Colorado's Unified Improvement Plan for Schools

DSST: Henry Middle School UIP 2019-20

      
 Download PDF

Content


  • Document icons and definitions

  • Priority Performance Challenges
  • Root Cause
  • Major Improvement Strategies
  • Action Steps
  • Progress Monitoring
  • Trend Direction

Executive Summary


Priority Performance Challenges Root Cause Major Improvement Strategies
  • Attendance Data
    		•
  • Lack of information for families on the importance of attendance
  • Lack of systematic responses to chronic absenteeism
    		•
  • Attendance Engagement
    		•
  • ELA data growth
    		•
  • Lack of data systems on the classroom level
  • Poor curriculum selection
  • Inconsistent culture practices across the school
    		•
  • Data Meetings
  • ELA and Math 6 Curriculum Shifts
  • Cultural Vision and Cohesion
    		•
  • Math data growth
    		•
  • Lack of data systems on the classroom level
  • Inconsistent culture practices across the school
  • 6th grade curriculum selection
    		•
  • Data Meetings
  • Cultural Vision and Cohesion
  • ELA and Math 6 Curriculum Shifts
    		•


    Access the School Performance Framework here: http://www.cde.state.co.us/schoolview/performance

    Access the Literacy Curriculum Transparency Dashboard here: https://www.cde.state.co.us/code/literacycurriculumtransparency-dashboard

    Improvement Plan Information


    Additional Information about the school


    DSST: Henry Middle School is a college preparatory middle school in Southwest Denver with a deep commitment to serving our community.  DSST's mission is to transform urban public education by eliminating educational inequity and preparing all students for success in college and the 21st century.  We are also committed to investing in our student's identity and character development - and approach this with a common set of core values to define how we operate together as a community.

    DSST: Henry was formed as one of two options in the replacement of Henry World Legacy.  In the past three and a half years, we have been working diligently to improve outcomes at the former Henry World Legacy campus.  There are areas for improvement that we are specifically targeting, in addition to celebrations of success as we have engaged in turn around work at the school.

    DSST: Henry Middle School has a new principal for the 2019-2020 school year.  The focus of the leadership team in previous years has been on establishing clear, consistent, and positive culture systems within the school, and rigorous coursework, to mixed effectiveness.  The focus of the leadership and teaching teams to start this year was to ensure cultural cohesion across the school, and to have a clear understanding of the rigor required on CMAS to inform classroom practice.

    DSST: Henry Middle School has focused in the 19-20 school year on improvement in three critical areas: student culture strength, ELA growth, and math growth.  All interim assessment, and qualitative observations have pointed to us being on track for markedly improved outcomes in the 19-20 school year.  We look forward to capitalizing on those successes and building from them in the 20-21 school year.

    Improvement Plan Information

    The school/district is submitting this improvement plan to satisfy requirements for (check all that apply):


    Checked
    -->

    Narrative on Data Analysis and Root Cause Identification


    Description of School Setting and Process for Data Analysis

    The process for developing the UIP was undertaken by the school in the summer and fall of 2019 using prior year culture data and the most recent CMAS data from spring of 2019.  The participants included the school leadership team, and included input from families and students based on their input from the student and family surveys in the spring of 2019.  The SAC was consulted and briefed on these plans in November of 2019.

    DSST: Henry Middle school serves students in Southwest Denver.  We serve a student body where 83% of families qualify for free or reduced lunch.  Entering the 2019-2020 school year, a new principal was in place to engage in further improvement efforts.

    Prior Year Targets

    Provide a summary of your progress in implementing the Major Improvement Strategies and if they had the intended effect on systems, adult actions, and student outcomes (e.g. targets).

    Prior targets were set in the 2017-2018 school year, before the current principal was employed at the school.  As a result, I have limited context from previous years outside of what is stated on the UIP.

    Reflection on Past Goals:
    Past goals, regrettably, did not indicate specific performance - instead, they were summarized as math growth, ELA growth, and values development.  These were intended to be measured by state assessments (presumably CMAS), as well as student survey scores for values development.  As such, it is difficult to know if past goals were met or not.  Based on the past three years of student growth data, the goals were partially met in the 2017-2018 school year, but not in the 2018-2019 school year.  In the 2017-2018 school year MGP was met in ELA, and was higher (but still not yet meeting) in math.  In the 18-19 school year, both of these result areas went down.  In the student survey area, in the 17-18 school year, we earned 1.5 points and in the 18-19 school year we earned 1 point - an inconsistent result.

