neasc self-study final report - duxbury.k12.ma.us€¦ · disciplinary collaboration and vertical...

2 0 1 2 S E L F S T U D Y R E P O R T

Duxbury High School

Accreditation Self Study

Completed June 2012

New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC)

S C H O O L A N D C O M M U N I T Y P R O F I L E

Duxbury High School



Completed June 2012

Duxbury High School, located in Duxbury, Massachusetts, solely serves the

residents of the town of Duxbury. Located 35 miles south of Boston, it is a primarily

residential community in Plymouth County bordered by Cape Cod Bay, Plymouth,

Kingston, Pembroke, and Marshfield. Duxbury is a historical seacoast community,

with cranberry and oyster farming as primary industries.

With a population of more than 14,000 citizens, no identifiable minority

group comprises more than 0.8% of the population. English is the primary language

spoken by 99.97% of the student population; one family speaks Portuguese at home.

In 2010, 2.2% of the school district population lived below the low-‐income level.

Most residents are employed in managerial and executive positions in the greater

Boston area. The median family income is $105,683.

Duxbury was a center of shipbuilding until the mid-‐nineteenth century when

ships became too large for the shallow bay. Many historic and beautiful homes

dating from the 17th century and the shipbuilding period still exist. Today Duxbury

is the sixth largest cranberry producer in Massachusetts and has become famous for

its oysters. The coastal location continues to play a vibrant role in the character of

the community. Duxbury Beach is a major, unspoiled, natural recreational asset and

there are many conservation areas throughout the town. Duxbury is home to

Battelle, a global leader in scientific discovery and application, and Island Creek

Oysters and also has one assisted living facility.

In addition to Duxbury High School with a population of 962, Duxbury Middle

School includes 839 students and Duxbury’s elementary schools Alden (grades 3-‐5)

and Chandler (grades K-‐2) house 781 and 614 students respectively. Bay Farm

Montessori Academy and Good Shepherd Christian Academy are the two private

elementary schools located in the community and 193 students attend non-‐public

schools.

The Duxbury Public School District is ranked 277 of 325 school districts in

the state in terms of per pupil expenditures and expended $10,598 per pupil

compared to a state average of $13,006 per pupil in FY2009 and $10,169 compared

to a state average of $12,448 in 2008. In terms of per capita wealth Duxbury ranks

36 out of 351 communities. In FY2010, state, federal, and other resources

accounted for 36.93% of all funds received in the district, leaving 63.07% of funding

to be obtained through local resources, which are allocated to the public schools.

The Duxbury Education Foundation gave out nine grants in FY 2011 totaling over

$85,000. Over the past six years the Duxbury Parent Teacher Organization has

awarded $20,000 in teacher mini-‐grants ranging from $100 to over $1,000.

Duxbury High School includes students in grade 9-‐12 with a total enrollment

of 962 students divided between 479 males and 483 females. The school population

has remained stable over the past ten years. The ethnic, racial, and cultural

composition has remained constant with a majority of Caucasian students, 0.4%

African American, 0.8 % Asian students, 0.5% Hispanic students, and 0.1 % Native

American students during the 2010-‐11 school year. The average dropout rate for

the past two years has been 0.1%, the average daily attendance, 96%, and the

average attendance rate among teachers, 94%, inclusive of administrative

reassignment, professional days, and personal and family illness.

There are 84 teachers at Duxbury High School, creating a student-‐teacher

ratio of 11:1. Individual teachers carry an average load of 89 students with an

average class size of 20. In those classes required for graduation, the average class

size is 21. Students attend school for 180 days and for a minimum of 990 hours.

Students in grades 9 -‐ 12 may select courses in three levels of college

preparatory, honors, or Advanced Placement (where offered). Ninety-‐three percent

of students are enrolled in at least one honors level class, 58% in at least one college

preparatory course, and 28% percent in at least one Advanced Placement course.

Approximately ten percent of students receive special education services. All

students are required to take four years of English, three years of social studies,

mathematics, and science, two years of world language, four semesters of physical

education, and four semesters of fine, performing, or practical arts. The other

courses taken to earn the 130 credits required for graduation come from a variety of

elective courses. Duxbury High School offers 47 co-‐curricular activities and 54

athletic teams (thirty at the varsity level). Annually, 40% of students each year

participate in at least one co-‐curricular activity and 65%-‐70% in at least one sport.

In the class of 2011, 91% of graduates plan to attend four-‐year colleges, with

4% enrolling in two-‐year colleges, and the remaining students entering preparatory

schools, the military, the work force or international schools. Graduates take

advantage of a diverse selection of colleges and universities across the US and

abroad including Ivy League colleges, the Massachusetts state university system,

and a variety of competitive private and public four-‐year colleges.

Educational partnerships include offering opportunities for students who

have earned the grade point average necessary to enroll in college classes at local

community colleges. In the District, there are nine students who attend vocational

school and 32 students in out of district placements. While there is no formal dual

enrollment program, currently seven students are taking college courses, 35

students are participating in Duxbury’s independent study program, and four

students are utilizing the PLATO online learning environment. During the 2011-‐

2012 academic year, Duxbury High School will be piloting the Syracuse University

Project Advance program (SUPA) in Physics and Biology, in which students can earn

college credit through the AP Physics and AP Biology courses. Duxbury High School

offers a work experience program for those students who work the minimum hours

and are looking to receive academic credit for that time. In 2011, forty students

participated in senior projects in which they spent the fourth term of their senior

year working within the community on an approved project. Students with special

needs can go on to participate in the collaborative Marshfield/Duxbury POST

(Providing Opportunities for Student Transition) Program until the age of 22 where

they learn life skills and participate in employment opportunities. Vocational

programs within Duxbury High School include the early childhood education classes

working with the Magic Dragon Center and the Breadboard culinary program.

Students are recognized for their accomplishments through various awards.

The philosophy of the Summa Award for grades 9-‐11 is to allow the faculty the

opportunity to recognize students who improve the atmosphere of the school and to

recognize students who realize their scholastic potential. Seniors are recognized in a

senior awards ceremony where they are awarded academic achievement awards by

subject areas as well as scholarships through the Duxbury High School Scholarship

Program. In 2011, the scholarship and award amounts totaled over $270,000. Each

term students who achieve honor roll and high honor roll are recognized in the local

newspapers, the Clipper and the Reporter. In the middle of junior year, students

who earn a cumulative 3.5 grade point average (GPA) are invited to apply for the

National Honor Society. Annually three to five Duxbury High School students are

selected through the National Merit Competition and receive recognition for this

honor at senior awards night. In 2010, 88 students were recognized as AP Scholars

for their exceptional achievement on AP exams. Music, drama, art, and athletics have

additional awards nights. The superintendent and school committee invite selected

students and their families to monthly school committee meetings to recognize their

achievements publicly.

C R I T I C A L S T R E N G T H S A N D N E E D S

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


Critical Strengths:

• The willingness of teachers to give of their own time and resources to improve instruction

• The rotating block schedule with 68-minute block periods

• Community willingness to support and fund various teacher and student activities that are not funded by the budget

• The later start-time initiative

• A curriculum that emphasizes higher order thinking

• The wide variety of instructional strategies across all disciplines

Critical Needs:

• Increase communication and shared decision-making between administrators and faculty

• Increase staffing to reduce class sizes, especially co-taught classes

• Increase opportunities for students to participate in vocational study either at Duxbury High School or at a collaborating school

• Provide sufficient common planning time for teachers to engage in cross-

disciplinary collaboration and vertical articulation

• Create the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of rubrics

• Create professional development opportunities, focused on reflection, inquiry and analysis of teaching and learning

C O R E V A L U E S , B E L I E F S , A N D L E A R N I N G E X P E C T A T I O N S

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


Duxbury High School has identified and published a set of core values, beliefs

about learning, and learning expectations that represent clear foundational commitments

to students and the community at large. Decision-making, both at the academic level and

the social/cultural level, is focused on and aligned with these core value commitments.

The student/parent handbook of Duxbury High School includes the revised core values

and learning expectations for the entire learning community. Every component of the

school, both at the administrative and curricular level, is driven by the core values and the

beliefs about learning and supports all students’ achievement of the school’s learning

expectations.

Duxbury High School has developed and has been engaged in a dynamic and

inclusive process based on best practices to identify and commit to beliefs and core

values about learning. A committee of fourteen people representing a variety of

stakeholders including students, parents, teachers, guidance personnel, and administrators

was established to start the process. The committee representatives sought input from

faculty as the core values adaptation work evolved and received endorsements from their

respective groups. As the committee compiled the data from the variety of meetings, it

was clear the mission statement had not been revised since 2006. The committee used the

NEASC Guide to Developing and Implementing the Mission to begin work on the new

core values statement. The committee reviewed literature on 21st century skills and

learners in order to generate lists of which characteristics are ideal for Duxbury High

School graduates. The core values group then began to draft a core values statement. At

the same time, an alternate list of characteristics and important beliefs about learning was

generated to be included in the expectations for student learning. A thirty-eight item list

of learning expectations was reviewed and consolidated to twelve items and sent to

faculty for review and reflection. In March 2009, three drafts of the Duxbury High

School statement were presented to the staff for a vote. A vote was taken, and the staff

adopted the core values and learning expectations.

During the 2009-2010 school year, the faculty continued to refine the existing

core values and learning expectations, and the rubric committee developed analytic

rubrics for each of the school-wide learning expectations. Each rubric was brought to the

faculty for input and revision and was voted on and adopted accordingly.

The Core Values Committee was reconvened in September of 2010. Through

advisory, all students provided input regarding their beliefs about student learning. The

faculty approved the final version of the beliefs about student learning in November,

2010.

The school has identified challenging and measurable 21st century learning

expectations for all students, which address academic, social, and civic competencies,

and are defined by school-wide analytic rubrics that identify targeted levels of

achievement. The Duxbury High School core values committee first met in December of

2008. The committee began the reviewable process of the DHS mission and expectations

that were last revised in 2006. The committee used the NEASC Guide to Developing and

Implementing the Mission to begin work on the new core values statement. The first task

that the committee undertook was a review of 21st century skills and learners. This was

used to generate lists of characteristics expected of Duxbury High School graduates.

At the second meeting of the core values group, the committee reviewed and

categorized characteristics that they felt were integral to the development of the mission

and began to draft a core values statement. The core values group reviewed more

literature on 21st century skills and began to work toward consensus on the core values

statement. At the same time, an alternate list of characteristics and important beliefs

about learning was generated to be included in the expectations for student learning. At

the March 10, 2009, core values meeting, three drafts of a DHS core values statement

were presented to the committee. A thirty-eight-item list of learning expectations was

reviewed and consolidated, and a staff presentation was planned. The March 24th

meeting included further consolidation of learning expectations from thirteen to twelve

items. The presentation to the staff was finalized. The draft of the mission statement and

learning expectations was e-mailed to staff in early April to allow time for reflection

before the April 8th, 2009 faculty meeting.

On April 8, 2009 a power point presentation was made to the DHS staff, and all

teachers were able to give input on the core values statement. A vote was taken and the

core values and learning expectations were adopted.

During the 2009-2010 school year DHS continued to refine the existing core

values and learning expectations, and the rubric committee developed analytic rubrics for

each of the school-wide learning expectations. Each rubric was brought to the faculty for

input and revision and was voted on and adopted accordingly.

In June 2010, the faculty spent time generating a list of characteristics for the

ideal DHS graduate. The core values committee reconvened in September 2010 and

generated a series of beliefs about student learning. The beliefs about student learning

were presented to the staff in October 2010. and were revised after input. Students also

provided input into the final version of the beliefs about student learning through a

school-wide advisory activity in which they generated their own lists about the ideal

graduate and compared their characteristics to the core values, beliefs, and expectations

of the school. The final version of the beliefs about student learning were voted on and

adopted by the faculty in November 2010.

The school has also developed challenging and measurable school-wide analytic

rubrics that identify targeted levels of achievement. In July 2006, a leadership team made

up of department heads met to draft school-wide rubrics for a NEASC five-year report.

The committee identified indicators for school-wide rubrics, which were presented to the

faculty and approved by vote at the start of the 2006-2007 school year. Since these

rubrics were not generated in an inclusive manner, it was decided to convene an

interdepartmental committee to begin drafting analytic rubrics for each of the six learning

expectations.

In December 2007, a rubric committee made up of faculty representatives from

each academic department began meeting bi-weekly to draft rubrics. As the principal

was driving the process at that time, the committee made the decision to elect faculty

committee co-chairs. It was also decided that the faculty would regularly present drafts of

each rubric to individual departments for feedback, and the entire faculty for approval. In

June of 2008, the entire committee worked to complete drafts for each rubric.

Throughout the 2008-2009 school year the faculty reviewed and approved the

reading, writing, communication, and creative, expressive and innovative learning

rubrics. During the 2009-2010 school year, the faculty reviewed and approved the

collaboration rubric, the acquire, integrate and apply knowledge rubric, as well as the

personal, social and civil responsibility rubric.

The school’s newly developed core values and beliefs are becoming more

reflected in the school culture. These values and beliefs are driving curriculum and

assessment in every classroom and are guiding the development and revision of the

school’s policies, procedures, decisions and resource allocations. The latest revision of

the core values was in the fall of 2010. Duxbury High School is currently implementing

the usage of rubrics that reflect student learning expectations. Thus, the school is

currently in a period of adjustment. The current core values and beliefs about learning

reflect 21st century and problem solving skills.

Each department has been involved in the development and refinement of subject

specific curriculum maps and Understanding by Design (UbD) templates. System-wide,

a timeline was established to publish these maps for parent access. Currently, music,

science, mathematics, English, and world language maps have been made public. The

social studies maps will be completed in 2012. Curriculum maps focus on content and

skill objectives and link these objectives to specific assessments. Over the last year,

curriculum maps have been revised to include the learning expectations covered in each

unit of study. Teaching of the skills necessary to be successful in meeting the school-

wide learning expectations has been the focus of department meetings beginning with the

2009-2010 school year. There are no longer level III courses offered at Duxbury High

School. Thus, more heterogeneous grouping occurs and equity in accessing the

curriculum for all students has increased. Coinciding with the elimination of level III

classes, the school has fully implemented an expanded co-teaching initiative. Currently,

there are 23 co-taught classes with a content specialist and a special education teacher.

The district is examining its use of formative assessment as a part of instructional

practices. In the past, assessment was perceived as an end-product in and of itself. Each

department has developed common, content-based, summative assessments that have

been implemented.

Proposals for changes to curriculum, instruction, and assessment are discussed

within departments and during leadership team meetings. The leadership team makes

final decisions. Additional project-based mathematics and science courses are centered

around the idea of equity of access. These classes were introduced in the 2011-2012

school year. Curriculum mapping and UBD work is based on the belief that all students

can learn and require equal access to the curriculum.

In terms of school culture, the commitment to “prepare students to meet the

challenges of a global society” has led Duxbury High School to re-examine its core

values and beliefs. The school then developed new learning expectations reflecting the

needs of the 21st century learner. School-wide rubrics were then created to reflect these

learning expectations. During the 2010-2011 school year, Duxbury High School began

using these rubrics in all departments. Duxbury High School’s core values, beliefs, and

21st century learning expectations are beginning to drive curriculum, instruction, and

assessment in every classroom. Duxbury High School has also incorporated the personal,

social and civic responsibilities rubric into the report cards for all high school students. In

June 2012, the school will pilot a report card that measures all learning expectations for

all students. Each department at DHS has primary responsibility for at least two learning

expectations, and all staff is required to report on student achievement of these primary

learning expectations.

The school has revised its core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning

expectations based on research, multiple data sources, as well as district and school

community priorities. During the 2006-2007 school year, the leadership team looked at

school-wide rubrics. In December of 2007, the rubric committee reconvened after a

transition in school leadership. In December of 2008, the school established a plan for

review of its core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning expectations based on

research, multiple data sources, as well as district and school community priorities. Over

a two-year period, the school developed core values and learning expectations for the

21st century and they were adopted in June of 2009. The rubrics were developed in a

committee of faculty from all departments in the high school and adopted during the

2009-2010 school year. In the spring of 2010, all academic departments were assigned

primary responsibility for implementing at least two of the rubrics on a regular basis.

Each department is currently responsible for collecting and analyzing data for each of

their primary learning expectations to improve instruction. In June of 2012, students will

receive a report of their progress in meeting their required learning expectations.

In the fall of 2010, all students submitted feedback on the Duxbury High School

core values, beliefs about learning, and learning expectations during an advisory session.

