Format for Executive Summary--4th version

SBE Meeting 02/2012

Attachment : LFI

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Title:

Renewal Recommendations for Charter Schools with Charters Expiring June 2012

Type of Executive Summary: Consent

Action

Action on First Reading

Discussion

Information

Policy Implications: Constitution General Statute #115C-238-29D(d) SBE Policy #TCS-U-007 SBE Policy Amendment SBE Policy (New) APA # APA Amendment APA (New) Other Presenter(s):

Mr. Philip Price (Chief Financial Officer, Financial and Business Services) and Mr. Joel Medley (Director, Office of Charter Schools)

Description: Based on GS115C-238.29D(d) and SBE Policy TCS-U-007, the following schools are requesting renewal of their charters: Cape Lookout Marine Science High School PreEminent Charter School Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School As part of the renewal process, the Office of Charter Schools examined DPI compliance forms and made renewal site visits to each school. That information, along with academic and enrollment data, was compiled into a renewal portfolio and was presented to the fifteen member NC Public Charter School Advisory Council (PCSAC). On December 14, 2011, the Council met to consider the renewal information and interviewed each of these charter schools before formulating the attached recommendations. Due to financial concerns about one school that emerged after the Council's vote on December 14, 2011, the SBE asked the Council to explore this situation further. The PCSAC met on January 10, 2012 to reconsider the new data for this one, charter school and amended its recommendation to the State Board of Education. The submitted materials include the Council's recommendation, each school's renewal portfolio, and the process followed by the Office of Charter Schools. Resources: N/A Input Process: Office of Charter Schools, The NC Public Charter School Advisory Council, The Leadership for Innovation Committee, and DPI. Stakeholders: Charter Schools, parents, students, and staff. Timeline For Action: This item was presented for Discussion at the January 2012 and for Action at the February 2012 SBE meeting. Recommendations: It is recommended that the SBE accept the Council's renewal recommendations as presented.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Audiovisual equipment requested for the presentation: Data Projector/Video (Videotape/DVD and/or Computer Data, Internet, Presentations-PowerPoint preferred) Specify: Audio Requirements (computer or other, except for PA system which is provided) Specify: Document Camera (for transparencies or paper documents – white paper preferred) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Motion By: ______________________________ Vote: Yes __________ No __________ Approved __________ Disapproved __________

Seconded By: ______________________________ Abstain __________ Postponed __________ Revised __________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Person responsible for SBE agenda materials and SBE policy updates: Pat Gillott 807-3491

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Data for Charter Schools Seeking Charter Renewal in 2012 Blank Cells denote areas of compliance * Data Not Available

School Name

Academic Performance

Low Performing

Met Growth

AYP (targets met/ total targets)

Grades Year

Composite

English I

39.0 50.0 68.0 72.9 27.7

60.0 42.1 55.9 73.1 45.5

Noncompliance

Enrollment (Best 1 of 2)

Alg I

(County) Cape Lookout Marine Science High School Gr. 9-12

06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11

52.0 35.3 53.1 46.4 15.0

Yes

HG No Yes HG No

No No Yes No No

1 of 2 1 of 2 3 of 3 2 of 3 1 of 3

(Carteret)

EC – CIPP plan and data were late in 2010. They received a corrective action letter in April 2011 for noncompliance of Transition Components on IEPs and the Internal Record Review. Not all individual records have been corrected; however, they are working on these revisions.

141 104 117 135 91

Criminal History Checks – listed as noncompliant in January 2010; however, the school is now compliant with this requirement. Title I – listed as non-compliant 2006-07 in 16 of 48 indicators reviewed. The issue was closed due to Cape Lookout’s choice to no longer receive Title I funding.

Summary Information:

Office of Charter School Site Visits:

NC Public Charter School Advisory Council Recommendation:

Considering the newly revised charter school law that includes a definition of inadequate academic performance, Cape Lookout must attain a 60% performance composite or make growth in order to remain open beyond 2012. Graduation rates have grown from 26.3% in 2006-07 to 52.2% in 2010-11. Student enrollment has declined from a Best 1 of 2 high of 141 students to a low of 91 students last year. Their first month ADM for 2011-12 was 68 students. April 24, 2007; March 11, 2011; September 13, 2011; October 12, 2011

After the December 14, 2011 meeting where the Council recommended a 4 year renewal for Cape Lookout, the Office of Charter Schools became aware of new financial concerns – the school requested an emergency 50% advance of its March 2012 allotment the day after the renewal recommendation had been made. Since the Council did not have this information at the time of their recommendation, the State Board asked the Council to explore these financial issues. At its January 10, 2012 meeting, the Council reconsidered the Cape Lookout renewal. After questioning the school about the emergency fund advance and discussing the financial status of the school, the Council recommended that the State Board not renew the charter. 1

1202_LFI 02_Attach


School Name


Low Performing

Met Growth


Grades (County) PreEminent Charter School Gr. K-8

Year

Composite

Reading

06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11

50.0 33.0 45.5 49.4 56.7

69.3 23.5 43.2 45.1 49.7

Noncompliance


Math

26.2 31.8 50.7 56.1 62.6

Yes Yes

No No No Yes Yes

No No Yes No No

7 of 13 7 of 13 13 of 13 12 of 13 10 of 13

Criminal History Checks – listed as noncompliant in January 2010; however, the school is now compliant with this requirement.

527 552 557 569 562

(Wake) Summary Information:

At the last renewal in February 2009, the SBE placed a restriction upon PreEminent that they “shall meet or exceed expected growth in the next two consecutive academic years (2008-09 and 2009-10). Failure to meet this growth for any reason will subject PreEminent Charter School’s Charter not to be renewed.” The charter school did not make growth in 2008-09 but has met growth the last two years.


January 8, 2008; March 26, 2008; May 1, 2008; August 21, 2008; September 9, 2008; October 21,2008; January 9, 2009; February 10, 2009; April 1, 2009; December 10, 2009; March 23, 2011; October 21, 2011


After reviewing the renewal portfolio, interviewing the charter school, and discussing their findings, the Council recommended that PreEminent Charter School receive a 5 year renewal with the understanding that they must comply with the academic standards of the State Board of Education policy and revised charter school statute.

2

1202_LFI 02_Attach


School Name


Low Performing

Met Growth


Grades (County) Sandhills Theartre Arts Renaissance School

Year

06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11

Composite

Reading

61.9 50.0 60.9 58.8 66.3

82.0 44.2 62.5 59.1 60.2

Noncompliance


Math

41.4 54.6 67.1 61.3 74.0

No No No No HG

No No Yes No No

Gr. K-8

12 of 13 11 of 13 13 of 13 10 of 13 11 of 13

EC -- formal written complaint in 2008-09. After corrective action was implemented, case closed 8/31/10. In November 2010, a verification visit found 9 records noncompliant. These have been corrected.

146 286 268 277 278

Criminal History Checks -- listed noncompliant in January 2010; however, the school is now compliant with this requirement.

(Moore)

Governance – received a governance warning in July 2010 for failure to follow open meetings law. They followed the terms of that warning and were cleared July 1, 2011.

Summary Information:

Considering the newly revised charter school law that includes a definition of inadequate academic performance, STARS must retain a 60% performance composite or make growth in order to remain open beyond 2012.


April 24, 2008; September 12, 2008; October 31, 2008; December 9, 2008; January 12, 2009; February 2, 2009; October 1, 2010; December 15, 2010; April 21, 2010; February 11, 2011; September 2, 2011; September 21, 2011; October 31, 2011


After reviewing the renewal portfolio, interviewing the charter school, and discussing their findings, the Council recommended that Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School receive a 10 year renewal with the understanding that they must comply with the academic standards of the State Board of Education policy and revised charter school statute.

