District
Plan for Professional Learning
2012-2013
District Professional Development Plan Checklist
Check to assure that
all pieces of your plan are included.
Use this sheet to check off each piece.
REQUIRED √
|
FORM
|
INCLUDED √
|
ü
|
Title page (Include district and
county names)
|
√
|
ü
|
Local Professional Development Plan
Checklist
|
√
|
ü
|
Table of Contents (Page numbered and
correlated)
|
√
|
|
Section
1: District Profile
|
|
ü
|
District Profile Sheet
|
√
|
ü
|
Local PD Committee Profile Sheet
|
√
|
ü
|
Copy of school district's goals
|
√
|
|
Section
2: A. Reflection
|
|
ü
|
Summary of positive aspects of
2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2011-2012 plans
|
√
|
ü
|
Identification of challenges
|
√
|
ü
|
Four-tiered reflection
|
√
|
|
Section
2: B. Needs Assessment
|
|
ü
|
Definition of student achievement
|
√
|
ü
|
Input from stakeholders
|
√
|
ü
|
Key data sources
|
√
|
ü
|
Analysis of needs assessments
|
√
|
ü
|
Copy of
recent needs assessment instrument
|
√
|
|
Section
2: C. PD Goals for the District
|
|
ü
|
Student learning goals
|
√
|
ü
|
List of district professional
development goals
|
√
|
ü
|
Alignment
|
√
|
|
Section
2: D.
District PD Opportunities
|
|
ü
|
PD Structures and processes
|
√
|
ü
|
Key curriculum areas of focus
|
√
|
ü
|
District support
|
√
|
ü
|
Communicated plan
|
√
|
ü
|
Connection between student learning
goals & PD goals
|
√
|
|
Section
2: E. Professional Development
Resources
|
|
ü
|
List of professional development
opportunities
|
√
|
ü
|
Identification of resources
|
√
|
ü
|
Engaging all stakeholders
|
√
|
|
Section
2: F. Ongoing Assessment &
Evaluation
|
|
ü
|
Knowledge, skills and behaviors
|
√
|
ü
|
Data used
|
√
|
ü
|
Additional data
|
√
|
ü
|
Job-embedded professional
development
|
√
|
ü
|
Evaluation of plan
|
√
|
|
Section 3: Plan Summary for District Plan
|
|
ü
|
Reflection
|
√
|
ü
|
Needs assessment
|
√
|
ü
|
Professional development goals
|
√
|
ü
|
Professional development
opportunities
|
√
|
ü
|
Professional development resources
|
√
|
ü
|
Evaluation
|
√
|
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
PREFACE
Page Number
Local
Professional Development Plan Checklist……………..…………………………….…......2
Table
of Contents……………………………………………...……………….….........................3
DISTRICT
PROFILE
District
Profile Sheet………………………………..….………………….…..…………………..4
Local
Professional Development Committee Profile Sheet……….………….…………….……..5
Copy
of School District Goals, Mission Statement, Vision Statement……………........................6
A.
REFLECTION OF PREVIOUS YEAR’S PLAN
1.
Summary of positive aspects & challenges, teacher practices …………………...………….7-9
2. Addressing student learning needs……………...…….………………………………….....9-12
B.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
1.
Definition of student achievement………………………...……………………….………….13
2.
Input from stakeholders………….……………………………..………………....…...…..13-14
3.
Key data sources……………………........................................................................................14
4.
Analysis of needs assessments………………………………………………………...…..14-16
5. Copy of recent needs assessment
instrument……………………………………………...17-20
C.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT GOALS FOR THE DISTRICT
1. Student learning goals.……………………………………...……..……………….……….…21
2.
List of district professional development goals……...……………………………….……21-24
3. Alignment…………………………………………………………………………………24-25
D.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES
1. Professional development structures and
processes……………………………….……... 26-27
2. Key curriculum areas of
focus………………………………………………………………...27
3. District
support……………………………………………………………………..……...28-29
4. Communicated plan…………………………………………………………………………...30
E. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES
1. List of professional development
opportunities………..…………………….……...…….31-32
2.
Identification of resources……………………………………………………....………........32
3.
Engaging all stakeholders………………………………………………………………....32-33
F. ONGOING ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION
1.
Knowledge, skills and behaviors…………………………………………..……...………….34
2. Student
data …………….…………………………...……………………………..……..34-35
3.
Additional
data…………………………………......................................................................35
4.
Job-embedded professional development…………………………………………………….35
5.
Evaluation of plan…………………………………………………………………………….36
G. PLAN SUMMARY FOR DISTRICT PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT……..…....37
Bridgeton High School……………………………………………………………………….38-39
Broad Street School…………………………..………………………………………………40-41
Buckshutem Road School…………...………………………………………………………..42-43
Cherry Street School…………………...……………………………………………………..44-45
Geraldyn O. Foster Early Childhood Center………………..………………………………..46-47
Indian Avenue School………………………………………………………………………..48-50
Quarter Mile Lane School………..…………………………………………………………..51-52
West Avenue School……………………..…………………………………………………..53-55
Appendix A – 2011-2012
PD Calendar
Appendix B – PD Evaluation Form (2011)
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
DISTRICT
PROFILE SHEET
Name of District: Bridgeton
District Code: 0540
Address: 41 Bank Street
County: Cumberland
County Code :
11
District Factor Group: A
Chief School Administrator: Dr. Thomasina Jones
Type of District (check one):
K-5___ K-6___ K-12___ 7-12___ 9-12 X Other (specify): Pre-K-12
List names of school buildings, grades, current
student enrollment, and number of
professional staff members:
Number of professional staff members (all those who hold
instructional or educational service licenses; as Child Study Team members.)
Name of building School
Code Grades
Enrollment Cert. Staff
Geraldyn O. Foster 150 PK 482 45
Early Childhood
Center
Broad Street School 030 K-8 1030 91
Buckshutem Road School 050 K-8 392 38
Cherry Street School 055 K-8 582 59
Indian Avenue School 060 K-8 652 57
Quarter Mile Lane School 100 K-8 326 41
West Avenue School 130 K-8 750 68
Bridgeton High School 020 9-12 1054 128
The District
Report on Professional Learning
D1. Please provide the names
and positions of the participants on the Expanded Local Professional
Development Committee responsible for preparing the report on professional
development. Have ELPDC members sign off on the report prior to approval by
the local board.
EXPANDED
LOCAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
|
|||
Last Name
|
First Name
|
Position
& Location
|
Signature
|
Johnson
|
Nedd
|
Assistant Superintendent
|
|
Realdine
|
Dorothy Dr.
|
Director of Curriculum
Bank Street Administrative
Offices
|
|
Robinson
|
Tanya Dr.
|
Director of Early Childhood
Dr. Geraldyn O. Foster Early Childhood Center
|
|
Okafor
|
Ericka
|
Supervisor of Bilingual
Education
Bank Street Administrative
Offices
|
|
Wilchensky
|
Barbara
|
Response to Intervention
Supervisor
Bank Street Administrative
Offices
|
|
Gbesi
|
Veronica
|
Supervisor of Curriculum
Bank Street Administrative Offices
|
|
Macchia
|
Derek
|
Principal
Buckshutem School
|
|
Maloney
|
Steve
|
Teacher
West Avenue School
|
|
Backman
|
James
|
Teacher
Broad Street School
|
|
Meyers
|
Thomas
|
Teacher
Cherry Street School
|
|
Arenberg
|
Sarah
|
Teacher
Dr. Geraldyn O. Foster
Early Childhood Center
|
|
Horwitz
|
Karen
|
Facilitator
Bridgeton High School
|
|
Cairone
|
Sarah
|
Teacher
Quarter Mile Lane
|
|
Waddington
|
Isolde
|
Teacher
Indian Avenue School
|
|
DISTRICT GOALS
·
Improve student achievement
as measured by standardized tests, report card grades, and student behavior
·
Improve safety
for students and employees
·
Increase parental
and community involvement
·
Improve district
facilities
The mission of the Bridgeton
Public Schools is to have all pupils meet the Core Curriculum Content Standards
and graduate from high school as lifelong learners who will make positive
contributions to the community, act with the highest moral and ethical
standards, promote equal opportunity, and participate in the advancement of our
democratic society.
VISION STATEMENT
To create a transparent
school system, with state of the art facilities, clearly focused on having all
students achieve academic and interpersonal excellence, supported by committed
parents, community members and staff who feel a moral obligation to help all
students meet the highest standards.
TEMPLATE FOR
DISTRICT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
2010-2013
Summary of positive aspects of prior Professional Development
Plans
In 2008-2009, 2009-2010,
2010-2011 and 2011-2012 Professional Development Plans for the Bridgeton
School District were comprehensive and flexible. Teaching staff were provided multiple
opportunities to pursue professional development linked to curriculum
initiatives and instructional strategies.
Addressing changes in Core Curriculum Content Standards, revising
curriculum, addressing State mandates and the ever changing staff development
needs were considered when developing opportunities for professional
development.
