[-] text size [+]

Reagan Elementary School

School Information

School Name: Reagan Elementary School
School District:Clovis Unified School District
School Address: 3701 Ashlan Ave. Clovis, CA. 93619
School Phone: (559) 327-8900
School Phone: (559) 327-8901
Principal: Dr. Robb Christopherson
Principal Email: robbchristopherson@cusd.com
Web Address: http://reagan.cusd.com/

Demographics

Number of Students: 794
Percent eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch: 35.8%
Percent of Limited English Proficient: 14.7%
Percent of Special Education: 7.1%
Racial/Ethnic Percentages:

  • Asian: 22.7%
  • Filipino: 6.5%
  • Pacific Islander: 0.1%
  • White: 36.1%
  • Hispanic: 26.1%
  • African American: 4.3%
  • Multiple: 2.9%
  • American Indian/Alaskan Native: 1.3%

Student Achievement Data

Scale: % at or above proficient on CA State Assessment (STAR)  

Grade 2
Math
(School/State)
Language Arts
(School/State)
2008
67/59
55/48
2009
78/63
68/53
2010
79/61
70/53

 

Grade 4
Math
(School/State)
Language Arts (School/State)
Writing (School/CUSD)
2008
68/51
76/48
51.9/63.7
2009
69/57
71/54
82.1/80.9
2010
85/60
82/58
NA

 

Grade 6
Math
(School/State)
Language Arts
(School/State)
2008
52/42
47/45
2009
64/44
65/48
2010
59/39
73/54

Reagan Elementary Academic Performance Index (API) (State Goal: 800)

Grade 2
Reagan API
CA API
2007
794
728
2008
823
742
2009
855
755
2010
881
767

Please comment on any aspect of the data that you believe is particularly significant.

All of the high-stakes data supports Reagan’s vision of continuous improvement.  According to the grades 2, 4, and 6 growth reports above, the mathematics growth over the three-year period has grown 12%, 17%, and 7%.  In English-Language Arts, our 3-year growth was 15%, 6%, and 26%.  These results also support the acceleration of Reagan student achievement growth when compared with the overall state growth.  During the last 3 years, Reagan Elementary grew at a rate six times the state average in mathematics: 12% compared to 2% (in grades 2, 4, and 6).  In English-Language Arts, Reagan doubled the state growth rate: 16% compared to 8% (in grades 2, 4, and 6).

The Academic Performance Index (API) is used by California to measure growth on the STAR test and considers the growth of all students, not just accounting for students meeting the minimum requirements for proficiency.  Students are placed into quintile bands with the higher bands weighted with higher scores.  Using this system of measurement, it is evidenced above that Reagan has consistently outperformed expectations and state growth rates.  Including data from four years, Reagan has grown 87 points, far exceeding the minimum requirement of an API of 800.  Reagan’s accelerated growth rate was 225% more than the rate of all California schools combined.

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 data above do not take into account the positive impact that PLCs have had on the achievement of our subgroup and special needs students.  Each year, all of our significant subgroups have met the state and federal benchmarks established by the API and AYP systems.  Every group, in both mathematics and English-Language Arts, benefitted from our PLC work and our intense focus on individual students.  In mathematics, our subgroups have achieved the following growth rates over the 3-year periods: Asian (6%), Hispanic (7%), Special Education (9%), and English Learner (11%).  In English-Language Arts, our subgroups attained the following growth rates: Asian (21%), Hispanic (14%), Special Education (19%), and English Learner (24%).

While we celebrate our school-wide success, our Reagan PLC structure has always focused on the mindset that our “chain” of strength is only as strong as our weakest links.  Our areas and students of need are not solely identified at the end of each year in the high-stakes world; they are identified every day in classrooms that value checking for understanding, provide initial instruction to 80% mastery, and regularly align standards-based quick tests to the standards.  In addition to monitoring data streams and engaging in curricular decisions, our PLCs act as mini-Student Study Team meetings and teachers discuss individual students in addition to developing systems to support students when they “get it” or when they have not achieved mastery. 

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

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

One of the core values of Reagan’s PLCs centers on measurement and evaluation; we know that “what gets measured gets done” and the only way to really know if students have learned what was taught is to have clearly articulated monitoring systems.  From a global perspective, our teachers use the data from the STAR test to audit student achievement and to audit alignment of the short-term assessment tools used throughout the year.  We understand that this summative view is an ineffective process for supporting learning for the students sitting in our classrooms today.  The following strategies have positively affected student achievement, modified the purpose of PLCs, and effected classroom change:

  • Checking for understanding:  There is no better time to intervene than at the moment the student is learning new material.  Our school has developed and incorporated a direct instruction model which includes frequent and random checks of students during initial instruction.  Teachers are able to modify instructional strategies and clearly identify gaps for post-instruction grouping. 
  • Rate of mastery during initial instruction:  Our school values an 80% model, where modeling and guided practice takes place until 4 out of 5 students exhibit mastery.  This model requires teachers to collect “real time” data both formally and informally.
  • Standards-aligned weekly assessments: Over time, our grade level PLCs have developed weekly assessments which are focused on the standards taught during the week.  Included in these tools are spiraled standards based on prior instruction.  The results of these assessments drive the conversations at the weekly PLC meetings and are the primary monitoring tools for determining intervention.
  • Benchmarks: Reagan uses Clovis Unified’s benchmark system for mathematics and English-Language Arts.  These quarterly assessments, aligned to California state standards, offer bigger snapshots of long-term mastery.  The PLCs spend a planning day after each benchmark to analyze results, re-create standards-aligned assessments, and develop long-range intervention programs.
  • Progress monitoring systems:  In addition to our use of a publisher’s online monitoring system, Reagan PLCs and site administration have developed tools to gather the wide range of data into comprehensive electronic sheets that measure individual student standards attainment over time. These are used for the PLC agendas and are submitted monthly to school administration.  In addition, the walls of our PLC room are covered with student progress monitoring cards.  This dynamic process includes color-coded dots which visually monitor progress on formal assessments.
  • Administrator inclusion in PLCs: Our PLC meetings take place at the same time each week in a dedicated room with grade level stations, allowing the principal and vice-principal to be in attendance at every PLC.  This structure allows for informal monitoring but also allows the administration to participate in the discussions and identify ways they can help support student needs.