3

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Renewal Process (1) A letter is sent to the school’s administrator from The Office of Charter Schools notifying them that they are starting the two year renewal process. It includes the General Statute and an explanation of the NC Charter Schools Renewal Report which will be created for the Charter School Council and the SBE. It outlines the steps of the renewal process. (2) A conference call training session will be held with each school up for renewal roughly 18 months out from their renewal date. It will be a time for answering questions about the renewal process, though schools should feel comfortable calling ANY time throughout the renewal process. (3) The renewal school will complete a self‐study. “THE CHARTER SCHOOL’S SELF‐STUDY. This section contains questions related to fulfilling the school’s mission, and the viability of the school’s education program including student accountability, the exceptional children’s program, business plan, and financial reporting, teacher licensure, and governance structure. It is suggested that this portion be undertaken by a team of people having the ability to look objectively at the entire school and identify ways to further strengthen and align the existing program to its approved mission and the desires of the community that it serves.” (This is normally due in October/November for schools that would be seeking renewal 20 months out.) (4) The Office of Charter Schools will request school information from Financial Services, Accountability, Exceptional Children, and any other office or service of the Department that may have information pertinent to the evaluation of the school. These compliance/non‐ compliance reports will be completed by DPI and shared with each school as soon as they are available. (This information will be collected twice – once at the beginning of the two year process and again when about 10 months out from the renewal decision.) The school will be given the opportunity through a Corrective Action Plan, to respond to any areas noted as having been in non‐compliance during the previous five years. The school’s Corrective Action Plan will be added to the information submitted to the Charter School Advisory Council and to the SBE. After the second set of compliance/non‐compliance reports are collected (approximately 10 months out) , the school will be notified of any areas still in non‐compliance or new areas of non‐compliance and given the opportunity to respond to those concerns in writing. If the school chooses to do this, these too are added to the information submitted to the Public Charter School Advisory Council and to the SBE. (5) The OCS renewal team will make a site visit to the school, receive a tour of the school, and meet with three separate groups: the administrative team including at least one board member, a representative group of staff members, and a group of parents. These meetings

4

1202_LFI 02_Attach

will focus on the school’s mission, educational programs, state testing results, student accountability, exceptional children’s services, governance structure, teacher certification and HQ status, staff development, communication processes, and (with administration and board) their business and financial plan, including federal funds such as Title I and Title II. With the administrative team, it will also be used to discuss any areas of non‐compliance and an explanation of the next steps in the renewal process for the school. (6) The Office of Charter Schools will complete a North Carolina Charter Schools Renewal Report for submission with each renewal school’s Self‐Study. This section consists of data and reports from the Office of Charter Schools, including but not limited to five years of ABC Accountability data, enrollment/dropout data, and compliance information. (7) The NC Charter Schools Renewal Council will be provided the above information. Renewal schools will then be invited to appear before The Council to answer any lingering questions or to provide additional information. (8) The NC Charter Schools Advisory Council will consider renewal options and vote to send a recommendation to the SBE.

5

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Renewal

Cape Lookout Marine Science High School – 16A

2012

Below is the school’s student academic performance data. If the year, subject or grade level is not applicable, N/A has been entered in the corresponding box. EOC Percent Proficient 2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

60.0 52.0 46.0 44.4 52.0 N/A N/A N/A 56.0 16.1

42.1 35.3 63.6 N/A 52.9 N/A 53.8 N/A 32.1 21.4

55.9 53.1 57.1 N/A 80.0 N/A 58.1 N/A 80.9 83.3

73.1 46.4 75.0 N/A 80.8 N/A 54.5 N/A 86.0 86.4

45.5 15.0 N/A N/A 19.2 N/A 12.2 N/A 44.0 25.8

English I Algebra I Algebra II Geometry Biology Chemistry Physical Science Physics ELPS US History

Four Year Graduation Rate 2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

26.3%

19.0%

24.6%

36.6%

52.2%

School Report Card ABCs Accountability Summary 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011

Performance Composite

ABC Status

39.0 50.0 68.0 72.9 27.7

Priority School Priority School School of Progress School of Progress Low Performing

Met Expected or High Growth HG No Yes HG No

Adequate Yearly Progress Met Targets Met/Total Targets AYP No 1 of 2 No 1 of 2 Yes 3 of 3 No 2 of 3 No 1 of 3

School Membership Data YEAR Year 1 (07 - 08) Year 2 (08 – 09) Year 3 (09 - 10) Year 4 (10 - 11) Year 5 (11 - 12)

1st Month/Last Day PMR- Membership 105 115 129 86 68

Last Month/Last Day PMR - Membership 103 131 117 71 N/A

Total # of Students Who Enrolled 212 273 208 118 N/A

Total # of Students Who Withdrew During the Year 104* = 49% 131* = 48% 88* = 42.3% 41* = 34.7% N/A

*These numbers DO NOT include students who left because they completed their studies.

6

1202_LFI 02_Attach

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION FILE NO:10 CVS 1650

COUNTY CARTERET N.C. Marine Science High School Inc. : : : :

Plaintiff(s) VS.

JUDGMENT

N.C. State Board of Education Defendant(s)

This matter coming on to be heard and being heard at the February 7, 2011, term of Civil Superior Court in and for Craven County and from the record, the stipulations of the parties, the exhibits and the evidence presented, the Court finds as follows: 1.

The matter was heard and a record made before the Honorable Joe Webster, Administrative Law Judge, on July 19, 2010;

2.

The Court has reviewed the entire administrative record including Transcript, Orders, Decisions, Pleadings and Exhibits as well as short testimony of the current Principal of the Petitioner, namely Teresa Parker;

3.

This Court hereby adopts as part of its findings of fact those findings in Nos. 1-23 of the Administrative Law Judge’s Decision, filed September 16, 2010, with the exception of reference to Cape Fear in lieu of Cape Lookout in the first and second No. 15 finding, and the Court hereby references those findings as if fully set out herein and find them to be persuasive in this case;

4.

The Petitioner is doing a good job of meeting the School Board's first priority on academics and at-risk students;

5.

The Petitioner, since its inception, has had a high dropout rate because it specifically targets at-risk students, has four (4) quarters of enrollment and reenrollment as opposed to two (2) semesters, and the Petitioner has a low student population in comparison to other high schools.

6.

The Court specifically finds Petitioner has met its marine science mission;

7.

The Board of Education acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it failed to renew Petitioner's charter, in that no grounds for termination or non-renewal were established by the evidence. 8. The Court does not accept the findings made by the Respondent in its November 4, 2010 Final Agency Decision.

7

1202_LFI 02_Attach

NOW THEREFORE, THE COURT HEREBY CONCLUDES, as follows: 1.

This matter is properly before the Court and the Court has jurisdiction;

2.

The Findings set forth in the Administrative Law Judge’s Findings Nos. 1-23 are persuasive and in keeping with the evidence set forth in the Record and the Transcript.

3.

The Respondent acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying Petitioner's renewal of its charter, in that the grounds of 115C-238.29G for termination or non-renewal of the Charter have not been met;

4.

The Charter should be renewed for two years;

5.

Petitioner and Respondent should establish procedures for identifying and correcting problems prior to failing to renew said Charter.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows: 1.

The charter of the Petitioner is renewed through the 2011-2012 school year. 2. The Respondent is to work with the Petitioner in addressing the dropout situation.

This the _____ day of March, 2011.

____________________________________ _____ The Honorable John E. Nobles, Jr., Judge Presiding

8

1202_LFI 02_Attach

9

1202_LFI 02_Attach

10

1202_LFI 02_Attach

CHARTER SCHOOL RENEWAL VISITATION REPORT School: Cape Lookout Marine Science High School Location: Morehead City

Date of Visit: 10/12/2011

Grades Served: 9‐12

Office of Charter School Consultants Present: Joel Medley and Dottie Heath

Administrator: Teresa Parker Current Enrollment:

71

Started the year with: 68 Max ADM: 109

Time In: 9:50 a.m.

Time Out: 1:45 p.m.

Background and Purposes: Cape Lookout Marine Science High School received a 2 year charter term from the State Board of Education, effective from July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2010. Nearing the end of that term in 2010, the SBE decided not to renew their charter due to several factors: high student turnover, the highest dropout rate in the state, inconsistent student performance on state testing, questions regarding a location for operation during the next year, and compliance issues during the previous five years. The school appealed that decision and, per legal orders, the school was allowed to remain open until a legal ruling was offered. The final decision granted the school another two year charter that concludes June 30, 2012. Thus, Cape Lookout is, once again, going through the renewal process. The renewal site visit afforded the team an opportunity to talk to parents, staff members, and administrative team including a board member. Through a series of questions, the team hoped to attain a fuller picture of the school, particularly in terms of continuity and fulfillment of its mission, its ability to provide for the academic and other needs of its students and their parents, and the support and development of its current staff. Ms. Parker, the school principal, was notified ahead of time about the visit and was allowed to choose the people to represent each of these groups. Ms. Heath, the renewal team leader, requested that each group embody a cross section. As an example, the team hoped for parents with diverse demographics as well as the length of time their children had attended the school. The team sought the same staff variations; however, the uncertainty surrounding the school’s future beyond June 2010 resulted in all but one teacher leaving. On a positive note, Ms. Parker said that all, but one, of the teachers from last year returned. She believes that the school is developing internal capacity. Page 1 of 7