In
order to ensure an ongoing, sustained classroom focused professional learning
program in the district, three full days of in-service training were provided
as well as professional development workshops through the school year. Results from the 2009, 2010 and 2011
administration of NJ ASK for grades 3-8 and NJ HSPA for grade 11 indicate that
the staff development was effective at some grade levels and in some sub
groups. However, the results continue to
indicate a need to incorporate additional training for teachers of special
education and LEP students.
In 2008-2009 and 2009-2010
professional development was provided to assist the math teachers (including
bilingual education and special education) in providing best practices in the
teaching of mathematics. Training on mathematics open-ended questions and the
use of rubrics, graphing calculators, and incorporating higher order questions
and constructive feedback was provided to staff members.
In 2010-2011, professional
development was provided to assist the math teachers (including bilingual
education and special education) in program components/math content and
incorporating technology into the math classroom. In 2011-2012, professional development was provided to assist the math
teachers (including bilingual education and special education) in program
components/math content, implementing the Common Core State Standards in
Mathematics, writing in mathematics and incorporating the use of the TINavigator
and Smartboard into the math classroom.
During the course of the 2008-2009
and 2009-2010 school years, teachers continued to receive professional
development in the areas of literacy. The district has adopted the Reading and
Writing Workshop as the frameworks for literacy instruction. The emphasis in
each of these areas is small group instruction and focused rigorous attention
to daily reading and writing. In 2010-2011, the district has continued to
implement the Reading and Writing Workshop. Professional development has been
provided in several ways. Teachers received formal training, peer observation,
informal observation, literacy coaching and grade level meetings to support the
acquisition of skills and knowledge needed to implement this framework. In
2010-2011, additional training was provided for the Being a Writer program by the Developmental Studies Center
consultants in grades K-5. Also in 2010-2011,
professional development was provided to assist the language arts
literacy teachers (including bilingual education, special education) on vocabulary
development/acquisition, reading fluency, comprehension strategies for
narrative and informational text, guided
reading, genre studies and writing strategies.
In 2011-2012, professional development was provided to assist the language
arts literacy teachers (including bilingual education, special education) to increase
engagement and rigor through best practices implemented with knowledge and rigor.
During 2011-2012, teachers in grades K-2 will receive focused professional
development in the following areas:
·
Guided
Reading (grade 1)
·
Comprehension
Strategies (grade 2)
·
When
Readers Struggle (grades 1-3)
·
Writing
Workshop with our Youngest Writers (grade K)
·
Assessment
(Fountas & Pinnell Results, Administering Running Records, High Frequency
words, and Beginning Writing)
·
Writing
(Being a Writer Program and Genre study; use of a Rubric)
During 2011-2012, teachers in grades 3-5 will receive focused
professional development in the following areas:
·
Reading
Workshop
·
Being A
Writer-coaching
·
Assessment/Rubrics
During 2011-2012,
teachers in grades 6-8 will receive focused professional development in the
·
Holt
McDougal Program Implementation
·
Addressing
the needs of Struggling and Hard to Reach Readers
·
Coaching
in middle grades literacy
·
Supporting
ELL’s in Upper Grades
·
Best
Practices in Adolescent Literacy
·
Writing/Rubrics
·
Rowan
Literacy Consortium (grade 8)
During 2011-2012,
teachers in grades 9-12 will receive focused professional development in the
·
Vocabulary Development
·
AP Reading Strategies
·
Support Strategies for At-Risk Readers
·
Benchmark Assessments
The results of feedback from
staff development (New Teacher Orientation, In-service days, Novice Teacher
training, SIOP training, in-district workshops) indicate that teachers believe
that their needs were met. Positive
aspects of the plan include:
·
Professional development opportunities were differentiated based on the
staff’s level of proficiency, interests and distinct initiatives.
·
The plan was comprehensive and flexible addressing changes in the Core
Curriculum Content Standards and revisions to curriculum and staff needs.
Collaboration among staff members and the emergence of Professional Learning
Communities at the building level continue to increase.
Identification of challenges:
There are some challenges that were a concern:
·
Providing substitutes for staff development
·
Providing staff development to the vast number of novice teachers and
newly reassigned teachers (2011-2012) in our district
·
Assessing how the impact of staff development has increased student
performance
·
Common planning/preparation time among grade level and content teachers
·
Elimination of LAL coaches, math coaches, facilitator (K-8), and tutors
(2010-2011)
·
Reduction of building level supervisors
Addressing student learning
needs:
During the 2008-09, 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 school years, state testing data was disaggregated and
discussed with teachers and members of the administrative team to identify
areas of instructional practice that needed to be addressed. As a result of
articulation meetings with grade level teams and department staff, administrative interests and observations,
along with information from consultants a determination was made to include
writing in the content area, differentiated instruction, support to diverse
learners and using assessment to inform instruction. Additionally, the
district’s professional development goals were infused into the school level
professional development opportunities.
Initiatives implemented in previous years were
continued during the 2008-09, 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years with additional professional development.
Content based initiatives were supported during the in-service days.
Professional development included state mandates to provide training in Suicide
Intervention, Child Abuse Reporting, Blood Borne Pathogens, Affirmative
Action/Anti-Bullying, Sexual Harassment and Right to Know.
District-wide
workshops and school level workshops were conducted on “Classroom Instruction that Works” (Marzano) with an emphasis on
effective use of research-based instructional strategies for increasing student
achievement. Teachers implemented the
instructional strategies into classroom practice in such a way as to maximize
student achievement. In 2007-2008 the
research-based instructional strategies the district focused on were:
Identifying Similarities and Differences, and Summarizing and Note Taking.
Templates were developed and implemented in support of focal areas. In 2008-2009, the district continued using “Classroom Instruction that Works”
(Marzano) and focused on the research-based strategies of Setting Objectives
and Providing Feedback. During walkthroughs and CAPA visits, there was an
increase in the posting of objectives. There was evidence that the students’
work contained constructive feedback from the teachers. However, there is room
for improvement in the aforementioned areas. In 2009-2010, the district
continued using “Classroom Instruction
that Works” (Marzano) and focused on the research-based strategies of
Reinforcing Effort & Providing Recognition and Homework & Practice.
There was evidence of reinforcing effort and providing recognition with
teachers’ posting student work with constructive feedback. In addition, the district refined the report
card policy (#5124) to reflect percentage weights for summative and formative
assessments, homework and class work.
All administrators received
training on Power Walkthroughs by McREL in September 2009. In 2010-2011, all
administrators will continue to receive training on Power Walkthroughs by
McREL. Also in 2010-2011, district-wide administrator workshops were conducted
on “The Art and Science of Teaching”
(Marzano) and the “The Highly Engaged
Classroom” (Marzano). In 2011-2012
administrators received training on “Meeting
Students Where They Live: Motivation in Urban Schools” by Richard Curwin; School
Ethics and School Governance and the latest in school law; Students Rights and
Responsibilities; Staff Rights and Responsibilities; Special Education Law,
Regulations and Due Process Procedures and CPI’s Nonviolent Crisis
Intervention.
All
administrators believe it is vital to monitor instruction by conducting routine
classroom observations. Administrators observe teachers' use of effective
instructional strategies, level of student engagement, use of technology, and
additional teacher practices research has proven to influence student learning.
Through the use of Power Walkthroughs, administrators determine that staff
development efforts are positively impacting teaching and student learning.
Assisting teachers in the acquisition of instructional
strategies to enhance the performance of English Language Learners continued to
be an emphasis in the district. In 2008-2009, SIOP training was provided during
the summer and school year. In 2009-2010, the district forged a partnership
with Rowan University to provide comprehensive professional development in sheltered instruction observation protocol (SIOP) which was provided
during the school year. Since the goal is the simultaneous acquisition of
language, content knowledge and skills, students who test at Level 3 & 4
have the opportunity to work in their content level courses while fostering
their English development. In 2010-2011, the district continued to implement
SIOP strategies. In 2011-2012, the
district continued to provide SIOP training at Rowan University and these SIOP
strategies continued to be implemented.
In 2007-2008, the district
first implemented READ180, a technology-based language arts literacy
intervention program for the low performing students in two elementary schools.
The READ180 Program is an intensive reading intervention program which assists
educators in addressing the problem of illiteracy on multiple fronts, using
technology, print, and professional development. Over the past two years, the
READ180 program has been expanded to three schools within the district. Data has shown an increase in student
achievement in reading for those students receiving this supplemental program.
In 2009-2010, professional development was provided for teachers who were
implementing the READ180 program. In 2010-2011, the READ180 Program has been
expanded to all K-8 schools and an additional after-school enrichment component
has been added. Additional professional development was provided to teachers on
the READ180 Program and System 44
Program. System
44 is a foundational reading and phonics program designed
for our most challenged, struggling readers. System 44 helps students
understand that the English language is a finite system of 44 sounds and 26
letters that can be mastered. In 2011-2012,
the READ180 program continued in the district, however in the K-8 schools it
was shifted to an afterschool program. In the district’s special education
classes, READ180 and System 44 continues to be utilized during the
instructional day.