Subsequently, the school reconvened the core values committee to revise the school’s

core values and to develop Duxbury High School’s beliefs about learning. The DHS

school-wide rubrics were fully implemented at the start of the 2010-2011 school year. In

May 2011, the faculty voted to accept “satisfactory” as the minimal level of performance

for each rubric. Under the auspices of the core values committee, Duxbury High School

will continue to evaluate its 21st century learning expectations. The Rubric Committee

reconvened in September of 2011 to make modifications to the personal, social, and civic

responsibility rubric in response to faculty feedback after one year of use. In addition,

the committee plans to review the use of all rubrics and their application within each

department. In October 2011, the committee presented a revised version of the personal,

social, and civic responsibility rubric and the faculty gave additional feedback. In

November of 2011, the committee presented its most recent revision to the faculty, which

was approved. In December of 2011, students again submitted feedback on the core

values, beliefs about learning, and learning expectations through advisory.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Duxbury High School is engaged in a dynamic and inclusive process guided by

best practices to identify and commit to its core values and beliefs about learning. The

entire school community was involved in the process that has significantly strengthened

and validated the school’s guiding statement, providing a values-based rationale for all

elements of school activity: curriculum, instruction, assessment, school culture, and

support services. The identified core values and beliefs about learning will move the

school, its faculty, its students, and its parents forward and will serve to prepare Duxbury

High School students for future success.

The school has identified challenging and measurable 21st century learning

expectations for all students, which address academic, social, and civic competencies,

and are defined by school-wide analytic rubrics that identify targeted levels of

achievement. The expectations are clear in their intent and specific enough for use within

subject areas, but they are also defined in a way that allows the breadth of the school’s

curriculum to support their achievement. Satisfactory as the minimal level of acceptable

achievement is consistent across all rubrics and departments.

The school’s core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning expectations are

increasingly visible in the culture of the school. The expectations, values and beliefs

about learning are now guiding curriculum revision, classroom assessments and the

development of school policies, procedures, decisions, and resource allocations. The

school has reviewed and revised its core values, beliefs, 21st century learning

expectations, and school-wide rubrics, on an ongoing basis.

Based on the rating guide for the standard, Duxbury High School judges its

adherence to the standard as acceptable.

Strengths:

• The broadly inclusive process to develop the school’s core values, beliefs about learning, learning expectations, and rubrics

• The development of analytic rubrics that are practical for use across curricular areas

• The establishment of a process to ensure the core values and beliefs drive

curriculum, instruction, and assessment using school-wide rubrics and assigning primary responsibility for particular rubrics to specific departments

• Regularly scheduled reviews of the school’s core values, beliefs about learning,

learning expectations, and rubrics by students

Needs:

• Develop a long-term plan to aggressively identify curriculum, instruction, assessment, policies, procedures, decisions, and resource allocations that require alignment to the school’s core values and beliefs about learning as well as the school’s learning expectations

• Develop and implement a formal yearly review cycle that incorporates research

and includes all stakeholders to review and revise the school’s core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning expectations

Standard 1 Committee:

Name: Position: Signature: Date:I

,Urtft "fr.t*ti ]{^ OfLl^P;j r,- z/;l/LS-rx,"'i?$'; r>L q\*-

/g'rr*'P{n\i\/ t\. \ r"\ ,1,/ I

lr U*#bLT+4

It-j.

I

tit', I7-l tlec;-*t) ,, lcrll

Dt) Ir \,,*' \ u,-,''J ,l tril' ,s ,!)

I!/

,+ ,i l,//.hj;,,rt( t lli.i**,-\ /lt' i'-r'{

tttl/tzl i/ /-t

'1 --*1,t' --a*.n.' I r' r{i.}i-t v " a

t

l:;",'a x--,r'r/ ( (,,,

a !'.- /' jt ) //2

/, u ''/I r'i i ,-,rii" L'ile' f**'l i',\t \-

I

r' ._t1., I, ,)Ll* {r{ \ -"iuc4* *:t;;i .i -x,.f i "]

! '- t t '/-:Jif

-1

C U R R I C U L U M

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


Duxbury High School curriculum is currently being driven by a purposeful design

to ensure that all students practice and achieve each of the school’s 21st century learning

expectations. The curriculum is designed to ensure that all students, regardless of their

chosen overall course of study and their individual course selections, are exposed to a

variety of experiences that prepares them to meet all of the school’s five 21st century

learning expectations. For example, the curriculum has an adequate emphasis on the

challenges of a global society and DHS prescribes specific instructional strategies that

allow students to “to pursue academic excellence, become active learners, and develop

personal, social, and civic responsibility.” In addition, the school has identified the

content areas that are primarily and secondarily responsible for teaching each of the 21st

century learning expectations. Furthermore, all curriculum documents are driven by

essential questions that require students to face the challenges of a global society.

Duxbury High School curricula are living documents and are subject to review on an

ongoing basis. Curriculum documents exist currently and are in various stages of review,

revision, and publication by departments. Additionally, faculty and administrators as a

whole review all proposals for changes in curriculum, instruction, assessment, policy, and

procedures to ensure that at the very least they are equitable and support the achievement

of the school’s 21st century learning expectations. The results of the Endicott survey

confirm that 73.1% of teachers and 87% of parents agree that the school’s formal

curriculum design ensures that all students practice and achieve all of the school’s

learning expectations. Consequently, all proposed curriculum is reviewed for further

discussion and adoption.

The school’s core curriculum is written in a common format that includes units of

study, essential questions, content, frameworks, skills, and assessment. All aspects of

the curriculum reflect the school’s 21st century learning expectations and include a wide

range of instructional and assessment strategies. The district’s leadership developed a

common format for curriculum maps and unit templates based upon the principles of

Understanding by Design (UbD). The maps are organized around the following

categories: content, essential questions, state frameworks, skills, and assessment options.

All departments used these common formats to write their curriculum. Upon

development of the school’s 21st century learning expectations and beliefs about

learning, and upon their approval by the faculty, curriculum maps and templates were

reviewed and revised to ensure that those expectations and beliefs were specifically

identified as an additional category. At that point, the curriculum was re-aligned to

reflect the new expectations. UbD templates specify the goals, essential questions,

central understandings, key knowledge and skills, performance tasks, student self-

assessment and reflection, learning expectations, learning activities, and technology

integration for each unit. The curriculum is written in such a way as to allow teachers to

personalize their instruction while still adhering to the guidelines laid down in curriculum

maps and templates. Rubrics that measure students’ performance relative to the learning

expectations were developed by the rubric committee and approved by the faculty. These

rubrics are now used extensively by the faculty. The school’s curriculum is under

constant review. Department heads and subject supervisors periodically solicit feedback

from teachers regarding the written curriculum and make the appropriate changes to the

curriculum maps and UbD templates. Upon the adoption of the new 21st century

learning expectations, the various departments identified the expectations for which they

would assume primary and secondary responsibility for teaching and learning.

Instructional and assessment strategies are widely varied, reflect best practices, and are

specifically designed to help the students to meet the school’s learning expectations.

The curriculum to varying degrees emphasizes depth of understanding and

application of knowledge through inquiry and problem solving, higher order thinking,

cross-disciplinary learning, authentic learning opportunities both in and out of school,

and informed and ethical use of technology. For example, every required history class

implements a research paper involving inquiry and problem solving. AP Calculus

students examine fuel consumption by a plane as a function of speed ensuring the use of

higher order thinking for real world problem solving. Students also demonstrate higher

order thinking in English by evaluating and debating characters’ behaviors and

connecting those to real-world human behaviors through Socratic seminars. In English,

students at all grades and levels are required to do at least four pieces of formal, multi-

paragraph writing each term and to complete a research paper. All writing assignments

require that the students engage in higher-order thinking. The Endicott survey proves

that over 74% of all staff and parents believe that teachers emphasize higher order

thinking. Also, the school-wide rubrics promote higher-order thinking skills. Some

examples of cross-disciplinary learning exist. For instance, some physics classes work

with a photography teacher to develop pictures using pin-hole cameras. Collaboration

takes place between art and consumer science. Overall, however, cross-disciplinary

learning is limited, as the results of the Endicott Survey show. According to that survey,

only 27.3% of teachers agree that the curriculum emphasizes cross-disciplinary learning.

Such opportunities could be increased with additional common planning time.

Nevertheless, 84.8% of teachers agree that the curriculum emphasizes authentic

application of knowledge and skills. Authentic learning opportunities exist both in and

out of school. For example, an art class completes projects to support a local non-profit

organization. Off-campus learning takes place through field trips, online coursework

through programs such as PLATO, dual enrollment coursework, and independent senior

projects. Duxbury High School informs students and parents about the ethical use of

technology through acceptable use guidelines that all students review during advisory

periods and take home to be signed at the beginning of the school year. The Endicott

survey shows that 91% of staff, 65.8% of parents, and 76.5% of students agree that the

school promotes knowledgeable and ethical use of technology. Currently, students who

would like to participate in vocational studies have limited opportunities to pursue such

study at DHS. However, there is a process in place for students interested in applying to

a collaborating school.

The school has adopted strategies to ensure clear alignment between the written

and taught curriculum, with the understanding that this area requires constant monitoring

and adaptation. According to the Endicott survey, 93% of staff agrees that written and

taught curriculum are aligned. Curriculum documents identify the 21st century learning

expectations. Teachers’ lesson objectives and daily agendas present clear learning

expectations and align with the UbD templates and curriculum maps. In addition to

supervising curriculum and teachers, department heads and subject supervisors

periodically require that teachers provide copies of unit exams and common assessments.

Additionally, all midyear and final exams have common assessments that proportionately

assess student mastery of the curriculum and of the learning expectations identified as the

focus of that course. Data is gathered from common assessments and standardized

testing results. School personnel analyze the data to evaluate and improve the curriculum

and its delivery. The curriculum maps ensure that the course material is being taught

consistently within each department. However, limited opportunities exist for teachers of

the same course to meet in order to discuss and share ideas about delivery of the

curriculum.

Limited curricular coordination exists between all academic areas in the school,

although communication among departments is increasing. Communication with the

sending school is improving with the recent creation of the 6-12 subject supervisory

positions. Duxbury High School provides individual departments time to meet

collaboratively. The school holds after school meetings twice a month. One of the two is

devoted to content area or department work, and the other is designated as the monthly

faculty meeting. The department meeting model includes curriculum development and

discussion or sharing of instructional and assessment practices. Department meetings are

occasionally devoted to cross-curricular collaboration. The English department now

aligns its curriculum with topics addressed in social studies at each grade. The

evaluation cycle allows for teachers to spend one or two years collaborating with teachers

in other departments. Department meetings are often devoted to meeting valuable yearly

goals that include reviewing and revising curriculum maps and UbD templates,

developing and articulating common assessments, and analyzing standardized test data

and common assessment data to inform instruction. Some departments also use

departmental time to insure framework alignment based on MCAS data. However, more

common planning time is needed in order not only to reach all of these goals, but also to

allow teachers to engage in spontaneous and creative academic collaboration. Vertical

articulation exists and involves a formal schedule of review for subject areas. Math and

science have recently gone through the K-12 vertical articulation process with

representatives of each school as well as department heads, curriculum specialists, and

administrators participating. The world language supervisor and music department head

are K-12 curriculum coordinators. As a result, they are responsible for articulation in

their K-12 programs. Curriculum documents are available on the district’s website for

review by all members of the school community. The creation of three new subject

supervisory positions (English, mathematics, and science) is expected to improve vertical

articulation within grades 6 through 12. Some departments regularly meet with the

sending schools; others are only just beginning to do so. The building of a new, co-

located middle and high school is expected to increase the opportunity for vertical

articulation and cross-curricular collaboration. The design of the building is expected to

encourage such collaboration. The leadership team, which consists of the department

heads, subject supervisors, principal, and assistant principals, meets monthly. This team

is responsible for the implementation and organization of the curriculum, including

reviewing UbD curriculum templates, curriculum maps, and monitoring the integration of

the learning expectations into the templates and maps. This team also facilitated the

process to determine which departments would be responsible each of the learning

standards. The Instructional Advisory Group (IAG) includes department heads, subject

supervisors, curriculum coordinators from the middle and elementary schools, and the

assistant superintendent. The IAG meets roughly once a month and is responsible for the

vertical articulation of all curricula. IAG is currently focused on implementing the

Common Core Standards. IAG is also currently working on an initiative to include

writing in all of the curriculum areas. This initiative will include a research method

called Independent Investigation Methods, for which training was recently provided for

some teachers and administrators.

The sufficiency of staffing, instructional materials, technology, equipment,

supplies, facilities, and the resources of the library / media center varies in the level to

which it supports the curriculum, including the co-curricular programs and other learning

opportunities. Staffing at Duxbury High School is generally sufficient. When enrollment

decreased in the 2010-2011 school year, staff cuts were effected through attrition. An

increase in enrollment in the 2011- 2012 school year of approximately 80 students was

accompanied only by a 0.4 FTE increase; thus, class sizes have increased. In some cases,

college prep classes are too large to accommodate the individual needs of some students.

Enrollment is expected to peak over the next two or three years and then decrease. Thus,

continued monitoring of staffing levels is necessary. Supply budgets have generally

remained stable, with small annual increases or level funding. In some areas, supplies are

insufficient for student needs. For instance, the athletic department only purchases the

most basic supplies. The department is forced to rely upon booster clubs to fund items

that would fall under the normal supply budget of other schools. With inadequate

funding, some sports are beyond the finances of families. According to the Endicott

survey, only 32.3% of staff feels that co-curricular programs are adequately funded.

Generally, departmental administrators have learned to spend their budgets early in the

fiscal year to avoid losing money to line item transfers in order to shore up other areas

that are subject to shortages. Scarcity of availability and sometimes limited access to

technology is becoming a critical issue as the school revises curriculum to include deeper

integration and use of technology as a tool for teaching and learning. The school is

slowly increasing the number of SmartBoards and most classrooms now have LCD

projectors. The significant demand for access to technology, however, is greater than

availability. In many cases, the building itself does not support the effective use of

technology. Limited access to wireless internet and even in some cases to electrical

outlets prevents use of technology even where present. According to the Endicott survey,

only 53.3% of parents feel that the school’s technology resources are adequate. With

regard to the general facilities, only 28.8% of teachers believe that the facilities fully

support the implementation of the curriculum. Specifically, science facilities are

inadequate and in some cases even unsafe partly because of their small size and partly

because of their layout. The inadequacy of the science laboratories significantly limits

delivery of a lab-based 21st century science curriculum. With regard to the library media

center, the Endicott survey shows that 51.8% of students state that they are assigned work

that requires them to use information and do research in the library media center, and

60.6% of parents believe that the library and media resources adequately support learning

in their children’s classes. Access to the school’s computer labs is limited due to high

demand. Additionally, the bandwidth is insufficient to support the demands placed upon

it. Students experience long delays in accessing the Internet, resulting in loss of valuable

time on learning. The building of a new co-located middle and high school is expected to

resolve many of the problems associated with inadequate facilities as they impact the

curriculum.

The district has made considerable progress in providing professional staff with

sufficient personnel time and financial resources for ongoing and collaborative

development, evaluation, and revision of curriculum in using assessment results and

current research. Currently the assistant superintendent has responsibility for the overall

curriculum development for the district. In the high school, building administrators

facilitate the ongoing evaluation and revision of the curriculum. The department heads

and subject supervisors oversee the five-stage curriculum review process. Curriculum

analysis and revisions are driven by student performance data. The five-stage process has

been in existence since 2006. The process consists of:

1. Data collection and recording 2. Vertical alignment: Gaps, overlaps, and essential questions 3. Implementation of maps, development of UbD templates and rubrics 4. Evaluation of maps, UbD templates, and rubrics 5. Ongoing revision of maps, UbD templates, and rubrics

Currently each department has spent on average two years on the completion of

curriculum maps based on the UbD model. As indicated in the Endicott survey, only

31.3% of teachers agree that the amount of allocated time was sufficient to complete this

task. However, 77.6% of the teachers indicate that they felt directly involved in

curriculum evaluation, review and revision. Every department is using student data in the

curriculum review process to drive decisions on curricular changes. There is a curriculum

mapping sequence on file that dates and documents the process for each department.

Professional development for ongoing review and evaluation of the curriculum has been

adequately funded over the last several years. For example, in the 2009-2010 school

year, every professional development day had some portion of the time allotted to

curriculum development or revision. Funding for summer workshops for curriculum

development and revisions has been provided. The summer of 2011 saw a significant

increase in funding for the provision of professional development opportunities for

teachers. In addition to the formal curriculum review cycle, a protocol exists to allow

interested parties to pursue new course offerings or to revise current offerings.

Department heads and subject supervisors work with teachers to develop new electives.

Proposals for new electives are presented for approval at leadership meetings.