    Reflection on Past Strategies:
    My only assessment of these past strategies is based on anecdotal knowledge from prior years.  Most of the strategies centered around intervention classes, likely to target students with disabilities - a sub-group that did not meet expectations in all years of data.  I cannot comment on the success of these strategies and their implementation.  Based on the fact that, in the 16-17 school year, students with disabilities data was "approaching", and in the 17-18 and 18-19 school year, the data was "does not meet", it is clear that, regardless of implementation, the strategies did not have the desired effect.


    Based on your reflection and evaluation, provide a summary of the adjustments that you will make for this year's plan.

    Significant adjustments will be made for this years plan.

    First and foremost, getting more granular on the specificity of our goals is paramount.  This year, our academic goal was to increase the MGP of our lowest performing students by 7 points as measured by CMAS and tracked by interim assessments.  This allowed us to have a much more targeted set of strategies specific to this data target.  Other adjustments have also been based on adult inputs that we believe are impacting the ability of students to make this growth.  Specifically:
    1. Attendance rate: students do not learn when they are not in school.  We see persistent gaps in our attendance between students with disabilities and those without.  We also see high correlations between attendance rate and academic growth - a correlation that is back up by national research.
    2. Staff retention and staff culture: staff culture and retention, based on my anecdotal understanding, has been in a poor place prior to the 19-20 school year.  Increasing the learning mindset of the team, in addition to increasing the quality of coaching and data meetings through our management structures should both propel academic achievement, as well as increase feelings of value and connectedness within our staff.
    3. Student behavioral and academic culture: student culture, as measured by suspension rates and student survey data, was not in a strong place in prior years.  While there were certainly pockets of success, there was not a cohesive sense of belonging in our student body.  Focusing on a strategy of cultural cohesion will be critical to future success.

    Lastly, we plan to target our goals and strategies more going forward: focusing on the highest leverage areas possible, and going all in on them, rather than having a lot of smaller strategies.  This will ensure that we can focus staff energy toward the places that we think are most likely to produce results for students.

    Current Performance

    In the 2018-2019 school year, across the board data were mostly approaching, with some ''does not meet'' areas - though some are much closer to meeting expectations than others.  For example, our data is only 5MGP away from meeting in math, but 10MGP away from meeting in ELA overall.  For the 2018-2019 school year, our ELA MGP was 40 and our math MGP was 45.  Within that data, we had large disparity across grade levels, with our 7th grade ELA and Math MGP meeting expectations, and our 6th grade ELA and Math MGP at ''does not meet'' expectations.

    Specifically, we identified a major area of improvement to be our service to students with disabilities - which did not meet expectations in all subject areas.  Our participation rate was also lower for students with disabilities than it was for the general population of students.  This is related to a persistent challenge for our community: attendance.  Students who are identified with disabilities have lower attendance rates in our community, both impacting their participation rates in important testing measures, as well as impacting their achievement and growth over the course of the year.  Additionally, our English Language Proficiency targets did not meet expectations.  We undertook major improvement in this critical area this year in response to that data.

    In the 2019-2020 school year, significant progress was made in changing these outcomes.  Based on our Winter MAP data results, our school had the top growth results in the DSST network and were projected to outperform our previous years' results - especially in math.  We are disappointed that this will not be able to show in 2020 CMAS results based on testing cancellation.

    Trend Analysis

    Trend Direction: Increasing then decreasing
    Performance Indicator Target: Academic Growth

    Area 1: Literacy/Evidence Based Reading and Writing Growth: middle school students are on a decline.  In 2018, MGP was 49, in 2019, MGP was 40.  This is a noticeable trend because of the magnitude of the change and because it sits well below our benchmarks for state expectations (Source: SPF)
    Trend Direction: Increasing then decreasing
    Performance Indicator Target: Academic Growth

    Area 2: Math Growth: student achievement has been on the decline.  In 2018, MGP was 58, in 2019, MGP was 45.  This is a noticeable trend because of the large decrease, as well as because it sits below our benchmarks for state expectations (Source: SPF)
    Trend Direction: Stable then increasing
    Performance Indicator Target: Student Engagement

    Area 3: Attendance Rate: has been stable, but increasing this year. In 2018, the percent of students meeting attendance benchmarks earned 1 point on SPF, and in 2019 earned only .5 points on SPF.  This is not that noticeable of a decrease, because the difference in overall attendance rate decreased only slightly - by about 2% points.  In the 19-20 school year, attendance data had us on track for an upward trajectory of 3%. We believe that, although the decreased trend is not notable, the overall low attendance rate is notable. (Source: Principal Portal and DSST internal tracking systems)

    Priority Performance Challenge and Associated Root Cause

    Priority Performance Challenge:  Attendance Data

    Improving attendance data to a 93% attendance rate.


