2012 TITLE I UNIFIED PLAN TEMPLATE District and School Information

District: PLAINFIELD Chief School Administrator: ana belin-pyles (interim Superintendent) NCLB Contact: Dawn Ciccone School: MAXSON MIDDLE SCHOOL The school is designated (select one): Targeted Assistance Principal: DR. ANTHONY JENKINS Chief School Administrator E-mail: abelinpyles@plainfield.k12.nj.us NCLB Contact E-mail: dciccone@plainfield.k12.nj.us Schoolwide Principal E-mail: AJENKINS1@PLAINFIELD.K12.NJ.US

Principal Certification
The following certification must be made by the principal of the school. Note: Signatures must be kept on file at the school. I certify that I have been included in consultations related to the priority needs of my school and participated in the completion of this Title I Unified Plan. I have been an active member of the planning committee and provided input to the school needs assessment and the selection of priority problems. I concur with the information presented herein, including the identification of programs and activities that are funded by Title I, Part A, and, if applicable, SIA, Part a..

__________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Principal’s Name

________________________ Principal’s Signature

Date

1

School NCLB Committee
Select committee members to develop the Unified Plan. Note: For continuity, some representatives from this needs assessment stakeholder committee should be included in the schoolwide stakeholder group and/or the SINI plan committee. Identify the stakeholders who participated in the needs assessment and/or development of the plan. Signatures should be kept on file in the school office for review. Print off a copy of this page to obtain signatures. *Add lines as necessary.

Name
Anthony Jenkins Wilbur Robinson Brenda Logan Brenda Noble Lisa Armstead Beverley Mack Jerold Williams Sarita Hanchate Jaime Utitus Ron Feldhun David Kole Jerome Jackson Cecila Bouffidis Kent A. Thompson Pamela Garcia Chair

Stakeholder Group
Co-chair Teacher - Elective Teacher – Social Studies Guidance Teacher - English Teacher – PRIDE/PBSIS Teacher - English Teacher – Special Education Community Representative Teacher - Math Teacher – Professional Development Representative Teacher – Professional Development Representative Teacher - Technology District Representative

Participated in Needs Assessment
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Participated in Plan Development
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Signature

2

School NCLB Committee Meetings
List the dates of the meetings when the School NCLB Committee discussed the needs assessment and Unified Plan development. *Add rows as necessary Date September 29, 2010 Location Conference Room Topic Needs Assessment Team Roster SPED data and Unified Plan CAPA Revisions and debriefing Instructional Support Ramp Up 8th Grade EOY Activities Staff In-Service Ramp-Up Implementation CASE Management /Professional Development and PBSIS Restructuring Saturday Academy CAPA Review & PBSIS Agenda on File Yes Minutes on File Yes

October 13, 2010

Conference Room

Yes

Yes

November 10, 2010

Conference Room

Yes

Yes

December 8, 2010

Conference Room

Yes

Yes

January 5, 2011 February 23, 2011

Conference Room Conference Room

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

3

March 9, 2011

Conference Room

Peer LED Instructional Focus Walks, PPT for the State of the Schools Presentation SIA Grant Revisions CAPA Visit Debriefing Role of the Leadership Team Restructuring Plan Needs Assessment 2012 Unified Plan

Yes

Yes

April 6, 2011

Conference Room

Yes

Yes

May 18, 2011 June 22, 2011

Conference Room Conference Room

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

School’s Vision & Mission
Provide, update, or develop the school’s vision and mission statement. Refer to the Introduction for Unified Plan pages for guidance. What is the school’s vision statement?

Maxson School, in partnership with parents, will be recognized as an institution for achievement and citizenship. Maxson Middle School, in collaboration with parents and the community, will provide continuous engagement in standards-based instruction. Our commitment to students will foster the academic skills, social development and global awareness necessary for them to become productive and responsible citizens. The committee met, monitored the benchmarks/achievements, and felt that no revisions were needed.

What is the school’s mission?

Describe the process for developing or revising the school’s vision and mission.

4

2012 Comprehensive Needs Assessment & Data Analysis Summary

Data Collection and Analysis
Table A: Multiple Measures Analyzed by the School in the Needs Assessment Process for 2011 Programs, Strategies and Practices ● Results and outcomes must be measurable. Areas Academic Achievement – Reading Multiple Measures Analyzed Achieve 3000; Reading Plus; DRA’s Overall Measurable Results and Outcomes Reading + students initial: 31 students reading 5+ grades below, current: 6 Initial: 0 students reading at or above grade level: Current: 10 ● Student completing up to 59% of recommended sessions Average level gain = 1.8 total of 45 students. ● Student completing up to 60 -99% of recommended sessions Average level gain = 2.7 total of 46 students. Achieve 3000: Gr 6 Avg LVL Gain .9 (exceeded expected post-test gain of .1) Total = 9 Gr 7 Avg LVL Gain .9 (exceeded expected post-test gain of .1) Total = 83 Gr 8 Avg LVL Gain 0 Total = 14 DRA’s (Pride Program) Reading Levels with comprehension 30 2 40 1 50 3 60 4 70 4 80 2

Academic Achievement - Writing

TAPS 6 5 5 12 4 60 3 79 2 32 1 2

5

Academic Achievement - Mathematics Parent Involvement

E:Path Needs Assessment Survey (school documentation that was issued May 2011), Parent Climate assessment tool (PBSIS – April 2011) and Parent Teacher Conferences Contain parental e-mail addresses file / folder to send data home 82 parents – 10% completed the survey – regarding looping, supporting student learning through long term relationships, teaming, and provide problem based learning assignments to students to strengthen student learning. PBSIS: 102 Parents completed the survey representing 1/3 of the parental population. Outcomes varied from: 68% agreed were satisfied with the responses to discipline and behavior and problems at the school, 79% agreed with staff and teachers at my child’s school care about my child’s, 58% agreed with the school having a positive and welcoming climate, 65% agreed with the value parent input and participation in school activities, 86% agreed with parents receiving help by getting ideas on how to help the students at home. Implementation of strategies in classrooms: results to appear in the NJASK scores. Administrative Walk through feedback: 4 of 5 Social Studies and Science teachers observed using reading comprehension strategies. Math Centers: 4 of 6 math teachers observed using math resources (E:PATH) to differentiate instruction. Differentiating Instruction in other content areas: inconsistent use of instructional resources by teachers in SPED and Gen Ed settings. Despite training and follow up, teachers were reluctant to create assignments in Study Island (ELA) and only began to use the program with any regularity in the latter part of the year. Academic Ramp Up (another form of differentiation, showed positive gains as measured by Achieve 3000 for Literacy. E: Path was more diagnostic and less instructional intervention). Students still showed significant deficits in math.