Graduation requirements are also currently under review by a committee of teachers and

administrators. Changes in these requirements may include changes in the curricula of

several departments.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Duxbury High School has a curriculum that is guided by a purposeful design to

ensure that all students practice and achieve each of the school’s 21st century learning

expectations. The core values and beliefs are a consistently growing influence in the

development and review of the school’s curriculum. Ongoing curriculum review ensures

alignment of the curriculum with the core values.

The school has developed a common template and format to ensure that all

curriculum documents include the necessary parts. Rubrics that measure students’

performance on the 21st century learning expectations have been developed and are

widely used by the faculty. Overall, instructional and assessment strategies are widely

varied and reflect best practices.

The curriculum emphasizes inquiry, problem-solving, and higher-order thinking.

Authentic learning opportunities exist both in and out of school. However, limited

opportunities exist for students who would like to pursue vocational study. Some

opportunities for cross-disciplinary learning exist. Such opportunities could be increased

with additional common planning time for teachers.

Procedures for ensuring the clear alignment between written and taught

curriculum are in place. This alignment will continue to improve as the various areas

complete the review and revision of their respective curricula. Limited opportunities

exist for teachers to share ideas about delivering the curriculum due to the lack of

common planning time.

Limited curricular coordination exists between all academic areas in the school,

although communication among departments is increasing. The creation of the grades 6-

12 subject supervisory positions is expected to improve the level of curriculum

articulation with the middle school, as is the new co-located middle and high school.

Budgetary support for curriculum, supplies, and staffing is generally adequate.

However, problems do exist. Some college prep classes, especially co-taught classes, are

too large to adequately serve the individual needs of all students. Access to technology

generally is inadequate to support demand, especially with regard to computer

laboratories. Science laboratories are also inadequate and do not support the delivery of

the curriculum. The latter two issues are expected to be resolved, however, with the

construction of the new co-located middle and high school building.

The district has made considerable progress in providing professional staff with

sufficient time and financial resources for ongoing and collaborative development,

evaluation, and revision of curriculum. Building administrators oversee a five-stage

curriculum review process.

Based on the CPSS Rating Guide for the standard on curriculum, Duxbury High

School believes its compliance with the curriculum standard is acceptable.

Strengths:

• The development and adoption of a curriculum template that includes all of the requisite traits identified in indicator two of the standard

• The use of the core values and beliefs and the 21st century learning expectations to guide the identification of prescribed and suggested instructional strategies

• The published curriculum documents for all courses that are aligned to the

appropriate learning expectations

• A curriculum that emphasizes higher order thinking

• Alignment between the written and taught curriculum

• The building of a new co-‐located middle and high school to increase opportunities for vertical articulation and cross-‐curricular collaboration

• Funding for professional development and course work over the summer of

2011

Needs:


• Allow for increased opportunities for students to engage in cross-‐disciplinary

learning

• Provide sufficient common planning time for teachers to engage in cross-‐disciplinary collaboration and vertical articulation

• Increase staffing to reduce class sizes, especially co-‐taught classes

• Ensure that plans for adequate access to technology and improved science

labs are realized in the new school building

• Increase funding for co-‐curricular programs

, n-y'/tfliz5)trrQ Ltf

-tlt. ls-A a4v,h,fi{fUrt h

'p \'t .!,,ratn+.p

n- 1/* /s // /7*4#3*+ J r_U

Y t/,n,/'> {**-1.-;,-7rt{

.-\

, XJ ,-,_u 2l ,, ' 1 - \ t/

el/!ft /ret/\ '-\\-{_" N'"''"'f'r{ ttvw"\

zt /n 15),,,tfi+J -q(,tMq ULry,,--7,/h/S

t-,ww,"//-t Ft'''' ,,r/b\nr1rrr-,t*(LOt,$*U)

2t lsls It_k;-tL-"^"r1, n'+t ntZ IUH ) .o)5';l^,'Attv2?\[lx

:alEC:eJnleu8tS:uoplsod:atueN

I N S T R U C T I O N

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


Teachers’ instructional practices are continuously examined to ensure consistency

with the school’s core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning expectations. The core

values speak directly to “preparing students to meet, both individually and

collaboratively, the challenges and opportunities of a global society. All students will

pursue academic excellence, become active learners, and develop personal, social, and

civic responsibility.” The 21st century learning expectations encourage a “partnership

among educators, students, family, and community.” To familiarize students and faculty

with the school’s core values, beliefs about learning, and 21st century learning

expectations, posters are displayed in each classroom, all common areas, the school

website, the program of studies, and on all forms of communication. All departments

within the school have assumed primary responsibility for specific learning expectations

and are using school-wide rubrics to assess student achievement of these goals. Through

the utilization of a school-wide rubric, all departments are responsible for assessing the

student expectation of “demonstrating personal, social, and civic responsibility.”

According to the Endicott survey, 67% of staff believes that teachers continuously

examine their instructional practices to ensure consistency with the school’s core values

and beliefs about learning. Data collected consists of the programs of studies, evidence of

the use of school-wide rubrics, department meeting and advisory agendas, as well as

agendas from professional development workshops.

The process teachers utilize to continuously examine their instructional practices

involves formal and informal evaluations as well as collaboration with colleagues.

Yearly evaluations of teachers alternate between individual, collaborative, and formal

evaluation. Pre- and post-conferences allow for dialogue and reflection between the

evaluator and faculty member. Unannounced classroom walk-throughs by administrators

occur. Department meetings provide teacher opportunities to share student work

samples utilizing rubrics and best practices. Through the practice of data analysis,

teachers are able to more readily revise their instructional practices. Curriculum maps and

unit curriculum plans using Understanding by Design (UbD) principles help to guide

instruction and ensure teacher consistency with the core values and beliefs about

learning. However, the time allotted to educators to continuously review the curriculum

maps, UbD templates, and core values, is insufficient.

The faculty of Duxbury High School designs and implements engaging lessons

that allow students to personalize content and make connections across disciplines. These

lessons challenge students to use higher order thinking and to apply this knowledge to

authentic tasks. Technology is incorporated on a daily basis to equip all DHS students

with 21st century skills. Finally, reflection and self-assessment help students make

meaningful connections.

Personalized instruction within a lesson is illustrated extensively across the core

content areas at DHS. Most faculty members serve as advisors for the student advisory

program that services all DHS students as a means of developing a personal connection

between staff and students. Each teacher advises the same group of twelve to fourteen

students on a biweekly basis during their four years at DHS. In addition, many staff

members serve as coaches and co-curricular advisors. Also, some faculty are residents of

the Duxbury community. This enhances student/teacher relationships and translates into

personal connections in the classroom. Within the classroom, some teachers use student

surveys and questionnaires as a tool for future instruction. Examples in English classes

include choices on assignments that appeal to multiple modalities, incorporation of

students’ cultural and ethnic backgrounds, and creative assignments that challenge

students to analyze concrete themes visually. Examples from science include student

learning-style questionnaires that encourage teachers to use multisensory instruction, and

laboratory experiments that require active student participation and problem-solving.

Examples from math include analysis problems that focus on student interests, active

student participation using the SmartBoard, and posting of daily notes on the X2 parent

portal.

Although there is substantial evidence that supports informal cross-disciplinary

instruction, DHS is deficient in formal cross-disciplinary instruction in some content

areas. All content areas include some form of informal cross-disciplinary instruction.

World language regularly makes connections to English, art, and history through

conversation, grammar analysis, and cultural association. Math and science lessons often

overlap and make reference to historical derivations and inventions. Art and photography

teachers discuss historical movements while tying in the science behind the art. Although

there is ample evidence to support informal cross-disciplinary instruction, there are few

examples to support formal cross-disciplinary instruction. Some examples include the

following: art and math make frequent connections through geometric and architectural

design and field trips, and with science through geological models of volcanoes. Science

makes connections with history through discussions and debate about the Dust Bowl and

evolutionary history of diseases. English and history often overlap through research

projects on the French revolution and nineteenth century England. There are a number of

factors that limit cross-disciplinary development. These include time constraints, lack of

professional development opportunities, and scheduling limitations. One area that has

potential for cross-disciplinary growth is through the evaluation process. Once, every

three years a teacher has a collaboration year where the teacher must show evidence of

working with another teacher to develop curriculum. Although in many cases this

collaboration is between teachers of the same discipline, some teachers collaborate across

disciplines.

All content areas include lesson examples where teachers regularly engage

students as active participants. Teachers use cooperative learning strategies daily, such as

round robin, jigsaws, think/pair/ share, and small and large group debates and discussions

to actively involve students in their learning. For example, daily journal entries, writing

prompts, and debates actively engage English students. World language students use

word walls, dialogue, skits, and game creation to actively participate in their own

learning. Science students actively participate in lab projects, creating movies using flip

cameras, virtual labs, and student-directed experimental lab designs. Math teachers

engage students through group investigations, interactive SmartBoard activities, and math

software such as Geometer’s Sketchpad. Examples of active participation in art include

group critique and discussion of all projects. Art students also participate in group art

projects that are displayed in the community. Family and consumer science encourages

students to collaborate and design menus as part of the class’s curriculum to actively

engage students in the learning process.

All content areas provide lesson examples where teachers emphasize inquiry,

problem-solving, and higher-order thinking. Teachers guide instruction based on

essential questions that require students to use higher-order thinking, inquiry and

problem-solving skills. English teachers use essential questions, themes, and motifs that

examine the function of stories within a culture. Science and math classes use problem-

solving and higher-order thinking skills on a daily basis as students create and solve real-

world problems. Family and consumer science students show evidence of these skills

through food labs and meal-planning lessons. History and English, teachers see students’

inquiry skills and higher-order thinking skills through debates in class. Project-based

activities within content areas provide evidence of these skills as well.

There is wide support to say that teachers at DHS are involved in applying

knowledge and skills in authentic tasks. One of the greatest examples of authentic tasks is

the number of venues where students perform. The DHS music department performs

every year in venues as illustrious as Carnegie Hall. The world language department uses

a wealth of different projects to enable students to use authentic target langauge including

the creation of podcasts, travel brochures, and fashion shows. The family and consumer

science department emphasizes the practical applications and usefulness of what they

teach, whether it be in the specific assignments of having a themed lunch or the day to

day running of the Breadboard restaurant. In the past, family and consumer sciences also

ran a child development course that had a hands-on relationship with the Magic Dragon

childcare center.

The senior project is a selective program in which students design a project

proposal that has a lasting impact on the community, implement that project, and reflect

on their contributions and experiences. The senior project participants devote 100% of

their academic time during the fourth term (excluding Advanced Placement (AP) classes)

to their project. Examples of last year’s senior projects include the rehabilitation of race

horses, the creation of an auditory version of parts of the United States History textbook,

community garden cultivation, and internships with local businesses such as Solstice and

Island Creek Oyster Company. However, opportunities for students to participate in

internships and school to career opportunities are limited by the constraints of the current

rotating schedule.

Evidence supports that student self-assessment and reflection occur consistently

across all content areas. Math students identify mistakes, reflect on the content, and make

necessary corrections to assessments. The English department offers a multitude of

opportunities for reflection, including: how literature is still present in modern day

culture, themes found in literature and relevance to modern day, and daily journal entries

on a multitude of topics related to literature, current events, and personal experiences.

Students are frequently asked to self-assess essays utilizing the DHS writing rubric, as

well as to reflect on their individual opinions prior to debating a variety of topics. The

special education department utilizes time spent in learning center classes for students to

reflect on their strengths and challenges and their successes and failures as a means to

build confidence and to identify areas where skills and strategies need to be developed.

Students who receive special education services are also provided with opportunities to

self-assess their work and make necessary corrections. During class labs, the science

department offers students the opportunity to self-assess their ability to acquire, apply,

and integrate knowledge; collaborate with peers, and adhere to DHS’s personal, social,

and civic responsibilities using a school-wide rubric. Students are also afforded the

opportunity to self-assess and assess their peers in collaborative group situations. Some

members in the language department require students to reflect on learning experiences

during field trip opportunities and to self-assess their competency for target language

speaking using the DHS communications rubric. In physical education, students are

asked to reflect on and articulate their experience in Project Adventure. As part of the

history curriculum, students are required to write and make changes to drafts when

developing an annual research paper, requiring them to reflect on suggestions and correct

for errors or inconsistencies.

All content areas provide lesson examples where technology is integrated into

instructional practices. All teachers have a webpage to provide information to parents

and students. Many teachers use this mode of communication to relay course

expectations, class guidelines, and/or homework assignments. All teachers use X2

grading software to provide students and parents with students’ grades twice a term, if

not more often. All teachers have access to three computer labs (two of which are

equipped with an interactive whiteboard). In addition math and science and technology

have dedicated computer labs.

All science and math classrooms have SmartBoard interactive whiteboards.

Science and math teachers use this technology on a daily basis to present information to

students. Information can be recorded, saved, and printed through the SmartBoard

Notebook software. In addition, math has a laptop cart. Evidence shows the use of

PowerPoint both by teachers and students in science classrooms.

Math classrooms have a number of technology tools integrated into daily

instruction. All classrooms are equipped with TI-Smartview software to show students

four snapshots of a graphing calculator. A teacher can demonstrate visually the necessary

keystrokes while students mimic the teacher’s actions. Many teachers use Geometer’s

Sketchpad to demonstrate geometry and calculus notions. Again, this visual

representation of information is an aid in student learning. Google SketchUp and

Geometer’s Sketchpad are the primary tools in a math technology class where students

design and create their own work using three-dimensional technology. Math teachers

also use document cameras and response systems on a regular basis.

Evidence supports the use of technology in other departments as well. English

and history classes use the Internet as a way to present and gather information. Student

assignments include web quests and term papers where students are required to conduct

research using the Internet.

The world language department has two SmartBoards and a laptop cart that is

regularly used by all department members. All modern language teachers regularly use a

language lab that is equipped with computers. The Spanish curriculum includes an online

textbook that is used in all foundation courses. The physical education/health department

also has evidence to support the use of technology in classes, through the use of podcasts,

PowerPoints, and websites for instructional purposes. Art has a computer lab for graphic

design and digital imaging. The music department has a music tech lab used for creating

and editing digital music. TV production courses have become popular electives and

utilize a variety of technologies. Family and consumer science students and teachers

utilize digital posters, power point, iMovies, and Twitter on a regular basis.

Teachers regularly adjust their instructional practices to meet the individual needs

of students during instructional time through the use of formative assessment. According

to instructional strategies charts and/or evidence presented by all departments, teachers

regularly and consistently employ formative assessments in class to inform subsequent

instruction, including but not limited to: tickets to leave, activators and summarizers,

calling on students, polling the class for general understanding, pre-quizzes, and teacher

or student-edited rough drafts.

Teachers regularly use information collected about individual students to

differentiate instructional practices to meet individual student’s needs. This information

comes from checking homework, classroom discussion, verbal questioning, and

formative assessment. Other methodologies employed are visual and multisensory

instruction, scaffolding, allowing extra time to complete work, master copies of notes,

and co-taught classrooms. It is common practice for teachers to create groups for

activities that have a range of student abilities, so proficient students can work with those

who are not yet proficient. Formative assessments such as “exit tickets” are corrected in a

timely manner, and teachers use that information to inform instruction in the next class.

Examples exist in several departments of teachers differentiating instruction. For

example, math teachers present problems and then allow students to choose from

multiple representations of data, such as verbal descriptions, tables, or graphs. English

teachers give options of presenting their interpretations with artwork, plays, or short

stories. World language teachers offer word banks and other aids to students who require

it. The Endicott survey shows that 83% of staff agrees that teachers use differentiated

instructional practices to meet the learning needs of all students. In addition, 76.3% of

parents agree that the teachers provide additional support to their children as needed.

Teachers across all departments purposefully organize group learning activities

for students often in the form of projects or cooperative learning activities. According to

the Endicott survey, 78.3% of students and 89.6% of teachers report that group activities

play an important role in instructional strategies. Additionally, all departments present

evidence of cooperative learning activities. For example, English teachers assign partners

to work on assorted peer editing tasks. World language teachers develop different reading

strategies in structured groups and regularly use “think-pair-share” discussions and oral

partner practice. Science teachers assign differentiated lab groups. Math teachers

facilitate partner and group problem-solving tasks. Additionally, teachers across all

departments report through instructional strategies charts that they regularly assign

collaborative group projects, often with a combination of individual student and group

accountability.

The school has adopted a number of strategies that provide additional support and

alternative strategies within the regular classroom. According to the Endicott survey,

58% of students report that teachers use differentiated instructional practices to meet the

needs of all students. The co-teaching model is utilized in English, math, science and

social studies in all grades. Instructional assistants provide individual support across all

disciplines. Students have daily opportunities to work with partners in all classes.

