1

DATE:

November 27, 2017

TO:

Andrea Tucker, Principal
Lyn Knoll Elementary School Governing Board
Lyn Knoll Elementary School Staff

CC:

Pilot Schools Joint Steering Committee
Rico Munn, Superintendent
Board of Education

FROM:

School Quality Review Team Members from Joint Steering Committee

SUBJECT: Lyn Knoll Elementary School Pilot School Quality Review
Background
In October 2007, both the Aurora Education Association and the Aurora Public Schools
Board of Education approved the plan to create a Pilot School Program in APS and
created a Memorandum of Understanding to guide the implementation. In 2011, through
negotiations between the Board of Education and AEA, Article 44 was created to
support and direct the ongoing development of Pilot Schools. After three full years of
operations, a Pilot school is required to participate in a School Quality Review (SQR).
Lyn Knoll Elementary School began operating as a Pilot School in the 2013-2014 school
year and is in its fifth year of operating as a Pilot School.
The SQR process requires a team to review the school and the schools’ self-study in
order to develop a report that outlines areas of success and recommendations in the
areas of:







School vision and mission
Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Professional Development
Family and Community Engagement
Student Support and Outcomes
Leadership and Governance

Presented: January 23, 2018

 2

Prominent benchmarks in every SQR should be (1) having in place a strong system of
assessment of student learning and achievement that demonstrates the school has met
or exceed district averages when compared to schools with similar demographics, (2)
progress in attaining high performance in multiple indicators of student engagement (e.g.,
transfers, suspensions, attendance) and achievement (e.g., end-of-year assessments,
and graduation and college-going rates, course grades), and (3) how well the Governing
Board and leadership function, support and communicate the school’s vision and goals
on student engagement and achievement to staff, students, parents, and community.
The following steps outline the School Quality Review Process:










The School submits a self-study to the Joint Steering Committee (JSC).
A visitation team from the Joint Steering Committee completes the School
Quality Review and provides input for the SQR report with recommendations
for improvement and Pilot status.
The completed SQR report is submitted to school.
The School may submit a response to the SQR report to the JSC.
JSC reviews SQR report at its meeting, any response from the school and, if
necessary, develops response/feedback to school.
JSC makes a recommendation to the Board of Education as to whether the
Pilot status should be continued and provides the SQR report.
If the school has not met its targets, the JSC will recommend the Board of
Education review and determine if the school should have its Pilot status
revoked (or extended conditionally pending a future review) at a subsequent
board meeting.
If the JSC recommendation for continuation of Pilot status is approved, the
school must include JSC feedback from the report into its action plans for the
next school year.

A review team from the Joint Steering Committee conducted a School Quality Review at
Lyn Knoll Elementary School on November 2 nd, 2017, from 9:00-3:00. The information
for this SQR report was gathered during the site visit from classroom observations;
climate and perception survey information; Lyn Knoll’s annual assessment outcomes;
the school’s Unified Improvement Plan; as well as interviews and discussions with, the
school’s principal, school staff, governing board members, and Lyn Knoll students.
Overview of Review Team’s Visit with the Governing Board
The SQR review team had the opportunity to hear from three members of the
Governing Board: two teachers—one academic and one elective—and the school’s
principal. The review team met with the teachers, respectively, and the principal, in two
separate conversations.
The teachers from the Governing Board both indicated that the small community feel of
the school is what keeps students, families, and teachers coming back to the Lyn Knoll
family year after year. The families that have left, according to the Governing Board,
Presented: January 23, 2018

 3

have had to move out of the area due to rising costs of living and housing in the Lyn
Knoll neighborhood.
The Governing Board members reflected on the impact of The Leader in Me, a 21st
Century skills and leadership program for kids based on the work of FranklinCovey and
Stephen Covey’s 7 Habits of Highly Effective People that supports students, teachers,
and families with a framework of common language and approaches around socialemotional behavior and leadership potential. Based on defined traits of successful
scholarship and engagement, students are able to articulate the influence and impact of
the habits in their daily interactions at school. Teachers stated that the common
language has knit a strong fabric of community in the school, and that students are
conscientious in ways they were not prior to launching the program. The Leader in Me
has been in place at Lyn Knoll for four years. The Leader in Me is known as a “whole
school transformation” tool, and is rooted in the belief that every child has leadership
potential.
Members of the Governing Board also mentioned that having APS Pilot status as a
school has afforded them the flexibility to staff the building in such a way that they could
maintain multiple every-day specials or electives for students, especially physical
education. Movement is a significant aspect of Lyn Knoll’s programming; every student
has PE every day at Lyn Knoll, and students can often be observed engaging in
physical activity designed to promote memory and cognition while in their academic
classes. The Governing Board indicated, as well, that flexibility afforded by Pilot status
has allowed Lyn Knoll to create a calendar that makes more sense for Lyn Knoll
families, and has allowed the school to design a professional development framework
that can be responsive and needs-based depending on the year-to-year needs of
teachers at the school.
Both teacher Governing Board members have been at Lyn Knoll for nine years and
twenty years, respectively; the principal at Lyn Knoll is currently in her eighth year of
leadership at the school. All Governing Board members state that the Governing Board
truly does serve as the primary governing body of the school, and is involved in all
decision-making that impacts the school from an operational perspective. The
Governing Board function at Lyn Knoll is a relative strength of the Pilot structure.
School Ratings
The visitation team, comprised of six members of the Joint Steering Committee,
reviewed information gathered from the site visit, RMC audit and Accountability
Evaluation report to score the school in six targeted areas utilizing the following rubric:




4 – Sustainable – the school demonstrates evidence of creating a high
performing school
3 – Moving toward Sustainability – the school demonstrates evidence of creating
a high performance school, but more evidence is needed
2 – Initial Steps toward Sustainability – the school demonstrates beginning steps
toward creating a high performing school

Presented: January 23, 2018

 4




1 – Area of Concern – the school demonstrates insufficient evidence of creating
a high performing school
U – Unable to determine

School Vision/Mission – RATING: 2.5
VISION:
We develop every child as a leader every day so they are successful in school, their
community and their career.
MISSION:
At Lyn Knoll, we will:










Provide child-centered, safe environments
Use the standards-based teaching/learning cycle
Create differentiated lessons for students
Keep the whole child in mind as we plan our day
Involve parents in their child’s learning
Prepare our students for the 21st century using higher order thinking skills
Model open-minded behavior/thinking by encouraging different perspectives,
values and ways of learning and thinking
Address the needs and concerns of our families and community in a timely
manner
Model the 7 Habits to students, parents and our community

Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment – RATING: 1.5
Review team members had the opportunity, following an introduction by the school’s
principal to expound upon aspects of the self-study, to visit eight classrooms as
individuals, or in groups of two or three observers. Observers noticed a high degree of
behavioral and affective engagement during the classroom visits, and, in some
classrooms, a relatively high degree of cognitive engagement. Observers made note of
inconsistencies across classrooms in terms of what percentage of the cognitive load
students were bearing; according to observation notes, while students were behaviorally
appropriate, there was not a high degree of confidence that students were being
challenged cognitively on a consistent and predictable basis.
Lyn Knoll would benefit greatly from a defined process and structure for evaluating the
implementation of academic initiatives throughout the school to ensure consistency in
instructional practice and the expectations outlined to support them.
The team also noted that there have been significant swings in student achievement
over the past several years, with a spike in growth in 2015-2016 in both math and
literacy, and a sharp decline in both math and literacy in 2016-2017. Student growth
Presented: January 23, 2018

 5

and achievement have not consistently met the expectations for academic outcomes set
forth in the Pilot Schools Manual. Governing Board members stated that the focus,
academically, last year was on the students demonstrating the lowest growth and
achievement; in retrospect, the team indicated that they should have focused on
students “on the bubble” and strategized to increase their growth to avoid the drastic
decline in overall outcomes for 2016-2017.
The principal noted during the opening conversation with the review team that the
Governing Board and instructional leadership team at the school made a conscious
decision not to review PARCC and CMAS outcomes in detail with teachers at the outset
of the school year; the decision not to do so was based on the belief that the data
yielded from these assessments is no longer relevant, as it is not as current as shortcycle assessments teachers utilize during the school year at Lyn Knoll. Teachers,
instead, are focusing on the interim assessment iReady, as it seems to be a much more
accurate portrayal of where students are today with respect to their math and literacy
skills.
Data teams and Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are emerging at Lyn Knoll,
but continue to be challenging based on the size of the teaching staff at the school;
finding time during teachers’ contract time to conduct these important meetings on a
weekly basis is not possible with the current schedule. A total of 12 staff members were
reduced during budget realignment at the end of the 2016-2017 school year, which has
left a single grade-level teacher at each grade. A bright spot with the current staffing
model is the full-time instructional coach who is able to meet with each teacher to plan
collaboratively for instruction on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. Currently, there is no
intervention program in place for students for support in mathematics. Lyn Knoll has the
95% Group in place for students requiring support in literacy.
STEP (Supporting Teachers with the Enrich Program) didn’t work last year, according to
the principal. Co-teaching and co-planning (with two teachers in nearly every
classroom) didn’t produce expected results, either. The classroom teacher who sits on
the Governing Board indicated that, while teachers do know each student well and can
intervene early and intentionally, there is not a specific structure to get support with
students or a defined structure for intervention. In the 2016-017 school year, members
of the Governing Board reported only being able to meet with the instructional TOSA for
“kid talk” about once each month.
Additionally, each student continues to have physical education on a daily basis; the
physical education teacher is a renowned brain theory expert with a focus on
neuroplasticity and the impact of movement on brain function. Students and staff alike
benefit on a daily basis from this teacher’s multifaceted expertise in this field.
In summary, according to the review team, consistent structures for instructional
planning and implementation of curriculum are lacking in the current Lyn Knoll
construct. A drastically sharpened focus on assessment practices and responses, as
well as a framework for and support of data-driven instruction strategies would raise
teachers’ level of awareness of and planning for more rigorous and appropriate gradelevel academic rigor for students at every level.
Presented: January 23, 2018

 6

Professional Development – 1.5
Members of the Governing Board, including the school’s principal, indicated that
professional development was not as much of a focus as it could have been to enhance
teachers’ understanding of appropriate grade level standards and the importance of
identifying standards that are most likely to appear on state standardized assessments.
Without a consistent way of examining and responding to student work in data team
meetings, recognizing patterns of error in student work in an effort to map both small
group instruction and the re-teaching of concepts students have not yet mastered is
difficult.
The Lyn Knoll team mentioned utilizing iReady assessment data intentionally this year
to guide planning; also, members of the Governing Board indicated that instructional
coaches and members of the community support team are supporting the Lyn Knoll
team to plan and deliver professional development for teachers that is more streamlined
and focused on data.
The Lyn Knoll instructional leadership team would benefit from creating dedicated time
in the late spring to utilize whatever assessment data is available to plan ahead for the
following year, with a focus on the design of structures that allow for the level of
collaborative planning current academic outcomes require.
Professional development must be intentionally aligned with student needs, and must
be led, or at a minimum co-facilitated, by instructional leaders at the school site. The
principal should work closely with her Learning Community Director to plan professional
development experiences for teachers each month that support the data team and
Professional Learning Community work that should be happening on a weekly or biweekly basis at Lyn Knoll.
The Joint Steering Committee has requested the opportunity to review the current
professional development plan for the remainder of the school year, to the degree that a
high-level overview can be provided.
Family Community Engagement – 1.0
Each member of the Governing Board indicated that Family and Community
Engagement is a relative gap at Lyn Knoll. The principal shared that parents have not
historically been comfortable in classrooms, in part due to the existing language gap for
many parents and guardians. The principal also shared an anecdote about a rift that
occurred that resulted in a trust and integrity breach between a former employee at Lyn

Presented: January 23, 2018

 7

Knoll and the parent community that has yet to fully heal; according to the school
leader, this event from several years ago caused a chasm between staff and families.
Parents do come to the school for certain events that occur each year, however, such
as Leader in Me leadership events and the positive attendance celebration. Parents
have not been well-represented on the Governing Board, and do not typically have a
voice in decision-making regarding curriculum or other operational functions at the
school.
The review team recognized Family and Community Engagement to be a significant
concern for Lyn Knoll moving forward as a school with APS Pilot status.
Student Support and Outcomes – 2.0
According to the Pilot School Manual (2014), Pilot schools must sustain growth through
years one and two and meet or exceed district averages when compared to schools
with similar demographics in the fall following year three. If a Pilot school has not met
agreed upon achievement goals after three years, the district will work with the school to
transition out of Pilot school status during year four (pg. 45).
Please see attached data report for historical academic growth and achievement
outcomes at Lyn Knoll.
Leadership and Governance – 2.5
Leadership and Governance, based on the criteria outlined in the Pilot School Manual,
is a strength for Lyn Knoll. Each staff member with whom the review team connected
revealed that the Governing Board, as well as the school’s principal, adhere strictly to
the notion that a Pilot school’s leadership stems from the Governing Board. Members
of the Board, as well as other teachers, indicated feeling incredibly and consistently
involved in all decision-making processes that occur at Lyn Knoll. This category was
clearly Lyn Knoll’s strength from the perspective of the review team.
The direction from the review team, as well as the Joint Steering Committee, is for the
Governing Board at Lyn Knoll, under the auspices of the Pilot School Manual, to take a
more active and directive role in supporting the principal and the rest of the Lyn Knoll
staff to create a plan to improve both academic and technical structures and practices in
the other categories outlined in this report as a part of the School Quality Review. The
Joint Steering Committee is prepared to support this organization and effort at every
level.

Overall School Level – 1.8
Presented: January 23, 2018

 8

Final Recommendation
Based on the historical progress that Lyn Knoll Elementary School has demonstrated
over the course of the last four years as an APS Pilot school, and in alignment with
feedback from the School Quality Review team, the Joint Steering Committee
recommends that Pilot status be continued for the remainder of the 2017-2018 school
year and the 2018-2019 school year. The Joint Steering Committee suggests three
specific actions in order to support this recommendation:
1. A JSC School Quality Review team will conduct a half-day visit in April of 2018 to
check on progress related to guidance stemming from the November 2017 SQR
walk-through.
2. A JSC School Quality Review team will conduct a full-day visit in the first
academic quarter of 2018 to check on progress related to guidance from the
November 2017 and April 2018 SQR walk-through experiences; the review team,
in conjunction with the Joint Steering Committee, will make a recommendation at
that time as to whether to support Lyn Knoll’s ongoing Pilot status.
3. Lyn Knoll’s building principal and members of the Governing Board will attend a
Joint Steering Committee meeting in January, 2018, to provide an update on
current state at Lyn Knoll, and to request any support the school needs to
continue making adequate progress as an APS Pilot school.
Respectfully Submitted,
The APS Joint Steering Committee

Presented: January 23, 2018