Professional Development

Strategic Reading Strategies Math Centers Differentiating Instruction Needs Assessment Survey of staff conducted the 2010 – 2011 school year: Data analysis drives instruction, co-teaching strategies, Problem Based Learning’s, Infuse technology into the classroom, restructuring the 80 minute block, utilizing effective math centers and reading comprehension of factual test at explanatory writing in math

Extended Learning Opportunities

21st CCLC, teacher tutorial sessions, E-Path, Reading Plus, Achieve 3000

80% of student enrolled in 21st CCLC have improved both socially and academically as evidenced in their report cards and reduced number of disciplinary infractions. The technology programs listed have been infused in the after school program and contributed to their academic success as well as community partnership enhancing social development. Additionally, the technology-based programs are utilized by the entire student body through teacher assignments, and supplementary enrichment activities such as ramp up. (See the aforementioned academic achievement areas listed for results). N/A

Homeless

N/A

6

Students with Disabilities

Attendance DRA Writing TAPS

Student attendance on par with rest of student body; Pride student suspension rate exceeds that of student body. Some data not collected by SPED teachers for math; ELA data Avg DRA moved from Level 57.5 without comprehension to an avg of 58.5 with comprehension. Writing moved from an average of 2.5 to an average of 3.2. Insufficient data due to limited staff Approximately 15% of parents are following through and utilizing the services that are rendered after being informed on numerous occasions such as back to school night, parent conference, and mailings. 90 plus % of staff and students attendance however there is a challenge with students’ academic performance. DCR’s have stabilized from the previous year. Class disruptions, defiance of authority, and student suspensions. 83% parents agreed that promoting a respectful environment is important and 34% of the students felt that a respectful environment is needed. 2009 – started with three building administrators (one principal and two vice principals) 2010 – end of 2010 had two administrators (one principal and one vice principal) 2010 – Principal only due to student enrollment All staff members are highly qualified; 1 teacher taught out of content area (science) Refer to Stacey Green

English Language Learners Economically Disadvantaged

DRA SES Tutoring Services

School Culture

Teacher and students Attendance Records, Discipline Case Reports (DCR’s) and PBSIS survey

Leadership

Building Principal and Vice Principals

Highly Qualified Staff School-Based Youth Services

HQ Status

7

Evaluation of 2011 Teaching and Learning Strategies & Programs
Table B: Strategies to Increase Student Achievement That Were Implemented in 2011 1 Strategy or Program 2 Content/Group Focus 3 Effective Yes-No 4 Documentation of Effectiveness 5 Measurable Outcomes

Achieve 3000 Reading Plus E-Path Achieve 3000 Study Island Achieve 3000 N/A

LAL LAL Mathematics
Students with Disabilities LAL ELL Homeless/Migrant

Yes Yes No No Yes Yes

Data Report Data Report Diagnostic data Teen Biz Data

Average gain of 1 grade level Average level gain = 1.8 More diagnostic than intervention, just provided more specific data 95% of the teacher implement with fidelity 35% of the teachers utilized the program and as a result was not able to obtain the data.

Data Report

Average gain was significant, students gain was of two to three grade levels

Table C: Description of Extended Day/Year Programs Implemented in 2011 to Address Academic Deficiencies - Do not include SES programs. 1 Strategy or Program 2 Content/Group Focus 3 Effective Yes-No 4 Documentation of Effectiveness 5 Measurable Outcomes

Not applicable

Students with Disabilities Homeless/Migrant ELL

8

9

Table D: Professional Development That Was Implemented in 2011 1 Strategy or Program 2 Content/Group Focus 3 Effective Yes-No 4 Documentation of Effectiveness 5 Measurable Outcomes

Strategic Reading Centers/Differentiation

LAL Mathematics

Yes Yes

Observations Observations

Science teachers implemented; 2 of 3 Social Studies implemented 3 of 5 implemented differentiation via individualized worksheets

Achieve 3000 Workshops

Students with Disabilities Homeless/Migrant

Yes

Observations

Increased class participation through interaction with classroom teacher

Achieve 3000 Workshops

ELL

Yes

Observations

Increased class participation through interaction with classroom teacher

Table E: Parent Involvement That Was Implemented in 2011 1 Strategy or Program 2 Content/Group Focus 3 Effective Yes-No 4 Documentation of Effectiveness 5 Measurable Outcomes

Educational Technology Workshops Educational Technology Workshops

LAL Mathematics

Yes Yes

Workshop attendance Workshop attendance

Increased by 10% the desire to utilize resources for student success. Increased by 10% the desire to utilize resources for student success.

Educational Technology Workshops

Students with Disabilities Homeless/Migrant

Yes

Workshop attendance

Students’ ability to comprehend benefits of resource for self-growth and academic motivation by 10%.

Educational Technology Workshops

ELL

Yes

Workshop attendance

Dual language component provided necessary bridge in language barrier.

10

2012 Needs Assessment & Evaluation Summary

When responding to the questions below, data from Tables A, B, C, D and E should be used.

