Original_TheInnovationAgendaReport_English

To ađress these areas identified by staff as crucial to supporting students, we need to provide teachers with common planning time, and joint and focused professional development in the

Trang 2

th

Trang 17

One High School Program With Four Learning Communities

Located in One School Building

!

One Upper School Program and a Network of Four Campuses

Located in Four larger School Buildings

#

With consistent feeder patterns to upper school campuses

!

Trang 22

95??'3*!A'3!U6)!9*5.$&*9!)*!*#$!5??$3!97#''6!7)1?59B!

Trang 27

$ 0+##9:#18.#1$

-)81#()5$

$ 2*6190+##$*(1$

8$$!7$6*+'&!^<!7B$6+)5!3'B45)*+'&!32'-2)08D!9'2!0'2$!+&A'20)*+'&!'&!*#$!6)B)6+*:<!B2'-2)0!

6'&A+-42)*+'&!)&.!$8*+0)*$.!$&2'550$&*!+&!86#''58!4&.$2!*#$!%&&'()*+'&!,-$&.)!B5$)8$!8$$!

,BB$&.+I!,D!!

!

Trang 28

The creation of the Cambridge Upper School Network, with four upper school campuses,

will be beneficial for students with disabilities Currently, some Cambridge elementary

schools have very small miđle grades, including some schools with only one class in

grades 6, 7, and 8 This structure limits the typical peer groups with whom students with

disabilities may interact and be mainstreamed The creation of four larger upper schools

will allow students in substantially separate classes, such as learning disabilities,

structured academics, autism spectrum disorders and developmental delays, to have

greater opportunities for inclusion as several groups (classes) of typical peers will be

accessible for them at each grade level

<1)/0(.(,/#,6#$.-7&/.0#=00(2/&7#.,#$-;0.)/.()**>#$&%)1).&#?*)00&0#

In recent years, community members, parents and staff have commented about the

number of transitions that students in substantially separate classes have to endure due to

the current district configuration and structure of our schools These transitions have

created a lack of equity for students with disabilities The Innovation Agenda district

configuration will limit transition of special education students in substantially separate

classes Furthermore and more importantly, having students from three elementary

schools join together at one upper school campus will create the potential for students in

these programs to transition with their rising 6th grade cohort As demonstrated in the

Proposed Special Education Program Locations Chart, strands have been located in

schools following their typical peers’ pattern of transition into the upper school sitẹ The

new structure will promote sense of community and belonging for our students, things

that have been identified as lacking in the current district structurẹ

?,/.(/ 3#,6#$%&'()*#@7-').(,/#$&1Ắ&0#

The district has several supports in place for students fully mainstreamed; however, a

strong partial inclusion programming is lacking Students that are in need of partial

inclusion programming and services but are not in need of a substantially separate class

have limited access to special education services that will meet their needs Larger

cohorts of students at the miđle grades will allow for the development and

implementation of resource room/learning center type of programming as there will be

enough students that may need this level of support

+1,6&00(,/)*#:&A&*,%3&/.#)/7#?,**);,1).(,/#5%%,1.-/(.(&0#6,1#<&)'9&10#

Why achievement gaps exist and persist are questions frequently discussed by district

staff General and special education teachers have identified the following as possible

causes for the achievement gaps of students with disabilities:

• Lack of simultaneous professional development for general and special

education teachers

• Lack of opportunity to plan and collaborate together

Trang 29

! "#$!%&&'()*+'&!,-$&.)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !25!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

/)012+.-$!3415+6!76#''58!

9$124)2:!;<!=>;;!

• Lack of consistency and alignment of curriculum across schools

Suggestions regarding how the district may help to close the achievement gaps for all

students but especially students with disabilities are:

• More opportunities for co-teaching across schools where general and special

education teachers work together

• Creation of ađitional continuum of services such as: Resource Rooms and/or

Learning Centers

• Joint professional development in the areas of: Response to Intervention

(RTI), Positive Behavior Intervention Systems (PBIS) and differentiated

instruction

To ađress these areas identified by staff as crucial to supporting students, we need to

provide teachers with common planning time, and joint and focused professional

development in the areas listed abovẹ

Miđle school teachers are experts in a specific content areạ Having larger numbers of

content-based teachers at our upper school campuses will provide special educators the

opportunity to participate in subject/grade specific meetings and professional

development, thus empowering them to become experts in another area besides special

education Furthermore, it will allow general education teachers to have access and be

able to participate in professional development opportunities that focus on supporting

special education students

A common concern shared by community members, including parents and staff, is a need

for general education teachers to be more skilled at implementing accommodations in

student’s Individual Education Plans (IEP), better trained in the areas of learning

disabilities and how this impacts students’ learning, differentiated instruction, and

behavioral differences, among others A larger cohort of upper school teachers will

enable the district to tailor professional development based on the needs of each upper

school campus facultỵ It will also allow for the professional development to be offered at

each site as enough teachers will be available and expected to participatẹ

@B.1)'-11('-*)1#='.(Ặ(&0#

The Innovation Agenda’s Upper School Network model will also provide a wider range

of elective courses for our students As a result, special education students will have more

access to classes that may be more interesting to them and that might allow them to be

more successful Furthermore, it is assumed and expected that, by creating larger cohorts

of students in these upper school campuses, the district will be able to offer stronger after

school and extra-curricular activities tailored for this population of students Thus,

students with disabilities will have more choices to participate in out of school time

activities

Trang 30

! "#$!%&&'()*+'&!,-$&.)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !26!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

/)012+.-$!3415+6!76#''58!

9$124)2:!;<!=>;;!

Proposed Special Education Program Locations Chart

SPRING STREET BUILDING Feeder

School Program Grade Level Enrolment Current Enrolment Max

Sub

Trang 31

Current Enrolment

Max Enrolment

Cambridgeport Special Start Integrated Pre 13 14

Sub

VASSAL LANE BUILDING Feeder

School Program Grade Level Enrolment Current Enrolment Max

Trang 32

! "#$!%&&'()*+'&!,-$&.)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !28!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

/)012+.-$!3415+6!76#''58!

9$124)2:!;<!=>;;!

Trang 38

!V$)&!'@!WDD$2!76#''5!32'-2)0!! ;A>>! _A>>!

!]4+.)&6$!/'4&8$5'2!! ;A>>! _A>>!

!/'2$!/5)882''0!"$)6#$28!HE)*#<!76+$&6$<!MB,!`!7'6+)5!7*4.+$8J!! ;=A>>! _KA>>!

!7D$6+)5+8*8!HT'25.!B)&-4)-$8<!3MSZ$)5*#<!E48+6<!,2*<!V2)0)J!! NAOL! =OA>>!

!E)*#!`!MB,!%&8*246*+'&)5!/')6#$8!! ;A>>! _A>>!

!"$6#&'5'-:!%&*$-2)*+'&!7D$6+)5+8*!! ;A>>! _A>>!

Trang 41

The Innovation Agenda

Cambridge Public Schools February 1, 2011

2

Trang 42

36

Trang 43

37

Trang 44

38

http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/profiles/

Trang 45

39

Non-‐

Kennedy-‐

Trang 46

40

Trang 47

41

Trang 48

42

Trang 49

43

Trang 50

44

Trang 51

45

Trang 52

Trang 53

47

Trang 54

48

In June 2010, the Cambridge School Committee approved the district’s current

improvement plan, which established a rate of accelerated improvement in both math and

English language arts for all students, and an accelerated rate for closing achievement

gaps between student groups The district’s #1 goal in its approved plan for 2010-12

encompasses both of these priority areas:

1) Improve achievement for all students, with a particular emphasis on reducing

achievement gaps

The specific targets the district is working toward are detailed in the tables that follow

This work is urgent and imperative within the district

Trang 55

49

Trang 56

50 Eleven JK-8 Elementary Schools

Trang 57

51

Trang 58

52

Trang 59

53

5 th /6 th 6 th 7 th 7 th th 8 th

th /6 th th /8 th

Trang 60

54

Trang 61

55

Trang 65

! "#$!%&&'()*+'&!,-$&.)!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !/H!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

$%&'()*+,#@7'.)2#<2399.0#@%(,68#A88)87*,0#<7(B,;C#-%;#>??!#

In the spring of 2007, the Cambridge School Committee commissioned Opinion

Dynamics to conduct a survey about parent attitudes toward the public school system:

what was working and what was not This survey consisted of 500 telephone interviews:

approximately 200 participants had children in the public schools; approximately 200

participants had children who had been withdrawn from the public schools; and

approximately 100 participants were potential incoming parents of Kindergarten students

The issue of middle schools was raised several times during this survey, helping to

launch the ongoing investigatory efforts of middle grades quality and family satisfaction

Some key findings from this survey relevant to our understanding of family perceptions

of the middle grades are included below Source: Survey Report

Students

Withdrawn Students

Some people have said it is important to have a

transitional level between primary and secondary

schools—like a middle or junior high school stage

Cambridge’s K-8 system limits educational, social,

and extra-curricular opportunities for middle-school

aged kids

49% Somewhat

to Strongly Agree

Trang 67

The Mayor’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Middle Schools was formed in 2007-08 to

build on the work of the Middle School Task Force, and to support joint research on

middle grades issues by the School Committee and the Superintendent The Blue Ribbon

Commission’s scope of exploration was more expansive than that of the Task Force; the

Commission was charged with studying all issues that might be impacting middle school

quality, including district configuration and/or grade structure The goal of this

commission was to “educate the entire School Committee and the public on the

challenges that exist within the current state of our middle schools and to further research

the issue of structure.”

In 2008, the Blue Ribbon Commission on Middle School Education clearly identified the

middle grades issues that continue to plague the Cambridge Public Schools today—the

issues that most persuasively answer the question of “why” that the Innovation Agenda

directly addresses The Blue Ribbon Commission’s report refers to the growing number

of parents and staff that had voiced concerns about pressing issues in the middle grades,

including concerns about “academic rigor, about varying degrees of student preparedness

for CRLS from the elementary schools, about behavior, and about the need for additional

opportunities for extra-curricular activities, teacher isolation, and the need for

coordinated professional development and common planning time.” (p 3)

Section III of the Blue Ribbon Report, “Strengths and Challenges of the Present CPS

Middle School Structure,” is particularly relevant to the Innovation Agenda, identifying

challenges presented by the district’s configuration and the impact of these challenges on

the Five Guiding Principles for Effective Middle Schools These challenges, identified in

2008, are still very much alive for the Cambridge students, families, and teachers of

2011, who are experiencing the same district configuration A review of these challenges

brings Cambridge middle grades issues, and the Innovation Agenda’s purpose, into

sharper focus

Trang 68

• Difficulty for teachers to become proficient in and prepare to teach the content for 2

or 3 grade levels of a demanding curriculum in schools that have small numbers

of students

• Isolation of content area teachers in all schools because of small numbers (e.g most

schools have only one middle school math or science teacher)

• Academic offerings and schedules driven by numbers and/or shared specialists

• Inefficiency/ inequity of teacher caseloads from school to school

Other Challenges

• Inconsistent agreement on philosophy, experiences, and preparation for high school

• Inconsistent teacher expectations re: common benchmarks for student proficiency

across schools

• Inefficient communication between and among departments to assure excellence in

instruction and programming in the middle grades

• Impact of ISP and local charter schools on middle grade programs in some schools

affecting student numbers and diversity in grades 6-8

• School-based decisions that are not always in sync with district direction (e.g

humanities and ELA)

• Lack of interdisciplinary curriculum development

Guiding Principle 3: Staffing and Professional Development

! ! ^S76$!T+33'&!1'22+::+'&!T$C'4*> p 11-12)

Structural Challenges

• Limited opportunities for teachers to collaborate with each other often and easily

due to the small size of most middle grades

• Difficulty in structuring opportunities for Middle School Leadership Team and

professional development opportunities due to 4 tier start/ dismissal times of

elementary schools

• Variance of 6th grade configuration by school (some schools have self-contained

6th grade, others have semi-departmentalized and some have departmentalized)

makes it difficult to schedule professional development for these teachers

(including determining who is included in which training)

• Lack of inclusion of specialists (Special Education, English as a Second Language,

Art, Music, PE, World Language) as members of the middle school team because

of scheduling and the fact that specialists are often shared by schools

Other Challenges

• Coaches conducting professional development, writing district assessments, and

supporting new teachers which takes away time working with individual teachers

• Lack of middle school coaches in some content areas (e.g social studies)

Định dạng
Số trang	91
Dung lượng	2,76 MB