Also, the district first implemented in each elementary school the use of Response to Intervention (RTI) program in 2007-2008. RTI includes three “tiers” of instruction with more intensive help provided if a child does not respond at each tier. In 2010-2011, the district has discontinued the implementation of the RTI program due to budget restraints. In 2011-2012, the district hired a district RTI supervisor and will hire 32 RTI Math and LAL teachers for grades K-8.
The high school implemented
the Talent Development High School (TDHS) secondary education reform model in
2006-2007. The TDHS model consists of a ninth-grade academy which is a
self-contained school-within-a-school with interdisciplinary teacher teams
designed to provide ninth-graders a smooth transition to high school and a
caring, respectful environment in which to begin their high school
careers. For students in grades 10 through 12, career academies are
self-contained small learning communities. These career academies in the high
school each have a career focus in core subjects, as well as elective courses.
The high school will continue to use the TDHS model. In 2010-2011, all staff
members received professional development on Responding to the Early Warning
Indicators (of student drop-out) by the TDHS providers. This professional development included
identifying students who are at high risk of dropping out of school and
implementing intervention strategies in improving student attendance, behavior
and course passing rates. In 2011-2012, all but one of the eight technical
assistance days in the TDHS contract were devoted to the Math/Science
departments to support a return to full implementation of the TDHS curricular
materials for Math. The one remaining
day was utilized to provide training to the high school academy leadership
teams. The focus of this training was on Developing Resiliency in Staff and
Students. This training expanded previous learning related to Responding to
Early Warning Indicators. Academy leaders have integrated components of the
Resiliency training into professional learning activities during extended day
academy meetings to benefit the entire staff.
The high school Math/Science Supervisor began working collaboratively
with the TDHS Math Instructional
Facilitator during the summer to prepare for the professional development needs
of the staff. The focus has been on increasing student engagement in classroom
discourse and inquiry activities using higher level questioning based on
Bloom’s taxonomy.
In 2009-2010, Bridgeton High
School (BHS) has partnered with FEA/NJASCD/Kean College in their “Putting It
Together” Program. BHS chose three
components of their four-part comprehensive process to assist them in their
efforts: the Instructional Core, Blueprints and Assessment.
The modules have a positive impact on raising teacher expectations, utilizing
instructional strategies and providing meaningful feedback that will raise the
rigor in all content areas. Selected
staff members have been meeting during their common planning groups and
department meetings to share/review data and review their common assessments
and benchmark tasks. In 2010-2011, BHS has continued to provide professional
development on implementing “The Instructional Cycle”. In 2011-2012 a third cohort will be
trained and receive classroom embedded coaching support. Also, in 2011-2012
Language Arts and Math teachers analyzed established benchmark tasks including
writing samples and Gates-MacGinnitie reading level assessments for language
arts literacy and common unit tests for mathematics. Department supervisors are
integrating these activities regularly into monthly department and weekly
common planning meetings.
In
2009-2010, Bridgeton High School staff members selected for the SMARTmove
(assessment and quality questioning) trainings have participated in increase
collaboration as they look at student data and their formative and summative
assessments to raise the rigor. The
first cohort of 40 staff members who were trained in 2009-2010 continues to
implement these strategies. In
2010-2011, no other staff members were trained due to budget restraints. In 2009-2010, Bridgeton High School (BHS) has
partnered with FEA/NJASCD/Kean College in their “Putting It Together”
Program. BHS chose three components of
their four-part comprehensive process to assist them in their efforts: the Instructional
Core, Blueprints and Assessment. The modules have a positive
impact on raising teacher expectations, utilizing instructional strategies and
providing meaningful feedback that will raise the rigor in all content
areas. The Blueprints component helps
teachers to develop effective instructional strategies to assist struggling
students “learn how to learn” behaviorally and academically. In 2010-2011, BHS continued to provide
professional development on implementing “Blueprints” to an additional cohort
of teachers and coaching assistance to previously trained teachers to support
classroom implementation of the instructional strategies. In 2011-2012, a third cohort will be trained and receive classroom
embedded coaching support.
In 2008-2009, the teaching
staff and administrators began implementing data analysis from Results: The
Key to Continuous School Improvement (Schmoker) on how to improve schools
with a staff that regularly collects and analyzes data from measurable goals. A
staff meeting is held at least once a month in which the Schmoker model is
used. This model has continued to be
implemented in 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.
In 2008-2009, the Work
Sampling System (WSS) was first implemented in the pre-school program. This
assessment system enabled teachers to derive student performance data from five
academic domains which fostered further individualized instruction. The Work Sampling System continues to be used
in the pre-school program.
The district also made a major commitment to
continuing job-embedded professional development. To that end, the district
employed a mathematics and language arts literacy coach in each building for
the past several years. These coaches
provided content knowledge and resources – including teaching strategies,
assessment techniques, assessment of skills, building and district trainings,
interpretation of assessment results, classroom routines and practices that
promote student success. Support was
provided to general education teachers, bilingual teachers and special
education teachers. In 2010-2011, the math and LAL coach positions were
abolished due to budget restraints. For the last several years, the district
also employed four master teachers who support the pre-school teaching
staff. In 2010-2011, the number of
master teachers was reduced from four teachers to three teachers due to budget
restraints.
In 2008-2009, the district
partnered with Rowan University to provide comprehensive professional development
in Language Arts Literacy through their literacy consortium to the Cherry
Street School and the Broad Street School, both under CAPA review. In
2008-2009, the focus of the literacy consortium was on reading. The district
continued the partnership that will include a focus on writing during the
2009-2010 school year. In 2010-2011, the
partnership with Rowan University will continue with the vice principals of
Broad Street School, Cherry Street School and Buckshutem Road School for the
purpose of building capacity among instructional leaders. In 2009-2010 the
Cherry Street School and the Broad Street School both under CAPA reviews are
part of the LAL Consortium. In 2010-2011, all assistant principals from
the Buckshutem School, Cherry Street School and the Broad Street School
attended the LAL Consortium. In 2011-2012, all K-8
schools have representatives who will participate in the literacy consortium. A cadre of LAL teachers has been selected to participate in the Major Speakers portion
of the Literacy Consortium program. These teachers will assist in
improving instruction in LAL at the classroom
level and providing a vehicle for sharing best instructional practices.
In addition, the district partnered with LLTeach consultants to work with the
Broad Street School math teachers by providing a model lesson, followed by a
debriefing session to support the discussion of why the model lesson reflected
best practices in mathematics. In 2010-2011 the LLTeach consultants were
eliminated due to budget restraints. In
2011-2012, the LLTeach coaching model was reinstituted and provided training to
the math teachers at the Broad Street School, Cherry Street School and the
Indian Avenue School.
In the current school year, the vast majority of
teaching staff are completing their professional development hours either by
attending summer trainings or school workshops. The vast majority of teachers
have completed far more than the minimal 20 hours of professional development.
As the district moves forward
with professional development, the transformation from activities driven to
results orientated model will continue. Professional development will be
centered upon best practices for teaching and learning. Teachers will continue
to work in collaborative grade level and/or content specific teams to focus on
student work and specific strategies for improving student achievement.
Professional Development will continue to support implementation of the research-based
math and language arts literacy programs as well as infusion of technology
across the curriculum. Additional areas of professional development will
continue to focus on meeting the needs of diverse learners, assessment and
instructional strategies.
All of the elements in our
current plan and previous plans reflect that effective staff development must
be consistent and focused on classroom instruction. Professional development
incorporates curriculum writing/revising according to the curriculum cycle.
The district emphasis is on
supporting teachers in gaining additional strategies to assist our population
of diverse learners in Language Arts Literacy and Mathematics. In response to
the ever changing nature of technology it is essential to continually support
our teachers in implementing technology in the classroom. Out of district,
in-district visitations, webinars, and research articles will continue to
support the professional development of our teachers in areas relevant to
effective teaching practices.
1. Definition of Student Achievement
The Bridgeton
Public Schools definition of student achievement is found in the district’s
mission statement. The mission of the
Bridgeton Public Schools is to have all pupils meet the New Jersey Core Curriculum
Content Standards, 2010 Common Core
State Standards and graduate from high school as lifelong learners who will
make positive contributions to the community, act with the highest moral and
ethical standards, promote equal opportunity, and participate in the
advancement of our democratic society.
There were common
threads among each school’s definition of student achievement. The
commonalities were that all students will be able to utilize 21st
Century Skills as it applies to its real life application in the world to
positively contribute to our community. This will be demonstrated as students
experience academic success leading to proficiency as evidenced by NJASK,
Algebra I EOC, HSPA, ACCESS and
district summative assessments scores.
The student learning
priorities highlighted were that students continually strive to meet their
individual learning goals in order to read well, independently, and with
understanding; to understand mathematical processes and skills needed to
succeed in an exceedingly challenging and changing global community; to gain
the ability to synthesize information and use it effectively in a variety of
ways; to use critical thinking to problem solve; to behave in a manner that
creates the optimum learning environment for each student.