1. Describe the process and techniques used in the needs assessment. Survey data via PBSIS was reviewed in an attempt to look at our school climate. Surveys were
completed by staff, parents and students. Multiple staff interactions generated feedback in addition to the formal survey. Instructional program data was reviewed by the school leadership team and additional teacher stakeholders who helped compile the data. Three years trend data was reviewed and the Professional development plan was reviewed as well. The restructuring plan was emphasized in the development of the needs assessment. 2. Describe methods used to collect and compile data for student subgroups: Instructional program data was gathered via Achieve 3000 and E-Path (students belonging to sub-groups were highlighted and their results recorded). Reading level assessments were generated by all teachers for an end of year snapshot of overall reading skills for each student using computer labs, teacher monitored student profile sheets, Reading Plus, Achieve 3000, E-Path, assigned and scheduled by technology teachers. 3. Explain how the data from the collection methods are valid and reliable? Time intervals were within one month of the close of the school year. The reading instruments are Lexile leveled. The math mirrors the state standards and CPI’s. 4. What did the data analysis reveal regarding classroom instruction? Some teachers were not able to motivate their students to perform. At the end of the year, some students felt that the assessment was not critical or important, so they put forth little effort; which compromised the validity of the results. The timing of the assessment is critical; too early may prevent possible gains and too late may result in over testing and burn out from final examinations and other end of year activities. 5. What did the data analysis reveal regarding professional development implemented in the previous year(s)? That some teachers lacked the wherewithal to implement new strategies, in many cases because they lack classroom management. Certain types of skill set teachers are needed at the middle school level. 6. How are educationally at-risk students identified in a timely manner? Initial NJASK scores, and DIA results, classroom data binders as well as student profile sheets and teacher – student and teacher- parent data chats. 7. How are educationally at-risk students provided with effective assistance? Through the Academic Support lab schedule, teachers are able to retain students in the classroom to provide additional assistance and support or by sending those students to the Academic Support Lab (ASL) for extra support. 8. How does the needs assessment address migrant student(s) needs? Not Applicable 9. How does the needs assessment address homeless student(s) needs? Not Applicable 10. How were teachers engaged in decisions regarding the use of academic assessments to provide information on and improvement of the instructional program? Training sessions were held for using the academic assessments, and a PD session was held at the close of the school year to determine future academic assessments. 11. Describe the transition plan for preschool to kindergarten, if applicable. Not Applicable 12. Describe the process used to select the priority problems and root causes for this plan? Leadership team was engaged and given the Unified plan template. The district’s restructuring plan was critical to school improvement efforts, and stakeholder input from staff was part of the decision making process. Underlying the problem seems to be the growing apathy toward learning, increasing gang issues (shootings, deaths, racial hostilities) and the lack of ability to remove highly disruptive, non-performing students from the general student body (alternative setting). 13. What did the data analysis reveal regarding the root causes of subgroups not meeting AYP? Two SPED teachers did not effectively deliver instruction. The LEP population received less time in this content area as the teacher had to split between two schools, with additional time for travel impacting the schedule. Economically disadvantaged students need additional support at home (technological tools at the ready). 14. Describe the evaluation results regarding the status of SMART goal #1 in the action plan?

11

SMART Goal:

By May 2011, as a result of instructional interventions the number of students reading below grade level proficiency will decrease by 15% as measured by Lexile gains, Reading Proficiency levels and/or DRA’s. 15 % of the students completing 60-99% of the Minimum # of Recommended Reading Sessions (MRRS) for Reading Plus advanced to reading at grade level. 7% of the students completing 20-59% of the MRRS advanced to reading at grade level. Students who took the Achieve 3000 Post-test showed overall growth. Overall, the # of students reading at or above grade level went from 21 to 33. Initially, 6% of the students were reading at grade level. By year end, 10% were reading at grade level or beyond.

15. Describe the evaluation results regarding the status of SMART goal #2 in the action plan? By May 2011, as a result of instructional interventions tied to lesson
design (using math centers) students in the general ed population will demonstrate a 10% increase in academic performance as measured by the District Interim Assessment. The 2nd administration of the DIA data showed the following could not be compared to the previous test since they were different. According to the DIA test results it is not a good predictor of the state test. Base on these results twelve percent of the students would pass the state exam shows: 29% percent passed the math in grade seven, which is well above the three percent proficient rate identified from the DIA and eighth grade math was 35.2% passed NJASK. LAL, seventh grade 20.7% compared to the 7% and eighth grade 67% passed the test compared to the 4% indicated on the chart below. Grade Subject Basic Below Basic Proficient or above 6 7 8 6 7 8 Language Arts Language Arts Language Arts Math Math Math 0 35 (27%) 44 (29%) 0 (89%) 118 (90%) 18 (12%) 18 (100%) 88 (67%) 104 (68%) 2 (11%) 10 (8%) 133 (88%) 0 9 (7%) 6 (4%) 0 3 (3 %) 1 (1%)

16. Describe the evaluation results regarding the status of SMART goal #3 in the action plan?
By December 2010, as a result of training and professional development, Social Studies, Science and LAL content area teachers will utilize weekly strategic reading strategies. This goal was met in all but one classroom.

12

2012 Needs Assessment – Partially Proficient
Provide the number of students at each grade level listed below who scored partially proficient on state assessments for two years or more in Language Arts Literacy and mathematics. Language Arts Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 171 151 17 117 Core day and 21st Century afterschool program Core day and 21st Century afterschool program 2008-2009 2009-2010 Services Provided Describe why services provided did not result in proficiency. NA NA Only one class (less than 25 students); Teacher quit. Behavioral issues. Attended feeder schools. While gains were made, gaps are too large to meet standards for many of those students in the afforded time frame While gains were made, gaps are too large to meet standards for many of those students in the afforded time frame

Grade 8 Grade 11 Grade 12

134

101

Core day and 21st Century afterschool program

Mathematics Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8

2008-2009

2009-2010

Services Provided

Describe why services provided did not result in proficiency.

124 139 183

18 129 158

Core day and 21st Century afterschool program Core day and 21st Century afterschool program Core day and 21st Century afterschool program

Significant gaps; difficulty adjusting to middle school rigor; behavioral issues; 21st Century program not strictly academic Teachers lacked classroom management The achievement gap narrowed, but the gaps are too large for many students; Additional courses in literacy are needed, and more effective math instructors.