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

Reagan PLCs have dedicated more time over the last 3 years establishing in-class interventions that immediately give students additional learning time and focused support.  These include:

  • In-lesson intervention and 80% focus: Following the identification of power standards, our teachers explicitly build lessons focused on those standards.  Our direct instruction model expects all classroom lessons to be mastered at a rate of 80% during initial introduction.  Through checking for understanding processes, the teachers immediately modify instruction, integrate new teaching strategies on the spot, and increase modeled and/or guided practice time.  This first line of defense is not only an effective method of intervention, but it is also proving to be quite efficient.  Teachers do not wait until the next PLC meeting to plan intervention strategies; these decisions are made immediately when deficiencies surface.
  • In-class intervention and small grouping:  Following initial instruction, teachers work individually and in small groups to intervene.  Because the instruction on the standard just occurred and because teachers witnessed the exact reason why students are not “getting it,” they are better able to target the intervention process.

The following out-of-class strategies have been developed over the last 4 years and support students beyond the in-class support:

  • Deployment:  Our grade levels deploy their students to increase instructional time for students who have not learned requisite material and to provide enrichment opportunities for students who have.  Each grade level PLC developed a unique deployment process, designed and supported by the teachers.  The student rosters for the deployment period are flexible and based on the focus standards from the prior weeks.  Deployment takes place, on average, about five hours per week.  PLCs also have the option to increase and decrease deployment time to meet unique learning needs.  For example, the 6th grade PLC greatly increased deployment time following the identification of needs on a district benchmark test.  When the grade level achieved their SMART goal established for the deployment, they moved back to the more traditional model.  Flexibility in the system has been a key.
  • Before-school and after-school intervention:  Virtually all grade levels offer traditional intervention programs.  Over the last few years, however, we have moved away from the “you’re low so you go” mentality and have offered smaller, standards-focused interventions taught by the classroom teacher.  The interventions become an extension of the classroom and are built around the current classroom content and usually operate for just a few weeks.
  • Lunch bunch and Physical Education grouping:  The primary teachers at Reagan have additional PLC time and intervention opportunities during the school day through an organized Physical Education tutoring program.  Three days per week, these teachers are offered approximately 45 additional minutes of time to work with students at the end of the school day. After attending a PLC conference two years ago, our upper-grade PLCs got the idea of developing a rotating schedule for Physical Education supervision so that grade level teams could be free to increase PLC meeting time and/or offer additional support to students in need.  In addition, most grade level PLCs also support students by offering lunchtime gatherings.
  • Formal after-school program:  Reagan has offered a formal after-school program, which lasts for three hours per day.  College-age students are on campus to assist students with independent practice time and homework.

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.

Reagan has been focusing on increasing teacher capacity over the last four years, knowing teacher quality is the key component in schools focused on mastery for all.  Our PLC program has been enriched and we have supported collaboration in the following ways:

  • SMART goals:  Accountability does not center as much on results of high-stakes assessments but are centered on SMART goals set by grade levels.  Some SMART goals are lofty and exist within a broader timeframe and others are set by the grade level at one PLC meeting and then followed-up immediately at the next grade level meeting.  Every grade level knows exactly how many students are required to be proficient to meet the school goal of an API of 900.  Goals are set grade level wide and responsibility for all students is shared because of the nature of the SMART goals.
  • Increased alignment:  Reagan has worked since its opening, aligning what gets taught to what is being measured.  Over the last three years, however, the one thing that has changed because of our PLC focus is alignment of what is being taught across classrooms.  The synchronized process was not designed to create a robot-like atmosphere but is used to drive PLC common conversations.  When all teachers in a PLC are teaching the same material and using the same assessments, reflective discussions and powerful reactions are wrought.  This has been an effective change for our school site.
  • Early release Wednesdays:  Every Wednesday our students leave campus 90 minutes early.  This contracted time has moved from “preparation” time to “PLC” time. We hold our PLC meeting during this common time.  This time is always protected and teachers are shielded from staff meetings and other tasks, enabling them to focus on data analysis, intervention strategies, and planning next steps.
  • Focused professional development:  Three years ago, the Reagan staff was trained on effective ways to analyze data.  The process at this time was moved from being one of looking globally at our success to a more scientific approach, focusing on question context, rigor of standards, and individual student success.  Three times each year, teachers participate in full-day release time to analyze data from benchmark tests and to make necessary decisions.  Over the last two years, Reagan has increased focus on our direct instruction model.  This model requires students to attain 80% mastery in a classroom before moving on to independent practice or interventions.  Professional development, PLC discussions, and observations/evaluation center on the mindset of 80%.
  • Classroom coaching:  The administration participates as interactive coaches throughout the year.  Administrator-teacher discussions take place in the classroom and during classroom instruction so teachers can develop skills and immediately practice new strategies.  In addition to formal coaching in the classroom, teachers are given feedback on the use of these strategies through frequent walkthroughs and an electronic feedback form which is emailed directly to the teacher via an iPad when the administrator is still present in the classroom.

List any Awards and Recognition Garnered by Your School

  • 2011-Title I Academic Achievement Award
  • 2010-California Distinguished School Award
  • 2009 & 2010-CLASSI Award-Clovis Assessment System for Sustained Improvement