The district will continue to
provide ongoing professional development to enhance the teachers’ content
knowledge which will undoubtedly increase student achievement. The district’s
professional development will include developing differentiated instruction to
meet the academic, social/emotional and physical needs of all students. The
professional development plan will also include a deepening understanding on
how to incorporate varied assessments into the teachers’ instructional
practice. The district is cognizant of its obligation to provide professional
development opportunities that are reflective of adult learning and
development. The district recognizes the need to constantly evaluate the
effectiveness of its professional development program by classroom
observations, analysis of test data, teacher, student and parent feedback. The
district supports the development professional learning communities by
providing diverse opportunities for staff including professional development
days, after school sessions, summer workshops and college courses.
2. Input from Stakeholders
The LPDC consists of a
representative from each school. The committee was further comprised of
teachers, building administrators and district staff. Additionally, each school
has a professional development committee whose stakeholders can include Early Childhood Advisory Council (ECAC), School Leadership Council (SLC) members and school staff members.
At the beginning of each
school year, all stakeholders are gathered to discuss the goals and objectives
of the coming year. The SLC also communicates the priorities for the school
year. Also, the district professional development plan is disseminated to all
schools as well as all SLC members. Additionally, the plan is placed on the
district website for all community stakeholders to view. The district publishes
a quarterly district news letter identifying priorities within the district as
it relates to student learning priorities. Furthermore, parental input was
sought through parent conferences, school
events, Parent Teacher Organizations, ECAC as well as feedback from staff
members of Intervention and Referral Service Teams also were part of the
process of identifying specific priorities.
The LPDC prepared and implemented a plan to assess
professional development priorities. The assessment process methods used to
gather information by the Professional Development Committee consisted of a
needs assessment, including a paper survey and staff interviews. Committee
members conferred with respective staff to identify areas of need as well as
areas of expertise. All staff in the district received Professional Development
information via the district’s curriculum newsletter and through emails. All
professional development activities are publicized in the professional
development calendar which is posted on the district website.
Evidence of professional
learning needs of the staff are gathered from various sources including, but
not limited to, formal and informal teacher observations and surveys,
Professional Growth Plans (PGP), monthly grades level meetings with
administrators, and school groups which may consist of parents, teachers,
students and community members (SLC or ECAC). A Professional Development Survey
was provided to the staff, highlighting areas of interest directly related to
professional development activities. The survey was separated by focus areas,
listing several workshop choices under each specific category. Teachers were
asked to select 10 or fewer areas of interest that they would like to receive
additional training. These results were then tallied and the top six were
highlighted. The LPDC then compiled the
data into a district priority list.
3. Key Data Sources
The use of varied strategies
for assessing the professional development needs of the staff has allowed the
Professional Development Committee to create a plan that will support teachers’
instruction with the ultimate goal of increasing student achievement. Several
factors contributed to identification of needs: classroom observations, review
of student assignments and assessments (summative assessments and state
assessments), student demographic data, student attendance and disciplinary
records, teacher requests/needs, and CAPA recommendations. The Director of
Assessments provided the district and each school a detailed analysis of
student data to be shared with staff.
In 2008-2009, the Early Learning Improvement
Consortium, in collaboration with the New Jersey Department of Education,
conducts an assessment in six randomly selected preschool classrooms
identifying areas needing improvement as defined by Early Childhood Environment
Rating Scale. The areas identified as needs
improvement are addressed through professional development. In 2009-2010 the
Early Learning Improvement Consortium was discontinued due to state funding
reduction. In 2010-2011, the funding was restored to the Early Learning
Improvement Consortium to conduct assessments for the school year. The district implemented the NJDOE Data
Summary Tool in 2009-2010 and plans to continue its use.
4. Analysis of Needs Assessment
The areas identified by the
survey completed by staff were consistent with district goals for improving
student achievement in Language Arts Literacy and Math, and for infusion of
technology into the curriculum. Additionally, staff identified as areas of
concern meeting the needs of students with disabilities and English language
learners as priority areas.
An analysis of the 2009-2010
survey results, indicate the need for professional development in the following
areas:
• Curriculum and Content
o
Continued professional development needed to support implementation of
standards-based
research-supported programs
o
Higher Order Thinking Questions
o
Balanced Literacy
o
Pre-School Tools of the Mind Curriculum
• Instructional Strategies
o
Differentiated Instruction
o
Cooperative Learning
• Diverse Learners
o
Sheltered Instruction for ELL students in Mainstream classes
• Special Needs
o
Assisting students with Special Needs
o
Co-teaching in Special Education inclusion classrooms
• Assessment
- Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills
(DIBELS)
- Assessing Comprehension and Communication in
English State-to-State (ACCESS)
- Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS)
- Preschool Classroom Mathematics Inventory (PCMI)
- Infant/Toddler
Environment Rating Scale (ITERS)
- Maculaitis Assessment of Competencies (MAC) II
- Running Records
- Learnia
- Fountas & Pinnell
- NJASK, HSPA
• Technology
o
Integration across the content
o
Use of technology to assist students with diverse learning needs
An analysis of the 2010-2011
survey results, indicate the need for professional development in the following
areas:
Curriculum and Content:
o Guided Reading
o Writer’s Workshop
o Genre Writing
o Basic Reading (Vocabulary
Development, Comprehension, Phonics, Phonemic Awareness and Fluency)
o Science Content and Inquiry
o Improving NJASK Student
Success
o Everyday Mathematics Program
o Open-Ended Questions
o Learning Centers
Instructional Strategies
o Classroom Management Skills
o Differentiated Instruction
o Special Education Strategies
o Working with
Parents/Community Effectively
o Motivating Students
o Cultural
Sensitivity/Diversity Issues
Technology
o Study Island Program
o Microsoft Office
o Elmos, LCD, Smartboards
Assessment
o Use of rubrics
o Alternate Means of
Assessment in the Classroom
An analysis of the 2011-2012 survey results, indicate
the need for professional development in the following areas:
Curriculum and Content:
o
Comprehension Strategies
o
Guided Reading
(K-4)
o
Early Primary Writing (K-2)
o
Teaching Basic Reading: Vocabulary Development, Comprehension,
Phonics, Phonemic Awareness and Fluency
o
Writer’s Workshop
o
Genre Writing
o
Development and Use of Open-Ended Questions (Math)
o
Developing and Implementing Learning Centers (Math)
Instructional
Strategies:
o
Improving Classroom Management Skills
o
Differentiated Instruction
o
Learning More about Community Resources for the Classroom
o
Motivating Students
o
Questioning Strategies
o
Special Education Strategies
Assessments:
o
Use of Rubrics
o
Use of Alternative Means of Assessment in the
Classroom
Technology:
o
Use of Elmo’s/LCD Projectors
o
Use of Smartboards/BrightLinks
2012-2013 Needs Assessment Instrument
BRIDGETON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
SURVEY
School______________________ Grade
_____________
The Bridgeton Public School District is
gathering data concerning staff development activities. The results of
this survey will assist the district in making future decisions regarding
professional development activities at both the district and building levels.