Teachers provide additional help for students both before and after school, and study

groups have been organized for AP test preparation.

Evidence exists to suggest that DHS teachers individually and collaboratively

improve their instructional practices by using student achievement data from a variety of

formative and summative assessments that include common assessments, midyear and

final exams, MCAS analysis and action plans, language assessments, and collections of

teacher assessments on communication, reading, and writing assignments. Most

departments regularly collect data from rubric use on common assessments. The process

of analyzing and using this data to inform instruction is in the developmental stage in

some departments. Data analysis of common assessments through Scantron provides

many departments with useful information to shape instruction. Department meeting

agendas also show time devoted to the examination of student work.

Teachers use feedback from students, other teachers, supervisors, and parents to

improve instructional practices. Seventy-six percent of teachers report that they “improve

their instructional practices by using student data from a variety of formative and

summative assessments.” Many teachers use student feedback surveys to reflect on their

own practice and revise instruction. All teachers use the parent compact for home-school

communication. The teacher evaluation system provides a formal means for supervisors

to give teachers timely feedback on instructional practice. Although some teachers

participate in peer observation on their own time, there is no formal process in place to

facilitate this practice. The mentor program encourages new teachers to participate in

peer observations. However, schedule constraints limit these opportunities.

DHS teachers fully consider the current research used to improve their

instructional practices both individually and collaboratively. Teachers participate in

professional development and engage in professional discourse on instructional strategies

on a regular basis. Administration regularly disseminates professional articles through the

school conference. Many departments maintain collections of professional literature

pertaining to instruction. All second year teachers are required to participate in the

Skillful Teacher course that focuses on best instructional practices. Professional

development opportunities emphasizing curriculum development, literacy training,

technology strategies, and co-teaching were offered to all staff in the summer of 2011.

Duxbury school district has partnered with Bridgewater State University to offer teacher

free or discounted college credits. Teachers regularly share instructional resources

through the FirstClass online platform. Department meetings regularly focus on best

practices, student achievement, and instructional strategies.

Teachers as adult learners maintain their expertise in their content areas and in

content-specific instructional practices in a variety of ways. As indicated in the Endicott

survey, 94% of the staff agrees that teachers as adult learners and reflective practitioners

maintain expertise in their content area and in content-specific instructional practices.

The formal teacher evaluation system requires teachers to remain current in content

curriculum. To facilitate this process, Duxbury Public Schools provides a total of fifty

thousand dollars annually for course reimbursement for teachers across the school

district. Many teachers also pay personally to participate in workshops, content area

courses, and advanced degree programs. Additionally, teachers gain knowledge about

instructional practices through school-sponsored professional development such as The

Skillful Teacher, SmartBoard workshops, webpage design, X2 training, MassCue

technology conference, AP workshops, Syracuse University Project Advance, co-

teaching summer work, and epilepsy training for educators.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Duxbury High School formally adopted a set of core values, beliefs, and 21st

century learning expectations that consistently drive instructional practices. All

departments have assumed primary responsibility for specific learning expectations and

are using school-wide rubrics to assess student achievement of these goals.

Teachers’ instructional practices generally support the achievement of the

school’s 21st century learning expectations through personalization, emphasizing inquiry,

problem solving, and the authentic application of knowledge and skills. Although some

cross-disciplinary connections occur, there is a need for a more formal process for

interdisciplinary collaboration. The senior project is one example of an opportunity that

allows students to apply knowledge and skills to authentic tasks. Students engage in

regular opportunities for self-assessment and reflection across all disciplines. Technology

is integrated into instructional practices in all subjects to varying degrees.

Teachers regularly adjust instructional practices to meet the needs of each student

through a variety of techniques. All teachers report using formative assessment

consistently to inform instruction. Differentiated instruction in all disciplines and the

strong co-teaching model in core academic subjects allow all students equal access to the

curriculum. Purposeful group learning activities and projects are evident in all content

areas. Teachers are readily available before and after school to assist students as needed.

Many teachers offer alternate or modified assessments to address individual student

learning needs.

The use of student achievement data from a variety of sources to improve

instructional practice is an emerging process at DHS. While all departments currently

collect data based on common assessments evaluated with school-wide rubrics, not every

department has formalized a method of analyzing and using this data. Teachers use a

variety of feedback from students and supervisors to inform instruction. Some teachers

informally engage in peer observation opportunities. However, there is no formal process

in place to facilitate this practice. Some professional development opportunities allow

teachers to improve instructional practice and review current research both individually

and collaboratively. However, there is not sufficient time for teachers to collaborate on a

regular basis during school hours.

Teachers maintain expertise in their content area and in content-specific

instructional practices in a variety of ways. The district provides a variety of professional

development throughout the school year and during the summer. Many teachers also

independently pursue content-specific professional development and course work at their

own expense.

Based on the CPSS rating guide for the standard on instruction, Duxbury High

School judges its adherence to the standard as acceptable.

Strengths:

• The willingness of teachers to give of their own time and resources to improve instruction

• The use of differentiated instruction including co-teaching model in core academic classes to meet individual student needs

• The sharing of best practices and willingness to engage in professional

discourse

• The wide variety of instructional strategies across all disciplines

Needs:

• Create more opportunity for cross-disciplinary instruction • Create formal opportunities for teacher collaboration

• Create formal opportunities for peer observation and sharing of

feedback

• Formalize a process for collection and analysis of student data to inform instruction

• Evaluate the current schedule to provide all students with

opportunities to connect to the community at large

A S S E S S M E N T

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


The professional staff at Duxbury High School (DHS) collectively and

continuously employs a formal process, based on school-wide rubrics, to assess whole-

school and individual student progress in achieving the school’s 21st century learning

expectations. DHS has developed and continues to revise seven analytical rubrics based

on the school-wide 21st century learning expectations to measure student progress

towards achieving DHS’s general expectations for learning. These rubrics include: read

effectively, write effectively, communicate effectively, acquire, apply, and integrate

knowledge, engage in creative, expressive, and innovative learning, work effectively both

independently and collaboratively, and demonstrate personal, social, and civic

responsibility. Each department has responsibility for at least two of the analytic rubrics,

which were developed to consistently and effectively inform students of the school’s

learning expectations in a more detailed and specific way and their progress in attaining

the identified level of successful achievement. The school’s 21st century learning

expectations have been effectively embedded in all curriculum documents and

instructional practices at DHS. The school-wide analytical rubrics were created by the

rubric committee, which included administrators and staff and met monthly over the

course of two years to develop the rubrics based on DHS’s core values, beliefs about

learning, and learning expectations.

Curriculum maps, departmental goals, and student examples evidence the formal

process of utilizing school-wide rubrics to assess both whole-school and individual

student progress. The formal process of developing school-wide rubrics has been an

ongoing and collaborative process for the past two years through rubric development

committees, faculty and department meetings, and professional development days with

considerable input from teachers and administrators. This process culminated in the

creation of school-wide rubrics, which are based on 21st century learning expectations.

Curriculum maps from each department reveal alignment of 21st century learning

expectations to assessment rubrics used in the classrooms.

Individual teachers’ use of the school-wide analytic rubrics is ongoing throughout

the school year and monitored by department heads and administration. It is the school-

wide goal that all classroom teachers will use the analytic rubrics to guide and assess

student progress providing consistency and the capability of whole-school assessment.

Department and faculty meetings have been held to inform and support teachers in the

use of the school-wide rubrics.

DHS’s professional staff consistently communicates individual student progress

in achieving the school’s 21st century learning expectations to students and their families

through both formal and informal mediums within the classroom. On a quarterly basis,

DHS issues progress reports and reports cards to convey student progress in each course

as well as their progress towards achieving the school’s social and civic learning

expectations. In June 2012, teachers reported student progress on learning expectations

for each department’s primary responsibilities. This was a pilot program that will be

formally implemented during the 2012-2013 school year.

Over the past several years, the school’s formal process for communicating

individual student progress has effectively used technology in a number of ways to

develop formal reports that are made available online to individual students and their

families. DHS uses the X2 computer program to enter all of an individual student’s

progress in their academic classes as well as assessment results for midyear and final

exams that are based on the school-wide 21st century learning expectations.

The core values, beliefs, and learning expectations of DHS were reviewed and

revised by the administrators and faculty at the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year.

During the 2010-2011 school year, DHS began the process of formally reporting out on

individual and school-wide progress towards meeting the school-wide learning

expectations by including comments from the personal, social, and civic responsibility

rubric on student report cards, which are then disseminated to students and their families.

Each teacher will report student progress in the form of a report card comment for the rest

of the rubrics at the end of each quarter beginning with the fourth academic term pilot in

the school year 2011-2012.

DHS professional staff collects, disaggregates and analyzes data to identify and

respond to inequities in student achievement and is making progress towards the regular,

systemic use of assessment data to measure student progress for the purpose of

identifying and responding to inequities in student achievement. MCAS results are used

annually within departments to assess student progress. Students who score in the

“failure” or “needs improvement” range in mathematics or biology are offered placement

in remediation courses specifically designed to help improve their levels of proficiency:

Elements of Mathematics I and II and Topics in Biology respectively. Additionally, an

after school tutorial program, Opportunities for Success, is available at no cost for all

students in need of remediation in English, mathematics, and biology. Departmentally,

midyear and final examinations are regularly subjected to item analysis for the purpose of

providing teachers with valuable feedback regarding student progress. Common

assessments, reflecting the learning standards, are required in most departments.

Department members use this data to inform their instruction. A co-teaching model has

been expanded to assist classroom teachers in their efforts to differentiate instruction to

meet the diverse needs of students. Students who underperform academically may be

referred to the guidance department and then to a student assistance team for evaluation.

The aforementioned process may result in a further referral to the Building-Based

Support Team (BBST), which may create a District Accommodation Plan (DCAP) to

support these students or further testing to determine whether a student qualifies for a 504

accommodation or Individualized Education Plan (IEP).

Prior to each unit of study, teachers communicate to students DHS’s applicable

21st century learning expectations and related unit specific learning goals to be assessed.

Charts identifying DHS’s learning expectations are posted in each classroom to maintain

visual awareness and to help promote an understanding of those expectations. All

departments have created curriculum maps and templates that relate units of study to

those learning expectations so that consistency of instruction in relation to those

expectations is maintained. The ongoing creation and administration of common rubric-

based assessments provides an opportunity for teachers to discuss those same

expectations with students both prior to, and following those assessments. According to

the Endicott survey, approximately 60 % or more of students, teachers and parents agree

that the 21st century learning expectations are being explained prior to each unit of study.

Units are driven by specific learning goals and essential questions. It is a school-

wide expectation that essential questions and objectives are communicated to students

prior to units of study. A variety of communication formats include posters, printed

notes, handouts, online agendas, or class discussions.

Prior to certain summative assessments, DHS teachers provide students with the

corresponding school-wide rubrics. Each department is required to use school-wide

rubrics at least once a term on a summative assessment. Some departments, such as world

language and English, use them more frequently. Periodically, curriculum

supervisors/department heads gather data from teachers that demonstrate the use of

rubrics on common assessments, which include midyear and final exams. Information

provided by students on the Endicott survey indicates that more than 75% agreed that

teachers provide rubrics prior to summative assessments.

In each unit of study, teachers employ a large range of assessment strategies,

including formative and summative assessments throughout the articulated curriculum.

According to the Endicott survey, 93% of teachers agree that they use a variety of

formative and summative strategies. On a school-wide basis, teachers at DHS assess

individual student learning through the use of individual assignment grades, unit tests and

quizzes, oral reports, peer and self evaluation, quarterly reports, midyear and final exams,

report cards, analytic scoring rubrics, student writing folders, departmental common

assessments, AP, PSAT, SAT, ACT, MCAS, and project-based assessments. Other

assessments that are used by some departments include performance assessments,

portfolio assessments, exhibitions, lab reports, debates, mock trials, simulations, Socratic

seminars, inventions, syntheses and surveys.

Teachers are making progress in consistently using formative assessments during

unit instruction to gain clarity on student comprehension. Teachers are making progress

towards adjusting their teaching to address individual and class needs. For example, the

English department keeps a writing folder for all students at DHS. Students in grades 9-

12 place all of their writing in a folder for the year. Each year, all students in K-12 choose

two pieces of writing to place in their permanent folder, which is passed on to the next

teacher. English teachers use the writing folder to assess student improvement and adjust

their teaching methodology. Teachers in the mathematics department utilize SmartBoard

activities and SmartBoard response systems to informally check student comprehension.

Many departments utilize daily writing prompts to assess ongoing comprehension of

content.

Staff at DHS meets monthly during department meetings and during professional

development days to create, analyze, and revise assessments, including common

assessments. Agendas from both monthly department meetings and professional

development days indicate that formal time is given to the discussion, creation, revision,

and analysis of common assessments.

No designated time in the daily schedule is dedicated for formal collaboration.

However, a scheduling committee has been developed to examine the current schedule to

discuss these adjustments. According to the Endicott survey, 65.7% of staff agrees that

teachers meet formally to discuss and improve both formative and summative

assessment. Significant digital collaboration occurs on the FirstClass conference where

teachers can share files, techniques, and formative or summative assessments.

Interdisciplinary collaboration occurs on an infrequent basis. Teachers from

across all disciplines met monthly for two years to formally create and analyze the

school-wide rubrics. They regularly brought information back to each department for

analysis, critique, and revision of the rubrics. These rubrics are now used to evaluate

common assessments. Specific interdisciplinary collaboration occurs between science

and art (pin-hole camera project, ceramic volcanoes project), art and English (poetry and

lost wax casting), consumer science and history (history of food during the Holocaust

project), art and consumer science (Empty Bowls project). Interdisciplinary assessments

occur at the discretion of the individual teachers.

DHS’s professional staff provides specific and timely feedback to ensure students

revise and improve their work. For example, in the English department, student work

shows improvement due to essay revisions based on teacher feedback. Additionally all

freshmen, sophomore, and junior history students are required to complete a thesis paper

demonstrating a similar process. Math curriculum templates indicate that with every unit

of study students are required to make exam corrections. Eighty-five percent of teachers

indicate they use revision as an assessment tool, according to the assessment strategies

chart. According to the same chart, three teachers from the English department use

revision as an assessment in every writing assignment. All members of the English

department indicate that they use revision regularly.

Endicott Survey results indicate that over 60% of students agree that teachers

assess work in a reasonable amount of time and offer suggestions for improvement.

Sixty-three percent of parents agree that their child’s teachers provide timely and

corrective feedback.

Teachers at DHS regularly employ formative assessment as a diagnostic tool for

student feedback and instructional improvement. Based on instructional data gathered,

many different types of formative assessments are used on a weekly basis for the purpose

of improving student learning. All departments are presently mapping curriculum in the

Understanding by Design (UbD) format. This format requires that units incorporate

performance tasks for determining acceptable evidence of a student’s understanding of

the material. Furthermore, the UbD format also requires the use of additional techniques

to show evidence of understanding including self-assessments, reflections, observations,

dip sticking, work samples, dialogues and quizzes.

DHS teachers and administrators, individually and collaboratively, do examine a

range of evidence of student learning for the purpose of revising curriculum and

improving instructional practices. Seventy-five percent of students either agreed or

strongly agreed that DHS personnel examine a range of evidence of student learning to

revise curriculum and improve instructional practices. The Duxbury school district has

focused on the assessment of student work individually, in department and faculty

meetings and as a district during professional development workshops.

Ways in which teachers at DHS individually assess student work for the purposes of

improving instructional practices and/or revising curriculum are varied. Some examples

of this include informal observations, dipsticking, and quantitative analysis. Evidence

also exists in the form of MCAS item analysis for all MCAS subject tests and

midyear/final exam item analysis of student work in almost every department. Teachers

analyze the results individually and then share and synthesize the findings to modify

future instruction. Subject supervisors and department heads then present these results to

the principal who develops a Curriculum Action Plan. The principal presents the plan to

the Assistant Superintendent and Superintendent who then present it to the School

Committee. The principal then shares the completed curriculum action plan with staff

and school council. This is the school’s annual cycle of revision.

All departments administer at least 1 common grade level assignment per term

graded using school-wide rubrics for the purpose of improving instruction. Departments

vary in the number of other common assessments. The world language, math and

science departments have common chapter/unit exams.

School-wide progress in achieving the schools 21st century learning expectations

is fulfilled by the common grade-level assessments as mentioned above. Teachers meet

formally, in department and faculty meetings, and informally after giving these rubric-

based assessments for the purpose of revising curriculum and improving instructional

practices.

Surveys are used in many ways to inform instructional practices at DHS.

