Glenn W. Levey Middle School

School Information

School Name:  Glenn W. Levey Middle School
School Address:  25300 W. 9 Mile Road
                        Southfield, MI 48034
School Phone:  (248) 746-8741
School Fax:  (248) 746-8718  
Principal:  Kelly A. Dean
Principal E-Mail:  deanka@southfield.k12.mi.us

Demographics

Number of Students:  780
Number eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch:  36%
Percent of Limited English Proficient:  
Percent of Special Education:  
Racial/Ethnic Percentages:

• White (5%)
• Black (92%)
• Hispanic (<1%)
• Asian/Pacific Island (<1%)
• Other (<2%)

Present Student Achievement Data in at least three points to demonstrate trends–for example, three consecutive years or the first, third, and fifth years. The data report should always include the most recent school year and should always offer a basis of comparison (for example, state scores, national scores, similar SES schools)

The chart below represents the growth in student achievement at Levey as measured by the Michigan Educational Assessment Progress (MEAP). The column for African-Americans presents the statewide performance of African-American students on the MEAP. The data reveal that Levey students not only score dramatically higher than other African-American students in Michigan but also have moved from far below the general state average to above the state average. Schools that are looking for how to close the achievement gap can look to Levey as a model.

	2000 Levey, State,A.A.	2005 Levey, State,A.A.
Reading	30, 68, 32	88, 62, 49
Math	31, 54, 34	78, 62, 49

 

MEAP	2004 (G. Levey /State)	2005 (G. Levey /State)
Soc.St.	30, 29	31, 29
Science	66, 66	60, 64

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

The MEAP is a standards-based test, which means that it measures how well students are mastering specific skills defined for each grade by the state of Michigan.

The goal is for all students to meet or exceed state standards on the test.

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 following are Principal Anthony Muhammad’s words regarding the transformation of Levey Middle School in Southfield, Michigan, into a Professional Learning Community: 
I was first exposed to the Professional Learning Community model in 1999 when I was an assistant principal at a middle school in Waterford, Michigan. In the fall of 2002, I received my first opportunity to become a building principal. I received this opportunity at Levey Middle School in Southfield, Michigan. Southfield is a “run-over” suburb bordering Detroit. Our school is 96% African-American and we are a Title 1 school. Levey had been known for poor Michigan Education Assessment Program (MEAP) scores and for being a building that was out-of-control due to poor leadership and poor student conduct. My passion has always been attaining high-achievement in predominately under-achieving schools, particularly schools that have a predominately African-American population, so my placement at Levey was a perfect fit.

From what I had learned about Professional Learning Communities, I felt that the PLC model could work anywhere. So, over the past three years, my staff and I at Levey have adopted the PLC model, and we have seen outstanding results (though we still have a long way to go). I have outlined some of the things that we have done over the past three years to show how high effectiveness can be reached in a high-minority, high-poverty school.

2002–2003 School Year

Initiated Staff-Wide book study of Turning Points 2000, the latest and most accurate research on Middle School Education and Getting Started: Reculturing Schools to Become Professional Learning Communities to introduce the staff to the PLC concept.

Focused heavily on professional development in the areas of pedagogy, classroom management, and methods for helping struggling learners.

Used the Language Arts department to pilot lesson plan alignment and common assessments.

Worked to shift paradigm from “what’s wrong with these kids” to “what can I do to help boost the achievement of our kids.” Most staff meetings were spent on convincing staff members to believe that our kids can achieve at the highest levels.

Improving parent relationships. To assist in this, I hired a parent volunteer coordinator (from Title 1 funds).

2003–2004 School Year

Updated curriculum for all subject matters; Teachers also developed a curriculum pacing chart to assure that their teaching was in sync.

Common assessments for Math, Language Arts, Social Studies, and Science were developed and taken by students at each grade level every nine weeks.

Math, Language Arts, Social Studies, and Science teachers in each grade were given a full day every nine weeks to analyze the common assessment data and develop strategies to target areas of student weakness. Teachers then had to report their findings to the principal.

An “Academic Enrichment” class was created at each grade level to address the needs that teachers identified as areas of weakness in the common assessments; Students have this class every day.

An after school tutoring program was developed to assist students who were in need of additional academic attention.

“Success is the only option!” was adopted as the school-wide motto. This motto is visible throughout our school and present on all of our correspondence.

In-depth analysis was given to our school mission and vision.

All teachers were organized into interdisciplinary teams who share the same students; Each team has both individual and common planning times. In addition to this, all teams have a common planning rubric, which contains the focus for each meeting. Common planning report forms for each team are to be turned into the principal at the end of each week.

Each department set student proficiency goals for the MEAP. These goals were released to the public in addition to all staff members.

An intervention plan was developed by the counseling staff to assist students who have social needs that could interfere with their academic success.

Teachers were allowed to assign after-school detentions for students who consistently fell behind academically. The detentions essentially became forced tutoring.

Student-Led conferences were implemented to improve our students’ ability to reflect on their learning and to involve their parents in that process.

There was an implementation of school-wide writing program in all subjects.

2004–2005 School Year

We specifically targeted PD for teachers within the building.

Sixth grade students had two mandatory math classes; 7th and 8th graders who were earning a D or an F in math had to participate in a mandatory math tutorial.

The administration hired a Student Support Specialist to ensure that no student would fail.

A “Homework Lunch” program was implemented.

A school-wide character education program was implemented during Student Advisory time.

A comprehensive male and female tutoring program was established.

Over 30 Service Learning projects were implemented throughout the building.

Partnerships were established with the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, and Oakland University in order to expose our students to college prep opportunities.

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

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

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

3. Building the capacity of teachers to work as members of high performing collaborative teams who focus the efforts of their team on improved learning for students.

The 2002–2003 school year was used to feel the pulse of the staff, students and the community. Our staff was introduced to research that I felt would help us reach the goals of our mission and vision statements as well as aide the staff in preparation of the implementation of the PLC model. Much effort was given to shifting staff paradigms to one of belief and confidence in our children.

2003–2004 was used to put into action the answers to the following questions: 1) What do we want them to know? 2) How do we know if they have learned it? 3) What do we do when they don’t learn it? (special note: 4) We believe that they can learn it!!).

2004–2005 was used to refine our system programs and emphasize staff development, especially pedagogy. We also put a lot of effort into character development and service learning for students. Mathematics support was also doubled at the sixth grade level.

These results come only after three-years of implementing the PLC model. We are infants in this process, and we have many more aspects of the PLC model to implement and to tailor to meet our needs. We feel that we can eventually be a model for schools with similar demographics and legacies of underachievement by using the PLC model. Within five years, we plan to be leading the state of Michigan in student achievement.

List any Awards and Recognition Garnered by Your School
2004-2005 school year, 6 students failed one or more academic classes, down from 150 in 2002
2004-2005 school year, 148 student suspensions, down from over 3000 during the 2001-2002 school year
52% of Levey students are on the honor roll
18 charitable student service learning projects completed during the 2004-2005 school year
Trailblazing “Hip-Hop” class that links literacy to pop culture
Business course and student run store offered for students in grades 6, 7, and 8 – “The Levey Dollar Store”