Please completed this survey by
Friday, February 10, 2012
Please check 10 or fewer areas of
professional development which are of interest to you:
LAL/Reading
_____Provide training in the
Implementation of the Core LAL Program
_____Provide training in
Comprehension Strategies
_____Provide training in
Guided Reading (K-4)
_____Provide training in
Small Group Instruction (5-8)
_____Provide training in
Readers’ Workshop
_____Provide training in
Writer’s Workshop
_____Provide training in
Content Area Reading Across Content Areas
_____Provide training in
Early Primary Writing (K-2)
_____Provide training in
Developmental Writing (PK)
_____Provide training in
Genre Writing
_____Provide training in
Running Records
_____Provide training in
Holistic Scoring
_____Provide training in teaching basic reading: Vocabulary Development, Comprehension,
Phonics, Phonemic Awareness and Fluency
_____Provide training in
Understanding the Priorities in the Current LAL Common Core State Standards
Science
_____Provide training in
Improving Knowledge of Science Content
_____Provide training in
Improving Knowledge of Science Inquiry
_____Provide training on
using Probes
_____Provide training in Understanding
the Priorities in the Current New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Science
Standards
_____Provide
training in Improving Student Success on the NJASK Assessments
_____Provide training in
Improving Student Success on the Biology State Assessment
Mathematics
_____Provide training in the
Implementation of the Everyday Mathematics Program
_____Provide training in the
Implementation of the Pre-Algebra Program
_____Provide training in the
Implementation of the Algebra Program
_____Provide training in
Development of Math Content
_____Provide
training in Understanding the Priorities in the
2010 Math Common Core State Standards
_____Provide training in
Development and Use of Open-Ended Questions
_____Provide training in
Developing and Implementing Learning Centers
General Strategies
_____Provide training in the
Response to Intervention (RTI) Math Program
_____Provide training in the
Response to Intervention (RTI) LAL Program
_____Provide training in the
Tools of the Mind Curriculum (PK)
_____Provide training in PBS
Strategies (PK)
_____Provide training in
Improving Student Success in AP Courses
_____Provide training in
Improving Classroom Management Skills
_____Provide training in
Differentiated Instruction
_____Provide training in
Questioning Strategies
_____Provide training in
Special Education Strategies
_____Provide training in
Developing and Using Portfolios
_____Provide training in
Standards-Based Learning Centers
_____Provide training in
Flexible Groups
_____Provide training in
Learning Styles
_____Provide training in
Grouping Students for Instruction
_____Provide training in
Developing Thematic Units
_____Provide training in
Cooperative Teaching in an Inclusive Classroom
_____Provide training in SIOP
_____Provide training in
Instructional Strategies for ELL students
_____Provide training in Ways
of Working More Effectively with Parents
_____Provide training in Learning More about Community
Resources That Can be used in the Classroom
_____Provide training in
Motivating Students
_____Provide training in
Cultural Sensitivity/Diversity Issues
Technology
_____Provide training in the
Use of the Study Island Program to Improve Student Achievement
_____Provide training in the
Use of Learnia.com to Develop Assessments
_____Provide training in the
use of NJSmart Program to Gather Data to Drive Instruction
_____Provide training in the
Use of Graphing Calculators
_____Provide training in the
Use of Fastt Math Program
_____Provide training in the
Use of IXL Math Software
_____Provide training in the
Use of Geometry SketchPad
_____Provide training in
Incorporating Microsoft Office skills into Content Areas
_____Provide training in the
Use of Elmo’s/LCD Projectors
_____Provide training in the
Use of Smartboards/BrightLinks
_____Provide training in the
Renzulli Model (Differentiated project resource for all content areas)
Data/Assessments
_____Provide training in the
Use of State Assessment Data to Drive Instruction
_____Provide training in the
Administration of DIBELS
_____Provide training in Work
Sampling Systems Electronic Portfolios (PK)
_____Provide training in the
Use of the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment
_____Provide training in the
Use of District Benchmarks to Drive Instruction
_____Provide training in the
Use of Rubrics
_____Provide training in the
Use of Alternative Means of Assessment in the Classroom
_____Provide training in the
Use of Formative Assessment to Drive Instruction
Other professional
development requested:
1. Student Learning Goals
The focus of all professional development has, as an
organizing principle, improvement of student achievement, specifically in the
areas of Language Arts Literacy and Mathematics. The study and analysis of data
to improve student achievement, as well as to identify areas of need for
professional development has been an essential component of the planning
process.
2. List of District Professional Development
Goals
Bridgeton is committed to
providing a professional development plan that incorporates varied structures
and designs for the delivery of professional development. Professional
development activities include experiences that are intended to increase
teachers’ understanding of their respective content areas with specific
emphasis upon the relationship between daily classroom lessons and alignment to
NJCCCS, Common Core State Standards, WIDA standards and NJPTLS (NJPTLSQ). Further, the professional
development opportunities are designed to assist teachers by providing research
supported strategies relevant to student behaviors, learning styles, and the
most effective strategies to provide instruction to a community of diverse
students. Opportunities for collaboration, the sharing of best practices, and
reflection are built into the process to foster the development of school-based
professional learning communities.
The support and professional
development of new teachers to the district, particularly novice teachers has
been deemed eminently important to the district. The new direction for
professional development in the district has been supported by collaboration by
stakeholders in the schools and the broader community: professional
organizations, national associations, community organizations, parents,
administrators, students, and teachers. The district recognizes the importance
of continual assessment and evaluation of current and future professional
development plans to assess whether identified goals are being addressed.
Additionally important is the need for follow-up on professional development
activities. It is essential that teachers work to implement research based
programs within their classes. Administration at both the school and district level,
ensure that sufficient allocation of resources are in place.
Professional
Development Goals:
Bridgeton School District
will:
• Provide our teachers with
sustained professional development opportunities to support curriculum
development aligned with NJCCCS, Common Core State Standards, WIDA standards
and NJPTLS (NJPTSQ). The
Professional Development opportunities will align with No Child Left Behind (ESEA), Professional Development
Standards, NJ Professional Standards for Teachers, NJ Professional Development
Standards, and the Eight Key Elements of High Quality Professional Development,
all with the goal of improving student learning.
• Provide teachers with professional development
opportunities that assist teachers in meeting the educational and instructional
needs of diverse students, including students with disabilities, English
Language Learners, economically disadvantaged students.
• Provide staff with scientifically based, research
based instructional strategies and the technology skills necessary for meeting
the needs of 21st century learners.
• Provide professional development opportunities
reflecting best practices and understanding of adult learning.
SMART Goals:
Language
Arts
In
2008-2009, the language arts literacy data (NJASK 3-8 & HSPA) reveals that
many students are in need of remediation in these critical areas: Working with
Text, Analyzing Text and Writing. In 2009-2010, the language arts literacy data
(NJASK 3-8 & HSPA) reveals that many students are in need of remediation in
Analyzing Text and Writing. In 2010-2011,
the language arts literacy data (NJASK 3-8 & HSPA) reveals that many
students are in need of remediation in the following areas: Working with Text
(Grades 3-8); Speculative Task (3-8), Expository Task (3-8, 11), Persuasive
Task (11) and Interpreting Task (11). In order to facilitate the district’s
continued movement toward infusing best practices for standards-based, balanced
language arts literacy instruction and to meet the needs of students and staff
as indicated by the needs assessment data, the following will take place:
·
Specific:
The district will provide experiences that deepen teacher understanding and
application of content knowledge; current thinking of how children learn
language; differentiation strategies to help students approach literacy in
alternate, modified, and scaffold ways; and collaborative examination and
analysis of student work on open response items as well as published work. In
2010-2011, Writing Workshop Residence training continued in grades 7 and 8;
Writers Workshop training continued in the elementary and the middle grades;
Teaching for Comprehension continued in grade 3; and Vocabulary Development
continued in grades Kindergarten and grade 1. In 2011-2012, grades K-2
teachers received professional development in Guided Reading,
Comprehension Strategies, When Readers Struggle, Writing Workshop with our
Youngest Writers, Assessments (Fountas & Pinnell Results, Administering
Running Records, High Frequency words), Beginning Writing, and Genre Writing and
the use of Rubrics. In 2011-2012,
grades 3-5 teachers received professional development in the
instructional components of the Reading and Writing Workshop Models. During
this school year, teachers in grades 3-5 received professional development in
the following areas; Reading Workshop and Being A Writer - coaching. In
2011-2012, grades 6-8 teachers received
professional development in implementing the new core reading series.
During this school year, teachers in grades 6-8 received professional
development in the following areas; Holt McDougal Program Implementation,
Addressing the needs of Struggling and Hard to Reach Readers, Coaching in
middle grades literacy, Supporting ELL’s in upper grades, Best Practices in
Adolescent Literacy Writing and the Rowan Literacy Consortium in grade 8. In
2011-2012, in grades 9-12, faculty-led action research projects continued.
These action research projects focus on studying and implementing strategies to
close the achievement gap in literacy.
·
Measured:
Student progress will be measured through formative and summative assessments
such as: READ180, Study Island, unit assessments, Learnia results, Fountas
& Pinnell Benchmark Assessment, DIBELS, High Frequency Word List,
report card grades, writing prompts (grades 3-8) and NJASK/HSPA/ACCESS scores.
·
Attainable:
Best practices for standards-based, balanced literacy instruction will be
attained by in-service professional development on content knowledge and
pedagogy; implementation of professional learning communities; articulation
meetings; teacher collaborations; and grade-level meetings, modeling of
lessons, and co-teaching experiences provided by administrators.
·
Results Based:
10% increase in state assessment proficiency/advanced proficiency achievement.
A 10% increase in state test data from 2008-2009 to 2009-2010 occurred for the
total population in grades 7 and 11. A 10% increase in state test data from
2008-2009 to 2009-2010 occurred for the general population in grades 6, 7, 8
and 11. A 10% increase in state test
data from 2009-2010 to 2010-2011 occurred for the following grade levels: Grade 3 (LEP, Female, Black, Economically
Disadvantaged); Grade 4 (Special Education, Female and Hispanic); Grade 5 (LEP
and Male); Grade 6 (LEP, Female, Black); Grade 7 (LEP, Non-Economically
Disadvantaged); Grade 8 (Special Education, LEP, Male and White) and Grade 11
(Special Education, LEP, Female, Non-Migrant, Black and Non-Economically
Disadvantaged). The district is looking to increase state assessment
proficiency and advanced proficiency achievement by 10% in 2011-2012.
