GILROY
– Starting next year, Brownell Middle School will have to rely,
in part, on experts outside the district to improve the performance
of Gilroy students, a state report says.
School board trustees last week gave a cautious endorsement of
an eight-point state plan to get Brownell back on track when it
comes to improving students scores on standardized exams. But there
is concern in the district that state funding will not be enough to
cover costs related to implementing the improvement plan.
GILROY – Starting next year, Brownell Middle School will have to rely, in part, on experts outside the district to improve the performance of Gilroy students, a state report says.
School board trustees last week gave a cautious endorsement of an eight-point state plan to get Brownell back on track when it comes to improving students scores on standardized exams. But there is concern in the district that state funding will not be enough to cover costs related to implementing the improvement plan.
“These actions represent a tremendous amount of work,” Superintendent Edwin Diaz told school board trustees last week. “This will definitely be an impact on my time, the time of district office staff and every employee who works at Brownell. There’s no getting around that.”
Even though the state’s recommendations are mostly in line with programs and policies currently in place at Brownell, school officials will have to rewrite their school plan and spell out some next-step initiatives. A school plan is a document that guides how programs and curriculums are carried out at each campus.
The new school plan will undoubtedly translate into more time teachers have to spend doing staff development. And the president of the Gilroy Teachers Association, Michelle Nelson, wants to make sure teachers are compensated, in wages or time off, for any additional work the improvement plan brings.
Nelson questioned if the $155,000 Gilroy Unified School District will receive from the state is enough to carry out the Brownell improvement plan.
The teachers association and the district already have a tenuous relationship when it comes to teacher work hours. The association and the district just recently reached a tentative contract agreement that covers teacher compensation or time off for extra hours worked.
Nelson held up a four-inch, three-ring binder packed with details of that agreement.
“It took a lot of time to come to this agreement. To avoid grievances I want to make sure we’re all on the same page,” Nelson said.
Diaz said the district might be able to land $50,000 to $100,000 in extra funding from the state to carry out the improvement plan. Diaz said the district’s general fund monies will not be used to cover costs, but some shifting of its categorical funds (money the state requires to be spent on a limited set of programs or services) may be required if the extra money is not obtained.
“Our next step is to get a team together to decide how to implement all of this,” Diaz said. “Hopefully the teachers association will be part of that process.”
The eight findings were drawn up by a team of education consultants that visited the campus in April. The team reviewed curriculum and materials, observed classes and interviewed teachers, parents and students. Trustees are mandated by the state to adopt the team’s recommendations.
Brownell Principal Suzanne Damm presented the findings to trustees at last week’s regular school board meeting. According to the evaluation team, Brownell Middle School has problems meeting the varied needs of its remedial students, providing relevant staff development and communicating with the district, its staff and its parents.
Each finding has up to five so-called corrective actions the school must implement by a specific due date, some as early as June 30. The school also will have to report to the superintendent monthly and school board trustees on a quarterly basis.
For instance, to improve staff development practices, Brownell administrators must choose three proven instructional strategies that will be used by all classroom teachers in reading, math and English language development. The strategies, and a process for monitoring how they are used in the classroom, must be put together by Oct. 1.
“I think (the evaluation team) gave us a lot of validation for what we were doing, because there is nothing in this plan that is not simply taking us to the next step of where we were going anyway,” Damm said. “But this does give us some focus.”
By August, district officials must develop a job description for an instructional coach. The instructional coach would model lessons and observe and provide feedback to teachers, among other things.
And by this fall, the school also must begin receiving consultation from sources outside the district. The outside consultant will, among other duties, observe remedial classes and help teachers better design their lessons to meet state standards and student needs.
State findings for school improvements:
1. The school plan does not provide a clear and coherent vision to all stakeholders about their role in supporting schoolwide reform.
2. The school lacks adequate decision-making structures for managing the school change process.
3. The current accountability and monitoring system is best suited for checking compliance and coverage rather than informing classroom instruction.
4. The system of meeting student needs through leveled intervention is not consistently augmented with modified instructional practices throughout the school day.
5. Professional development activities are not consistently perceived by school staff as being connected or relevant to ongoing school initiatives and lack accountability and support for proficient implementation at the classroom level.
6. The use of a single, comprehensive intervention program is not addressing the varied needs of students requiring interventions.
7. Staff has varying degrees of expertise in using data. Professional conversations around data are more about placement rather than improving instructional practice.
8. Communication systems are not consistent or effective between district and school, school and staff, and school and home.
