Table of Contents

Comprehensive Needs Assessment3

Schoolwide Reform Strategies13

Highly Qualified Instructional Staff 19

Professional Development21

Increasing Parent Involvement 22

School Transition 25

Assessment26

Coordination and Integration of Services & Programs27

Activities for At-Risk Students29

Student Assessment Results, Interpretation & Delivery to Parents 30

Collection and Disaggregation of Data31

Disaggregated Assessment Results31

Public Reporting of Data31

Planning – One Year32

Community Involvement of the Plan/Implementation of the Plan33

Sharing the Plan33

Translation34

School Improvement Provisions34

References35

Appendices36

1. Comprehensive Needs Assessment

Little Mill Middle School (LMMS) opened its doors in 2007 and has since been providing quality, engaging instruction to all students. In December 2007,Title 1 supplemental assistance was awarded in the form of a Targeted Assisted program. Title 1 eligible students in sixth through eighth grade currently receive supplemental instruction in reading and/or math by Title 1 personnel. Various programs have been designed to promote the school’s overall goal of teaching students to embrace the school’s vision of Dream, Strive, Achieve.

The community is a mix of affluent, middle class and poverty level families with the median annual income of approximately $38,000. Most students live within a ten mile radius of the school. The school opened with a population of approximately 650 students, but has grown to 968 students in the 2012-2013 school year. The current demographic make-up of LMMS includes:

Approximately 40.12% of the students qualify for free and reduced meals. Additionally, there are 13.4% of LMMS students served through special education programs, 14% served through Title I programs, 3.6% served in English learner programs, and 16.4% served in programs for the gifted and talented. The school’s population includes three (3) migrant students and 24 students participating in the McKinney Vento Homeless Education program.

Little Mill Middle was recognized as a Title 1 Distinguished School in the 2009-10 school year and in the 2010-11 school year. The school was also recognized as a Title 1 Reward School in 2011-12 school year distinguishing LMMS as one of the top 5% of highest performing schools in the state. Other awards include being one of only two schools recognized with the Student Support Team Association of Georgia Educators (SSTAGE) award for promising practices. LMMS is proud to be the home of the 2011-12 Forsyth County Middle School Teacher of the Year. Two employees have been recognized by the Forsyth County Board of Education as REACH Employees of the Month. Additionally, both guidance counselors have been recognized as middle school Counselors of the Year for Forsyth County Schools.

Numerous stakeholders have been involved in the gathering and interpreting of data as well as in the decision making process in LMMS moving to aschoolwide Title 1 school. These stakeholders include but are not limited to –

STAKEHOLDER / ROLE / MEETINGS/TOPICS COVERED
Administrative Team / Connie McCrary - Principal
Jeff Clapper - Asst. Principal
Cheryl Riddle – Asst. Principal / Meets: Weekly
Topics Covered: Student achievement, assessment particularly upcoming changes to high stakes state assessment, student concerns, professional development, assessment, Title 1 items, SPED/Gifted, operational issues
Leadership Team / Angela Gula – Instructional Technical Specialist
Dawn Hudson – Graduation Coach
Anna Murdock – Media Specialist
Anne Marie Sasser – Spanish Teacher
Jeff Woods – Social Studies/Gifted
Sandy Forman – Math Teacher/6th Grade
Beth Loedding – Math Teacher/SpEd
Connie Hohulin – Counselor / Meets: Bi-Monthly
Topics Covered: Student achievement, assessment, scheduling, professional development, staff climate/morale, school climate and culture.
Title 1 Team / Kari Shepherd - Math
Marcy Gravitt - Math
Jackie Case – Reading
Tera Alford – Math/Reading
Kim DeRose – Parent Involvement Coordinator (PIC) / Meets: Weekly
Topics Covered: Assessments, Upcoming Family Events, Inventory, Budget and Plan Needs Addressed, Student Needs and Concerns, extensive collaboration on schoolwide plan including writing the plan
Local School Council (LSC) / Stacy Archer – Chairperson
Davey Bales – Member (parent/business partner)
Dusty Findley – Member (parent/business partner)
Todd Nizialek – Member (parent)
Tammi Mobley – Member (parent)
Chris Duncan – Member (teacher)
Beth Faris – Member (teacher) / Meets: Monthly throughout the school year with the exception of December and April
Topics Covered: All issues relating to the school and district, academic achievement, Title 1 including the move to schoolwide where LSC reviewed the plan and offered input
Family Engagement Action Team (FEAT) / Allen Jones - Parent
Ann Nix - Parent
Denise Ray - Parent
Liz Cano - Parent
Jennifer Gwyn – Parent
Paula Burger - Parent
Theresa Edwards – Parent
Annaliza Thomas – Community Partner
Amy Sol – Community Partner
Tony Santoriello – Community Partner
Kathy Johnson – Community Partner
Steve Wall – Community Partner / Meets:Weekly
Topics Covered: Mustang Camp, Compact/Policy , What is Title 1?, Compact Distribution ideas, CLIP, Six Capacity, Title 1 Handbook approval, Activity approval for meeting, Title Reward status, Public Library, Mustang Crawl, Texting as a means of communication, Give Plan, Focus Group, Survey for Bingo Night, reviewing the transition to schoolwide Title 1 plan including the giving of input and feedback
Parent Teacher Organization (PTO) / Kim Wooten – President
Cindy Connor – Co President
Donna Grace – Vice President
Nancy Perry – Secretary
Saundra Taylor - Treasurer / Meets: Monthly
Topics Covered: Events, Budget, Expenditures, PTO sponsored academic events; discussion on schoolwide transition including the review of the plan and providing input