Presently, many teachers conduct end-of-course surveys/questionnaires to inform their

instruction. During the spring of 2012, the guidance department will survey current

seniors through Naviance, which will include questions on instruction and assessment.

The guidance department is currently in the process of developing a survey that will work

with National Clearinghouse to provide post-secondary data.

Members of the guidance department meet with personnel from Duxbury Middle

School to review individual student data, MCAS scores and grades for students entering

ninth grade at DHS. The large majority of students entering DHS come from DMS. For

those that enter from or move to other districts, there is no formal process to evaluate data

that is used to inform instruction.

DHS is revising grading and reporting practices and implementing a review

process to ensure alignment with the school’s core values and beliefs about learning.

DHS has recently updated their core values and beliefs about learning. DHS has also

created school-wide rubrics to grade and assess these core values and beliefs. Since the

grading and reporting of student achievement of the learning expectations are a recent

practice for DHS, the common assessment instruments continue to be refined during

professional development days and at faculty, department, and committee meetings.

Moreover, the teachers at DHS continue to work together to improve common

departmental assessments and to align them with the school’s learning expectations and

the rubrics that measure those expectations. Meeting time has been allocated to review

student work and to discuss discrepancies between teacher grading practices. In line with

this review and assessment process, DHS has also changed the commenting practice on

report cards to align with school-wide rubrics and the school’s core values. This new

grading and reporting process will be reviewed following implementation during the

2012-2013 school year.

Executive Summary

DHS collectively and continuously employs an ongoing formal process to assess

whole school and individual student progress. The school’s 21st century learning

expectations have been embedded in all curriculum documents and instructional

practices. Curriculum maps and templates, departmental goals, and student work

substantiate the formal process of utilization of school-wide rubrics, the creation and

administration of which is an ongoing process that is monitored by subject supervisors,

department heads and administration. Each department uses rubrics at least once a term to

assess student progress and achievement. These rubrics were the product of a two-year

cross-disciplinary collaboration.

DHS is making progress towards the regular, systemic use of assessment data to

measure student progress. Teachers meet monthly during department meetings and some

professional days to create, analyze, and revise assessments. Curriculum documents are

available for access and collaboration on the FirstClass server.

Teachers employ a large range of assessment strategies and provide specific and

timely feedback to ensure students revise and improve their work. These strategies are

aligned with the recently updated core values and beliefs about learning. When gaps in

student achievement are identified, various programs are available to respond to these

inequities.

On a quarterly basis, DHS issues progress reports and report cards to report

student progress in each course, as well as progress towards achieving the school’s 21st

century personal, social and civic responsibility expectation, and has begun to report

achievement toward the school’s other 21st century learning expectations.

Based on the CPSS rating guide for the standard on instruction, Duxbury High

School judges its adherence to the standard as acceptable.

Strengths:

• Available department meeting time to create, analyze, and revise common assessment

• The development and utilization of school-wide rubrics

• The use of a variety of formative and summative assessments

• The examination of common assessments and MCAS exams to identify strengths

and weaknesses in student comprehension

• Frequent and effective communication with students and parents through various means

Needs:

• Allot formal time in the schedule for interdisciplinary collaboration • Allot formal time in the schedule to use data gathered from common

assessment/MCAS analysis for the purpose of revising curriculum and improving instructional practice

• Gather post-secondary data for the purpose of revising and improving instruction

on a regular basis

• Evaluate the effectiveness of rubrics

{}Ir1la\23nfll N,avtfli

=u, lsffi)>WD)I.)DP.{od l4)sop

n--g) )x [9--1 -.-rc OJ,xrlJ4\''-YY

''/:ls"ru{@6)"11cv-allbuoVyCLusJee?C/

' 6frtt'ry"re*{N?L 'a)try u"ort

?'lhls+JsQvr7"W6"t/A/gt -^ry'NUrut?%ryw r -7, I 'h,{

lr['J,-rrp _rru

rt vfrvT'aunlA vyaa.vnft,P -/*t"*ffirr,ft)aY't"/, Yuaot?por?.rl

:?W-ttr|fi/ s?)z+Dvay6glt-t"dVf-S l.W\^

:aleo:oJnleu8IS:uoplsod:etueN

S C H O O L C U L T U R E A N D L E A D E R S H I P

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


The Duxbury High School (DHS) community consciously and continuously

builds a safe, positive, respectful, and supportive culture that fosters student

responsibility for learning and results in shared ownership, pride, and high expectations

for all.

In the Endicott survey, 85.5% of students reported that they feel safe at DHS. In

addition, over 85% of parents agreed that the school maintains a safe, positive, and

respectful learning environment. The same survey found that 75% of the staff believed

that the school maintains a safe, positive, and respectful learning environment. In an

effort to further investigate the discrepancy between parental and staff perspective on the

learning environment, a subsequent survey (Survey Monkey) completed by 49 staff

members and dated 6/3/2011, found that, while 91.8% of staff felt that a safe

environment is maintained at DHS, 60.4% felt that a respectful environment is

maintained at DHS, and 46.9% felt that a positive environment is maintained at DHS.

The DHS community continues to work to improve culture. The advisory program,

initiated during the 2008-2009 school year, has become a vehicle to address matters

relating to personal, social, and civic responsibility. The school’s core values and

expectations for student learning were re-evaluated and revised to more directly reflect

these beliefs.

In addition, there are numerous groups that actively involve students, teachers,

administrators, parents, and other community members. These groups include the school

council, the principal’s advisory committee, the school health advisory council, the

student handbook committee, the athletic handbook committee, and the Link Crew, as

well as hiring committees assembled to interview candidates for teaching and

administrative positions.

In 2005, DHS was the first in the state to implement the Link Crew program. As

part of this program, students, faculty and administrators work to transition incoming

students into the high school as smoothly as possible. The program fosters a sense of

pride and unity among students.

DHS fosters student responsibility for learning through a number of practices.

Staff posts school-wide learning expectations in every classroom and communal space,

and individual teachers communicate expectations for their own classes. Teachers

communicate grades to students and parents through online progress reports and report

cards.

Academic achievement is recognized and rewarded with Summa awards (for

underclassmen) and senior awards (including scholarships and book awards).

Additionally, student work is displayed throughout the school. An academic display

room and various bulletin boards are utilized. The faculty senate is currently looking at

ways to increase student recognition within DHS.

There are a number of programs at DHS concerned with improving school

climate. In addition to the advisory and Link Crew programs, student organizations

include Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD), National Honor Society (NHS),

Best Buddies (a group that mentors students with intellectual and developmental

disabilities), a World of Difference (a group to encourage tolerance and acceptance

among students), Gay Straight Alliance (GSA), student government, captains’ council,

and Rachel’s Challenge (a group, founded by the family of Columbine victim Rachel

Scott, to create a permanent, positive culture change in the school). A transition room is

also available for students coming back to school after an extended absence. Guidance

counselors, a school psychologist, a school resource officer, and a school assistance

counselor are also available resources for students.

Student incidents that violate the student code of conduct are organized into four

categories of offenses. The incidents are documented using the X2 data management

system. Tardiness is the most reported student violation and has been for the past five

years.

The faculty senate has recently been reconvened at the initiative of the faculty to

facilitate communication between teachers and administrators. The official mission of

this group is “to promote a positive environment that fosters professional and educational

excellence within the DHS community.” This is an example of a faculty-designed

initiative to improve school culture.

Overall, the DHS community continues to work towards building a safe, positive,

respectful and supportive culture that fosters student responsibility for learning.

Programs continue to be implemented and current programs revised in order to foster a

safe, positive and respectful culture.

Duxbury High School is equitable, inclusive, and fosters heterogeneity, where

every student, over the course of the high school experience, is enrolled in a minimum of

one heterogeneously grouped core course. Students have an opportunity to take a

heterogeneous course in all curriculum areas. However, though the opportunity exists for

all students, not all students take a heterogeneously grouped course in all core curriculum

areas. All students are enrolled in a heterogeneously grouped language course, including

Spanish, French, Latin, and American Sign Language. Also, all students are required to

take four semesters of a physical education, which is also heterogeneously grouped.

Although students may not be grouped heterogeneously in all core curriculum areas, the

content of the curriculum is the same regardless of level. Through the use of co-taught

classes, the individual needs of all students are met through inclusive and equitable

instruction.

All students have the opportunity throughout their four years at DHS to take

heterogeneously grouped electives in all core subject areas. There are nine

heterogeneously grouped courses in visual arts, five in English, eight in technology and

engineering education, four in computer science, seven in mathematics, fourteen in

music, ten in social studies, and two in science and technology.

The number of students and percentage of student body by identifiable ethnic and

racial background being enrolled in each level of a course offered is not statistically

significant to DHS as the percentage of Caucasian students is 98%.

Duxbury High School is equitable, inclusive, and fosters heterogeneity, by

enrolling all students in a heterogeneously grouped language course. Physical education

courses also are heterogeneously grouped as well as many other elective classes

throughout all departments.

Duxbury High School (DHS) has a formal, on-going program through which each

student has an adult in the school, in addition to the school counselor, who knows the

student well and assists the student in achieving the school’s 21st century learning

expectations. The National Youth Risk Behavior Survey administered in 2005, indicated

that only 65.6% of DHS students felt that they had one adult at the high school to whom

they could go for help, 34.4% did not. Forty-eight percent of students felt valued, while

52% did not. Fifty-two percent of students felt that a faculty or staff member cared about

them while 48% did not. These statistics led a team of teachers and administrators to

research and consider various programs that would increase personalization within the

high school. An advisory program was developed in 2007, and implemented in the fall of

2008. Students are randomly assigned into an advisory group consisting of 10-14

students with one advisor. These groups are sorted by grade and stay together over the

four years of high school. Every full-time faculty member and administrator is involved

in the advisory program. Advisory groups meet for 30-minute sessions every other week.

Each session has a grade-specific curriculum guide for all advisors to follow. The

content of each session aims to assist students in achieving one or more of the school’s

learning expectations. Assessment of the program content and evaluation of the

program’s success began in the summer of 2009. The Endicott survey reported that

70.2% of students agreed that they have an adult in the school with whom they meet

regularly and who knows them well. DHS continues to revise the program and work

towards making the content more relevant for students. An advisory committee meets

regularly to discuss any issues, hear suggestions, update lessons, and plan revisions for

next year. These meetings are open to anyone interested in participating in the planning

of advisory sessions.

In order to improve student learning through professional development, the

principal and professional staff engage in professional discourse for reflection, inquiry,

and analysis of teaching and learning, use resources outside of the school to maintain

currency with best practices, dedicate formal time to implement professional

development, and apply the skills, practices, and ideas gained in order to improve

curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

A significant amount of time is allocated to professional development throughout

the school year. This school year (2011-2012) Duxbury has five full in-service days and

two half-days scheduled. Professional development time is also utilized during the one-

hour monthly faculty meetings and the one-hour monthly department meetings.

Professional development opportunities are communicated to the staff by means of e-mail

communication from the assistant superintendent along with PD agendas. In addition, the

district provides a yearly budget of $50,000 for course reimbursement to teachers with

preapproved courses.

Over the past five years, teachers have been engaged in curriculum mapping, the

creation of common assessments, Understanding by Design (UbD) training, and the

integration of instructional technology. The school has adopted school-wide learning

expectations along with school-wide grading rubrics. Curriculum maps have been

developed for every subject and are now included on the Duxbury Public Schools’ web

page. All teachers have participated in UbD training and UbD is now standard for lesson

development. In addition, the integration of technology in the classroom has been

available through webpage development, X2 training, and SmartBoard technology

education. The district has established a group of professionals charged with the task of

training educators in 21st century skills. In the Endicott survey only 31.3% of teachers

reported that they have sufficient time to be engaged in formal curriculum evaluation,

review, and revision work. This statistic suggests a greater need for professional

discourse for reflection, inquiry and analysis of teaching and learning. A scheduling

committee has regular meetings to evaluate a new schedule that would incorporate more

time for teacher collaboration.

Professional development time has been allocated for MCAS data review over the

past few years. The Skillful Teacher course is mandated for all new staff within the first

three years of employment. Additional opportunities for teachers to continue to engage

in content development are available through the assistant superintendent’s office. In the

summer of 2011, numerous paid PD opportunities were made available to teachers. Much

of this training was for the co-teaching program and curriculum development. This year,

an Apple training, a literacy course, and an iEarn workshop have also been made

available through the assistant superintendent’s office. Additionally, DHS has developed

a relationship with Bridgewater State University (BSU). A few different BSU courses

are being offered at DHS in the evening for free or at a reduced rate of charge. Finally,

the focus of professional development over the last year and a half has been allocated to

developing the self-study report for NEASC.

Overall, the DHS community does engage in professional discourse to analyze

teaching and learning, uses outside resources to maintain currency, dedicates time to

professional development, and attempts to apply these skills. More teacher collaboration

time for curriculum evaluation, review, and revision would aid teachers in the application

of these new skills.

School leaders regularly use research-based evaluation and supervision processes

that focus on improving student learning. All administrators are required to successfully

complete the Observing and Analyzing Teachers course offered by the Research for

Better Teaching (RBT) organization. Administrators, subject supervisors, and department

heads are consistently undertaking additional coursework in order to stay current and

further their licensure. Currently the evaluation process for teachers is a three-year

process that includes a formal, collaborative, and individual component. During the

collaborative and individual years, teachers are allowed to design their own growth plan,

and are required to provide a summary of evidence for the achievement of their goals.

Although the evaluation process is clearly defined in the contract, additional

expectations are being introduced without respect to the negotiation process. For

example, in the 2010-2011 school year, the superintendent and assistant superintendent

began doing written observations for all second year staff. Additionally, the principal has

strongly suggested the utilization of a “lesson design plan” and “lesson reflection”

document as part of the review process. Thus, school leaders do regularly use research-

based evaluation and supervision processes that focus on improving student learning.

The organization of time supports research-based instruction and the learning

needs of all students. However, it does not allow for professional collaboration among

teachers. According to the scheduling survey (2009), the 68-minute block, is seen as

adequate or optimal for research-based instruction according to 90.9% of the respondents.

Also, 87% believe the rotating schedule helps them to meet the needs of students.

However, the schedule does not allow for professional collaboration among teachers, nor

does it allow students to easily pursue opportunities such as internships or work-study

programs. A report from the scheduling committee (4/29/10), which analyzed the

scheduling survey, noted that many teachers felt that “the daily schedule should be used

for teaching, planning, and grading. Teacher collaboration and curriculum work should

be done during professional development days.”

The organization of the school day also allows teachers to meet the learning needs

of all students sufficiently. Though there is not time built into the schedule for one-to-

one instruction during the school day, there are learning centers for students on IEPs, a

transition room for students with extended absences, and options and study skills for

students who need these scaffolds. There are 25 minutes after school contractually built

into the teacher schedule when students can come for extra help. However, many

teachers stay longer than this 25-minute allotment. Though many teachers find the

current schedule to be optimal and find that it allows them to sufficiently meet the needs

of all students, it does not allow for time for professional collaboration among teachers

during the school day. The scheduling committee continues to meet to analyze the

schedules of other districts and consider changes that DHS would implement in

anticipation of the new building. Teacher collaboration, student collaboration and

interdisciplinary studies, student academic support, and connecting the students to

the community through internships and project-‐based learning have been the main

topics of discussion at the scheduling committee meetings. The current academic

schedule of rotating 68-‐minute blocks does support research-‐based instruction and

the learning needs of all students. However, time for professional collaboration is

limited.

Student load and class size enable teachers to meet the learning needs of

individual students. Individual teacher class sizes are manageable but not optimal.

Class sizes vary from teacher to teacher in core academic courses between 10

students to 27 students. Gym classes and music classes are the largest classes with

46 students in one class. Class loads are manageable with most teachers between

95 and 115 total students. The learning needs of every student are met, but optimal

class size should be kept below 20 students for every core subject course.

Moreover, because of budgetary constraints, staffing levels have decreased in some

curriculum areas, limiting the number of elective courses offered throughout the

curriculum. The average class load of full time teachers who taught five classes in

the 2009-‐2010 school year was 96 and in 2011-‐2012, it is 106. Though the averages

on the class lists for the 2011-‐2012 school year indicates the average class load per

teacher is 94, this includes teachers who are only part time as well as subject

supervisors who only teach one class and department heads who teach three

classes. Student load per department has significantly increased but is equitable

between departments. All departments have similar student to teacher ratios. One

area where DHS has tried to keep the class sizes low has been in the co-‐taught

classes. For example, two co-‐taught science classes in the 2010-‐2011 school year

had an average of eleven students each. However, this year those same classes now

average over twenty students due to an increase in class size and students on IEPs.