·
Time-bound: by
June 2012
Mathematics
In
2008-2009, the mathematical data (NJASK 3-8 & HSPA) reveals that many
students are in need of remediation in three critical areas: Geometry and
Measurement; Data Analysis, Probability and Discrete Mathematics; and Problem
Solving. In 2009-2010, the
mathematical data (NJASK 3-8, Algebra I EOC & HSPA) reveals that many
students are in need of remediation in three critical areas: Patterns and
Algebra; Data Analysis, Probability and Discrete Mathematics; and Problem
Solving. In 2010-2011, the mathematical
data (NJASK 3-8 & HSPA) revealed that many students are in need of
remediation in Number and Numerical
Operations (Grades 3-8), Data Analysis, Probability and Discrete Mathematics
(Grades 3-8,11) and Geometry and Measurement (Grade 11). In order to
facilitate the district’s continued movement toward infusing best practices for
standards-based, mathematics instruction and to meet the needs of students and
staff as indicated by the needs assessment data, the following will take place:
·
Specific:
The district will provide experiences that deepen teacher understanding and
application of content knowledge; current thinking of how children learn
language; differentiation strategies to help students approach math in
alternate, modified, and scaffold ways; and collaborative examination and
analysis of student work on open response items as well as published work. The Kindergarten math curriculum was revised
in 2010. In 2010-2011, teachers were provided with content and program
training, TI-Navigator training and the Accuplacer exam training. Both vertical
and horizontal articulation has continued. The district has continued to
participate in articulation meetings with the Cumberland County College and
Cumberland County Curriculum Consortium. In
2011-2012, all K-12 math curriculum guides were revised to reflect the 2010
CCSS. In 2011-2012, twenty teachers and three administrators attended the NCTM
Conference, all K-12 teachers received training on understanding and
implementing the CCSS in mathematics, grades 6 & 7 math teachers received
training on implementing writing into the math classroom, grades 9-12 teachers
received training on the use of the TINavigator and Smartboard and grades 1-6
received training on the Everyday Mathematics core program. The district has continued
to participate in articulation meetings with the Cumberland County College and
the County Curriculum Consortium.
·
Measured: Student
progress will be measured through formative and summative assessments such as:
Study Island, unit assessments, Learnia results, IXL reports, report card
grades, and NJASK, Algebra I EOC,
HSPA scores.
·
Attainable:
Best practices for standards-based, mathematics instruction will be attained by
in-service professional development on content knowledge and pedagogy;
implementation of professional learning communities; articulation meetings;
teacher collaborations; and grade-level meetings, modeling of lessons, and
co-teaching experiences provided by administrators.
·
Results Based:
10% increase in state assessment proficiency/advanced proficiency achievement.
A 10% increase in state test data from 2008-2009 to 2009-2010 occurred for the
total population in grades 3 and 4. A
10% increase in state test data from 2008-2009 to 2009-2010 occurred for the
general education population in grades 3, 4, 5, 7 and 11. A 10% increase in state test data from 2009-2010 to 2010-2011 occurred
for the grades: Grade 5 (Male), Grade 6 (Total, General Education, LEP, Female,
White, Black, Economically Disadvantaged, Non- Economically Disadvantaged,
Non-Migrant); Grade 7 (Black); Grade 8 (Total, General Education, LEP, Male,
White, Black, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged, Non-Economically
Disadvantaged, Non-Migrant) and Grade 11 (LEP, Female, Black, Hispanic, Non-
Economically Disadvantaged). The district is looking to increase state
assessment proficiency/advanced proficiency achievement by 10% in 2011-2012.
·
Time-bound: by
June 2012
- Alignment
The
district’s professional development plan aligns with the district’s priority
and systemic goals in that the focus of the strategies is on improvement of
student achievement. This plan incorporates state, district, and school-level
initiatives and programs for enhancing knowledge of content, encouraging the
development of a variety of classroom based instructional
strategies/assessments, and providing opportunities for integrating new lessons
and instructional strategies through collaboration.
Plan alignment with Professional
Development Standards for NJ Educators:
Context Standards:
o
Learning Communities: All professional staff members are organized into
learning communities
o
Leadership: The district has created a culture that
emphasizes professional development and shared leadership. Teachers are
empowered to direct their own learning and contribute to the learning of their
colleagues through collaborative activities and college courses.
o
Resources: Teachers are given sufficient time and
financial sources to ensure successful implementation of the PD plan every
year. This includes: substitute teachers, in-service training days,
advancement on the salary guide for graduate credit and reimbursement for
graduate credits.
Process Standards:
o
Data Driven: Teachers review student work and student
achievement data to make decisions regarding professional development.
o
Research-based: Professional development opportunities such
as grade-level meetings, workshops, and college courses focus on research-based
best practices.
o
Evaluation: Numerous opportunities are in place to
evaluate the program and adjust as needed.
(Teacher input, student achievement data, curriculum evaluations)
o
Design: Structures for professional development are
differentiated and linked to the goal.
o
Learning: Aspects of adult learning are considered in
the development of staff development experiences.
o
Collaboration: Teachers meet frequently as part of
collaboration meetings, grade level or department meetings/teams, and school
teams during the day and after school.
Content Standards:
o
Equity: Professional development in the district
supports the belief that all students can learn. Attention has been given to
culturally responsive instructional strategies.
o
Quality Teaching: Workshops and other
opportunities are offered that focus on content knowledge, instructional strategies
and formative assessments.
o
Family Involvement: Professional development
opportunities are provided to support the establishment of parent, family and
community partnerships.
Plan alignment with The Eight Key Elements of High Quality
Professional Development
1. Professional Development Structures and Processes
The district will implement
professional development opportunities based on low state and district
assessment scores, the number of new teachers/novice teachers, teacher content
knowledge, teacher pedagogical knowledge and implementation of research-based strategies. The district currently offers and intends to
provide the following professional learning opportunities during the 2011-2012 school year.
Job-Embedded Professional
Learning
Job-embedded professional
development at each school will occur during the common planning time period,
monthly grade level meetings, department meetings, monthly vertical and
horizontal articulation meetings, district articulation meetings, in-service days,
as well as regularly scheduled administrator classroom visits. All K-8 teachers will meet for a full day at
a minimum of four times (once per marking period) for collaboration. These collaboration meetings will be held
with special education teachers, bilingual teachers, and general education
teachers. During these times, teachers will analyze student work, benchmark
assessments, interim reports, building level and district level assessments,
share ideas, engage in professional reading, agree on common strategies,
establish school goals and make any modifications to instructional practices to
enhance student learning. Professional
development will be conducted by school instructional leaders and other
district support. School administrators
will extend the teachers’ repertoire of knowledge and pedagogical skills by
providing demonstration lessons, professional conferencing, peer coaching, and
content specific research-based instructional strategies to improve student
achievement in the core content areas. In 2009-2010, the Bridgeton School
District continued to provide professional development for administrators on
McREL’s “Balanced Leadership” & Power Walkthrough and Marzano’s “Leadership
that Works”. In 2010-2011, the Bridgeton
School District will provide professional development for administrators on
McREL’s “Power Walkthrough and Marzano’s “The Art and Science of Teaching” and
“The Highly Engaged Classroom”. In 2011-2012, administrators will receive professional development on “Meeting
Students Where They Live: Motivation in Urban Schools” by Richard Curwin.
In-district Workshops
The district will continue
the following professional learning opportunities for all teachers during the 2011-2012 school year.
·
New Teacher
Orientation – A two-day orientation held during the summer months for all new
teachers.
·
District-wide
In-service Days – Two days are
scheduled during the year.
·
Schmoker Data
Meetings – Monthly
·
Novice Teacher Training (3 full days)
·
Mentor Teachers Training
Out-of-District
conferences, university courses
Research substantiates the
need for teachers to receive support upon receiving professional development
opportunities to ensure that the skills, strategies and techniques will be
retained, and utilized by the teachers to enhance instructional performance.
The Bridgeton Board of Education affords the opportunity for teachers to attain
graduate courses up to nine credits a year. Therefore, the school district
supports job-embedded professional development and limits out-of-district
professional learning, except for NJDOE-sponsored workshops related to
assessment, coaching, literacy, mathematics, science, early childhood program
implementation and programs using district instructional materials.
2. Key Curriculum Areas of Focus
Data Analysis
All schools report that there
will continue to be an emphasis on detailed analysis of the state and district
assessments (i.e. NJASK3-8, Algebra I EOC, ACCESS, DIBELS, Fountas &
Pinnell Benchmark Assessment, High
Frequency Word List, and HSPA). Students in grades K-8 will have their
performance analyzed through running records. Students taught in READ180 will
have their instruction differentiated through the Scholastic Reading Inventory
as well as the rSkills tests. All schools indicate there will be
grade-specific collaborative meetings for teachers (including bilingual
education and special education) to determine areas of concern and specific
instructional strategies to increase student performance. All schools report
that there will be continued emphasis on:
Language
Arts
·
Using Nonlinguistic
Representations
·
Implementing Writing
Strategies Across the Curriculum
·
Implementing Running
Records and Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System
·
Implementing
Literacy Circles, Grades 5-8
·
Implementing
Literacy Learning Centers, Grades K-4
·
Implementing
Guided Reading Strategies
·
Using Holistic
Scoring
·
Using Data to
Guide Instruction
·
Differentiating
Instruction
·
Increasing Rigor
in Reading and Writing
Mathematics
- Using Nonlinguistic Representations
- Implementing Cooperative Learning
- Using Graphing Calculators and Math Software (IXL.com and TINavigator System)
- Implementing Learning Centers
- Developing, Understanding and Teaching Open-ended
Questions and Writing in the Math Classroom
- Implementing a Variety of Questioning Techniques
that Use Higher Order Thinking Skills
- Using Data to Guide Instruction
3-5. District Support
The district will support the diversity
of school professional development goals by addressing the professional
learning gaps specific to the needs of each school.