Multiple sources of data were examined in determining the school’s strengths, weaknesses, and goals for the 2013-14 academic year. The disaggregation of assessment data from several sources over multiple years were used to strengthen identified areas of weakness. These sources included:

CRCT Data

6th Grade CRCT – Little Mill
% Does Not Meet (DNM) / % Meets (M) / % Exceeds (EXC)
2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012*
Reading / 1 / 1 / 1 / 45 / 42 / 41 / 54 / 57 / 57
Math / 5 / 6 / 6 / 55 / 50 / 45 / 40 / 44 / 49
Note: In Reading, 2012 Georgia state average for Meets/Exceeds = 96%
In Math, 2012 Georgia state average for Meets/Exceeds = 80%
7th Grade CRCT – Little Mill
% Does Not Meet (DNM) / % Meets (M) / % Exceeds (EXC)
2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012
Reading / 5 / 3 / 1 / 59 / 61 / 53 / 36 / 35 / 46
Math / 6 / 2 / 2 / 41 / 40 / 28 / 53 / 58 / 71
Note: In Reading, 2012 Georgia state average for Meets/Exceeds = 94%
In Math, 2012 Georgia state average for Meets/Exceeds = 91%
8th Grade CRCT – Little Mill
% Does Not Meet (DNM) / % Meets (M) / % Exceeds (EXC)
2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012 / 2010 / 2011 / 2012
Reading / 1 / 1 / 2 / 47 / 47 / 42 / 52 / 52 / 56
Math / 12 / 6 / 5 / 53 / 48 / 51 / 35 / 46 / 44
Note: In Reading, 2012 Georgia state average for Meets/Exceeds = 96%
In Math, 2012 Georgia state average for Meets/Exceeds = 77%

(Taken from the Georgia DOE Department of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment)

Data depicting CRCT performance in Meets and Exceeds from 2008-2012 for the school’s 8th grade subgroups of SWD, ED, and Hispanic are as follows:

Little Mill Middle School
8th Grade / Statewide8th Grade
Subgroups (from 2008-2012) / Reading / Math / Reading / Math
Economically Disadvantaged (ED) / 90% to 97% / 80% to 92% / 90% to 96% / 69% to 80%
Students with Disabilities (SWD) / 84% to 87% / 68% to 69% / 71% to 81% / 41% to 46%
Hispanic* / 89% to 100% / 84% to 97% / 88 % to 96% / 71% to 85%

(Taken from the State DOE Longitudinal Data System with 2011 being the most recent state data available)

*Within the LMMS Hispanic sub-group are a small percentage (1% ) who qualify and receive EL services at LMMS

In analyzing and interpreting the school’s CRCT data over the last three years, the following strengths and weaknesses were identified–

Strengths

  • All grade levels outperformed the state averages in both reading and math;
  • The percentage of 6th grade students exceeding standards in reading and math increased 3% and 9% respectively;
  • The percentage of 7th grade students exceeding standards in reading and math increased 10% and 18% respectively;
  • The percentage of 8th grade students exceeding standards in reading and math increased 4% and 9% respectively;
  • The percentage of 7th grade students who did not meet standards in reading and math decreased by 4% in both subjects;
  • The percentage of 8th grade students who did not meet standards in math decreased by 7%.