11

1202_LFI 02_Attach

General Information: Cape Lookout began the 2011‐2012 school year with 68 students. They currently have 71 students. Ms. Parker says they have only lost one student since school started, and it was due to familial relocation. The school resides within the same building as they did during their last renewal phase. The board and administration has entered discussion with the city about another possible location where another charter school had been located. They feel the location and lease would be better for them in the long run. Ms. Parker wants to involve the staff in that decision because, in her words, “I can’t run a school by myself.” The team was told that there are 13 full time staff members and 1 half time person. The EC director is also the guidance counselor and teaches two classes per day. Ms. Parker said approximately 20% of the student body receives EC services. Teachers arrive at 7:30 and are released at 3:30, and all three groups stated that teachers often stay after school to work with students rather than leaving. The day for students begins at 7:50 a.m. and ends at 3:00 p.m. However, Saturday classes are also provided two Saturdays per month for students needing additional assistance. During these weekend classes, classroom teachers provide assignments for their students to the staff members in charge of these Saturday classes. Lunch is provided free of charge to all students. Utilizing their autonomy, the school has benefited from the generosity of the community. Local churches, Chick‐fil‐a, the Texas Steak House, parent volunteers, and other groups frequently contribute. These are planned weeks in advance and, according to the administrator, have resulted in the students always having plenty to eat. On the day of the team visit, a local store delivered two tables full of bread that students could take home to help their families. On‐Site Activities: Parent Group: The renewal team first met with eight parents and one former student. She came with her mother and asked to help represent her sister who currently attends Cape Lookout. One of the parents also is currently a co‐chair of their board of directors. There were several consistent themes expressed by parents. Unanimously, they felt the school was an extension of their family and provides for the needs of students who might not be successful in the regular public school system. They see the advantages of Cape Lookout as:         Page 2 of 7

Very small teacher/student ratios, allowing teachers to personally know all of the students. Communication lines are always open, including at the student pick‐up, and teachers even make home visits. The school is accommodating to the specific needs of their children. Many of these children struggled in their former high schools. When problems arise, the school administration and staff willingly work with parents. Children with special needs are accepted by staff and peers alike. The teachers go above and beyond to help students succeed. They like the open door policy with teachers and the administrator.

12

1202_LFI 02_Attach

 

Parent‐teacher conferences are conducted by the students, and, often, the students use those conferences to “tell on themselves first.” Teachers stay after school to help any student who needs help.

Significant comments that were made were:          

“If the school were not here, our children would not have graduated.” “Parents and teachers are as one.” “If not for this school, my child would not be in school.” “This school provides a niche for students who need more than public schools can provide.” “Students here are allowed to speak their minds without repercussions.” “These teachers go above and beyond to help our children succeed.” “My child matters here!” “They follow my son’s IEP to a T!” One parent said she was there for a foster child who had actually repeated 9th grade three times but was now in 10th grade with all A’s. One of the parents commented that she thinks the reason the school is so successful is because they work “to touch the heart first…then they get the mind.”

When asked about the school’s grievance policy, the parents said the process always starts with the teacher, but “we haven’t had to use that process yet.” We asked them what one thing they would like to change, and after a thoughtful silence, one parent said she was disappointed because civics was dropped through a low enrollment. Then a second one commented on transportation issues, and it was seconded by several others. They acknowledge that the school bought a van and is looking for another one, but transporting their children to and from school is difficult. Lastly, the comment was made that the court case really hurt their enrollment and also affected attendance. Several parents commented on the difficulty the students had that year focusing on academics dealing with all of the news media on the closing of their school. The comment was made that “It looks like the state was pushing these kids aside again.” Teaching Staff Group: We asked several questions about the staff development that is provided and how they would go about seeking staff development. We were told that all of their staff development days for last year were dropped because of make‐up days. However, should a teacher desire to attend a workshop, the staff would personally ask Ms. Parker who would check to see if it was in the budget. One teacher said that she had taken part in an ACT/College and Career Promise webinar. Another went to a Civics strand workshop, and a third said that she would be going to the EC conference this year. We asked about curriculum. We were told that a lot of focus last year was put on trying to align their curriculum to be sure that they are fulfilling the marine science component expressed in their charter. This resulted in a decision to offer all marine science class options during 3rd period with teachers being able to come up with their own electives with a maximum of 15 students per class. It did seem that the Page 3 of 7

13

1202_LFI 02_Attach

teachers were enjoying this. They said a senior project is also required, which must focus on a topic in marine science. That followed with excitement that students in their physical science class were going to be able to pair with Duke University on a blue crabs and whooping cranes study. Regarding administrative evaluations, the teachers said that they receive three evaluations per year. They said that they get to choose the date for the first one but the other two are unannounced. They then added that Ms. Parker also does a lot of “pop‐in’s” and they don’t even notice that she is in the classroom. The staff indicated that they receive honest opinions and feedback. As we began to talk about their classes and their relationships to their students, their faces lit up and they became very vocal. Teachers expressed that they felt authority was delegated to them which allowed them to make faster decisions to suit the individual needs of the students. They stressed that they think their daily contact with parents is adding to student success. As part of the process, the staff attempts to make the students and parents comfortable and welcomed. Others commented on the need to address issues students bring from outside the classroom and the need for teachers to share this information to better meet the needs of students. Comments that were made included the following:      

“Ms. Parker is the captain and we are the shipmates.” “I feel like a pioneer.” (This statement was made as the teacher referenced being able to assist in drafting the school’s curriculum.) “It is a team environment.” “We try to go above and beyond.” “We do not want to use a cookie‐cutter approach…students need different approaches.” “We are a family.”

The staff clearly expressed that they believe the school is growing stronger. The renewal team explored that assertion by asking why. We were told it starts during the registration process. Students or parents are required to personally come to the school to pick up the application. An interview is then held with the parent and the student to discuss expectations. The parents are required to sign a parent pledge agreeing to donate 10 hours per month, and prospective students are required to write an essay. The teachers also expressed that they feel the personal educational plans that are written for each student are helping them make those connections with the students. Additionally, they said that the improved parent/school communication efforts are paying off. They write progress reports for their students each Monday and send them home. All must be signed by the parents and if they do not get them back within two days, they call the parents. Open Houses and parent/teacher conferences are held regularly. They said the focus has really been on building relationships both with students and parents and part of that is having a true open door policy. They say parents can and do walk into their classrooms any time. The renewal team asked how the staff used assessment data to guide instruction. We were told that assessments are primarily used for EOC practice and for parent conferencing. One teacher did say she uses this data to create focused mini‐lessons. Another said she used these tests to gauge student Page 4 of 7

14

1202_LFI 02_Attach

weaknesses so that she can correct the issues. Then the teachers said they used them a lot to identify student learning styles, to do inventories, and they also did values inventories with the students. They said that the lead administrator holds two staff meetings per month which are used to relay important information and/or procedures but not for staff development. It appears that there is no in‐ house staff development. We asked how data was shared with the staff. We were told that if they recognized something was a weakness, the teachers gathered together and talked about it ‐‐ brainstorming possible ways to address the issue…such as incorporating math and writing into art. They said the board members have brought in books for the students and teachers and provided materials so that the students will have whatever it takes to be successful. It is also why they work so hard to feed all students free lunches. The staff said that there are many fundraisers. They do a yard sale. They sell baked goods for the yearbook. They also try to involve the students in giving back. They have a club called “Cape Crusaders” that take food out to needy families. Each class decorates a Christmas tree and they are judged for the best. Then they are given to needy families. The students assist in making booklets for the daycares. They even decorated wooden fish that were made in a local shop and then took them back to the store to see and raise money for the school. Administrative Group: Ms. Parker has been with Cape Lookout since the early 1990s when it served as the LEA’s alternative school. She took over as the lead administrator in the fall of 2010 when the school reopened and has instituted many changes. She said that they had gotten away from their mission and their original focus on marine science. The school, which is on a block system, now has all students involved in marine science in some way during their third period (which is a 45 minute period) class. There are ten marine science classes taught during this period ranging from boat safety to small marine engine repair to marine science writing, to marine art, and marine construction. Further, marine science is also integrated within the core curriculum as well, and this marine focus has led to an exciting partnership with the Duke Marine Science lab (funded by a Federal grant received by Duke). Ms. Parker says that communication with parents is very important. She requires that all teachers contact parents weekly. She says it is her policy that when they contact a parent, they must always say something positive before hitting something negative. She suggests strongly that they maintain email contact whenever possible and feels strongly that the school must maintain an open door policy. Board meetings are held the second Tuesday of each month at 5:30. They will discuss any policy issues, discipline issues and there will be a teacher report. There is also a student council member present at all meetings as the representative for that group. One of the big things the board did two years was commit to finding ways to provide free lunches to the students so that they would not have to leave during the day. We were told this action reduced behavioral issues from the students misbehaving while in public. Also, keeping the students on‐site for lunches has minimized the number of students that failed to return from lunch. Furthermore, the board has approved the hiring of a consulting group to help Cape Lookout with grants, compliance, reporting, and instructional improvement. Ms. Parker says that three observations are done on each teacher each year – two from the administration and one from a peer. Student surveys are also done each semester and given to the Page 5 of 7