The Broad Street School has the largest
elementary teaching staff in our district and is a Year-9 school. At the Broad
Street School, Regie Routman in
Residence, a thirteen session program designed to improve writing for
audience and purpose was provided for seventh and eighth grade LAL, bilingual
and special education teachers. Regie
Routman in Residence has been expanded to include all seventh and eighth
grade LAL teachers in the district. In
2011-2012, the Regie Routman in Residency has been completed and the strategies
continue to be implemented.
In
2011-2012, the LLTeach coaching model was reinstituted and provided training to
the math teachers at the Broad Street School, Cherry Street School and the
Indian Avenue School. This coaching model includes a pre-conference and
post-conference to the demonstration lesson, co-teach lesson and critique
lesson.
In 2009-2010 the Cherry
Street School and the Broad Street School both under CAPA reviews are part of
the LAL Consortium. In 2010-2011, all
assistant principals from the Buckshutem School, Cherry Street School and the
Broad Street School attended the LAL Consortium. In 2011-2012, all schools have representatives who will participate in the literacy consortium. A cadre of LAL teachers has been selected to participate in the Major Speakers portion
of the Literacy Consortium program. These teachers will assist in
improving instruction in LAL at the classroom
level and providing a vehicle for sharing best instructional practices. This
consortium is a partnership with Rowan University. The knowledge gained at
these workshops was turn-keyed by the team for the staff in both school year
2009-2010 and 2010-2011.
At the Indian Avenue School
and Cherry Street School, staff members will continue to receive professional
development in Positive Behavior Support in Schools (PBSIS). PBSIS is a data
driven, tiered system of positive behavior support to address these challenges.
Based on a national model of positive behavior support, the New Jersey Department of Education,
Office of Special Education Programs
in collaboration with The Elizabeth M. Boggs Center, UMDNJ – Robert Wood
Johnson Medical School is providing training and technical assistance for
developing and implementing the three tiered intervention approach of
PBSIS. This approach will continue to
assist the school with building the capacity for inclusion of students with
disabilities and challenging behaviors within general education settings. In 2011-2012, PBSIS program was expanded
to include the Bridgeton High School, Broad Street School and Buckshutem Road
School.
In 2010-2011, the sixth grade
students at Quarter Mile Lane, Indian Avenue and Cherry Street schools implemented
Teaching and Learning with Essential
New Technologies in the 21st Century (TALENT21) grant. This grant prepares
students with the knowledge and skills essential for the digital age and for
college and career readiness. Intensive
professional development for teachers and administrators will assist with the
effective integration of technology and the 21st century skills and
themes across the content areas, along with the
development of a sustainability plan that extends beyond the grant period. In 2011-2012, this grant was extended to
include the seventh grade students in the Cherry Street School, Indian Avenue
School and the Quarter Mile Lane School.
In 2009-2010, PK3 and PK4
staff members were provided with professional development in Positive
Behavioral Support (PBS). PBS is an
empirically validated, function-based approach to help eliminate challenging
behaviors and replace them with pro-social skills. In 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, the PBS strategies will
continue to be implemented.
In 2009-2010, the BHS staff
members were trained on implementing the Bert Simmons’ Successful Behavior Management Strategies. These strategies
establish a safe and orderly environment in the classroom and a school-wide
discipline plan to address negative behavior, increases learning time, develops
positive relationships and teaches students responsibility. Reduction of
disruptions in the classroom, increased student on-task behavior, fewer
referrals to the office, and more administrative time for instructional
leadership are all direct benefits. In 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, these strategies continue to be implemented in conjunction with the PBSIS initiative.
In 2010-2011, all BHS staff
members received professional development on “Responding to the Early Warning
Indicators” (of student drop-out) by the TDHS providers. This professional development included
identifying students who are at high risk of dropping out of school and
implementing intervention strategies in improving student attendance, behavior
and course passing rates. In 2011-2012, TDHS provided training to the high
school academy leadership teams with a focus on Developing Resiliency in Staff
and Students. This training expanded previous learning related to Responding to
Early Warning Indicators. Academy leaders have integrated components of the
Resiliency training into professional learning activities during extended day
academy meetings to benefit the entire staff.
In 2009-2010, Bridgeton High
School (BHS) has partnered with FEA/NJASCD/Kean College in their “Putting It
Together” Program. BHS chose three
components of their four-part comprehensive process to assist them in their
efforts: the Instructional Core, Blueprints and Assessment.
The modules have a positive impact on raising teacher expectations, utilizing
instructional strategies and providing meaningful feedback that will raise the
rigor in all content areas. The
Blueprints component helps teachers to develop effective instructional strategies
to assist struggling students “learn how to learn” behaviorally and
academically. In 2010-2011, BHS continued
to provide professional development on implementing “Blueprints” to an
additional cohort of teachers and coaching assistance to previously trained
teachers to support classroom implementation of the instructional strategies. In 2011-2012, a third cohort will be
trained and receive classroom embedded coaching support.
In 2010-2011, two BHS
mathematics teachers attended professional development on implementing the
TI-Nspire Navigator system in their classroom. The TI-Nspire Navigator system
creates a powerful connection between the students’ graphing calculator and the
teacher’s classroom computer utilizing a wireless networking system. In 2012, fourteen BHS math teachers
attended three days of professional development on implementing the TI-Nspire
Navigator system. Also in 2011-2012, twenty teachers and three administrators
attended the NCTM conference. In addition, grades 1-6 teachers who were new or
newly reassigned received professional development on the implementation of the
Everyday Mathematics program. The sixth & seventh grade teachers received
professional development on incorporating writing into the math classroom. All
K-12 math teachers received professional development on the new 2010 Common
Core State Standards of Mathematics.
In 2010-2011, the BHS science teachers attended the NJ
DOE workshop on “9-12 Science Standards” (Module A) and the workshop titled “High School Biology Curriculum Development”. The knowledge gained at these workshops has
provided an in-depth knowledge on curriculum revising and understanding the newly
adopted standards. Also in 2010-2011, seven K-12 science teachers attended the
34th Annual NJ Science Convention. The NJ Science Convention is
co-sponsored by the New Jersey Science Teachers Association and the New Jersey
Science Education Leadership Association and had up
to one hundred sessions of interest to all levels and disciplines in science.
In 2011-2012, all K-12 science curriculum guides were revised to the NJCCSS. In 2011-2012, six BHS science teachers
attended two days of professional development at the 35th Annual NJ Science
Convention. Also in 2011-2012, six high school teachers received training on
the use of Vernier probes in the science classroom. As for the K-8 teachers, grade 3 teachers received professional
development on the Space kit, Chemical
Test kit and Rocks and Minerals kit; grade 4 teachers received professional
development on the Human Body kit and the Magnetism and Electricity kit; grade
5 teachers received professional development on the Microworlds kit and Ecosystem
kit; grade 6 teachers received professional development on the Diversity of
Life kit; grade 7 teachers received professional development on the
Catastrophic Events kit; and grade 8 teachers received professional development
on the Energy, Machines and Motion kit.
6. Communicated Plan
The district professional
development plan will be shared with administrators, building staff members,
parents and community members through different communication modes. The professional development plan will be
discussed at monthly administrative council meetings for districts
administrators. The details of the plan will be explained to staff members and
clarifications will be addressed at on-going building level meetings and
professional development trainings. In
addition, curriculum newsletters/emails will keep staff informed of district
professional development opportunities as well as research based data on
effective instruction. Parents and
community members can access the district professional development plan on the
district website.
7. Connection Between Student Learning Goals and
Professional Development Goals
As our district creates a
culture that emphasizes professional development and collaboration, teachers
will continue to move forward towards achieving mastery of their subject-matter
content standards and pedagogical skills.
The collaborative learning opportunities will help school communities
reach not only their goals, but the learning goals of a diverse student
population.