Grade 11 Grade 12

13

14

Selection of Priority Problems
School Needs Assessment Summary Matrix Certification: For Title I SINIs and SW schools, Population Categories A-M have been annually assessed.
Using information from the data analysis, identify all priority problems. Select three or four priority problems to address in this plan. The selected problems should be checked in column T. When completing the matrix below, data from Tables A, B, C, D, E and the Needs Assessment Summary should be used.
P op ul ati on Ca te go rie s

● ● ● ●

Prio rity Prob lem #

Priority Problem

A. All stu de nts Student Acad emic Needs

B. St ud en ts wi th Di sa bili tie s

C. Ea rly chi ldh oo d

D. E co n. dis ad va nt ag ed

E. Ne gle cte d/ del inq ue nt

F. Y ou th at ri sk of dr op pi ng ou t

G. Ra ci al/ et hni c

H. Ho m ele ss

I. Im mi gr an t

J. LE P

K. Te ac he rs

L. Pa ra pr of es sio nal s

M. Pa re nts

N. Su bst an ce ab us er s

O. Pe rp et ra to rs of Vi ole nc e

P. O utofsc ho ol

Q. M en tal he alt h

R. G ift ed & Ta len te d

S. O th er (S pe cif y) __ __ __ __ __ __ _

T. S el ec te d Pr io ri ty P ro b le m s

1 2

Closing the achievement gap Early childhood education

X

X

15

Core Curric ulum Con tent Stand ards

3a 3b 3c 3d 3e 3f 4

Language arts literacy and reading Mathematics Science Social studies World Languages Cross Content Workplace Readiness Technology Literacy

X X

Staff Needs

High Qu ality Profes sional Devel opme nt

5. Imp lem ent ing the CC CS

5a 5b 5c 5d 5e 5f

Language Arts Literacy Mathematics Science Social studies World Languages Cross Content Workplace Readiness Effective classroom use of technology Standards-based assessment Instructional skills and strategies Mentoring Classroom management Using data/assess to improve learning Working with parents X

X

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

16

Hiri ng, Rec ruitin g and Retai ning

13 14 15 16 17 18

Highly qualified teachers Teachers in shortage areas Teachers in Math and Science Teachers to reduce class size Qualified paraprofessionals Highly qualified personnel X

Prob lems Identifie d

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Alcohol use Drug use Tobacco use Violence Weapons Gang activity Delinquency Vandalism Suspensions, removals, or expulsions Serious or persistent discipline problems Bullying Victimization Truancy/attendance Mental health Sex/gender issues Interpersonal conflict Intergroup conflict/bias Negative peer influence X X X

Admin

X

17

37 38 39 Qua lity Teach er Tech. & Ed. Materi als Stud ents with Spe cial Needs Litera cy, & Adult Ed. Leade rship

School safety School climate/environment Risk factors

40

Teacher Quality

41 42

Technology activities Instructional/Educational Materials

43

Drop-out rate

44 45 46 47

Adult literacy Parent/community involvement Leadership Network Leadership PD

18

Description of Priority Problems and Strategies to Address Them
● ●

All student subgroups not meeting AYP MUST be considered during the needs assessment process. Select at least three priority problems. Complete the information below for each priority problem checked in column T on the previous pages. Add additional sections as needed.
#1 #2
3B Mathematics 65 - 70% of the students failed NJASK Mathematics over the last two years Students are entering the middle school lacking computational fluency and have limited conceptual understanding of higher mathematical operations All 7-8 Mathematics E-Path; Cognitive Tutoring through Carnegie, and flexible schedules amongst team mates to allow student tutorial sessions Connected Math, Math centers, and Differentiated Instruction E-Path, Carnegie identifies specific strands and skills mirrored by the NJCCCS. Math needs to be rigorous and based on real life experiences

Population Category Letter & Problem Number Name of priority problem Describe the priority problem Describe the root causes of the problem
Subgroup or population addressed

1A
Closing the Achievement Gap Students have not met AYP in either content area last year Student apathy toward learning, learning gaps and adolescent social acceptance and in some cases, lack of effective teaching. All 7-8 Math, Literacy Team Approach (Smaller Learning Communities) and flexible schedules amongst team mates to allow student tutorial sessions

Grade span Related content area missed Name of scientifically research based program/strategy/practice to address problem How does the program/strategy align with the NJ CCCS? CAPA finding or recommendation related to the priority problem

Not a direct correlation, but more integrated/thematic approaches will be emphasized through problem-based (PBL’s) approaches. Utilize PBL’s approaches to learning

19

Description of Priority Problems and Strategies to Address Them (continued)

#3

#4

Population Category Letter & Problem Number Name of priority problem Describe the priority problem

28 A. K. L. Serious or persistent discipline problems Students exhibit a number of inappropriate behaviors, including but not limited to: engaging in sex in school stairwells, directing disrespectful language and aggression toward teachers, cyber bullying, harassment directed at other students, physical assault on teachers and parents, throwing objects in the lunchroom and afterschool, breaking and entering to steal computers, etc… Lack of parental control at home extends to the school, lack of concern for school-related consequences, lack of enough positive incentives for good behavior. All 7-8 All Positive Behavior Support in Schools

Describe the root causes of the problem Subgroup or population addressed Grade span Related content area missed Name of scientifically research based program/strategy/practice to address problem How does the program/strategy align with the NJ CCCS? CAPA finding or recommendation related to the priority problem

Not an instructional intervention, rather it addresses school culture/climate More intensive monitoring Administration needed

20

Action Planning
Check Before Proceeding:
● ● ●

The action planning section is required for all SINIs. The action plans are developed for the primary strategies and programs selected that address the priority problems. At least ten steps must be identified.

Action Plan for Strategy Related to Priority Problem #1 and 3B
Na m e of Pr og ra m, St ra te gy or P ra cti ce to A dd re ss Pr ior ity Pr ob Governance: Restructuring

21

le m: S M A R T G oa l:
(S pe cifi c, Me as ura ble , Ac hie va ble , Rel ev ant , Ti me ly)

By September 2011, Maxson Middle School will implement a smaller learning community designed to limit the # of students failing core courses to a maximum of 20%

22

Re se ar ch S up po rti ng St rat eg y
(fr om IES Pr act ice Gu ide or W hat Wo rks Cle ari ng ho use )

The Department of Education defines an SLC as an environment, in which a group of teachers and other adults within the school knows the needs, interests, and aspirations of each student well, closely monitors each student’s progress, and provides the academic and other support each student needs to succeed. SLCs may be structured as freshman academies, multigrade academies organized around career interests or other themes, ‘‘houses’’ in which small groups of students remain together throughout high school, and autonomous schools within-a-school. These structural changes are typically complemented by other personalization strategies, such as student advisories, family advocate systems, and mentoring programs.
1. # of failing grades issued as a final grade 2. # of students receiving internvetion services, including I& RS, SES tutoring, SIA fund sponsored afterschool tutoring and 21st Century

In di ca to rs of Su cc es s:

23

D es cri pti on of A cti on Pl an St ep s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Persons Involved