    Root Cause: Lack of information for families on the importance of attendance

    Research shows that the more a school and family communicate about the central importance of attendance, the less likely students are to have chronic absenteeism. Our school has yet to partner most effectively with families to ensure higher attendance rates, and to educate them on the importance of attendance.

    Root Cause: Lack of systematic responses to chronic absenteeism

    Our school has just started to establish systematic ways to identify and address signs, symptoms, or cases of absenteeism in students. By improving the systems we started in the 19-20 school year, and building on them, we will be able to better address chronic absenteeism and catch it early to support families.


    Priority Performance Challenge:  ELA data growth

    Increase ELA data MGP for our lowest performing students by 7 points (as defined by DSST performance bands)


    Root Cause: Lack of data systems on the classroom level

    Prior to the 19-20 school year, data meetings did not happen consistently across the school. This year, we started to ramp up these systems as teachers reached base levels of proficiency in management and lesson planning to move into weekly meetings analyzing student data.

    Root Cause: Poor curriculum selection

    In the 18-19 school year, our network moved toward an ELA curriculum called Wit and Wisdom. While this curriculum was well-researched and has produced great results in K-5 schools, the new 6-8 curriculum offered failed to be as standards aligned as we hoped. In the 19-20 school year, we piloted new curriculum by Reading Reconsidered, and after seeing a lot of success based on interim data, purchased the curriculum for the 20-21 school year for every grade level.

    Root Cause: Inconsistent culture practices across the school

    Clear and consistent culture systems and expectations were not in place in previous school years. This led to some highly effective classrooms, and some minimally effective classrooms.


    Priority Performance Challenge:  Math data growth

    Increase Math data MGP for our lowest performing students by 7 points (as defined by DSST performance bands)


    Root Cause: Lack of data systems on the classroom level

    Prior to the 19-20 school year, data meetings did not happen consistently across the school. This year, we started to ramp up these systems as teachers reached base levels of proficiency in management and lesson planning to move into weekly meetings analyzing student data.

    Root Cause: Inconsistent culture practices across the school

    Clear and consistent culture systems and expectations were not in place in previous school years. This led to some highly effective classrooms, and some minimally effective classrooms.

    Root Cause: 6th grade curriculum selection

    6th grade math, in particular, was an area that saw both the largest decrease in performance, but also contributed to overall school data being lower than meets expectations. This has been a curriculum issue across our network for the last few years. Students conceptual understanding from the course is not yet translated into procedural fluency in the way we've implemented the Common Core.


    Why were these challenges selected and what is the magnitude of the overall performance challenges:

    Priority Performance Challenge #1: Attendance Data: attendance data is a critical measure both of student engagement, but also a critical feeder into student success.  Without being in school, students are not learning.  Because this has been a downward trend from 2017-2018 to 2018-2019, it is an important first step in improving academic outcomes.  In the 2019-2020 school year, our attendance rate overall had improved based on the initial efforts around attendance that we had taken.  Our attendance rate had improved to 92% prior to COVID shut down, and over 40% of our students were meeting the benchmarks for attendance (an increase from the 18-19 school year).
    Priority Performance Challenge #2: ELA growth data: While ELA proficiency is also an area of concern, students cannot reach proficiency without first growing at much higher rates than they currently are.  Turnover from the 17-18 school year had presented many challenges to performance in the 18-19 school year, and in particular, on the outcomes in our ELA and math classrooms, with less experienced and proficient teachers.
    Priority Performance Challenge #3: Math growth data: Similar rationale to the above for ELA.  We must be growing students at a much higher rate to improve their proficiency rates.  Our math department in particular from the 17-18 to 18-19 school year had only 2/6 teachers return.  In the 18-19 school year, less proficient teachers led to less growth for students.  Teacher proficiency at craft is an area to address.