Professional Development Opportunities
1. There are numerous comprehensive and on-going
opportunities for teachers to participate in professional development during
the course of the year in workshops, committees, and collaborative team
meetings. In addition, the following
enumerates other opportunities for faculty that include:
·
Common planning
time for all staff
·
District wide and
school level vertical and horizontal grade level and articulation meetings
(including general, special and bilingual education)
·
Two full day
district-wide in-service days
·
Monthly Schmoker
Data Driven Meetings
·
School Leadership
Council and ECAC Meetings
·
Analysis of
common assessments across the grades
·
Curriculum
Development
·
Peer Observation
·
Power Walk
Throughs
·
Professional
Learning Communities
·
District wide Prekindergarten/Kindergarten
articulation & classroom visitations
·
District wide articulation
meetings
·
District &
School Professional Development Committee
·
District wide
trainings in LAL, science and
mathematics
·
District wide
& School Literacy Team meetings
·
Contracted services ie. TDHS, READ180 & Study Island, Pearson-Work
Sampling Systems Online, LLTeach, McGraw
Hill – Everyday Mathematics, Carolina Biological (Science), Delta Education
(Science) FEA/NJASCD/Kean University - Blueprints, Harcourt-Storytown,
Developmental Studies Center - Being a Writer, Third Sector New England - Tools
of the Mind, Holt/McDougal (Literacy), Scholastic- READ180/System 44 and
Heinemann (Literacy)
·
Site licenses for
Tools of the Mind and Pearson-Work Sampling Systems Online
·
Partnership with
Rowan University (LAL Consortium)
·
Partnership with
Cumberland County College (Bridge Program)
·
Partnership with
EIRC
·
Participation in
Cumberland County Curriculum Consortium
·
Articulation
between BHS/HOPE and Cumberland County College
·
Action research
projects
·
Participation in
curriculum writing projects
·
Formal Novice/Mentor
Teacher Training Program
·
Model lessons
provided by administrators
2.
Identification of Resources
The district uses a variety
of revenues to support professional development activities.
Included in these sources are
funding from local funds and monies from federal grants. No Child Left Behind
funds support professional development activities as a primary activity. In 2010-2011, three schools received
SIA and SIAg funds that support professional development. In 2011-2012, four schools
received SIA funds that support professional development. Stipends are also
used to pay teachers to write/ revise curriculum, to provide turnkey training,
to pay substitute teachers to allow teachers to attend out of district professional
development workshops, to observe peers or to provide model lessons.
Administrators provide information and guidance regarding a range of effective
and innovative educational practices through various avenues such as: individual discussions (informal and formal),
coaching sessions, demonstration lessons with pre- and
post-discussion/analysis, study groups, staff meetings, professional development and/or in-service training
programs, workshops, assisting building and classroom level educators in
implementing challenging and rigorous curriculum-based New Jersey Core
Curriculum Content Standards and Common
Core State Standards using student work and assessment results as
rationales and evidence to assist teachers in making decisions and instructional
activities. In 2010-2011, the district has abolished the math and LAL coach
positions due to budget restraints. In 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, NCLB/ESEA funds allow the district to
provide trainers and consultants from national, state or local organizations to
provide training to staff. Finally, the district provides staff tuition
reimbursement of up to nine credits per year for graduate courses that are in
the educational field or related to the employee’s work.
The resources and structures
in place in the district that demonstrate that the district community values
and nurtures quality professional development for adult learners include site
licenses and contracted services, administrative Power Walkthrough, and
dedicated professional development days.
3. Engaging All Stakeholders
Collaborative professional
learning provides the most effective and efficient vehicle for realizing
maximum benefit from the people within the school district. Schools realize the
additional benefit of employing the team concept to reduce the isolation of
teachers, parents and community members from each other, a known phenomenon
that contributes to dysfunctional schools.
The district will engage all
stakeholders in the support of collaborative professional learning through the
following actions:
- Providing numerous opportunities for the
grade/departmental level teams to share information
- Providing numerous opportunities for parents and
community members to become involved in the decision-making process
- Providing in-service training in the identified
areas of need
- Ensuring resources are available to meet the team
needs (facilitation, research, technology, time, etc.)
- Ensuring that professional development is aligned
to system goals, programs and initiatives
- Developing norms that support the commitment to
learning
- Focusing on student learning through a continuous
cycle of inquiry, reflection, planning, application, and improvement
- Determining team learning needs based on data and
supported by research, tools, consultants and leadership
- Reducing isolation of staff members, parents and
community members in the school district and improve communication
- Encouraging individual teachers to apply new
concepts acquired through professional learning collaboration
- Collaborating with principals to promote
successful practices by encouraging cross-school collaboration
- Providing school leadership with professional
development to increase content knowledge and pedagogy in support of their
roles as instructional leaders
1. Knowledge,
Skills, Behaviors
Professional Development for the
Bridgeton staff is ongoing and job-embedded in all the components of the
NJDOE-CCCS. As a result of the 2011-2012
Professional Development Plan, the staff will focus on the following priority
areas to improve student achievement:
·
Knowledge of how
to use data to drive teacher instruction for optimal student achievement
·
Knowledge of the
variability among children, in terms of culturally responsive teaching methods
and strategies that may be required, including teaching English Language Learners (ELL), children from
various economic and regional contexts, and children with identified
disabilities
·
Knowledge of
assessment procedures such as: Fountas
and Pinnell, DIBELS, ACCESS, Work Sampling System Online, SRI and Learnia
Evidence that will indicate
staff has learned new skills will be monitored through:
·
Classroom visits
·
Formal/Informal
Observations by Administrator
·
Peer to Peer
Observations and Feedback
·
Power
Walkthroughs
·
Assessment Data
·
Workshop
evaluation forms
2. Student Data
The following are
job-embedded methods for collecting, analyzing and interpreting student data to
determine if the educator’s knowledge has impacted student learning.
·
DIBELS in Grades
K-2
·
NJ ASK in Grades
3-8
·
NJPASS 9 & 10
·
HSPA
·
Pre & Post
Writing Prompts in Grades 3-8
·
High Frequency Word List in Grades K-2
·
Pre & Post Gates-MacGinnitie Reading Level
Assessment in Grades 9-11
·
Grade K baseline, mid-year and end-of-year math
assessments
·
SRI/SPI for READ180/System 44
·
ACCESS
·
Work Sampling System
Online in PK3 & PK4
·
Grade
Distribution Sheets
·
District
Benchmark Assessments
·
Running Records
·
IXL reports (Grades K-8 math)
·
LEARNIA data in Grades
3-8
·
Fountas and
Pinnell Benchmark Assessment in Grades K-8
·
Report Card
Grades
·
Holistic scoring
guide
3.
Additional Data
Evaluation of the plan has multiple components. One
aspect of evaluation is student performance/achievement outcomes. These
outcomes may be observed through observations of students and by evaluating the
student performance in the classroom and analysis of student achievement on
standardized assessments. Also included in this area would be the review of
teacher lesson plans, classroom observations, workshop evaluation forms,
curriculum revisions, collaborative meetings, surveys and relevant student data
from ancillary sources, such as IXL
and Study Island.
4.
Job-embedded Professional Development
Job-embedded professional
development at each school will occur during the common planning time period,
monthly grade level meetings, department meetings, monthly vertical and
horizontal articulation meetings, district articulation meetings, contracted coaching services,
in-service days as well as regularly scheduled administrator classroom visits. These
professional development opportunities will also include all staff. During
these times teachers will analyze student work, benchmark assessments, interim
reports, building level and district level assessments, share ideas, engage in
professional reading, agree on common strategies, establish school goals and
make any modifications to instructional practices to enhance student
learning. Professional development will
be conducted by school instructional leaders who have been trained to support
teachers in disaggregating and analyzing data to make sound instructional
decisions. School-building
administrators and contracted services
will extend the teachers’ repertoire of knowledge and pedagogical skills by
providing demonstration lessons, professional conferencing, peer coaching, and
content specific research-based instructional strategies to improve student
achievement in the core content areas. The Bridgeton School District will
continue to provide professional development for administrators on McREL’s
“Power Walkthroughs”. In 2010-2011, the Bridgeton School District provided
professional development for administrators on Marzano’s “The Art and Science
of Teaching”, “The Highly Engaged Classroom”. In 2011-2012,
the Bridgeton School District provided professional development for
administrators on “Meeting Students Where They Live: Motivation in Urban
Schools” by Richard Curwin.
Evidence to support
job-embedded professional development will include but not be limited to:
surveys, agenda/minutes, teacher observations, funding for substitutes and
evaluation forms.
The district supports the
development of professional learning communities for teaching staff members
that provide collegial support, job-embedded learning, and coaching to enhance
professional practice. District and school professional development
provides support and follow-up, such as instructional and content-based
coaching or classroom visitations.
5.
Evaluation of Plan
·
How
might you consider holding focus groups to get teacher input on needed
professional learning?
Focus groups would be implemented during
common planning times, grade level meetings, faculty meetings, monthly School
Leadership Meeting and District Supervisors/Directors meetings in efforts to
retrieve teacher input on needed professional learning.
·
How might
you conduct surveys of staff and stakeholders to get input on opportunities to
offer?
Surveys will be collected online,
verbally, in written form, in person, via phone or mail.
·
How
will you examine and tabulate individual evaluation forms from specific events
or team meetings to determine usefulness of professional learning offered in
the past that you might repeat for other staff?
To determine the usefulness of past
professional learning that might be repeated for other staff, several sources
will be considered, including the following: surveys will be counted and
summarized, Data Driven meetings (Schmoker Model) results will be counted and
summarized, Professional Growth Plans will be reviewed individually, as will
Teacher Observations, and Workshop and In-service evaluations will be
summarized and followed up on through administrative walkthroughs, monitoring
of lesson plans, and formal and informal observations.
No comments:
Post a Comment