Resources Needed

Due Date - Timeline

Decide on a governance reform strategy Invite stakeholders to have input Confirm reform model/strategy Seek input for team formation from teachers Draft schedule with smaller learning teams Plan rollout of Smaller learning teams to teachers Rollout Smaller Learning Teams to staff Set team learning goals and create quarterly PBL’s Establish benchmark dates for data collection Review data findings 3 x during course of year 24

LEA Asst. Supt, and Supt LEA/BOE Teachers Jenkins and Armstead Prof Dev Committee Prof Dev Committee Teachers Teachers and Joanne Brown Teachers, principal Phone, email Board approval none Projected student enrollment; time Planning time Planning time and teacher release time Planning time Genesis reports

March 2011 February 2011 May 2011 June 2011 August 2011 August 2011 September 2011 Sept 2011 October 2011

10

Data and planning time

By May 2012

11 12

25

Action Plan for Strategy Related to Priority Problem #1A and 28
Na m e of Pr og ra m, St ra te gy or P ra cti ce to A dd re ss Pr ior ity Pr ob le m:

Positive Behavior Support in Schools

26

S M A R T G oa l:
(S pe cifi c, Me as ura ble , Ac hie va ble , Rel ev ant , Ti me ly)

There will be a 20% decrease in the number of discipline referrals for the 2011 school year from the previous year as evidenced by the suspension reports and the number of DCR’s received.

27

Re se ar ch S up po rti ng St rat eg y
(fr om IES Pr act ice Gu ide or W hat Wo rks Cle ari ng ho use )

Positive Behavior Support in Schools (PBSIS) is a data driven, tiered system of positive behavior support to address these challenges. Based on a national model of positive behavior support, the New Jersey Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs in collaboration with The Elizabeth M. Boggs Center, UMDNJ – Robert Wood Johnson Medical School is providing training and technical assistance for developing and implementing the three tiered intervention approach of PBSIS to assist schools with building the capacity for inclusion of students with disabilities and challenging behavior within general education settings by creating a three tiered model of interventions known as school-wide positive behavior support (Sugai et al., 2005).

In di ca to rs of Su cc es s:

1. Reduction in office referrals for discipine 2. Favorable

28

D es cri pti on of A cti on Pl an St ep s 1 2

Persons Involved

Resources Needed

Due Date - Timeline

Complete Grant Application and secure grant Establish a Universal Design team

Principal Teachers, support staff, principal Universal Design team Universal design team Universal Design team Universal Design team Universal Design team 29

District approval Release time

2010 2010

3

Attend training sessions

Release time (subs)

2010 – 2011

4

Issue surveys to identify problem areas/behaviors Plan Kickoff event

Release time, computers Release time

June 2011

5

June 2011

6

Create manual for staff

7

Procure incentive items

Release time and support from grant providers $

August 2011

August 2011

8 9 10 11 12

Hold kickoff event Monitor behaviors through data collection Review results

School staff School Staff School staff

none Incentives Data reports

September 2011 On-going monthly May 2012

30

Action Plan for Strategy Related to Priority Problem #1 (Close the Achievement Gap)
Na m e of Pr og ra m, St ra te gy or P ra cti ce to A dd re ss Pr ior ity Pr ob le m:

Response to Intervention

31

Re se ar ch S up po rti ng St rat eg y
(fr om IES Pr act ice Gu ide or W hat Wo rks Cle ari ng ho use )

Response to Intervention (RTI) approach for Language Arts and Mathematics is a research-based approach that involves assessing the academic needs or levels of students, creating a tiered instructional framework, and implementing effective interventions to address the academic deficiencies.

32

S M A R T G oa l:
(S pe cifi c, Me as ura ble , Ac hie va ble , Rel ev ant , Ti me ly)

By June 2012, at least 50% of students will demonstrate an increase in reading levels as measured by Lexile gains

In di ca to rs of Su cc es s:

1. Lexile level gains

33

D es cri pti on of A cti on Pl an St ep s 1 2 3

Persons Involved

Resources Needed

Due Date - Timeline

4

5

Use NJASK scores to create tiered levels of students Research resources for interventions Submit purchase order and secure site licenses for instructional resources Create schedule to include Response to Intervention opportunities Research, review and/or create RTI monitoring tools

Armstead Principal, teachers Principal secretary Armstead, principal Principal School Leadership team Principal

District reports for incoming students Adaptive curriculum, $$, tech support, $$

July 2011 August 2011 August 2011

Time, final staff rosters from central office Time, internet, What Works Clearinghouse

August 2011

August 2011

6 7

Identify Before/Afterschool tutoring teachers Prepare rollout of RTI as a school-wide approach to address achievement gap

Stipend funds

September 2011 September 2011

School Prof Time, handouts, Development binders, committee; Principal

34

8 9

Establish data monitoring schedule Conduct data review sessions

10

Assess effectiveness of intervention approaches by meeting with teachers

Principal; teachers Teaching staff; parent stakeholders Principal

Time tech support Release time Hold evening discussions Time and a buffer

Sept 2011 On-going

By end of 1st semester

11 12

35

Plan Components for 2012
Table F: Proposed 2012 Core Strategies to Address Student Achievement PLEASE QUANTIFY THIS COLUMN Name of Strategy Content Area Focus Math Language Arts Research Supporting Strategy Target Population(s ) All mainstreamed and Gen Ed students Person Responsible Principal Indicators of Success (Measurable Evaluation Outcomes) Building based interim assessments Instructional program data (Reading Plus, Achieve 3000, Cognitive Tutor, AHA Math)
(from IES Practice Guide or What Works Clearinghouse)

Response to Intervention

Response to Intervention (RTI) approach for Language Arts and Mathematics is a research-based approach that involves assessing the academic needs or levels of students, creating a tiered instructional framework, and implementing effective interventions to address the academic deficiencies. Program utilizes dual language approach to instruction offering students opportunity to excel in English language while still supporting native language.

ELL

Achieve 3000

Homeless Migrant Students with Disabilities

N/A N/A

*Use an asterisk to denote new programs.