    How were the Root Causes were selected and verified:

    These root causes were selected and verified using the RELAY GSE rubrics on school effectiveness.  This helped us identify a few possible strategies for improvement.  They were also based on research around attendance systems, and school walk throughs by the leadership team at the campus and network level to help determine direction.

    Action and Progress Monitoring Plans

    Major Improvement Strategy and Action Plan

    >

    Attendance Engagement

    What will success look like:

    		We will improve yearly attendance to 93% and have over 50% of our students meet or exceed a daily attendance rate of 95%.

    Describe the research/evidence base supporting the strategy:

    		Most of our research came from this website: https://www.attendanceworks.org/

    Associated Root Causes:

    Lack of information for families on the importance of attendance: Research shows that the more a school and family communicate about the central importance of attendance, the less likely students are to have chronic absenteeism. Our school has yet to partner most effectively with families to ensure higher attendance rates, and to educate them on the importance of attendance.

    Lack of systematic responses to chronic absenteeism: Our school has just started to establish systematic ways to identify and address signs, symptoms, or cases of absenteeism in students. By improving the systems we started in the 19-20 school year, and building on them, we will be able to better address chronic absenteeism and catch it early to support families.

    Implementation Benchmarks Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Benchmark Name Description Start/End/Repeats Key Personnel Status
    Attendance Data Analysis We'll look at attendance trends on a monthly basis 08/01/2019
    06/01/2021
    Monthly     		LT and social work team
    Attendance Meetings Meetings between leadership team and social work team to analyze and respond to attendance data 08/19/2019
    06/01/2021
    Weekly     		LT and social work team

    Action Steps Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Name Description Start/End Date Resource Key Personnel Status
    Engage families in attendance
    		During all school events - including back to school night and trimester conferences, emphasize the importance of attendance on student success 08/01/2019
    06/01/2021     		School Director, Deans of Students, Student advisors, social workers
    Establish attendance meetings
    		A system and a clear cadence of meetings needs to be established to get our attendance responsiveness off the ground 08/30/2019
    09/27/2019     		Templates from other schools who are running effective attendance response meetings Leadership team, culture team leader, social work team
    Flyer App Integration
    		Parent communication and engagement is key to attendance. We will communicate with families through the Flyer app to improve our ability to communicate in multiple languages, and to track advisor outreach related to attendance. 05/11/2020
    06/01/2021     		Flyer application All staff members
    >

    ELA and Math 6 Curriculum Shifts

    What will success look like:

    		We will shift our curriculum to Reading Reconsidered in ELA, and pursue revisions to our Math 6 curriculum With these shifts, we will improve our MGP to be at least 50 in both ELA and Math

    Describe the research/evidence base supporting the strategy:

    		Data across our network supports the success of a well-implemented Reading Reconsidered curriculum in integrated literacy classrooms. Schools that used Reading Reconsidered outperformed schools that used Wit and Wisdom by over 20 points in MGP. Additionally, we piloted some Reading Reconsidered units in our school this year, and found them both better aligned to quality materials look-fors, and produced better YOY results than our previous curriculum. We have not yet made significant shifts to our Math 6 curriculum, and will do so with research based practices in the 20-21 school year.

    Associated Root Causes:

    Poor curriculum selection: In the 18-19 school year, our network moved toward an ELA curriculum called Wit and Wisdom. While this curriculum was well-researched and has produced great results in K-5 schools, the new 6-8 curriculum offered failed to be as standards aligned as we hoped. In the 19-20 school year, we piloted new curriculum by Reading Reconsidered, and after seeing a lot of success based on interim data, purchased the curriculum for the 20-21 school year for every grade level.

    6th grade curriculum selection: 6th grade math, in particular, was an area that saw both the largest decrease in performance, but also contributed to overall school data being lower than meets expectations. This has been a curriculum issue across our network for the last few years. Students conceptual understanding from the course is not yet translated into procedural fluency in the way we've implemented the Common Core.

