capacity to work as members of high performing collaborative teams that focus efforts on improved learning for all students.
Grade level data teams meet bi-monthly before the school day begins with the following team members: grade level teachers, principal, reading interventionists, counselor, and special education teacher. The grade level teachers create the agenda based around the four corollary questions during daily collaborative time. The agenda is shared prior to the data team meeting, several days in advance so that input from the data team can be added prior to our meeting. The agenda is a common document utilized by each grade level. Besides the four corollary questions, the agenda also looks at strategies used for instruction, celebrations,reflections and evidence of our classroom data. We use Google Classroom as a common location for all classroom teachers to share their data team agendas prior to meetings. By sharing our data team agendas with each other, Google Classroom gives us the opportunity to provide feedback and ideas for instructional strategies to other classroom teachers. Collaborating with one another through google classroom and during grade level meetings provides opportunity for each team member to become a leader. Further, every grade level team meets daily for collaborative planning. This time is used to analyze common assessments and reteaching in order to document student success. Other teachers are not assigned to attend grade level teams on a daily basis, but the reading interventionists and special education teachers are available as needed or requested. While planning for intervention groups, additional teachers are frequently in attendance at grade level meetings to plan appropriate instruction for all students. Related specials teams such as art, music, library and P.E. also meet on a bi-monthly schedule within the district. Specials teachers also help reinforce skills from the classroom by including activities in their curriculum. For example, in P.E., math problem-solving skills are utilized. Students were required to solve a math problem to get back into a game when they were out of the game. Collaboration enforces accountability on all team members. When collaboration is successful it results in working toward common goals in a more efficient way.
Achievement Data Files
Additional Achievement Data
Our state testing data has shown consistent growth with the exception of the data decline in 2017. We attribute that decline to yearly staff turnover in 5th grade. For the past three years, both teachers at the 5th grade level were new to our building. Often our 5th grade teachers were first year or out of state teachers unfamiliar with Missouri Learning Standards. Despite our best efforts at providing professional development to our new teachers, they continued to struggle. We have undertaken efforts to revamp our hiring process and provided them with a manual outlining our non-negotiable practices. We also provided our 5th grade team extra planning time to meet with the 4th grade team to implement vertical planning. This year we have one returning 5th grade teacher, and it is our hope that will improve the continuity in 5th grade instruction.
Each year we assess our students in the area of literacy three times using the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). Our goal is to have 80% of students at the core support level. When we first started the PLC process, we ended the year with 14% of students needing intensive support, 12% of students needing strategic support, and 74% of students needing core support. While we have not quite reached our goal of 80% of students at the core support level, we ended the 2017-2018 school year with 11% of students needing intensive support, 11% of students needing strategic support, and 78% of students needing core support.
Another assessment we use to measure achievement is the STAR. The STAR reading test measures comprehension, fluency and vocabulary. In 2017-2018, our students achieved a mean percentile rank of 67, up from the 60th percentile at the beginning of the year. The STAR math test assesses skills based on state standards. In 2017-2018, our students achieved a mean percentile rank of 82, up from the 76th percentile at the beginning of the year.
Accelerated Reader is an online reading comprehension program. Students take tests on books they have read independently, read with someone or have been read to. In 2017-2018, our students scored an average of 89.1% correct on all tests. Our students earned 19,672.9 points with a mean point total of 86.6 per student. 86.6 points is well above the recommended point total for most of our students.
As we began the PLC process, we realized that Bartley students were all teachers’ students and not just one teacher’s students. This led to an increase in achievement as we all took responsibility for student learning.
|School Student Achievement Data|
|State Accountability: [Missouri MAP]|
|Percentage of Students Meeting or Exceeding Proficiency|
|SUBJECT||Sub-Group 1||Sub-Group 2||Sub-Group 3||School||State||School||State||School||State||School||State|
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Excellence in recognition of successful implementation of School Wide Positive Behavior Support at a Gold Level 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Exemplary Award of Professional Learning Communities 2015
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Sustaining Exemplary Award of Professional Learning Communities 2018