36

Table G: Proposed 2012 Extended Learning Opportunities to Address Academic Deficiencies. Do not include SES. Content Area Focus ELA Indicators of Success (Measurable Evaluation Outcomes) Research Supporting Strategy
(from IES Practice Guide or What Works Clearinghouse)

Name of Strategy

Target Population(s ) All nonbussed students

Person Responsible Principal

Reading Plus

Lexile levels

Carnegie Learning (Cognitive Tutor)

Math

Tier I and II

Teachers

Classroom assessments (mid-terms, Finals)

Research3 One study of Cognitive Tutor ® Algebra I meets What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards. The study included 255 ninth-grade students from three junior high schools in Oklahoma. 4 Based on this study, the WWC considers the extent of evidence for Cognitive Tutor ® Algebra I to be small for math achievement.

Homeless Migrant ELL Students with Disabilities

*Use an asterisk to denote new programs.

37

Table H: Proposed 2012 Professional Development to Address Student Achievement and Priority Problems Name of Strategy Content Area Focus All Research Supporting Strategy Target Population(s ) All teachers Person Responsible Principal Indicators of Success (Measurable Evaluation Outcomes) One PBL implemented per semester # of common collaborative planning sessions # of infractions
(from IES Practice Guide or What Works Clearinghouse)

Smaller Learning Communities

Small learning communities are characteristic of several interventions that have shown promise at addressing outcomes related to preventing dropping out.

Homeless Migrant ELL

N/A Principal
One PBL implemented per semester # of common collaborative planning sessions # of infractions Small learning communities are characteristic of several interventions that have shown promise at addressing outcomes related to preventing dropping out.

Students with Disabilities

N/A

*Use an asterisk to denote new programs.

38

Table I: Proposed 2012 Parent Involvement Strategies to Address Student Achievement and Priority Problems Name of Strategy Content Area Focus All Research Supporting Strategy Target Population(s ) Habitually tardy students Person Responsible School Base – Ms. Howard Indicators of Success (Measurable Evaluation Outcomes) Improved tardiness, behavior, academic outcomes by 10%
(from IES Practice Guide or What Works Clearinghouse)

Family Rewards Program

An analysis of 9th grade students who had scored proficient or higher on their 8th grade math tests revealed statistically significant impacts on enrollment, attendance, credit accumulation, and passing Regents exams.

Homeless Migrant ELL

N/A
School Base – Ms. Howard Improved tardiness, behavior, academic outcomes by 10% An analysis of 9th grade students who had scored proficient or higher on their 8th grade math tests revealed statistically significant impacts on enrollment, attendance, credit accumulation, and passing Regents exams.

Students with Disabilities

N/A

*Use an asterisk to denote new programs.

39

2012 Parent Involvement (PI) Narrative

1. What is the connection between Parental Involvement and the priority problems identified in the needs assessment? Student motivation is a concern, and with a Family Rewards program, it is expected that motivation will improve, leading to an increase in achievement from average to above average students. 2. Do you have a school-parent compact? Yes 3. Describe the process to ensure that parents receive and review the school-parent compact. They are issued to parent s during the first week of school, signed and returned. 4. How is student achievement data reported to the public? At Back to school Night and during PTO meetings. 5. What is the procedure for notifying parents if the district has not met their annual measurable objectives for Title III? District shares at Board of Ed meetings and Principal shares at PTA meetings. 6. Identify procedures for informing parents about the school’s improvement status. Reported during Back to School Night and at PTO meetings. Written notification is not sent unless a school of choice situation occurs. 7. Identify procedures for informing parents about the school’s disaggregated assessment results. Reported during Back to School Night and at PTO meetings. Written notification is not sent home unless a school of choice situation occurs, however it will be posted on the school’s website. 8. How were parents involved in the development of the Unified Plan? No parent consistently participated. 9. Identify procedures for informing a parent about their child’s student assessment results. Computer access is provided via Genesis; progress reports are issued; guidance counselor schedules meetings with parents of failing students; teachers can communicate directly as well as data chats and parent / teacher conferences. 10. How were the required PI funds used in 2011? Recognition events for student achievement (Culminating activities scheduled) 11. How will the required PI funds be used in 2012? Family Reward programs, to support the PBSIS initiative and student achievement recognition

40

Table J-1: 2011-2012 Annual Student Targets (Use best available data from One-Year Charts). At least two measurements must be listed. GRADE SPAN & SUBGROUP 6-8
GRADE SPAN: ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR HIGH SCHOOL4.0 Total Students with Disabilities Limited English Proficient Students White African-American Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian/Native American Hispanic Others Economically Disadvantaged GRADE SPAN: ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR HIGH SCHOOL Total Students with Disabilities Limited English Proficient Students White African-American Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian/Native American Hispanic NJASK 2011 43.2 48.9 NJASK 2011 31.2 38.1 NJASK 2011 43.0 48.7 NJASK 2011 34.8 47.2 NJASK 2011 44.3 49,9 NJASK 2011 30.2 37.2 NJASK 2011 NJASK 2011 NJASK 2011 44.0 15.3 22.9 49.6 23.7 30.6 NJASK 2011 NJASK 2011 NJASK 2011 32.5 14.8 39.3 23.4

LANGUAGE ARTS
State Assessment Baseline 2012 Target

MATHEMATICS
State Assessment Baseline 2012 Target

41

Others Economically Disadvantaged

Table J-2: 2011-2012 Annual Student Targets – Other Assessment GRADE SPAN & SUBGROUP
Middle School

LANGUAGE ARTS
Other Assessment Name Baseline 2012 Target

MATHEMATICS
Other Assessment Name Baseline 2012 Target

GRADE SPAN: ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR HIGH SCHOOL
Total Students with Disabilities Limited English Proficient Students White African-American Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian/Native American Hispanic Others Economically Disadvantaged Reading Plus Reading Plus Achieve 3000 Achieve 3000 E: PATH

GRADE SPAN: ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR HIGH SCHOOL
Total Students with Disabilities

42

Limited English Proficient Students White African-American Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian/Native American Hispanic Others Economically Disadvantaged

Highly Qualified Staff
Table K: Strategies to Attract and Retain Highly Qualified Staff
Number & Percent Teachers who meet the qualifications for HQT, consistent with Title II-A Teachers who do not meet the qualifications for HQT, consistent with Title II-A Paraprofessionals who meet the qualifications required by NCLB (education, ParaPro test, portfolio assessment)

Content & Focus

Description of Process to Meet Highly Qualified

Description of Strategy to Retain HQ Staff

100%

Administering PBSIS protocols for meaningful student/teacher interaction

100%

Informal mentoring with senior staff and administration

43

Paraprofessionals who do not meet the qualifications required by NCLB (education, ParaPro test, portfolio assessment)

Professional development opportunities

Description of Strategy To Attract HQ Staff
● ● ●

Individuals Responsible Building Administrator

Opportunities for leadership. Meaningful professional development in content areas. Teacher acknowledgement through public recognition and incentives.