Class size of twenty and above in co-‐taught classes is also being seen in English,

math and social studies. Overall, the student load of teachers and class size enable

teachers to meet the learning needs of individual students.

The principal, working with other building leaders, provides instructional

leadership that is rooted in the school’s core values, beliefs, and learning

expectations. Agendas from the DHS leadership meetings focused on the use of

common assessments within departments and data collection from those

assessments that informs individual and departmental instruction. Additionally, the

leadership team analyzes data on student achievement of learning expectations.

Both of these items align with the school core values of students’ pursuing academic

excellence and becoming active learners. Agendas from these meetings also

addressed the incorporation of digital learning and the use of Web 2.0 and digital

learning tools within our classrooms. This aligns with the school’s core values of

preparing students to meet the challenges of a global society.

The principal has demonstrated his focus on teaching and learning by

maintaining the DHS virtual round table, a blog that is updated monthly. The

principal has also held round table discussions with faculty to discuss school

happenings and best practices for teaching. The principal is currently working with

the faculty senate in an attempt to reinvigorate this program and others that will aid

in communication between the administration and the faculty.

Agendas from leadership meetings also included the content of the civic and

social responsibility rubric that was recently adopted by the school and used in

student report cards. Before this change was implemented in the school, it was

discussed on several occasions at faculty meetings, and adopted by a majority vote

from the faculty. The use of this rubric as part of the grading of students holds

students accountable for not only their academic performance, but also their civic

and social responsibility as a part of the Duxbury High School community. The

principal played a pivotal role in leading discussions on this topic, allowed for

feedback from staff, and assured that a majority vote from the faculty was received

before a final decision was made.

When conflicts have arisen in the school, the principal has been an active and

decisive leader providing clear communication to students, parents and faculty. The

most recent example of this occurred when one student had drawn swastikas in

some of the bathrooms of the school. The principal acted swiftly to make students,

parents, and faculty aware of the situation and took action to prevent further

incidents. A letter was sent home to parents explaining the details of the incident as

well as emphasizing the severe implications of the symbols and the threat to the

community. The principal reminded students and parents of their responsibility to

act when such behavior is seen, and asked students to reflect on their own identity

and that of the school community as a whole.

Upon review of the sampling of communication, activities, and decisions of

the principal, it is evident that the principal promotes instructional leadership that

is rooted in the school’s core values and beliefs.

Teachers, students, and parents are involved in meaningful and defined roles

in decision-‐making that promote responsibility and ownership. DHS has numerous

committees and groups that are dedicated to substantiating the above statement.

These include, but are not limited to, the following: school council, student council,

faculty senate, Parent-‐Teacher Organization (PTO), handbook committee, special

education parent advisory council (SEPAC), scheduling committee, principal’s

advisory committee, booster’s clubs, Duxbury Education Foundation, professional

development committee, rubric committee and the school committee. Each of these

groups regularly makes decisions, which affect policies and change within Duxbury

Public Schools.

The school council designs the school improvement plan, reviews budgetary

decisions, and makes revisions to the student handbook. Administrators, teachers,

parents, and students who make up this council are the decision-‐making body of this

group. Their policies are fully implemented at DHS.

The Duxbury Education Foundation (DEF) is a private non-‐profit

organization whose main goal is to fund educational programs, which benefit the

students, teachers and staff of the Duxbury Public Schools. The PTO encourages

teachers to apply for “mini-‐grants” throughout the year in order to fund new and

innovative programs. They make the final decision about how the funds are

dispersed. The Parent Connection also provides funding for student and parent

educational programs.

Going hand in hand with the DEF are the Duxbury booster clubs. Their main

goal is provide support for all athletic, music, and drama programs at Duxbury High

School (DHS). For example, the athletic booster clubs meet with the athletic

director in order to decide how the funds will best benefit athletics as a whole and

they make final decisions about how the funds will be distributed.

Duxbury High School has recently reconvened the faculty senate. Their

mission is “to promote a positive environment that fosters professional and

educational excellence within the DHS community.” This group is a liaison between

the faculty and the administration, and it empowers teachers to have more input

into decisions made at DHS.

The rubric committee composed of DHS teachers, designed school-‐wide

rubrics used to evaluate all students. The faculty then voted on the adoption of

these rubrics. The level of achievement for each student on the personal, social and

civic responsibility rubric is now on student report cards.

Surveys/questionnaires, focus groups and other vehicles are used regularly

to collect data from various groups. This data helps to drive the decision-‐making

process. Faculty surveys have been conducted to evaluate the school culture, the

school schedule, and evaluate opinions on exempting seniors from final exams.

Analysis of these studies has resulted in the administration implementing the

changes desired by the majority of the faculty. Surveys of faculty members and

parents are also conducted. A major sleep study was conducted throughout the

community. Feedback from this study directly resulted in a change to the start time

of the elementary, middle and high school.

As evidenced by the many examples above, Duxbury High School fosters the

concept of parents as partners in the education of their children. Students are encouraged

to actively participate in their own education by voicing opinions and taking

responsibility for their actions and words. Teachers have numerous opportunities through

committees to be involved in decisions made in the district. Through these actions,

ownership evolves. There are numerous ways in which teachers, students, and parents

are involved in meaningful and defined roles in decision-making that promote

responsibility and ownership at DHS.

Teachers exercise initiative and leadership essential to the improvement of the

school and to increasing student engagement in learning. Numerous departments

introduce elements of distributed leadership within their departments. When adding or

replacing staff, teachers are included on the interviewing committees. There is a state-

mandated school council that includes teachers and publishes agendas and minutes on the

system’s website. Examples of individual teacher activities and achievements are cited in

the school’s weekly newsletter. A number of teachers initiate field trips and activities

outside the building that are specific to their curriculum. Some teachers are writing

grants to improve student learning. The district provides $50,000 annually for teachers’

tuition reimbursement. The faculty senate also exemplifies teachers exercising leadership

within the school.

Under the new superintendent, there has been a shift from distributive to a more

top-down model of leadership. For example, in the social studies department, the AP

European History course was eliminated without consulting the members of the

department. In the English department, additional mandated curriculum requirements

including a common research paper, addressing social studies topics each term, and

required outside reading were presented to all English staff in September with immediate

implementation expected. Prior to the current school year, department head positions

were union teaching positions. There was a change in this model to subject supervisors,

which unilaterally removed the union positions without opening negotiations.

Teacher’s engagement in leadership is limited by the lack of communication

between administration and staff. For instance, agendas and minutes for leadership

meetings, such as DHS leadership and Instructional Advisory Group (IAG) are not made

public. The switch from 60% teaching (three classes) department heads (English, math,

social studies, science, and world language) to the current supervisor model for English

math, science, and world language, where supervisors only teach 20% (one class), is

further limiting teacher involvement in leadership decisions.

Professional development time has been primarily taken up in preparation for the

NEASC visit. This has taken away from the building’s ability to provide quality

professional development based in pedagogy and content. Most of the designated

professional development provided is generated by the administration. Recent efforts

have been made to solicit suggestions from staff. In a recent NEASC faculty survey

(5/20/11), 59.2% of 49 respondents say they only spent between 0 and 2 hours in

professional opportunities outside of school in pedagogy, and 65.3% spent 0 to 2 hours

outside the building in opportunities based in content. However, 53% of respondents

reported spending 45 or more minutes in professional discourse for reflection, inquiry,

and analysis of teaching. Teachers do attempt to exercise initiative and leadership

essential to the improvement of the school and to increase students’ engagement in

learning. However, many decisions are made in a top-down manner.

The school board, superintendent and principal are collaborative, reflective, and

constructive in achieving the school’s 21st century learning expectations. The

administrative team meets monthly. This team consists of the superintendent, the

assistant superintendent, the technology director, the special education director, the

business manager, building principals and assistant principals, the elementary curriculum

coordinator, and subject supervisors. Agenda items from the current school year have

included, but not been limited to, evaluator assignments, technology updates, 21st century

skill development, budget, and hiring and recruitment of staff. Consistent e-mails,

pertaining to technological updates and new publications, are also sent from the

superintendent to the administrative team to provide an additional method of

communication. Additionally the school-based leadership team, comprised of the

principal, the assistant principals, department heads, coordinators, subject supervisors,

and a special education representative meet once a month.

School committee meetings occur a minimum of one time per month. The

superintendent is the conduit between the school committee and the Duxbury Public

Schools. Agenda items at these meetings include, but are not limited to, the introduction

of new hires, technology updates, the new school building project, the capitol budget, and

recognition of both academic and athletic achievements. In addition to these meetings,

the superintendent communicates with the school committee through a weekly

newsletter. The school committee chair and the superintendent also communicate

through e-mail and phone conversations on a regular basis.

The principal and superintendent also communicate daily on an informal basis.

They exchange e-mails frequently and converse routinely. Of late, the school building

project, whose objective is to provide DHS and DMS with a facility suitable for 21st

century learning, has been a major topic.

Overall, the school board, superintendent and principal are collaborative,

reflective, and constructive in achieving the school’s 21st century learning expectations

by working together in many ways.

The school board and superintendent provide the principal with sufficient

decision-making authority to lead the school. Duxbury schools maintain a distinct chain

of command and are guided by the Educational Reform Act of 1993. The district policy

and procedures manual, in compliance with this law states, “all building principals are to

act as the chief executive officer of their respective building.” The manual further states

that the principal “shall be responsible for and shall have authority over the actions of

students, professional and support staff employees, visitors, and substitutes or persons

hired to perform special tasks.”

This site-based management is evident in the following examples: the principal

has the ultimate decision making authority for all discipline issues, the principal is in

charge of the school improvement plan (along with the school council), and the principal

develops and implements the budget, and the principal authorizes all field trips (except

overnight trips, which need school committee approval). This list is intended to give

examples of the principal’s authority, but does not represent the extent of his authority.

His decision-making extends into academic areas as well, as indicated in the principal’s

job description. The principal serves as the educational, curricular and instructional

leader of the school. He is in charge of recruiting and the recommendations for the

hiring, retention, and/or termination of all staff. He is also in charge of inspiring all staff

to accomplish the school goals and strategic plan. The principal also supervises and

evaluates staff. Overall, these examples clearly demonstrate that the principal does have

sufficient authority in educational, fiscal, and managerial areas in order to lead the

school.

Executive Summary The school culture and leadership reflect Duxbury High School’s (DHS) core

values and beliefs about student learning. As such, the DHS community provides a safe

learning environment and continues to work towards building a positive, respectful and

supportive culture. Programs continue to be implemented and current programs revised

in order to foster a safe, positive and respectful culture. The Summa awards provide a

long-standing example of this, while the Link Crew and advisory program offer examples

of recently implemented initiatives. DHS is currently in the fourth year of an advisory

program. The advisory curriculum has evolved over the four years and continues to be

modified based on student needs.

Student learning and achievement are important at DHS. This is demonstrated in

the schedule, professional development activities, and teacher evaluation process. The

current 68-minute rotating block schedule allows DHS to meet student needs. However,

DHS is investigating other schedules that would encourage teacher collaboration, student

collaboration, internships, interdisciplinary studies, and project-based learning.

When not devoted to the NEASC self-study, professional development time has

focused on, but not been limited to: curriculum mapping, common assessments, and the

integration of instructional technology. While the district funds a significant amount of

time for professional development, there is a need for more time for reflection, inquiry

and analysis of teaching and learning.

The evaluation and supervision processes have student learning at their heart.

The student-teacher ratio in most classes is acceptable but needs to be improved in co-

taught classes. Thus, a culture directed towards student learning is evident at DHS.

The principal directs the school with its core values and beliefs in mind. The

school committee and superintendent have provided the principal with the authority to do

so. The overall effort reflects coordination among the school board, superintendent, and

principal.

Opportunities are available at DHS for teachers, students, and parents to nurture

responsibility, initiative, ownership, and leadership. These are especially plentiful for

students and parents, but somewhat limited for teachers because of an emerging top-

down leadership style.

All world language classes at DHS are heterogeneously grouped. Many electives

are also heterogeneously grouped. DHS cannot move from the limited to the acceptable

category since we only offer one heterogeneously grouped core course. Thus, based on

the CPSS rating guide for the standard on instruction, Duxbury High School judges its

adherence to the standard as limited.

Strengths:

• District funded professional development opportunities

• The creation and scheduling of the advisory program

• The existence of a safe learning environment

• The opportunity for parent and community involvement through many clubs and groups

• The community willingness to support and fund various teacher and student

activities that are not funded by the budget

• The rotating block schedule with 68-minute block periods

• The later start-time initiative

Needs:

• Create opportunities for more collaboration time within and between departments

• Improve the student-teacher ratio for co-taught classes

• Allocate sufficient funds to support co-curricular programs

• Increase communication and share decision-making between administrators and faculty

• Create professional development opportunities, focused on reflection, inquiry and

analysis of teaching and learning

• Continue the development of a quality advisory curriculum

The members of the standard 5 NEASC committee agree to our final document andexecutive summary.

Iamie Doherfy

Karen Irvine-Thorne

Maureen Kelleher

jack Kennedy

Mary Anne Leydon

Amy Marino

Paul Massicotte

Tim McPhillips

Keith O'Connell

Meghan Peterson

Matt Sprague

Meg Radzik 'lTk i?rtnb-k

(iL u--^

S C H O O L R E S O U R C E S F O R L E A R N I N G

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


Duxbury High School has a variety of timely, coordinated, and direct intervention

strategies for all students, including identified and at-risk students that support each

student’s achievement of the school’s 21st century learning expectations. While the 21st

century learning expectations are relatively new, the programs and strategies to support

every DHS student’s achievement of school-wide learning expectations are not new.

Every student is assigned a school counselor and also participates in the DHS advisory

program where every student meets regularly with a small group of students (12-15) and

faculty member. In addition, a student-mentoring program, called Link Crew, connects

trained juniors and seniors with all freshmen to assist in the transition to high school. A

Student Assistance Team (SAT) and Building Based Support Team (BBST) meets

weekly to support struggling students in achieving academic success. A crisis team is in

place for emergency situations, which may arise in the school or community. Individual

support staff includes a resource officer, a school psychologist, a student assistance

counselor, a school nurse, a transition room teacher and six guidance counselors. A total

of 73.3% of students surveyed agree or strongly agree when asked on the Endicott survey

if they know whom to ask for help at school if they have a problem; 65.1% of students

strongly agree or agree that they feel comfortable going to their guidance counselor.

The school provides information to families, especially to those most in need,

about available student support services. The Student Assistance Team (SAT) and

Building Based Support Team (BBST) are available for all students especially to those

most in need. The SAT meets weekly to discuss students who have been identified as at-

risk emotionally or behaviorally, or as being in need of support services in some capacity.

Students may be identified by teachers, parents/guardians, counseling staff, or by self-

referral. The purpose of the SAT is to collaborate and formulate a plan on how to best

address the emotional/behavioral needs of the students. The BBST also meets once per

week as part of the student study process to discuss students identified as at-risk

academically. During student study, the BBST reviews teacher feedback and discusses

strategies or best practices to be implemented in the classroom to address student

concerns. Contact with parents of students identified by the SAT and BBST is an integral

part of the process of providing support.

In addition to the SAT and BBST, school administrators, guidance counselors, the

student assistance counselor, the school resource officer, and the school psychologist

regularly call parents of students regarding individual student issues that arise from time

to time. Counselors review weekly attendance of students as well as progress reports and

report cards in order to identify students who may be in need. Other communication

from DHS guidance services includes regular and frequent updating of the guidance page

on the school’s website. The site includes a variety of information on standardized

testing, course selection, college process, scholarships, and financial aid. The DHS

weekly newsletter, which is e-mailed to all students and families every week, includes

more detailed and timely information from guidance services. In addition to the

newsletter and website, guidance counselors hold monthly evening presentations on

topics relating to college admissions, college process, financial aid, course selection, and

freshmen transition to high school. Each guidance counselor is also available one

evening per week for appointments. The student assistance counselor has a website with

links to community resources as well as helpful information for parents about mental

health issues and high-risk behaviors. Furthermore, the DHS website contains updated

contact information for all support personnel.

Every August, all parents of new students and incoming freshmen are invited to

attend an orientation during which school support services are introduced. At the

beginning of every school year, parents must read and sign the student handbook, which

highlights all student support services available in the building. Parents are also invited

to meet their child’s teachers at an open house, which takes place every September.

Additionally, every September, all students attend a grade-level “Meet Your

Administrator” assembly in which students are introduced to all support staff and briefed

on what support services are available to them. Families are also invited to a parent

conference evening in November of each year to speak with the individual teachers of the

students if necessary.

Support services staff use technology to deliver an effective range of coordinated

services for each student. The introduction of X2, the FirstClass e-mail system, a school-

wide website, and Naviance in recent years provides technological software for guidance

counselors, the library/media specialist, and the school nurse to communicate effectively

with students and their families. Each staff member also has a laptop and can access the

school’s comprehensive X2 student management system. All parents/guardians are

encouraged to use X2’s online portal system, which grants them access to progress

reports, report cards, transcripts, and the option to e-mail teachers directly. Students also

have a password for the X2 student portal. During course selection time, teachers make

recommendations for next year’s courses, and students are able to view and select courses

on the X2 portal. All school personnel share a variety of student information via the

FirstClass e-mail client. Also, the Duxbury High School website is used to communicate

all relevant information to students and families and is updated weekly in the student

support services area. The library has computer labs available, one with a SmartBoard,

for classroom use. In-school and remote access to a variety of online information

databases is available through school, public library, or school-funded subscriptions,

extending the availability of library resources beyond the school day. For students

looking to take courses for credit recovery or enrichment purposes, Duxbury High School

offers online classes through PLATO during the academic year and summer session.

School counseling services have an adequate number of certified/licensed

personnel and support staff who deliver a written, developmental program and meet

regularly with students to provide personal, academic, career, and college counseling.

Six licensed guidance counselors, one licensed student assistance counselor, and one

licensed school psychologist serve the school population. The guidance counselors

provide students with academic, social, personal and career/college counseling. The

average caseload for each counselor is 170 students as of the 2011-12 school year. Based

on enrollment projections, this number will grow within the next few years. The

responsibilities of the student assistance counselor include providing social, emotional,

and behavioral counseling in both individual and group settings. The responsibilities of

the school psychologist include administering psycho-educational evaluations,

interpreting test results, crisis intervention, and individual counseling. In addition, there

are two guidance administrative assistants that help with answering phone calls and

completing clerical tasks.

Duxbury High School has a comprehensive and developmental school counseling

program, which provides services that promote the academic, personal/social and

career/college potential of its students. All four years of this program focus on academic

planning, with ninth grade also concentrating on transition to high school, and tenth and

eleventh grades addressing career planning and college exploration. Senior year

concentrates on post-graduation plans, with an emphasis on college choice and the

application process. Guidance counselors meet individually with each student at least

twice a year and more often with seniors and juniors. Additionally, opportunities exist

for students to meet with counselors in a group setting. For instance, guidance counselors

conduct group presentations through advisory. The student assistance counselor has daily

lunch groups and the occupational/vocational guidance counselor has a weekly lunch

group that involves the Duxbury Best Buddies program. The DHS advisory program in

general complements the guidance curriculum.

All members of guidance services refer students and families to community area

mental health agencies and social services providers, which include mental health

agencies and specialized outreach programs such as the Family Continuity Program.

Additionally, the school refers students and families to Duxbury Counseling, Mass Bay

Counseling, North River Counseling, Collaborative for Counseling, Arbour Counseling

Services, Linden Tree Counseling, the Center for Anxiety & Related Disorders at Boston

University, as well as multiple private counselors. Students have been referred to

community agencies for issues including, but not limited to, mental health issues, high-

risk behaviors, and/or family conflicts. The Department of Children and Families (DCF)

works collaboratively with the school when necessary.

There has been some use of assessment data gathered from surveys to parents,

students, and the school community using Survey Monkey, Naviance, and paper surveys.

This was used to improve services and ensure that each student achieves the 21st century

learning expectations. Seniors complete a senior survey at the end of the school year and

data is shared within the guidance department. Freshmen complete a freshmen snapshot

sheet early in freshmen year to assess their transition to high school and to identify their

needs moving forward. The leadership team and guidance utilize the assessment data

collected from standardized testing to make necessary changes to guidance services and

individual departmental curriculum as needed. Currently the school council and

guidance counselors are analyzing alumni surveys with the intention of improving

support services offered to students. Duxbury High School has contracted with National

Clearinghouse to collect data on students after graduation to make recommendations

about student services and curriculum moving forward.

The school's health services have an adequate number of certified/licensed

personnel and support staff that provide preventative health services and direct

intervention services to the school community. Duxbury High School is staffed with two

part-time registered nurses, who share a full-time position to meet the needs of the 1024

students and 129 staff members. Both nurses are required to have professional licensure

status and are supported by a district nurse manager and a health assistant. The nursing

staff works collaboratively with the administration, guidance department, school

psychologist, student adjustment counselor, school resource officer, staff, and

parents/guardians to promote the health of students through prevention, case-finding,

early intervention, and assistance for specific health problems.

The nurses provide direct, individualized services for all students. Direct

intervention services require nursing assessment and triage, including emergency

treatments ranging from minor cuts, evaluation of injuries, fractures, respiratory issues,

diabetes, seizure disorders, dermatological concerns, gastrointestinal issues,

psychological concerns, and other emergency responses. The nurses are also responsible

for the administration of prescribed medications during the school day. This includes

storage of medications and updated medical orders. The nurses also serve on the school’s

crisis team and Student Assistance Team. They are CPR and first aid trained, providing

any needed instruction to the staff. They also oversee the maintenance of the two

Automatic External Defibrillators for the school and athletic trainer.

Both nurses have public health experience, enabling them to make referrals

regarding health issues within the high school to the appropriate community agency.

These agencies include the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Poison Control,

primary care physicians, eye care specialists, dentists, dermatologists, mental health

coordinators, social workers, local bereavement groups, local charitable agencies, and

churches. They are also mandated reporters for the Department of Child and Family

Services for cases of possible abuse or neglect.

The nurses develop and update Individualized Healthcare Plans (IHP’s) for

students with asthma, severe allergies, diabetes, seizure disorders or other health

conditions. They also distribute informational cover pages and regular updates to

teachers and guidance for students with IHP’s or 504 plans. In addition, nurses

participate in re-entry meetings for students who have been absent from school for

extended periods. Depending on the need, the nurses are often included in parent/teacher

meetings.

The nursing staff provides health counseling and services to promote an optimal

level of wellness for students and staff. Examples include current updates on a variety of

topics, such as concussions, communicable diseases, and nutrition, that appear throughout

the year in the weekly newsletter, e-mails, the DHS website and the Duxbury Clipper.

The nurses administer preventative health services, including screening of scoliosis for

freshman and vision/hearing screening and height/weight analysis for sophomores, while

maintaining confidential health records of all students. The health office also uses X2 as

a database for lifetime immunization records, growth and development records with BMI,

health and family histories, screenings, recent illness and injuries, and documentation of

health-related communications to family and teachers.

The health office logs every student visit, recording arrival and departure times,

reason for the visit, assessment findings, interventions and outcomes, parental and teacher

communications, and recommendations. During the 2010-11 school year, there were

more than 7,117 individual visits to the nurse’s office for reasons ranging from basic first

aid to emotional needs. The nurses use X2 to compile visit statistics on immunizations,

health screenings, and updated physicals.

The library/information services program and materials are integrated into the

school’s curriculum and instructional program, and the library staffing is adequate to

meet student and staff needs. The Library Media Center (LMC) is staffed by a full-time

certified library media specialist (LMS) and a full-time library clerk. The LMS is

responsible for overseeing the library/media program, and the library clerk assists in the

day-to-day functioning of the library. The LMS collaborates with teachers to integrate

library/media services into the curriculum through face-to-face conferences, e-mail

communication, professional development opportunities, and attendance at departmental

meetings when necessary to inform specific departments of relevant resources. The LMS

regularly requests suggestions from the faculty to ensure that the LMC collection fully

supports the implementation of the curriculum. The LMS also sets up trials for electronic

databases and communicates this information to teachers so that they can preview a

resource and help determine its relevance. All ninth grade English classes complete a

library orientation in the fall to ensure students are aware of the resources available. The

library is available for continued curriculum support to all content areas as well. For

instance, all students at Duxbury High School must complete a research paper in their

respective history and English courses for each grade, and the LMS assists with this

process. Endicott survey data states that 73.1% of the teachers felt the

“library/information services personnel are actively engaged in the development and

implementation of the school’s curriculum.”

The library’s print and electronic collection as well as its technology resources

support all areas of the school’s curriculum. The most recent collection analysis (January

2011) shows that the library houses a collection of 17,402 items, with an average

publication date of 1988. Although the library staff is striving to improve this average

date, it is a significant improvement from the oldest analysis available (November 2003),

where the average publication date of items was 1982. This is despite the fact that in the

interim there has been a limited budget for print materials. Through the elimination of

outdated materials and selective purchasing, the library has also increased its items per

pupil ratio from 16.62:1 to 17.19:1, despite increased student enrollment and budget

limitations. Specific initiatives that have improved technology resources are the

subscription to several electronic databases and access to many others through the

school’s affiliation with the Massachusetts Library System, the addition of a computer

lab with a SmartBoard in the library, the purchase of eight laptops for students to sign out

and use either with a class or independently, the acquisition of eight Flip Cameras for

students and teachers to use to add more options for integrating multi-media projects into

the curriculum, the purchase of a data projector for visual presentations of electronic

resources, and the receipt of a grant from the Parent Teacher Organization allowing the

LMS to create an interactive whiteboard in the library. The library is open from 7:45am

until 3:10 pm. The faculty and staff have regular access to the library during the school

day. Students have access to the library for 35 minutes before school and 25 minutes

after school. Students are allowed to use the library during the day with a pass from their

teacher, and the library is also open to students during lunch, provided that a class is not

using it for instruction. The library/media services staff is responsive to students’

interests and needs in order to support independent student learning. The fiction

collection has been moved to a more central location in the library to encourage students

to use the library for pleasure reading. The library catalog is accessible from all the

computers and from home so that students can search for materials that are relevant not

only to their schoolwork, but also to their personal interests. The library website has a

posting area where students can electronically request that specific books be added to the

collection.

The library staff conducts ongoing assessment by soliciting input from all

teachers. A user needs assessment was conducted as a part of the development of the

LMC’s joint long-range plan with Duxbury Middle School, which shaped future

purchases for the library. Additionally, frequent communication with teachers regarding

library collection development helps the LMC staff assess how well the library services

are meeting the school community’s needs.

The support services for identified students, including special education, Section

504 of the ADA, and English language learners (ELL), have an adequate number of

certified/licensed personnel and support staff. There are seven licensed special education

teachers, seven instructional assistants, one reading specialist, one specialist for English

language learners, one part-time speech and language therapist, two clerical support

persons, a team chairperson, and the district Director of Special Services, who

coordinates all personnel in the areas of special education, Section 504 of the ADA, and

English language learners. One of the special education teachers also serves as the

building coordinator. All special education teachers receive the same professional

training as regular education teachers and understand that the school’s 21st century

learning expectations are for all students. The school adheres to the federal and state

laws regarding the identification, monitoring, and referral of students for special

education services. The special education liaisons have average caseloads of thirteen

students as of September 2011.

In the past four years, special education services have expanded from a learning

center model to a full inclusion model. Specialists work with regular education teachers

in the classroom. This allows for additional support in the small group setting. Co-

teaching has been implemented in four core subjects: math, science, English, and history.

Content teachers collaborate with special education teachers to provide accommodations

and modifications in the classroom consistent with the school’s core values and beliefs

about learning.

The learning center model is structured by grade level. Grades 9-10 focus on

academic skill development and remediation. Grades 11-12 continue skill development

and transition to independent learning. Learning centers utilize curriculum maps and

lessons that focus on skill development to meet the students’ IEP goals.

Based on assessment data, the school implemented two programs to support

students. An after-school MCAS preparatory program began six years ago.

Additionally, a transition room, which supports students that are returning to school

following significant absences has been in effect since the 2007-2008 school year. The

transition room also provides a setting for students receiving IEP or 504 accommodations

that require an alternate test setting and/or extra time to take tests and quizzes. The

transition room teacher holds certifications in special education and history. During the

2010-11 school year, 47 students utilized the transition room.

In addition to the special education program, DHS has the support of the Duxbury

Special Education Advisory Council, referred to as SEPAC. This group consists of

volunteer parents that offer information, contacts, and networking opportunities for

parents of special education students. The district special education director and the team

chairperson attend these meetings and collaborate with members of the council.

The use of assessment data was the critical force in moving from a special

education delivery model that was primarily restricted to resource room support to one of

nearly full inclusion. For the past two years the special education department has hired a

consultant to review programming and make recommendations to improve the processes

and service delivery. While the school’s 21st century learning expectations and the

school-wide rubrics are relatively new, special education teachers have readily embraced

the use of the rubrics to help special education students understand the targeted level of

learning that is expected, along with the areas in which the students need to improve.

Collaboration between teachers, counselors, and support service personnel occurs

in a variety of ways. Weekly SAT meetings are held to identify at-risk students,

communicate vital information, and recommend appropriate interventions. BBST

meetings are conducted weekly to discuss students that are experiencing academic and/or

behavioral difficulties and make recommendations for curriculum accommodations,

parent-teacher meetings, or further evaluation. During common planning time, special

and regular education teachers meet to discuss and develop lessons. On an as-needed

basis, meetings are held with guidance counselors, teachers, the school psychologist, the

student assistant counselor, an assistant principal, and a school nurse to discuss individual

student accommodations per district accommodation strategies and/or 504

accommodation plans. District-wide monthly meetings are held with school

psychologists and adjustment counselors to review processes, case studies, and new

developments in the assessment and treatment of learning and emotional disorders.

Meetings with special education teachers, guidance counselors, administrators, and

school psychologists in the middle and high school are held to support students

transitioning from eighth to ninth grade. The crisis team meets to support students and

faculty as needed.

Executive Summary Duxbury High School has timely, coordinated, and direct intervention strategies

for all students, provides adequate counseling, health, library/media service, and special

education personnel, fully informs families, especially those most in need, about

available student support services, provides a comprehensive range of counseling and

health services to students, and provides a wide range of materials, technologies and

other information services in support of the school’s curriculum.

Counselors deliver a written developmental program, meet regularly with students

to provide personal, academic, career and college counseling, engage in individual and

group meetings with all students, and deliver collaborative outreach and referrals to

community, mental health agencies, and social service providers. Health personnel

provide preventative health and direct intervention services, use an appropriate referral

process, and conduct ongoing student health assessments.

Library/media services are integrated into the curriculum and library/media

personnel are engaged in the implementation of the school’s curriculum and are

responsive to students’ interests and needs in order to support independent learning.

Special education services utilize a full inclusion model, focusing on co-teaching in the

regular education classroom and skills development in learning centers. Therefore, the

school resources for learning committee agrees that Duxbury High School meets this

standard at the exemplary level.

Strengths:

• The frequently updated website, especially with regard to health and counseling services and programs

• The technology and resources that extend the information from the library/media

center to home

• The developmental guidance program with a focus on regular, formal, individual and group meeting time with important topics for every student in all grade levels through the Advisory program

• The availability of the transition room to all students

• The Link Crew freshman transition program

• The provision of adequate staffing, including leadership roles, for every support

service area

• The low school counselor to student ratio

• The low caseload in our special education program that is designed to help every student achieve the school’s 21st century learning expectations

Needs:

C O M M U N I T Y R E S O U R C E S F O R L E A R N I N G

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


The community served by Duxbury High School and the district's governing body

does not provide dependable funding for a wide range of school programs, personnel,

services, sufficient professional and support staff, on-going professional development, a

range of technology support, curriculum revision, sufficient equipment, and instructional

materials and supplies.

Over the past five years, the school district’s budgets have been approved through

a collaborative working relationship between the school committee, town manager,

superintendent, and business manager. A number of public meetings are scheduled

several months in advance of the town meeting, held in March, to discuss the proposed

budget. The superintendent and business manager are effective in promoting these

meetings, during which questions and concerns are addressed. School, parent, and

community groups are encouraged to attend these meetings and make presentations in

support of the school’s programs and services. The school committee has continued its

commitment to maintaining staffing levels and course offerings while limiting the budget

for instructional materials, supplies, maintenance, and capital improvements.

Over the past several years, Duxbury has increased and revised course offerings

in some core academic areas. The range of programs has varied over time to

accommodate students’ interests and needs. Funding for professional staff has been

adequate. However, it has been less than adequate for support staff. Duxbury provides

sufficient professional development time per calendar year. Technology equipment has

increased (partially due to community resources outside of the school); however technical

support for this equipment has not matched this increase. The budget for school supplies,

and instructional materials is not sufficient.

The high school does not develop, plan, and adequately fund programs to ensure

the maintenance and repair of the building and school plant, nor does it maintain,

catalogue, and replace equipment. The high school provides an adequate daily level of

building cleanliness and endeavors to ensure the health and well being of all building

occupants.

The high school has certificates of inspection to indicate health and safety, which

apply to the building as a whole or only to specific areas, such as the food preparation

areas. To ensure the maintenance and repair of the building and school plant, the high

school has a partial list of equipment used in maintenance and repair. However, this list

merely lists what equipment shall be maintained and when inspection should occur. It

does not inform as to the status of equipment, or if and when inspections are completed.

A Maintenance Service System (MSS) exists online, where any staff member may report

missing, or broken equipment and request repairs. The high school does not have an

effective preventative maintenance program in place to maintain the building and/or plant

equipment, nor is adequate funding provided for such a program that would ensure the

long-term operation and sustainability of the building and plant equipment. The majority

of capital expenditures over the past five years (approximately $250,000) have been

earmarked for upgrades of lighting systems, carpet replacement, tile replacement, and

other repairs to the building. To keep the school clean on a daily basis the high school

has a document entitled Standards/Frequencies for Cleaning. This document lists duties

and schedules of completion (daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, annually, and as

required) for the following areas: corridor and entrances, stairways, offices, lounges,

health care rooms, classrooms, restrooms, etc. It further lists day custodian duties and

duties per building areas for second shift custodians plus other maintenance duties

(ceiling tile replacement procedures and carpet care). Visual inspection shows that this

program is inconsistently implemented, primarily due to insufficient manpower and

resources to complete the duties.

Although there is ongoing planning to address future programs, enrollment

changes, staffing, facility, and technology needs as well as capital improvements, there is

an actual shortfall of funding necessitating additional community and family funding to

implement programs.

On an annual basis the Duxbury School District’s budget includes a separate line-

item breakdown to ensure funding of the long-range five-year plan. The process for

developing the plan includes several forums inviting participation and input from many

school constituencies. The community continues to provide a limited and less than

adequate level of funding on an annual basis to support the school’s programs and

services. Currently, Duxbury ranks 277th in the state for pupil expenditures, yet is

ranked 17th in the state in terms of relative wealth. In 2005, the school district was

$1,400 below the state average in per pupil spending. In 2011, Duxbury budgeted $2,400

per pupil less than the state average.

Other inadequacies of funding for services and programs for students include all

co-curricular activities. User fees supplement all these programs and activities. Athletics

require a $225 fee per student/per season. The cap is five sports per season per family for

$1,125. All families with free/reduced lunch pay $25. Co-curricular programs at DHS

require fees ($110 per student) to allow for such programs to exist. The capital budget

has been underfunded for multiple years. Booster organizations are needed to help fund

music, drama, athletic, and co-curricular programs. The capital budget has not been

funded adequately to address these programs and activities.

The K-12 coordinator of guidance and director of technology collect and analyze

a variety of data that allows the school to address future programs and services to support

the school’s core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning expectations. They compile

reports, which are distributed to central office and building level administrators for use in

reviewing course enrollment trends and staffing levels and for determining the number of

courses and sections to be offered. The X2 database software allows the high school to

track student demographics, grades, transcripts, and schedules as well as helping to

develop the master schedule by providing a breakdown of student course requests. The

high school also has the capacity to generate a number of reports including total school

enrollment, average daily attendance, absences, tardy and dismissal rates, transcripts, and

honor roll lists. The technology department provides assistance to relevant personnel on

using the variety of software programs to generate any number of reports related to future

planning. Other examples of adequate and on-going support include the purchasing of

laptops for teachers, additional SmartBoards for classrooms, expanded wireless

capabilities, and increased funding for professional development in technology. An

additional example that demonstrates adequate and on-going support was the formation

of the educational visioning committee linked to the feasibility study. The result is

community support to design and build a new co-located middle and high school.

Prior to the feasibility study related to the proposed construction of a new co-

located middle and high school, the school committee, and community allocated funding

and hired New England School Development Corporation to provide future enrollment

projections. These projections were based on live birth rates, elementary school trends,

and residential building developments. The projections aided in the overall planning for

the project as well as provided additional enrollment information/data for other use by the

school district.

Building administrators, subject supervisors, and department heads are actively

involved in the development and implementation of the budgetary process. However,

according to an Endicott survey only 25% of faculty feel they have input in the

development of the school budget.

The budgetary process for the current school year begins in the early fall of the

previous year with individual teachers indicating their initial needs for the following year

via in-depth discussions at departmental meetings. Teachers’ requests are submitted to

their respective department heads, or subject supervisors, who review those requests and

determine budgetary priorities for the following year. It is common practice for a

department head or subject supervisors to meet one-on-one with individual teachers to

discuss these priorities. The next step of the budgetary process occurs during a series of

meetings with the school’s leadership team comprised of building administrators,

curriculum and subject supervisors, and department heads. Some additional

changes/additions may be included following these meetings. Finally, the principal

submits a budget proposal to the superintendent of schools no later than early October.

After a final review, the proposed budget is then presented to the school committee for

extensive discussion and review. A number of public hearings are scheduled before the

proposed budget goes before the town manager and selectmen. In early December, the

superintendent has one last opportunity to make recommendations prior to the budget

going before the school committee. In March the town votes its approval at town

meeting.

Currently, the school site and plant rarely support the delivery of high quality

school programs and services. The current facility is inadequate for the student

population. The feasibility study identifies that the population has doubled since the

building was built, and the technology requirements are significantly different. A

specific example is identified in a letter to The Duxbury Clipper newspaper that identifies

that the National Science Foundation (NSF) recommends science rooms contain lecture

and separate lab station areas. The NSF recommends 1600 – 1800 square feet, whereas

the science rooms at DHS have combined lecture/ lab areas that are 1100 square feet and

do not contain adequate electrical outlets and/or hot water. Furthermore, they do not

possess working fume hoods and other recommended safety equipment. The school also

does not have adequate space for private conferences to support special education and

guidance nor does it have soundproof offices. Additionally, information collected from

staff and all departments indicate inadequacies in heating, air conditioning, and air

quality, which negatively impacts the students’ abilities to focus and be receptive.

Furthermore, the district has a mandate to incorporate 21st century technology and skills

into all aspects of education. Currently, the plant facility has inadequate equipment,

server size, and support to adequately meet this goal. However, these issues will be

addressed by the approval for the building of a new co-located middle/high school in

November.

The school maintains up-to-date documentation that the physical plant and

facilities meet all applicable federal and state laws and are in compliance with fire,

health, and safety regulations. This includes annual fire inspection, annual fire

extinguisher inspection, fire suppression, and the kitchen hood inspection. The district

director of plant facilities is the repository for the applicable certificates, which state the

physical plant and facilities meet the aforementioned regulations. However, the evidence

gathered in the feasibility study identifies a number of deficiencies in the heating,

ventilation, and temperature control throughout the facility, which indicates the plant and

facility is antiquated and has experienced significant wear and tear. The school has

significant deficiencies meeting the Americans with Disabilities Act as identified in the

feasibility study and many systems are not compliant with current building and code

standards. The Duxbury Public School District has recognized these deficiencies. The

Massachusetts State Building Authority (MSBA) has approved Duxbury’s desire to build

a co-located middle-senior high school. Duxbury has secured the services of an Owner’s

Project Manager (OPM), an architect, has selected a model school design, and

community funding has been approved.

The professional staff at Duxbury High School continues its commitment to

effectively engage parents and families as partners in each student’s education and to

reach out specifically to those families who have been less connected to the school.

Duxbury High School has consistently enjoyed success engaging a significant number of

parents of students involved in a number of the school’s co-curricular activities, including

the fine and performing arts, nationally sponsored programs, competitions, and athletics.

The school has a number of established programs to engage parents and families

as partners, including one open house held at the beginning of the school year and a night

for individual conferences after the first marking period. Both are held during the

evening hours in order to accommodate as many parents as possible. In addition, parents

are always encouraged to schedule conferences with individual or small groups of

teachers throughout the school year. For those new members of the community, the

school offers a special open house prior to the beginning of the school year in order to

facilitate their assimilation into a new school system.

The school’s e-mail system has significantly improved communication between

classroom teachers and parents/families related to regular updates on their

son’s/daughter’s academic progress. Some teachers have opted to experiment with a

parent portal, which allows parents to view and keep track of their son’s/daughter’s

grades on a regular basis. All teachers are required to post quarterly progress reports and

report cards on the portal. All teachers have the ability to maintain a teacher website on

the district’s network, on which they may post upcoming assignments, projects, and

resources available. The Duxbury Public School system regularly updates the district’s

web page, which includes information such as details about the school building project,

the annual report, the school calendar, sporting events, MCAS schedules, bus

information, upcoming events, and forms that parents may need to fill out. Information is

directly communicated to every household in the community via the school’s Connect Ed

regarding cancellation of school, health related issues, upcoming events, deadlines for

school events, and other important time-sensitive announcements. Parents are also

actively involved as members of committees including the principal’s school council, the

Parent Teacher Organization (PTO), as well as several booster organizations.

School publications also keep parents and families informed of upcoming events.

The principal posts an electronic newsletter on a weekly basis. The student handbook is

made available to families and parents electronically, and both students and parents are

required to read and sign an acknowledgement at the beginning of the school year. This

student handbook provides parents and students with information about the school

schedule, school calendar, rules, and student participation in school, athletic, and co-

curricular activities. Additionally, a schedule of upcoming events is published weekly on

the school’s website.

The school has consistently maintained productive parent, community, business

and higher education partnerships that support student learning. However, over the past

few years the number of partnerships has fluctuated. The Parent Teacher Organization

(PTO) has developed a relationship with the high school staff. They hold regular

meetings attended by our teaching and administrative staffs. The PTO provides for a

number of teacher appreciation events and funds mini-grants for teachers throughout the

year. During 2010-2011, the PTO provided $5000. Parents are regularly involved in

various committees developed by the school such as school council, interview teams,

student health committee, and the building project team.

The school regularly maintains partnerships with a number of community groups.

In partnership with the police department, students can access an internship program to

explore career opportunities in law enforcement. They also provide job-training

opportunities (clerical and maintenance) for our special needs students. A community

resource officer works within the school system and sits on our Student Assistance Team

(SAT) and also coordinates the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program.

The Duxbury Senior Center provides students the opportunity for community service and

to interact socially with our senor citizens. Each year the Duxbury chapter of the

American Legion sponsors a group of our future leaders to both Girls’ and Boys’ State

programs. They also sponsor students each summer to the Student Trooper program

where they are able to explore careers in law enforcement. The Duxbury Education

Foundation (DEF) is a non-profit community educational support group. Each year the

DEF funds a variety of teacher-generated grants. During 2010-2011, DEF grants totaled

$85,811 district-wide, with $35,146 ear-marked for the high school. The Duxbury Bay

Maritime School provides students with educational opportunities with boating, sailing

and the maritime industry. The Interfaith Council partners with the school to provide

support for needy families and hosts the annual Baccalaureate program for seniors.

Through the Duxbury Student Union, students are offered after-school programs for

education and recreation. Duxbury Before and After Dark is a community continuing

education program that operates out of the schools. This group provides a number of

educational opportunities including driver education and SAT preparation.

In collaboration with Battelle Labs, students apply for internships in the field of

science research. Additionally, scientists from the lab work with younger students on the

Science Fair and continue to fund grants written by the science department. Seniors also

have the opportunity to conduct an approved senior project in partnership with local

businesses, organizations, and schools. The limited number of businesses in town, and

the rotating daily schedule, present challenges for creating partnerships.

Duxbury has developed higher education partnerships with colleges including the

Syracuse University Project Advance (SUPA), Massasoit Community College,

Bridgewater State University, and Quincy College whereby students can pursue college

level classes under a dual-enrollment policy. In addition, the Providing Opportunities for

Students to Transition (POST) secondary students attend a program at Bridgewater State

University on a weekly basis.

Executive Summary

Duxbury High School is fortunate to have a strong and supportive network of

family and community groups. Many of the school’s successes are directly related to the

involvement of Duxbury residents and parent advocacy. Without these private funding

sources Duxbury High School students would not have the wide variety of opportunities

available to them. The school’s lines of communication are used to actively engage

parents and families in making decisions, planning for the future, and developing and

maintaining a multitude of student programs. The town has recently voted to approve the

funding for a new co-located middle/high school. As such, it is expected that this physical

plant will initially solve many of the deficiencies in the school environment. However,

proper planning, funding and resources will need to be allocated in the future to maintain

the new facility.

Currently, Duxbury spends significantly less than the state average in per pupil

expenditures. All after school and co-curricular activities are partially funded by user

fees or fundraising. The current building infrastructure has not been properly maintained

and there is not a plan in place to do so. However, the school maintains documentation

that the physical plant and facilities meet all applicable federal and state laws. The

forecasted budget for school supplies often comes up short or is frozen by the end of the

fiscal year. The planning and needs assessments by the community and school officials

are evident, however the budgetary restrictions prevent the implementation of some

desired programs.

The school budget has been level-serviced for the past several years, resulting in a

shortfall in many areas. Textbooks are in the process of being updated or replaced for

some core subject areas. The infusion of technology into the curriculum has been

initiated by outside funding and continually supported by the technology budget. The

support staff for this technology has not kept pace with the increase in technological

equipment. Significant increases in support staff in other areas, such as secretarial,

clerical, custodial, instructional assistants, and maintenance staff have not been made.

Communication with parents and families is an important aspect to the Duxbury

High School community. Through the use of communication avenues such as e-mail,

SchoolWires website, X2 Portal, Naviance, guidance flex time, principal’s newsletter,

roster page in local newspaper and Connect Ed, the school is committed to creating a

partnership to foster the development of student achievement.

Based on the rating guide, the Community Resources for Learning Committee

feels that Duxbury High School meets this standard at the limited level.

Strengths:

• The high level of community involvement in athletics, co-curriculars and academics

• The approval of $128 million for the planning and construction of a new co-

located middle/high School

• Level of effort taken by administration, teachers, and staff to actively engage parents and guardians in student achievement

• The offering of a variety of co-curricular and athletic programs to all students

• The effort as a school system to make long range plans for future needs

• The commitment to increase technology access and use building and system wide

Needs:

• Develop more business partnerships available to all students

• Develop a tangible preventative maintenance program

• Increase funding to support the conclusion of long range planning done by the school system

• Replace existing facility with a new building

Standard 7 Committee:

Name: Position: Signature: Date:

, -")-,(/\,\[(ic Ai[, 5

, fl ., r{ I I {.u. lut )l :l l,l{i},/\,-- i l.{i,,,.:'5;i: i1;4{{

,j )

T>u.t, v* ) \k'u lf,tA Trt' Tfn t rl, r*r"t,

s"rtr i> 4:/,4/L",u /+ /A*, t.z /Jrjf"--r 77,-lu**'l : r

-l-b,.,1'L\1*l..r Pfiit ,/+- |-

\ l<(rc ,[.t .- - u, */s/r>fnAf FILEE {fcg lsct

t {,I2/g/,?

()u,lr*n tirr-'\ ?hu:,ii* I {tf rl,rrrt,,! /;r((. il,,-^///

S-/ i: /r trl2/e/,u

L-,,..Iq,'.,'i (-,rluIt

-*?d.. - - - --ra#*"

*-"-4r'-" 7*?-rlEZ-uu-i-kt- / frrl €L't o+r''/u- ' 4"el4ffi t ),/Jr, ,*I ,1,Jt::tfir lc(/.1*Sr:r A/# f" =-" - -t *''l'?.,hr,Tf ; I Lt'i-l--

,r.* .'j Y- j

ItY't.,, rfr r{. V;in#i ( rJr,*1,t

ti nfi) T(t,r'" j \J_,, . :i*-fh,,,,, :(l tt,/o i*lr,- , a/

'<){l $'t t{ {; itt l'JnQ,L0qtt I[- \t-[",/,?-

ryi{.{r4 {#$f

i

T W O A N D F I V E Y E A R R E P O R T S

Duxbury High School


Completed June 2012


2 year plan

• Increase communication and shared decision-making between administrators and faculty

• Provide sufficient common planning time for teachers to engage in cross-

disciplinary collaboration and vertical articulation

• Create the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of rubrics

• Create professional development opportunities, focused on reflection, inquiry and analysis of teaching and learning

• Develop and implement a review process made up of all stake holders to regularly

review and revise the schools core values, beliefs, and 21st century learning expectations that incorporates research and data sources

• Ensure that plans for adequate access to technology and improved science labs are

realized in the new school building

• Formalize a process for collection and analysis of student data to inform instruction

• Continued development of a quality advisory curriculum

5 year plan


• Evaluate the current schedule to provide all students with opportunities to connect

to the community at large

• Increase staffing to reduce class sizes, especially co-taught classes

• To gather post-secondary data for the purpose of revising and improving instruction on a regular basis

neasc self-study final report - duxbury.k12.ma.us€¦ · disciplinary collaboration and vertical...

Documents