    Implementation Benchmarks Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Benchmark Name Description Start/End/Repeats Key Personnel Status
    Fall, Winter, and Spring MAP Testing We give 3 progress monitoring assessments throughout the year - these are intended to assess growth, regardless of grade level content. 09/07/2019
    05/14/2020
    		 All Staff
    ELA Early Benchmark This was an additional early benchmark given for ELA classes specifically in early October. 10/07/2019
    10/10/2019
    		 ELA teachers
    Interim Assessment #1 We give 3 interim benchmarks during the year based on grade-level content 11/18/2019
    11/20/2019
    		 All Staff
    Interim Assessment #2 We give 3 interim benchmarks during the year based on grade-level content 02/26/2020
    02/28/2020
    		 All Staff
    Interim Assessment #3 Due to COVID-19, this planned interim assessment was cancelled. 05/27/2020
    05/29/2020
    		 All Staff

    Action Steps Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Name Description Start/End Date Resource Key Personnel Status
    Math 6 Curriculum Revision
    		At the start of the 19-20 school year, we undertook a complete overhaul of our previous curriculum. This year, and going forward, we have implemented curriculum from Achievement First, with adaptations to support our students. 07/01/2019
    07/02/2019     		Achievement First Math 6 curriculum Math 6 teacher, School Director
    Reading Reconsidered Curriculum Pilot
    		In collaboration with our ELA department teachers, we selected units to pilot within the Reading Reconsidered curriculum. 07/01/2019
    07/03/2019     		ELA department, School Director, ELA instructional coach
    Further Curriculum Purchase and Training
    		For the 19-20 school year, we purchased Reading Reconsidered curriculum for our 6th and 7th grade courses. For the 20-21 school year, we will be purchasing full curriculum for our 8th grade course (which had 2/6 units this year as Reading Reconsidered). Additionally, in December, we sent our 6th and 7th grade ELA teachers to a Reading Reconsidered training to further enhance our execution of the curriculum 10/01/2019
    07/01/2020     		Reading Reconsidered curriculums ELA department, School Director, ELA instructional coach
    Reading Reconsidered Pilot Assessment
    		After piloting several units, we compared the assessment results of these units on an October literacy benchmark assessment to classes where the piloted units were not used. In this, we determined that Reading Reconsidered was producing better results. 10/07/2019
    10/10/2019     		ELA department, ELA instructional coach, School Director
    >

    Cultural Vision and Cohesion

    What will success look like:

    		Success will look like having a clearly defined vision for what we want our culture to look, sound, and feel like. It will include clear minute by minutes to ensure that the vision is spelled out on a granular level. Success will be all school members being invested in and executing on that vision.

    Describe the research/evidence base supporting the strategy:

    		Research shows that clear, consistent, positive expectations and culture make school feel more safe and positive, in addition to improving student achievement results.

    Associated Root Causes:

    Inconsistent culture practices across the school: Clear and consistent culture systems and expectations were not in place in previous school years. This led to some highly effective classrooms, and some minimally effective classrooms.

    Implementation Benchmarks Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Benchmark Name Description Start/End/Repeats Key Personnel Status
    First 9 Weeks Data Tracking In the first nine weeks of the school year, our team undertook daily (first four weeks) and then weekly (next five weeks) assessments of core components of culture - which we call "The Fine Nine" for our nine most important culture systems. We will repeat this process in the 20-21 school year to launch the school year successfully. 08/19/2019
    10/18/2019
    Weekly     		School leadership team
    Quarterly Culture Reviews After the first nine weeks, at the end of each trimester, we conducted "dipstick" assessments to further refine or realign culture components that needed strengthening, or to raise the bar on those that we thought could be even better. We will repeat this process in the 20-21 school year. 11/15/2019
    05/31/2021
    Quarterly     		School leadership team

    Action Steps Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Name Description Start/End Date Resource Key Personnel Status
    Define the vision for excellence for 9 core culture systems
    		We defined what it would look, sound, and feel like to excellently execute our "fine 9" culture systems: - Arrival - Morning Check - Morning Meeting - Advisory - First Three/Last Three - Lunch/Recess - Hallway Transitions - Dismissal - After School Interventions 06/08/2019
    06/14/2019     		School Director and Senior Dean of Students
    Create clear minute by minute procedures
    		Once we had defined excellence, we then put it into minute by minute documents to help define what would happen at which times for each procedure 06/20/2019
    06/24/2019     		Senior Dean of Students
    Systems Roll-Out
    		We spent a significant portion of time in our summer development days with our full staff internalizing and practicing these core systems 08/03/2019
    08/15/2019     		All Staff
    System Monitoring and Refinement
    		As mentioned in our benchmarking system, we took daily and then weekly assessments of the health of each of our systems at the start of the year - using it to get better and refine toward our vision. 08/19/2019
    10/18/2019     		All Staff
    >

    Data Meetings

    What will success look like:

    		In the 19-20 school year, we will start the foundations of, and in the 20-21 school year expand on, data meetings for all content areas.

    Describe the research/evidence base supporting the strategy:

    		Relay GSE has driven much of our thinking in this area. Data driven practices are proven to improve academic achievement for students.

    Associated Root Causes:

    Lack of data systems on the classroom level: Prior to the 19-20 school year, data meetings did not happen consistently across the school. This year, we started to ramp up these systems as teachers reached base levels of proficiency in management and lesson planning to move into weekly meetings analyzing student data.

    Implementation Benchmarks Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Benchmark Name Description Start/End/Repeats Key Personnel Status
    Data Meeting Cadence Measure We will measure the cadence of data meetings to ensure that each teacher is getting at the very least a biweekly data meeting. This cadence is measured and held accountable to during weekly ILT meetings. 08/26/2019
    05/31/2021
    Weekly     		Instructonal leadership team
    Data Meeting Quality Assessment In the 20-21 school year, instructional coaches will get direct ratings and development on the effectiveness of their data meetings, using the Relay GSE data meeting rubric. 08/03/2020
    05/21/2021
    Monthly     		Instructional leadership team

    Action Steps Associated with Major Improvement Strategy

    Name Description Start/End Date Resource Key Personnel Status
    IL Data Meetings Training
    		Training hosted by the SD (who attended Relay GSE National Principal Academy Fellowship) to the instructional leadership team on how to conduct excellent data meetings. 07/19/2019
    07/19/2019     		Relay GSE slide decks and resources Instructional leadership team
    Staff Data Meetings Training
    		Trained staff on the why behind data meetings, the cadence we would use as a school, how data meetings would go, and systems to support the work in data meetings 08/06/2019
    08/06/2019     		All Staff
    IL Data Meetings Training 2.0
    		This training will advance skill in instructional leaders to look less toward the system of data meetings and more toward the quality and skill in data meetings. 07/20/2020
    07/20/2020     		Instructional leadership team
    Monthly Data Meeting Coaching
    		School Director will coach coaches on the quality of their data meetings, giving areas of excellence and specific action steps for improvement. 08/03/2020
    05/31/2021     		Instructional leadership team

    Progress Monitoring: Student Target Setting

    Priority Performance Challenge : Attendance Data

    Performance Indicator:

    		 Student Engagement

    Measures / Metrics:

    		 Attendance
    ANNUAL
    PERFORMANCE
    TARGETS
    2019-2020: Attendance will increase to a 93% daily average
    2020-2021: We will keep or beat our 93% attendance average, and now focus on increasing our % of students meeting the 95% benchmark. We aim that 50% of our students will meet the 95% or above benchmark.

    INTERIM MEASURES FOR 2019-2020:

    		 Monthly attendance meetings with data pull from Principal Portal.

    Priority Performance Challenge : ELA data growth

    Performance Indicator:

    		 Academic Achievement (Status)

    Measures / Metrics:

    		 ELA
    ANNUAL
    PERFORMANCE
    TARGETS
    2019-2020: DSST Henry students will increase ELA growth MGP to 50. This was unable to be measured due to the cancellation of CMAS testing in the 19-20 school year.
    2020-2021: DSST Henry students will increase ELA growth MGP to 57.

    INTERIM MEASURES FOR 2019-2020:

    		 Early ELA Benchmark Assessment (October) Interim Assessment #1 (November) Interim Assessment #2 (February) Interim Assessment #3 (May) Fall MAP testing (September) Winter MAP testing (January) Spring MAP testing (May)

    Priority Performance Challenge : Math data growth

    Performance Indicator:

    		 Academic Achievement (Status)

    Measures / Metrics:

    		 M
    ANNUAL
    PERFORMANCE
    TARGETS
    2019-2020: DSST Henry students will increase Math growth MGP to 52. This was unable to be measured due to the cancellation of CMAS testing in the 19-20 school year.
    2020-2021: DSST Henry students will increase Math growth MGP to 60.

    INTERIM MEASURES FOR 2019-2020:

    		 Interim Assessment #1 (November) Interim Assessment #2 (February) Interim Assessment #3 (May) Fall MAP testing (September) Winter MAP testing (January) Spring MAP testing (May)

    Attachments List

    © 2017 State of Colorado