44

Table L: Support for Teachers Use the Table below to describe the 2012 methods for supporting teachers needing assistance with instruction and classroom management. Description of Support Informal Mentoring Content Area Focus ELA/Math Target Group Academic support teachers Person Responsible Building Administrator/ Principal Indicators of Success (Evaluation) Informal observations and classroom management How are teachers identified? Administrative observation

Lead Teachers

ALL others

Table M: Support for Administrators Use the Table below to describe how leaders in schools in need of improvement are provided with support and instructional leadership. Description of Support Content Area Focus Target Group Person Responsible Diane White Network Indicators of Success (Evaluation) How are administrators identified?

Student Eligibility and Selection
Table N: All Schools: Identify the multiple measures used to determine student eligibility in a targeted assistance school and the measures to identify students who need additional support in school-wide programs. For targeted assistance schools, use the last two columns to designate if the measures are used as criteria for program entrance or exit. Homeless Measure Migrant Students with Disabilities Economically Disadvantaged ELL Other SubGroups Targeted Assistance Schools Entrance Criteria ( ) Exit Criteria ( )

45

State Assessment

NJASK

NJASK

NJASK

NOT APPLI CABLE MAXSON HAS AN SCHOO LWIDE PROGRA M
NJASK

Other Assessments English Language Proficiency Assessment Classroom Grades Teacher Recommendation Other

Achieve 3000 Reading Plus

Achieve 3000 Reading Plus
IPT

Yes

Support Elements Ongoing and Sustained Technical Assistance*
1. What assistance did the NCLB committee determine it needs to implement the 2012 Unified Plan in the school’s efforts to increase academic achievement? From the district: Sufficient staffing to implement a Smaller Learning Communities approach; content area supervisors to support and assist in the monitoring and reviewing of learning outcomes. Content area specialist to act as lead and resource teachers and provide and direct instruction for students. Allow teachers to visit and observe at least two successful schools that have made AYP and that are within the same DFG. Provide constructive feedback when conducting school wide walk throughs. From outside experts: none From others:

46

2. Describe the current technical assistance offered to staff at the school. Include assistance by district level and/or outside experts, for example, skilled consultants, institutions of higher education (IHE), etc. At the district level, monthly meetings have been tentatively planned. 3. How is it targeted to the priority problems identified in the needs assessment? The current technological assistance for Closing the Achievement Gap, mathematics and Discipline issues are not targeted at this time. 4. Identify the person(s) responsible for ensuring this technical assistance is provided. Interim Assistant Superintendent Caryn Cooper

*Technical Assistance is support offered to the school in any form necessary. It can include the development of policies, procedures and evaluation instruments, data analysis, coaching, program planning, budgeting, and the provision of specialized information. Assistance may be offered directly by district staff, the NJDOE, or an outside consultant.

47

District Support (completed by LEA for SINIs only)
1. Explain why the previous school and district plans did not bring about increased student academic achievement.
Lack of administrative and leadership consistency at the district and school level has led to plans and programming not being consistent for students and teachers. Budgetary concerns have forced limited utilization of some of the strategies listed in table B to improve student performance.

2. Explain how the district is supporting the school in the following areas:
Providing professional development that focuses primarily on improving instruction and using data to inform instruction This year we have three literacy professional development support programs at Jefferson School provided by the district. The NJASK literacy / writing workshop was designed to improve teacher’s ability to write and score prompts and design instruction to improve their findings on these benchmark assessments. The teachers college PD provided modeling strategies for the literacy block (specifically reading comprehension strategies and writers workshop instruction). Finally, CLI provided more support for K-2 teachers in developing scaffolding opportunities to improve reading comprehension. Looking forward, more effort is needed from the district in providing specific response to intervention professional development for struggling students in all sub groups, professional development on the common core standards implementation, and improved PD and support for educationally at-risk populations such as LEP and SPED. Implementing strategies grounded in scientifically based research that will strengthen instruction in core academic subjects Expanding parental involvement activities that support the school’s efforts to increase student achievement Reallocating the budget to fund activities that support the school’s improvement plan and are most likely to increase student achievement Ensuring that curriculum is aligned to the CCCS We have a best practices document in all subject matters and resource teachers available to support specific scientific based strategies in our classrooms. Content teams will be working during the new year to review REL/WWC strategies and provide analysis of our current programming. More support would be appreciated from the district in this area. This year, with district support, Jefferson school held several parent meetings to discuss student academic goals and will implement a Parent Academy to help support parents in how they can work with their children. As for increased district support, we could use greater PI funding to expand our programs. The district will not reallocate funds within the NCLB budget. The allocations will remain intact for each Title. Business Operations will work collaboratively with the schools to use resources effectively and efficiently. Federal, State and Local funds, including the city tax levy for education and Federal Entitlement and Competitive Grants State and Private Grants will be allocated and/or reallocated according to guidelines to fund the activities that support the school’s improvement plan. The curriculum has been revised in all areas to reflect greater alignment to the NJCCCS and includes back-mapping and strategies on how to ensure retention of all requisite standards and CPI’s. The district is beginning to support development of the Common Core Standards lesson plans and curriculum alignment.

48

2010-2011 Resource Allocation
Resource Allocation – Provide the following information regarding the use of the 2010-2011 funds including but not limited to 2010 SIA Part (A).
Brief Description of Strategy or Practice Implemented with Funds Reading Plus, Carnegie Learning (Cognitive Tutor), Family Rewards Program, Achieve 3000, Reading Plus, E-Path, Study Island, Strategic Reading, Centers/ Differentiation Purchasing of HP Desktops computers / technology resources to utilize the current features of newly acquired instructional software needed to enable full access for classroom instruction. Outcomes as a Result of Implementing the Strategy or Practice To be determined once the Spring 2011 NJASK results are received and analyzed

Type of Funds 2010 Title I, Part A

Amount Allocated We are a Schoolwide school with blended funds $26,450

SIA Amount Carried Over NOT APPLICABLE

Reallocated Use of SIA NOT APPLICABLE

Evidence NJASK Spring 2011

2010 SIA Part A

N/A

N/A

25 HP Desktops computer systems purchased and installed prior to start of 20102011 academic year. Systems utilized primarily for classroom instruction for general education and ELL students.