Weaknesses

  • The subgroups of SWD, ED, and Hispanics are not performing at the level of the All Students group in both reading and math (See Appendix A)
  • Using data from the state CRCT Summary Report, it is indicated that the Domains of Reading Skills and Vocabulary Acquisition as well as Numbers and Operations are weak for the All Students group

Furthermore, the other sources of data outlined above identified the following strengths and weaknesses –

Needs Assessment Surveys - Parents

Strengths

  • Flexible meeting options with regard to dates, times & locations to include home visits if necessary
  • Meeting participation has been expanded to include virtual options such as text, email, and phone conferences
  • Information is provided in multiple languages as needed in both print and in verbal communication

Weaknesses

  • School to home communication is felt to be inconsistent among grade levels and among staff members
  • School is not perceived as a welcoming environment

Needs Assessment Surveys - Staff

Strengths

  • Organized parent involvement program

Weaknesses

  • Low percentage of parents attending parent teacher conferences
  • Lack of parent participation in Title 1 sponsored family events/meetings
  • Lack of parental support for student achievement at home as evidenced in homework completion and return of documents to school

Middle Grades Writing Assessment (MGWA)

Strengths

  • The Does Not Meet percentage has decreased from 6% to 5% - the county wide percent increased from 3% to 9%
  • LMMS average of 91% Meets and Exceeds outperformed the state average of 83% Meets and Exceeds (2012)

Weaknesses

  • The Does Not Meet percentage for SWD increased from 30% to 40%
  • The rate of Meets/Exceeds in 2012 is lower for male students (87%) than for female students (95%)

School Attendance Data

Strengths

  • Targeted Attendance groups that focus on students who have 10 or more absences in a year – involves daily check in, weekly and monthly awards that are based on student established goals
  • Improved attendance of those students who participated in the school’s Targeted Attendance groups
  • Schoolwide attendance incentive plan that rewards perfect attendance quarterly by grade level

Weaknesses

  • Lowest average Daily Attendance Rate as compared to all schools within the county
  • The lengthy process from the school’s reporting of truancy and educational neglect to the subsequent action plans taken by the court system

School Discipline Data

Strengths

  • The majority of office referrals are isolated to a recurring 10% of the student population
  • The majority of office referrals are classified as “minor, non-violent” in nature

Weaknesses

  • In comparison to other Forsyth County middle schools, the number of office referrals is significantly higher
  • Discipline referrals are increasing over time

GAPSS Analysis

Strengths

  • Curriculum Key – collaboration, posted standards, use of pacing guides
  • Assessment Key – the at risk students have been identified and their deficits have been used to establish tutorial classes
  • Instruction Key – school wide instructional decisions are based on a thorough analysis of data
  • Planning and Organization Key – vision is well known, common planning, data is used to create student schedules, solid RTI process in place
  • Student, Family & Community Support Key – home school communication, mentor program, Parent Portal, welcoming environment
  • Professional Learning Key – supportive professional learning environment, resource allocation for staff development
  • Leadership Key – data driven instructional decision making, administrators are viewed as instructional leaders, Graduation Coach is actively involved in the analysis and utilization of data to monitor student progress, principal has focused the efforts of the leadership team on student achievement
  • School Culture Key – faculty and staff are committed to working together to teach and nurture each student, culture supports a sense of belonging that promotes community pride, administrators are approachable and highly visible, sincere pride in the school, dedicated support staff, frequent celebrations of accomplishments of faculty and students

Weaknesses

  • Professional Learning Key – monitoring the implementation of the professional learning plan, low incidences of job embedded professional learning, need for a plan to understand and implement differentiated instruction
  • Instruction Key - communicating the learning goals to students, lack of strategies designed to increase problem solving and higher order thinking
  • Student, Family & Community Support Key – lack of inclusion of stakeholders in the school improvement process, lack of diversity on school committees, low evidence of implementation of Epstein’s Parent Involvement Framework, minimal processes in place that promote two-way communication between the school and stakeholder groups, weak parent involvement as it relates to student achievement.

Potential root causes of the weaknesses outlined in the analysis of the various data sources include: socioeconomic status of the families, staff members’ lack of awareness and training regarding impoverished students, and lack of parental involvement. Other root causes discovered include language barriers, poor health habits affecting school attendance, changing demographics, and an increase in the percentage of Students with Disabilities. It is also important to note that discipline referrals create disruption to classroom instruction impacting student learning.

The Little Mill Middle School schoolwideTitle 1 plan is based on information about all students in the school and groups of students have been identified who do not achieve at the same level of proficiency as the All Students group. Specifically, these groups include Students with Disabilities (SWD), Hispanic, and Economically Disadvantaged (ED) students. This plan has been integrated with the school’s improvement plan known as the A Plus Improvement Model (AIM) in an effort to ensure that all students’ needs are addressed utilizing a variety of strategies and interventions. In reviewing the school’s multiple data sources, the following goals have been established:

AREA / TARGETED GOAL
Student Achievement / Raise the percentage ofall studentsscoring Meets and Exceeds as measure by the Georgia CRCT from
98.6% to 99% in reading
96% to 98% in math
Raise the percentage of all students scoring Exceeds as measured by the Georgia CRCT from
53% to 55% in reading
55% to 57% in math
Raise the percentage of ED students scoring Meets and Exceeds as measured by the Georgia CRCT from
97% to 98% in reading
92% to 94% in math
Raise the percentage of SWDscoring Meets and Exceeds as measured by the Georgia CRCT from
92% to 94% in reading
79% to 81% in math
Raise the percentage of Hispanic students scoring Meets and Exceeds as measured by the Georgia CRCT from
99% to 100% in reading
90% to 92% in math
Raise the percentage of all students scoring Meets and Exceeds from 91% to 93% on the MGWA
Attendance / Increase Average Daily Attendance from 95.56% (2011-12) to 97% for the 2012-13 school year
Decrease the percent of students with 10 or more absences from 24% to 20%(See Appendix B)
Professional Development / Implement a plan that focuses on professional learning in the areas of differentiated instruction and classroom management with greater than 60% of the staff attending one or more sessions on the topics
Monitor the plan and make adjustments as necessary which includes follow-up classroom observations by school administration with 25% of those attending the sessions implementing the strategies presented.
Parent Involvement / Increase Title 1parent volunteers to 33% from 10% (2012-13)
Increase the percentage of parent respondents on the Title 1 parent survey to 60% of the overall student body
Increase the number of community groups/partnerships – ESOL, grandparent as parents, and single parent groups among others - 3 groups currently meeting to 8 groups.
50% of families will attend at least one Title 1 sponsored event/meeting within the school year.
Behavior / Decrease the number of office referrals by 20% in the 2013-14 school year.

Plans for all students are based on the needs as determined by local, state, and nationally-normed assessments. All of the above data has been taken into consideration throughout the thoughtful development of the Title I plan in which all qualified students’ needs are met regardless of what subgroup in which they may be included. Additionally, a variety of screener type assessments are administered to collect data on students who are identified as needing further academic support. Upon enrollment at Little Mill, McKinney-Vento (MV), or homeless students, arescreened in the same manner to ensure proper placement, and are automatically eligible for Title I services regardless of other criteria.Regarding migrant students entering the Forsyth County Public Schools System, the Migrant Education Office at the Georgia Department of Education provides a Current Enrollment Report (CER) and New Participant Report (NPR) each month of the school year (if the system has new migrant students enrolled). A Priority for Services (PFS) form is completed for each new student and submitted it to the Migrant Education Program (MEP) office at GaDOE for review. PFS students are identified per their academic needs, including mobility and EL status. All PFS students are given priority for supplemental tutoring services based on the district's Implementation Plans approved by the state. In addition, the national Migrant MSIX data base provided by USED's Migrant Education office is checked to review assessment and enrollment data for the student. The State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS) in the districts information management system known as Infinite Campus also provides assessment information. Locally, the district's Comprehensive Needs Assessment committee reviews student attendance and grades at the end of each grading period and makes recommendations for adjustments to tutoring or other support services as deemed necessary. The ELL Coordinators at each school are contacted, as well as ESOL teachers to notify them when new migrant students arrive. Additionally, they are notified if the GaDOE MEP office designates a migrant student as PFS.

Additionally, if available, previous school records showing classroom performance as well as scores on any state assessments are reviewed to assist with student placement. All grade levels, including support staff (Title I teachers, Special Education teachers, ESOL teachers, and Gifted Education teachers) meet on a regular basis to discuss and analyze student work, score reports, and the effectiveness of implemented strategies. The information gleaned from these meetings provides constructive feedback allowing the grade-level teams to modify instructional plans that meet the academic needs of all students.