15

1202_LFI 02_Attach

board. That information is utilized to help drive instructional changes. Regarding curriculum, Ms. Parker says all the teachers have written curriculums and their lesson plans are turned in to her weekly and reviews them, writes comments, and then returns them to the teachers. Regarding the sharing of student performance data, Ms. Parker said that the board met with her and then with the teachers as they reviewed the need for improvement. She said the board also talked to them about using lexiles and understanding “growth” vs. performance composite on the ABC report. Regarding the past two years, they wanted us to know that the school has changed greatly beyond just getting marine science back into their curriculum. We were told “The school used to be a dumping ground.” They said that the local LEA often told students who wanted to withdraw that they had to enroll at Cape Lookout before dropping out. The school asserted this was one of the contributing factors to their previously high drop‐out rate. Cape Lookout reiterated that the new application process has helped. Incoming students go through an interview where students and parents write several paragraphs about their goals and purposes. This assists the school in the development of a personalized education plan for each child. Parents further sign a document agreeing to volunteer hours at the school each month. The renewal team also heard that Cape Lookout has worked hard to change the mentality of the building into one that encourages the students to become the best they can academically. They very proudly stated that almost 700 people attended their graduation. They had sent an invitation to the previous graduates to attend and close to 200 did, making it a great reunion. They wanted OCS personnel to know that Cape Lookout’s focus is now clearly on developing the whole student. They want the Cape Lookout experience to be a successful experience for students leading to diplomas not dropouts. When asked what would happen if the school closed, the administrators responded that the LEA’s drop‐out rate and county’s crime rate would both grow. The team mentioned to Ms. Parker that they had not received a response to the school’s areas of non‐ compliance – Exceptional Children’s Department, Title I, and Criminal Records Checks. Though the school was not required to respond, the team wanted the administration to know that she still could respond to these items and have the school’s responses included in the renewal documentation. Summary Statements: 1. Cape Lookout, despite the changes presented during the renewal team visit, faces a significant struggle in terms of their students’ academic performance. In one year’s time, the performance composite dropped from 72% to 27%. Due to the State Board of Education policy, and its recent codification into law, the charter school must make their ABC growth goals or have its performance composite higher than 60%. If they do not succeed in that endeavor this year, then the charter will automatically terminate. Further, if they do reach those levels, they must repeat that same success again the following year in order to avoid losing their charter. 2. Cape Lookout’s other struggle involves student enrollment. Their enrollment figures have dropped significantly and are dangerously close to the state minimum of 65. The renewal team did not perform a head count but noticed that classrooms were sparsely filled. Obviously, Page 6 of 7

16

1202_LFI 02_Attach

enrollment drives the budget of the school; so a declining enrollment minimizes the funding that can be devoted to improving academics. Additionally, the Principal’s Monthly Report (PMR) shows that during the 2009‐2010 school year, Cape Lookout enrolled 208 students and ended the year with 117 (a 44% withdrawal rate). During the 2010‐2011 school year, they enrolled 118 students and ended with 71 students (a 40% withdrawal rate). Another concern in terms of enrollment and sustainability deals with the proportion of students at each grade level. In comparing enrollments over the past two years, there has been a significant shift to more students at the higher grade levels and fewer at the 9th and 10th grade levels. That means that with each graduation there are fewer current students to replace these vacated slots. If something is not done to increase the number of students enrolling, this alone could put the school in even more danger of falling below the state minimum of 65.

Page 7 of 7

17

1202_LFI 02_Attach

18

1202_LFI 02_Attach

19

1202_LFI 02_Attach

20

1202_LFI 02_Attach

21

1202_LFI 02_Attach

22

1202_LFI 02_Attach

23

1202_LFI 02_Attach

24

1202_LFI 02_Attach

25

1202_LFI 02_Attach

26

1202_LFI 02_Attach

27

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Per an email from Rebecca Dowless on December 13, 2011, Cape Lookout has submitted their CIPP. They are working on records but all individual records are not completely in compliance. Also, technical assistance visits are planned but not currently scheduled. Joel E. Medley 12/15/11

28

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Cape Lookout has submitted their required paperwork and is now compliant with criminal history checks. Joel E. Medley 12/15/11

29

1202_LFI 02_Attach

30

1202_LFI 02_Attach

31

1202_LFI 02_Attach

32

1202_LFI 02_Attach

33

1202_LFI 02_Attach

34

1202_LFI 02_Attach

35

1202_LFI 02_Attach

36

1202_LFI 02_Attach

37

1202_LFI 02_Attach

38

1202_LFI 02_Attach

39

1202_LFI 02_Attach

40

1202_LFI 02_Attach

41

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Renewal

PreEminent Charter- 92M

2012

Below is the school’s student academic performance data. If the year, subject or grade level is not applicable, N/A has been entered in the corresponding box. EOG Percent Proficient 2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

64.1 75.7 69.8 64.4 71.4 69.7

18.8 38.6 23.3 13.3 37.1 24.2

14.9 22.0 26.2 35.7 21.6 35.3

26.9 22.0 26.2 53.6 45.9 35.3

44.1 42.4 35.7 47.8 40.7 44.8

61.0 53.0 40.5 46.4 51.9 48.3

31.2 58.2 44.3 55.1 37.5 65.0

55.8 67.3 47.5 44.9 56.3 80.0

41.5 51.6 58.5 56.4 40.5 49.1

54.7 74.2 56.1 56.4 69.0 63.2

3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade 7th Grade 8th Grade

Percent Proficient in Science Course Science 5 Science 8

2007-2008 9.2 17.6

2008-2009 11.9 34.5

2009-2010 27.9 75.0

2010-2011 56.1 54.4

EOC Percent Proficient Algebra I Geometry

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

22.7 N/A

N/A 50.0

>95 N/A



ABC Status

50.0 33.0 45.5 49.4 56.7

Priority School Low Performing School Low Performing School Priority School Priority School

Met Expected or High Growth No No No Yes Yes





42


Total # of Students Who Withdrew During the Year 145 = 23.5% 83 = 14.3% 54 = 9.1% 72 = 12.3% N/A

1202_LFI 02_Attach

February 6, 2009

PreEminent Charter School Michael Stack 3815 Rock Quarry Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27610-5123 CHARTER RENEWAL Dear Michael: At the February 2009 North Carolina State Board of Education (hereinafter “NCSBE”) Meeting, the NCSBE voted to approve a three-year extension of PreEminent’s Charter (until June 30, 2012). During this extension, PreEminent Charter School must meet the following requirement in order to retain its charter. Failure to satisfy any of the following conditions will result in no additional renewals of PreEminent’s charter, pursuant to N.C. General Statutes, Section 115C-238.29D(d). In addition to meeting this requirement, PreEminent Charter School remains subject to all terms and conditions as stated within their charter, which includes compliance with applicable Federal and State laws and NCSBE policies. Note: The NCSBE reserves the right to terminate the charter prior to June 30, 2012 for any violation of law or policy outlined herein or otherwise. I.

Meet or Exceed Expected Growth in the 2008-‘09 and 2009-’10 years. PreEminent Charter School shall meet or exceed expected growth in the next two consecutive academic years (2008-’09 and 2009-’10). Failure to meet this growth for any reason will subject PreEminent Charter School’s Charter not to be renewed.

Please forward a copy of this letter to your Board Chair in a timely manner. Should you have any questions, please contact the Office of Charter Schools. Sincerely,

Jack Moyer JM:jmh OFFICE OF CHARTER SCHOOLS Jack Moyer, Director | [email protected] 6303 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6303 | (919) 807-3491 | Fax (919) 807-3496 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER 43

1202_LFI 02_Attach

CHARTER SCHOOL RENEWAL VISITATION REPORT School: PreEminent Charter School Location: Raleigh


Grades Served: K‐8

Office of Charter School Consultants Present: Jackie Jenkins and Dottie Heath

Administrator: Michael Stack Deans: Michael Eldridge, MS; Jennie McCloud, 3‐5; Shayla Lowman K‐2. Current Enrollment: 539 Max ADM: 618 Time In: 8:30 a.m.

Time Out: 12:15 p.m.

Background and Purposes: PreEminent Charter School received a 3 year renewal at the February, 2009, NC State Board of Education (SBE) meeting. The current charter is effective from July 1, 2009, through June 30, 2012. As a condition of the renewal, the SBE required that “PreEminent Charter School shall meet or exceed expected growth in the next two consecutive academic years (2008‐‘09 and 2009‐‘10). Failure to meet this growth for any reason will subject PreEminent Charter School’s Charter not to be renewed.” As part of the renewal process for schools with charters expiring in June 2012, a site visit is performed by members of the Office of Charter Schools. Its purpose was to afford the team an opportunity to talk to parents, staff members, and the administrative team including a board member. Through a series of questions, the team hoped to attain a fuller picture of the school, particularly in terms of continuity and fulfillment of its mission, its ability to provide for the academic and other needs of its students and their parents, and the support and development of its current staff. Mr. Stack, the school principal, was notified ahead of time about the visit and was allowed to choose the people to represent each of these groups. Ms. Heath, the renewal team leader, requested that each group embody a cross section. As an example, the team hoped for parents with diverse demographics as well as the length of time their children had attended the school. The team sought the same diversity variation in the staff members. General Information: PreEminent began the 2011‐2012 school year with 521 students. They currently have 539 students. PreEminent has 42 full time staff members and no half time persons. They had to replace 7 teachers this year as well as 7 the year before. There are two full time Exceptional Children’s teachers and one full time EC para‐professional. A social worker is shared half time with another NHA school in the area – Research Triangle – and there is also an EC Director who serves all five NHA schools in NC. They follow the “Dean Model” with an administrator assigned to middle school, one to K‐2, and one to the 3‐5 wing. Page 1 of 7

44

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Mr. Stack wanted the OCS team to know that PreEminent listened carefully to the recommendations of the visiting DPI specialists’ team in 2009. The school adopted many of the recommendations and believed the changes positively affected PreEminent, resulting in better academic performance. Middle school classes have been extended to 70 minutes with students in math and reading grouped by instructional levels as determined by NWEA’s Measures of Academic Progress. Science and social studies classes remain heterogeneously grouped by grade level. EVAAS is also used as a tool for student placement in Algebra I. Rather than using the National Heritage Curriculum, PreEminent now uses the NC Standard Course of Study and “backward planning” to identify what basic stepping blocks must be taught for the students to attain required grade level skills. Mr. Stack informed the team that state objectives currently studied in classrooms would be posted, and we did observe that fact. Another suggestion taken from the DPI specialists’ team was the idea of teaching reading and math across the curriculum. Mr. Stack said that even his art instructor teaches math within art classes, and the PE teacher works on skills with his students that will assist them with their classroom academic goals. Reading was moved into the morning for all classes, so that it is taught when the students are the most fresh. Though math is still covered in the afternoon, the length of the math block has been increased to 90 minutes. Another suggestion that they took from the visiting DPI team was to require that all grade level teachers plan their units together. Team meetings occur weekly as do Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) meetings. Other changes have occurred. All teachers have undergone training in Capturing Kids Hearts, a character education program intending to equip teachers with tools to address student discipline through a positive respect model of expectations. Social contracts created in the fall by all classes were posted as reminders of expected behavior. Mr. Stack says that the students have really bought into writing their own classroom contracts and holding their classmates accountable for them. According to Mr. Stack, the after school intervention (ASI) occurs two times per week until 4:45 p.m. Although this tutorial program is optional, the programmatic offerings will increase to four times per week during the second semester. Teachers can request for students to be placed in these sessions because of identified needs or parents can request this assistance for their children. Another change was the dismantling of the centralized library. All library books were routed into classrooms to be more readily available for students. This modification enabled students and teachers to have immediate access to leveled libraries. The library and technology centers were then merged into one very large computer room that can serve at least two full classrooms of students at a time. On‐Site Activities: Parent Group: Five parents and one grandparent were able to meet with us. Their experiences with PreEminent ranged from a first year parent to a parent whose children have been at the school for eight years.

Page 2 of 7

45

1202_LFI 02_Attach

The parents feel that the communication from the teachers and the administration is excellent. Daily agendas with notes and homework assignments, emails, newsletters, and phone calls were discussed as the norm. Additionally, they expressed that they could go on line to observe daily their children’s grades and homework. Several parents said they even had their children’s teachers’ personal cell phone numbers. It appears that drop off and pick up times as well as a steady flow of emails are also common communication pieces. NWEA’s Measures of Academic Progress have been used for several years at the school to not only measure student, class, and school growth and performance but also to identify individual student strengths and weaknesses. It was obvious from the parent comments that the parents have a good grasp of what the test is, what it measures, and how it is used. They discussed their children’s growth on this instrument as well as “summer loss.” They also mentioned how it can be used to identify areas that they, as parents, need to reinforce at home as well as in after school tutoring sessions. One of the parents had an EC child, and she openly admitted it. During her comments, she said that she could not be happier with the services her child received. When she requested testing for her child, it was done quickly and was followed by a team meeting where they discussed, in detail, their findings. Most importantly, she said they answered all of her questions. She said her child now receives pull out services as stipulated in the IEP. Another parent said that the school had recommended retention of her child but, after a long parent/teacher/administrator conference, she received supplemental materials to use with her child over the summer. Her child was even allowed to come into the school and work on Study Island. That combination of support assisted her child to be successful the next year without retention. After which, another parent said that her child had been allowed to come into the school to work on Study Island during spring break. The parents believe the school is doing whatever it can to help their children succeed academically. Regarding a question about differentiated instruction, a parent expressed that the class would not move on until every student had the material. Others said that teachers used individual instruction as well as small group instruction to help students. When we asked them to name one thing they would like to see changed, the answers were to add a “real” cafeteria, to get more Smart Boards, and to add foreign language into the curriculum earlier than middle school. Significant comments that were made:        Page 3 of 7

“We are always kept informed, so we do not have to feel like we are micro‐managing our children.” “Administration is visible everywhere.” “We chose a charter school because of the open access it provides to our children.” “The school does things to help parents follow up with their children.” “The principal is always present in our IEP meetings.” “They are about kids….They want to see success for all.” “They keep the parents involved.”

46

1202_LFI 02_Attach



“There is care and concern from the leadership and the rest of the school follows.”

When asked about the school’s grievance policy, the parents clearly outlined the process from going to the teacher first, then the deans, then the administration, and lastly the board. One parent added, “It is all outlined in the Parent Handbook we receive every year.” Teaching Staff Group: We had six teachers for this interview and they truly did represent a cross section of the school. It ranged from a first year teacher to a teacher with eight years of teaching experience. Most of them were in their second to fourth year here at the school. They described the leadership structure of the school with the mentors, deans, and principal. They said they felt supported by this structure. They indicated that staff development is ongoing and continuous. This past summer, the staff received training in using Lexiles, and they also have monthly professional development on a variety of subjects. The first year teacher said she was flown to Michigan for a week of training that provided her access to the training already received by other staff members ‐‐ Capturing Kids’ Hearts, backward planning, using pre and post tests to guide instructions, guidance in doing “Workshop” time. She said it really helped prepare her for teaching and meeting the expectations of the school. Additionally, they said that all first through third year teachers are assigned mentors with specific, content expertise. The curriculum, they stated, is clearly aligned to the NC Standard Course of Study. Pacing guides are used and then the grade level teams sit down to use backwards planning: “to be sure they have all of the building blocks in place.” They said their lesson plans are turned in weekly and then their respective Deans will sit down to collaboratively review them. They said that the Deans essentially set the objectives, but the teachers are allowed the freedom to decide how to best achieve them. Regarding having the resources to do what they need to do, all said it was not an issue. K‐5 teachers expressed that their weekly, common planning time is sacred and uninterrupted so that they can plan together, address needs, and do their vertical planning. Middle school teachers said that their planning is split so that math and science plan together and social studies and language arts plan together. It was obvious that using assessments to plan instruction is an expectation of all of them. Not only do they use MAP assessment information on their students, but they said they have created common, grade level pre and post tests for their students. Middle school added that they administer released, state EOG’s three times per year to gauge the progress of their students. Regarding communicating with parents – they said that most of the K‐5 teachers send home weekly newsletters. Monthly newsletters are also sent home by the administration and student agendas are used at all grade levels for homework and behavior reports to parents. Middle school teachers said their communication with parents is more targeted where there are issues, but additionally they hold quarterly conferences with parents. School Reach is an automatic phone messaging system used on Sundays by the principal to remind parents of upcoming events or activities. A staff member expressed that “building relationships is very important.” It was seconded by several others present. Page 4 of 7

47

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Regarding communication from the staff – we were told that, in addition to all of those weekly Dean meetings, the administration frequently emails teachers with ideas and/or compliments. He also publishes a newsletter with all of the upcoming dates and events plus good things that are happening. Teachers said that they have weekly evaluations that are done by the deans. These typically last 12 to 15 minutes and are used to focus on specific areas based on each teacher’s needs. They are followed by a one‐on‐one meeting with the observing dean to talk about what was observed and new areas for focus. We were told the majority of these dean observations are unannounced. The teachers said that peer observations and/or mentor observations are generally done on a monthly basis and that all ILT’s are evaluated using the new state evaluation form. When asked to identify the strengths of the school, the teachers firmly stated that the greatest strengths are the staff and the bonding and collaboration. They feel the new infrastructure is strong and the administration works well with the teachers and “really listens.” They said they appreciate the administration’s open door policy. Those who had been here for three or more years said the change has been great and added that even the specials teachers are on board and are setting goals and objectives. Regarding their greatest needs – the staff expressed a variety of answers including: more real world connections for their students and continued horizontal and cross curricular planning. It was also expressed that their students’ greatest need was in reading. Administrative Group: The principal, the deans, and a member of the board were present during this discussion. They said that the board consisted of six members, including one parent representative who is chosen through an interview process with the board. They meet the second Monday of every month at 6:30 p.m. and the meetings typically last about three hours. Mr. Stack in coordination with NHA prepares an annual budget based on projected student enrollment, and then it is presented to the board for approval. This includes a component for staff development. Additionally, there is time allowed at each meeting for parent input. Tonya Richardson, the board member who was present, said that they usually do not respond to the parents who speak at the meetings, but they listen so they understand parental concerns. All expressed that the school’s mission was important to them. They view their role as meeting the individual needs of their students. As evidence of this, they discussed their extended day being initiated to better meet the needs of their students; the addition of their summer learning program, which had 180 students last summer; the fact that spring break was even used as another opportunity for additional instruction for needy students. They said their focus is on “growing kids,” which means not only providing “intense, intentional instruction and remediation, but in moving the high achievers too. The team left with a feeling that staff development was very intentional – either from a decision by NHA or the school. New teachers to the school are sent to Michigan for a whole week of staff development. School wide staff development is provided for school wide initiatives such as Capturing Kids Hearts, Open Court, MAP training, etc. We were also told that the School Improvement Team does a Needs Page 5 of 7

48

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Assessment to identify the types of staff development that would be most beneficial for school staff. This eight member team is composed of volunteer members including one parent and the Title I coordinator. Administration said that curriculum pacing guides have been created and shared at each grade level and that they have also made sure that there is a veteran teacher on each grade level team. The Deans are instrumental in curriculum design and implementation with their teachers. Regarding evaluations, the administrative team confirmed what the staff had told us about weekly evaluations by the Deans on specific skills with immediate feedback meetings and a discussion of “steps to improvement.” They added that not only are peer evaluations also part of the process but master teachers come into their classrooms to model best practices and teachers are also encouraged to observe in each others’ classrooms. This administrative group also stressed the importance they place on communication – with parents through newsletters, emails, phone calls (Teachers are required to make at least 10 phone calls per week to parents and log them.), and even during drop off and pick up. They feel that the weekly grade level meetings with administration have helped staff communication and also made teachers feel more ownership in decisions being made. Comments:     

“Student assessment data is used to guide our instruction.” “We are trying to build building capacity.” We have tried “to create an open environment where teachers feel comfortable giving and receiving input.” “We want to build a culture and community of openness.” “Our goal is to have intentional teaching.”

In closing, Mr. Stack said that he believes “the school has gained a lot of momentum since the last visit.” He says, “The school is capable of high growth…we have committed parents, strong teachers, and a great school.” “Now, we just need to get our renewal!” Summary Statements: 1. As stated earlier, the SBE placed a restriction upon PreEminent in order to receive an additional renewal. That restriction required the charter school to meet or exceed expected growth for 2008‐2009 and 2009‐2010. Unfortunately, PreEminent did not satisfy that SBE requirement in 2008‐2009 because they did not make expected growth. The charter school did, however, make expected growth in 2009‐2010 and, once again, in 2010‐2011. 2. Because of PreEminent’s receiving the designation of “Low Performing for two consecutive years (2007‐08 and 2008‐09) and three of the previous four years, the school received an on‐site visit from an Evaluation Team with expertise in Curriculum, Instruction, and Leadership. This Page 6 of 7 49

1202_LFI 02_Attach

team, in the fall of 2009, extensively evaluated the school’s programs, curriculum design, curriculum integration with the NC Standard Course of Study, instructional methodology, and leadership. They prepared a summary report for the school identifying areas of deficiency and recommending a Corrective Action Plan. Many of those recommendations have been implemented by PreEminent Charter School and have contributed to the increased academic performance. 3. PreEminent is still showing a significantly high annual teacher turnover rate that we did not have the opportunity to explore in depth. This rate could be driven by a multitude of factors including charter flexibility for staff retention. Despite this turnover, however, the school has moved their overall student proficiency on their EOG’s‐EOC’s from 45.5% proficient in the 2008‐ 2009 school year to 56.7% proficient in the 2010‐2011 school year.

Page 7 of 7

50

1202_LFI 02_Attach

51

1202_LFI 02_Attach

52

1202_LFI 02_Attach

53

1202_LFI 02_Attach

54

1202_LFI 02_Attach

55

1202_LFI 02_Attach

56

1202_LFI 02_Attach

57

1202_LFI 02_Attach

58

1202_LFI 02_Attach

59

1202_LFI 02_Attach

60

1202_LFI 02_Attach

61

1202_LFI 02_Attach

62

1202_LFI 02_Attach

63

1202_LFI 02_Attach

64

1202_LFI 02_Attach

65

1202_LFI 02_Attach

66

1202_LFI 02_Attach

67

1202_LFI 02_Attach

68

1202_LFI 02_Attach

69

1202_LFI 02_Attach

70

1202_LFI 02_Attach

71

1202_LFI 02_Attach

72

1202_LFI 02_Attach

73

1202_LFI 02_Attach

74

1202_LFI 02_Attach

75

1202_LFI 02_Attach

76

1202_LFI 02_Attach

77

1202_LFI 02_Attach

78

1202_LFI 02_Attach

79

1202_LFI 02_Attach

80

1202_LFI 02_Attach

81

1202_LFI 02_Attach

82

1202_LFI 02_Attach

83

1202_LFI 02_Attach

84

1202_LFI 02_Attach

85

1202_LFI 02_Attach

86

1202_LFI 02_Attach

87

1202_LFI 02_Attach

PreEminent has submitted their required paperwork and is now compliant with criminal history checks. Joel E. Medley 12/15/11

88

1202_LFI 02_Attach

89

1202_LFI 02_Attach

90

1202_LFI 02_Attach

91

1202_LFI 02_Attach

92

1202_LFI 02_Attach

93

1202_LFI 02_Attach

94

1202_LFI 02_Attach

95

1202_LFI 02_Attach

96

1202_LFI 02_Attach

97

1202_LFI 02_Attach

98

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Renewal

Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School (STARS) – 63B

2012

Below is the school’s student academic performance data. If the year, subject or grade level is not applicable, N/A has been entered in the corresponding box. EOG Percent Proficient 2006-2007 3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade 7th Grade 8th Grade

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

Reading

Math

64.1 84.0 85.7 82.6 80.0 84.6

44.4 32.0 43.3 52.2 50.0 46.2

48.1 32.1 31.4 47.1 63.6 52.9

74.1 53.6 40.0 61.8 59.1 35.3

77.4 59.3 54.8 54.3 60.0 75.0

87.5 63.0 54.8 60.0 80.0 56.3

62.2 54.1 46.9 69.0 58.8 70.6

70.3 62.2 46.9 65.5 47.1 88.2

48.1 57.1 57.1 74.2 48.1 72.7

59.3 64.3 74.3 90.3 70.4 81.8

Percent Proficient in Science Course Science 5 Science 8

2007-2008 14.7 35.3

2008-2009 25.8 37.5

2009-2010 40.6 58.8

2010-2011 68.6 54.5

EOC Percent Proficient 2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

N/A

36.8

N/A

N/A

N/A

Algebra I



ABC Status

61.9 50.0 60.9 58.8 66.3

No Recognition Priority School No Recognition Priority School School of Progress

Met Expected or High Growth No No No No HG





*Does not include child who died.

99


Total # of Students Who Withdrew During the Year 41 = 13.4% 43*= 14.5% 28 = 9% 36 = 11.8% N/A

1202_LFI 02_Attach

100

1202_LFI 02_Attach

101

1202_LFI 02_Attach

102

1202_LFI 02_Attach

CHARTER SCHOOL RENEWAL VISITATION REPORT School: Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School (STARS) Location: Vass


Grades Served: K‐8

Office of Charter School Consultants Present: Joel Medley and Dottie Heath

Administrator: Wes Graner Current Enrollment: 275

Started the year with: 269 Max ADM: 300

Time In: 8:45 a.m.

Time Out: 12:45 p.m.

Background and Purposes: Sandhills Theatre Arts Renaissance School (STARS) received a 3 year charter renewal from the State Board of Education, effective from July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2010. They were granted a three year rather than a ten year renewal because their “performance composite for two out of three years was 50.0,” and in 07‐08 they missed being a Low Performing school only because of the confidence band. Additionally they did not make AYP four of the previous five years and were on Sanction Level 3 in Title I. As part of the renewal process for schools with charters expiring in June 2012, a site visit is performed by members of the Office of Charter Schools. Its purpose was to afford the team an opportunity to talk to parents, staff members, and the administrative team including a board member. Through a series of questions, the team hoped to attain a fuller picture of the school, particularly in terms of continuity and fulfillment of its mission, its ability to provide for the academic and other needs of its students and their parents, and the support and development of its current staff. Mr. Graner, the school principal, was notified ahead of time about the visit and was allowed to choose the people to represent each of these groups. Ms. Heath, the renewal team leader, requested that each group embody a cross section. As an example, the team hoped for parents with diverse demographics as well as the length of time their children had attended the school. The team sought the same diversity variation in the staff members. General Information: STARS began the 2011‐2012 school year with 269 students. They currently have 275, which is pretty consistent with their “Best 1 of 2” in 2010 at 278, 2009 at 277, and 2008 at 268 students. The team was told that there are 35 full time staff members and 6 half time staff members. Mr. Graner came to STARS in January of 2012. When he was hired by the school, they were still struggling with the remnants of an intensely‐divided board. In fact, the division was so deep that factions of the board sued one another leading to the involvement of the judicial branch. Those board members, per the judicial order, Page 1 of 7

103

1202_LFI 02_Attach

have rotated off the board; and the new board has received training from the Office of Charter Schools. This new board, consisting of 9 members, is more functional and unified behind the common goal of supporting the mission of this charter school. One of their first decisions was to tap the school’s reserve fund to provide much‐needed materials and supplies to their teachers. The staff noticed this change immediately and was thrilled at the support from these new board members. Mr. Graner said he was very aware of the issues at STARS when he took the position but was determined to improve the academic expectations while still maintaining an arts focus. To do this, he eliminated the existing administrative positions and replaced them with a behavior specialist and an administrator who serves as both the curriculum director and test coordinator. He also replaced all but two of his middle school teachers. Additionally, he says that he went to 5.5 periods of 65 minutes each in middle school. Using a rotating A/B schedule, the students are still able to select 4 arts electives with a maximum of 20 students per class. He says he also ordered textbooks for most of the subject areas where they did not have any and started focused staff development on arts integration, Common Core training, and technology. He also proudly stated that all teachers now have netbooks. Additionally, he has arranged the schedule so that all K‐5 teachers have common planning periods and middle school teachers have common planning periods by coordinated subjects. Professional Learning Communities (PLC’s) meet once a week, focusing on how to integrate the arts into their content areas. Mr. Graner says that the School Improvement Team (SIT) is new this year. SIT is composed of representatives from K‐2, 3‐5, middle school, and the arts. They meet and use school test data to establish school wide goals. Mr. Graner admitted that not all staff members understand how to use data to improve instruction, but they are continuing to address this deficiency. Approximately 13% of the student body receives EC services, which will put the December head count at 35 students. OT and PT services are provided by outside consultants. Last year’s school income surveys show approximately 33% of the students are below the poverty level; however, forms were not returned for about one third of the students. Mr. Graner believes the poverty level is significantly higher. The school does not have a formal lunch program. Instead, students provide their own lunches, and the school keeps lunches on hand for students who do not have food. On‐Site Activities: Parent Group: The renewal team met with four parents. These parents all expressed their love for the way that STARS incorporates the arts into academic subjects and academic subjects into the arts, i.e. teaching fractions in dance class – geometry in music. They feel that communication is a real strength of the school and a great improvement over the previous administration’s practices. They said this included not only talking to their children’s teachers at student pick up and drop off, but newsletters that are sent home by most teachers each Friday. They discussed the phone system that Mr. Graner has implemented to keep parents informed of upcoming school activities or other pertinent information. The school’s website is another place where parents can see the school calendar and upcoming activities. These parents expressed that they loved the school’s “Open Door Policy.” All of the parents present said they actually had their children’s teachers’ Page 2 of 7

104

1202_LFI 02_Attach

home phone numbers and would never hesitate to call a teacher if they had a question or concern. They stated that, unlike in previous years, the students and parents now know the behavior expectations and the consequences should they violate those rules. Parents also have to come to the school at the end of the first quarter to personally pick up their children’s report cards and talk to their children’s teachers. The topic of communication led to a significant discussion of the changes that have occurred with the new administration. The parents expressed that the new administration has brought about “phenomenal changes.” Their comments included: “The new administration is more organized.” “They brought in an excellent quality of teachers.” “I am excited about the middle school staff.” “If it wasn’t for the change in administration, we wouldn’t be here.” The parent who made this last remark commented that her child had been extensively bullied the previous year with nothing being done. She said continued that the bullying has definitely not occurred this year. They see the advantages of STARS as:   



A place where it is okay to be different – a place where students can express themselves in their own way. A school where students who are not athletic have another way to develop their self‐ confidence and self‐esteem. A school where communication is a definitive strength. As an example, they shared was how the administration informed the staff and parents about the academic standards they had to reach in order to retain their charter. Nothing was hidden from them, and they appreciated that transparency from the school. The teachers have been trained in specific, instructional techniques to help students bridge their learning gaps.

Significant comments that were made were:      

“The ‘us’ against ‘them’ mentality is gone.” “Now it is a team, and it was not before.” “As a parent, I now feel that I have support and that things are going to be handled.” “There has been a huge boost in morale at the school” for staff and students. “I am finally receiving test data on my child.” “There isn’t nothing this school can’t do!”

When asked about the school’s grievance policy, the parents said the process always starts with the teacher, and then goes to Mr. Graner if satisfaction was not reached at that level. They said the next step would be to the school’s board to which one parent added: “At least now I know when the board has its meetings!” When asked about the strengths of the school, the parents uniformly agreed that it involved a change in leadership which has brought about a real team based on unity of purpose and focus which has in term created a better atmosphere for learning and higher expectations for staff and students alike. Page 3 of 7

105

1202_LFI 02_Attach

When we asked them what one thing they would like to change, parents responded with “a bus to Fayetteville,” “15 students in kindergarten rather than 20,” “full time assistants in all classrooms,” and “a lunch program.” Teaching Staff Group: We met with four staff members: one from middle school, a second grade teacher, a 3rd grade teacher and a fourth grade teacher. Their experience levels encompassed first year teacher to an eleven year veteran. We asked several questions about the staff development that is provided and how they would go about seeking staff development. All confirmed that they had received extensive staff development this past year. We were told that the K‐2 teachers received training on using Common Core . A+ Fellows came to the school last week to do training in “Cross walks” and curriculum training. One said that they worked with the Hill Center in Durham on Functional Brain Research. They added that the Open Dream Ensemble was doing staff development at the school on integrating the arts into the curriculum today while we were speaking. We asked about curriculum. We were told that the NC Standard Course of Study is their curriculum. They added that DRA testing is done at the beginning of the year to identify student reading levels and then leveled readers are used at each grade level to address student needs. Their math series is Scott Foreman’s Envisions Math. For K‐4 grade levels, they said that social studies and science were address through weekly readers from Scholastic and supplemental materials. The 5th grade class does, however, move into a science textbook as do all middle school classes. To meet the needs of the individual student, we were told they employ differentiated guided reading, pairing and small group instruction, and individual writing conferences. Additionally, they said that students are pulled out for Title I and can receive after school tutoring on Monday through Thursday. The teachers added that the A+ training has really helped them incorporate movement into their lessons and to more effectively address the different modes of student learning. Regarding evaluations, the teachers said that all new teachers are assigned mentors, with three mentors available at the school. These mentors observe them formally five times per year with pre‐conferences, self‐evaluations, and follow up meetings with each observation. Additionally, we were told that the mentors do a lot of snapshot visits. All of the teachers in this group had received at least one formal observation already this year. Parent/Student Surveys are also sent to parents and the results shared with teachers as a mechanism for teacher improvement. Finally, they remarked that the principal is always out and about walking through their classrooms. Regarding communication with parents, about half of these teachers said that they used newsletters and/or Facebook to give parents student assignments. All expressed that phone calls and emails are a critical component of keeping their parents informed. They added that school wide conferences are held with all parents after the first grading period with targeted conferences after that. Like the parents had expressed, the daily drop off and pick up times were critical for daily communication with parents. Administrative communication with them they said was done primarily through emails and monthly staff meetings. They said these are also times that the administration shares test data and EVAAS data Page 4 of 7

106

1202_LFI 02_Attach

with them as well as expectations of performance. They expressed having “better communication and better expectations” with this administration. They do have a School Assistance Team. When teachers identify students who appear to be having problems learning, their names and issues are taken to the School Assistance Team. The team then brainstorms ideas for the teacher to use to better meet the needs of the student in question. The teacher then returns to the team to give feedback on whether or not these strategies worked. It is this team that would decide if further testing is needed. When we asked them about the school’s strengths, they responded “The Arts Program.” Then they added “the sense of community with parents and grandparents,” “the great ties with the community at large,” the fact that “everyone is concerned about the progress of the kids,” and the ability to “showcase what kids are learning in the classroom.” Additionally, one teacher said, “We have a voice….we know what is expected of us.” Another immediately added: “We have a voice now and are listened to,” to which the others nodded. The question of where is their greatest need solicited a lot of comments: “space to house the growth,” “a library,” “more storage space,” “a partnership for science materials,” and “the PTA to work on playground equipment.” Their last statement was telling: “We have strong leadership and feel we are on the right path.” Administrative Group: Two board members meet with the renewal team as well as Mr. Graner. In discussing the main thoughts for the board and the principal, Sandy Lampros, the board chair, indicated that the board does not want to micromanage the school. Unfortunately, previous board members heavily involved them within the affairs of the school, and that micromanagement contributed to the academic difficulties. For the principal, Mr. Graner said he desires to keep the board informed with a true and accurate picture of the school. Had the board understood the academic struggles of the school, STARS, possibly, would never have encountered the charter jeopardy they currently face. It was expressed that the board and the administration feel it is very important that parents understand the mission of the school but that the staff also needs to understand this mission. Therefore, Mr. Graner says that he has tried to provide staff development that supports the integration of the arts with academics. They have had extensive and on‐going staff development beginning in March, 2011, with additional training in April, and then this fall. The plan is that they will continue to work with A+ with additional staff training sessions in February and March of 2012. Mr. Graner says he feels that this training helps his teachers learn how to collaborate and how to better design instruction that works on arts integration while incorporating multiple intelligences. His Assistant Principal was also sent to a Collaborative Conference for Student Achievement, and the staff was given NCWISE training. Additionally, the staff received technology training for two days after school in early September so that they would better be able to utilize the new technology upgrades, interactive whiteboards, and mobi handheld devices purchased with the surplus board money. Mr. Graner also wanted us to know that his school was also awarded an internship from a traveling acting/education grouped named Open Dream Page 5 of 7

107

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Ensemble from October 31st through November 10th. During this internship, the group demonstrated science/arts integrated lessons to all teachers at the K‐5 level every day. The hope was that it would allow the teachers to witness the power of planning science lessons around artistic elements. In addition to all of the staff development mentioned above, Mr. Graner also created the School Improvement Team this year. It consists of representations from K‐2, 3‐5, MS, and the arts. They meet to identify three goals for the school. He said for them to do this successfully, staff must truly understand how to interpret and use data. He plans to continue to work on staff training on using data to guide instruction. Enrollment has been pretty consistent and Mr. Graner feels with 38 students in kindergarten this year and only 22 8th graders who will be graduating, their enrollment should increase next year. Regarding teacher evaluations, Mr. Graner says that he does use the new state observation instrument with his current focus on all ILT’s and teachers new to STARS. He expects to complete his second round of observations soon. The board has been reorganized since the last renewal visit. It consists of nine members who rotate off with staggering terms so that turnover is not all at once. We were told the school’s board includes a good representation of the community and the educational environment, including individuals with backgrounds in art, education, and law as well as people who serve on other boards. They now follow Robert’s Rules of Order. They said with so many of them new, they had to “reinvent” themselves and learn how to work together, but it has gone very well. They said they feel theirs is a very well functioning board focused on policy and mission rather than trying to micromanage at the school level. Each meeting begins with a call to order and an approval of the previous meeting’s minutes. This is followed by general discussion, committee reports, principal’s report, personnel, issues, an arts report, and budget as needed. We were told that they are currently looking at putting in a policy for open discussion with parents. Additionally, they said “The board is in a real go position” with no one afraid to ask questions. Their financials are done by an outside firm but most of the budget comes from Mr. Graner based on their projected enrollment. Board members said that budget had not been a big focus of the previous board but this board feels it is very important. When asked what he sees as the greatest need of the school, Mr. Graner replied: “Continuing to push teachers to teach well!” Additionally, he said that they really need more space. “Every room is used all day long.” He shared his vision for the addition of more buildings to the rear of the site. His last area of need he said was to help the teachers interact more professionally with parents. The board expressed that they hoped to keep the board balanced in terms of their individual talents and that all board members come to all meetings. Page 6 of 7

108

1202_LFI 02_Attach

Summary Statements: 1. Although the school has made significant strides academically under the tutelage of their new principal, STARS still faces uncertainty due to the SBE policy and modified charter school law. The law defines inadequate performance as a school that does not make a 60% performance composite or expected growth for two out of three consecutive years. In the 2011‐12 academic year, STARS must meet that standard in order to retain its charter. 2. The school’s improvement in student EOG performance composite scores and “high growth” designation last year coupled with a stable enrollment in spite of the board issues and turnover of board and administration is a good sign. The school appears to not only be stabilizing but to be moving in the right direction. Previous site visits noted the school’s emphasis on the arts was often done to the exclusion of academics. This visit clearly demonstrated a new focus on academics with the arts being a tool to achieve student academic success.

Page 7 of 7

109

1202_LFI 02_Attach

110

1202_LFI 02_Attach

111

1202_LFI 02_Attach

112

1202_LFI 02_Attach

113

1202_LFI 02_Attach

114

1202_LFI 02_Attach

115

1202_LFI 02_Attach

116

1202_LFI 02_Attach

117

1202_LFI 02_Attach

118

1202_LFI 02_Attach

119

1202_LFI 02_Attach

120

1202_LFI 02_Attach

The school is now compliant with EC Joel E. Medley 12/15/11

121

1202_LFI 02_Attach

The school has submitted their required paperwork and is now compliant with criminal history checks. Joel E. Medley 12/15/11

122

1202_LFI 02_Attach

S.T.A.R.S. complied with these stipulations and has received two governance trainings from the Office of Charter Schools. They are fully compliant. Joel E. Medley 12/15/11

123

1202_LFI 02_Attach

124

1202_LFI 02_Attach

125

1202_LFI 02_Attach

126

1202_LFI 02_Attach

127

1202_LFI 02_Attach

128

1202_LFI 02_Attach

129

1202_LFI 02_Attach

130

1202_LFI 02_Attach

131

1202_LFI 02_Attach

132

Format for Executive Summary--4th version

Format for Executive Summary--4th version

Suggest Documents

Format for Executive Summary--4th version

MOF Executive Overview version 3.0

Full version [ PDF format 71kb ]

NGMN 5G White Paper - Executive Version

WEO 2013 Executive Summary Portuguese version - IEA

ENERCALC S.E.L. Version 6 - Executive Summary

VOTable Format Definition Version 1.2 - IVOA < TWiki

IVOA Recommendation: VOTable Format Definition Version 1.3

VOTable Format Definition Version 1.3 - IVOA

using version 67.5 output2 neutral format option for ... - MSC Software

download PDF format (English Version) - Institute For Political and ...

centric digital - executive bio - long format - brendan hammond - 2

Executive summary Executive summary - European Institute for ...

World Energy Outlook 2015 - Executive Summary - English Version - IEA

SVT Multi Format Test Set Version 1.0 - EBU Technical - Ebu.ch

PC-Axis file format manual version 2006-5 - Tilastokeskus

The Variant Call Format (VCF) Version 4.2 Specification - Samtools

(19;34;28)- Excel Number Date Format Get Full Version (Technocom)

First Version of a Dataflow Interchange Format - Ptolemy Project - UC

PX-file format specification AXIS-VERSION 2013 (pdf)

Download the Brochure version in PDF format - Plasti-Fab

N.B. This version maintains the original format and page numeration ...

CMD Group CRM Integration XML Format Version 1.3 Administrator's ...

Version FranÃ§aise pdf format Welcome to the LANDMARK project