Students advanced 1 to 2 reading levels as a result of systems bundled with educational software. NJASK Spring 2011

Federal

State

Reading Plus, Carnegie Learning (Cognitive Tutor), Family Rewards Program, Achieve 3000, Reading Plus, E-Path, Study Island, Strategic Reading, Centers/ Differentiation Reading Plus, Carnegie Learning (Cognitive Tutor), Family Rewards Program, Achieve 3000, Reading Plus, E-Path, Study Island, Strategic Reading, Centers/ Differentiation

We are a Schoolwide school with blended funds We are a Schoolwide school with blended funds

NOT APPLICABLE

NOT APPLICABLE

To be determined once the Spring 2011 NJASK results are received and analyzed

NOT APPLICABLE

NOT APPLICABLE

To be determined once the Spring 2011 NJASK results are received and analyzed

NJASK Spring 2011

49

Local

Reading Plus, Carnegie Learning (Cognitive Tutor), Family Rewards Program, Achieve 3000, Reading Plus, E-Path, Study Island, Strategic Reading, Centers/ Differentiation

We are a Schoolwide school with blended funds

NOT APPLICABLE

NOT APPLICABLE

To be determined once the Spring 2011 NJASK results are received and analyzed

NJASK Spring 2011

Other

School Budget Pages
School level budget pages in Excel must be completed along with each school’s Unified Plan, identifying the following: ● How the Title I, Part A school allocation is budgeted for targeted assistance schools or schools operating schoolwide programs that do not blend their funds ● How the SIA, Part a allocation is budgeted for all schools receiving this award Budget Detail pages and a Budget Summary are available as an Excel program at the following location: www.nj.gov/education/grants/entitlement/nclb/. Complete the Excel budget pages for each school and upload the file to the NCLB Application on EWEG on the Title I Unified Plan upload screen. These budget pages are in addition to the Title I Unified Plan for each school required to complete a plan. Budget Detail pages must be uploaded. The signature of the Business Administrator must be kept on file at the district/school.

50

Corrective Action, Restructuring, and School Improvement

Certification: For schools in Year 4 hold, 5, 5 hold, 6, 6 hold, 7, 7 hold, 8, 8 hold, 9, 9 hold and 10 that have had a CAPA visit. The corrective action plan, corrective actions identified in the CAPA summary report continue to be incorporated into the Unified Plan.

Corrective Action (CAPA Recommendations) Status Report
This form is completed by all schools in Year 4 and above. Schools in corrective action had to implement one or more of the following corrective actions (as identified by the district) in addition to the SINI and/or SW components. Identify which corrective action(s) will be taken and describe the implementation and how the action(s) will be incorporated with the other elements of the Title I Plan. Note: CAPA report prioritized recommendations and action plans must be incorporated into the Unified Plan. Corrective Actions (Recommendations from CAPA Report) 1. Required implementation of a new research-based curriculum or instructional program 2. Extension of the school year or school day 3. Replacement of staff members, not including the principal, who were relevant to the school’s low performance 4. Significant decrease in management authority at the school level 5. Replacement of the principal
6. 7. 8.

Restructuring the internal organization of the school
Appointment of an outside expert to advise the school Provide, for all relevant staff, appropriate, scientifically research-based professional development that is likely to improve academic achievement of lowperforming students.

Corrective actions implemented: # _____3___ Corrective Action #

Complete the table below regarding the corrective actions implemented:
Effective Yes - No

Description

Evidence of Effectiveness

Outcomes

1

Replacement of Staff members, including the principal, who were relevant to the school’s low performance was chosen but not implemented

No

NJASK

School did not make AYP

2 3 4

51

SINI Year 5H and Above: Restructuring Implementation

N/A

Certification: For schools in Year 5 hold, 6, 6 hold, 7, 7 hold, 8, 8 hold, 9, 9 hold and 10 that have completed a restructuring plan, the approved restructuring plan continues to be incorporated into the Unified Plan.

Year Restructuring Plan Created: _2010-2011______ The district must develop a restructuring plan for schools in Year 5. The alternative governance actions must be initiated (see below). Note: Districts must also complete the required “School Restructuring Plan,” which includes more detail on the planning process and the restructuring details www.nj.gov/njded/title1/accountability/restructure.doc. The restructuring options are as follows: 1. Implement any major restructuring of the school’s governance that is consistent with the principles of restructuring as set forth in the No Child Left Behind Act. 2. Re-open the school as a public charter school as defined by state statute and regulation (N.J.S.A. 18A:36A-1 et seq. and N.J.A.C. 6A). 3. Replace all or most of the school staff, which may include the principal, who are relevant to the school’s inability to make adequate progress (consistent with existing contractual provisions and applicable statutory protections in Title 18A). Identify the restructuring option(s) selected: _1___ For schools in Year 5 hold and above, complete the table below. Add additional rows as needed. Fundamental Governance Reforms Implemented as Listed in Approved Restructuring Plan
1 2 3 4 5

Status of Implementation

Effective Yes - No

Evidence of Effectiveness

Outcomes

Central office oversight

Rejected at the state level

List revisions made to the original restructuring plan.

52

Peer Review
Check Before Proceeding:
● ● ●

At minimum, the peer review must be completed by staff members from a school that is not in federal improvement status. Peer reviewers should have expertise in content areas and in school improvement. Peer review must contain recommendations. TO BE COMPLETED

1. Describe process used for peer review of the plan. (The NJDOE peer review suggested process is available at www.nj.gov/njded/title1/program/peer_review.pdf.)

2. Provide the actual date and location the peer review(s) took place.

3. Provide the information below.
Peer Reviewer Name Title Affiliation Area of Expertise Principal/Leadership Language Arts Mathematics Special Education ELL Address

4. Provide a summary of the recommendations made by the peer review school.

5. List the specific recommendations that were incorporated into the plan as a result of the peer review.

53

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful