Archived Information

Assessment/Accountability
School and District Accountability and Assistance

Panel Report
Compass School Candidate Review
Richard J. Murphy School - Boston Public Schools

Introduction

The Program

The Exemplary Schools Program is one part of the Massachusetts School and District Accountability System. The purpose of the Exemplary Schools Program is to recognize and celebrate improvement in Massachusetts' schools, and to disseminate information and encourage networking and sharing of ideas, effective practices, and models for success. The program is intended to provide a means for the se schools to share their expertise with other schools in the state.

Based on the School Performance and Improvement Ratings issued in January 2001, and continued and/or significant improvement on the 2001 MCAS test results, the Department identified 175 schools that exceeded their expectations for improvement and invited them to participate in the program by applying for consideration as candidates to serve as 2002 Commonwealth Compass Schools. Of the 84 schools who chose to apply by submitting information on the initiatives they have undertaken to improve student performance that they think have had the most positive impact on their results, seven high schools, eight elementary schools, and three middle schools were selected as finalists and scheduled for an on-site review to determine their willingness and capacity to serve. Data and information gathered from the applications and the review process of these schools will be published in a report this fall.

Schools selected to serve as 2002 Commonwealth Compass Schools will receive special recognition and a $10,000 grant to support the participation of their administrators and staff in information sharing and dissemination activities over the next year.

The Report

This report summarizes the findings and analyses of the visiting team based on their March 13, 2002 site visit review of the Richard J. Murphy School. The report will assist the Commissioner in determining which schools from among those visited will be designated to serve as Compass Schools in the state's new Exemplary Schools Program.

The review panel evaluated data and written information on the school's performance and improvement efforts, visited the school, and met with school and district officials in order to answer the following two key questions:

1. Is this school using effective improvement initiatives that could be replicated in other similarly profiled schools?
2. Are the conditions in place for this school to serve as a model of effective practices and successful improvement initiatives?

The panel's responses to these two questions frame the report. The findings and conclusions presented here are the product of analysis, discussion, and observation, and are based on the evidence made available to the panel before and during their visit. A list of panel members who participated in the Murphy School review is provided in Appendix A. A detailed schedule of the panel's activities is provided in Appendix B.

Murphy School Profile

The Richard J. Murphy, one of 86 elementary schools in Boston, enrolled 772 students in Grades K- 5 in 2001. This represents a decline in enrollment of 100 students since 1998. Student demographics have been stable during this period. The student body is 56% African American, 21% white, 16% Asian, and 6 % Hispanic. The Murphy School reported that 18% of the students receive Special Education services; 31% of students speak a first language other than English, and 15% of students have been identified as Limited English Proficient. The Murphy School has a School-Wide Title I program with 83% of the student body being eligible to receive free and reduced price lunch.

In 2000 (the most recent attendance data available to the panel), the school's daily attendance rate was 96.2 percent, with students missing an average of six to seven days per school year. This represents a decrease from an average of 10 to 11 days in 1997. One student received an out-ofschool suspension, and there were no in-school suspensions or exclusions in 2000. The retention rate at the Murphy School over the last three years has been 3.5%. Thirty-two students were retained in grade in 2000.

Staffing

Murphy's students are taught by 64 full time teachers for an approximate pupil-to teacher ration of 20 to 1. There are 25 teacher aides. Average class size at all grade levels is 18 to 20 students. The school administration consists of the Principal and two assistant principals. The central staff also includes a Student Support Coordinator and four Teacher Leader/ Curriculum Facilitators. The school reported that 57 (89%) of its full-time teachers were certified to teach in their current positions.

MCAS Results

The Murphy School's overall performance Category for Cycle I was "Very Low," and the school met or exceeded its improvement expectations for 1998-2000 by achieving a 1999/2000 average score that was 6.5 points higher than the 1998 baseline score. Had mid-cycle ratings been established, the school's Performance Category would have moved from Category 5 (Very Low) to Category 4 (Low.) The school demonstrated significant overall improvement between 1998 and 2001 in English/ Language Arts decreasing the number of students in the Warning Category from 37% to 23% and increasing the numbers of its students in the Proficient and Advanced Categories from 13% to 40%. Results in Mathematics during this same period of time saw decline in the Warning Category from 54% to 29% and an increase in the Proficient and Advanced Categories of 20% to 39%.

Panel Reponses To The Key Questions

KEY QUESTION 1: Is This School Using Effective Improvement Initiatives That Could Be Replicated In Other Similarly Profiled Schools?

It is very apparent that the Murphy School community has a shared vision and sense of purpose to increase student achievement through implementation of effective improvement initiatives that could be replicated in similarly profiled schools with similar resources and staffing.

At the Murphy School all educational activities and programming are viewed through the lens of continuous and rigorous examination of the teaching and learning process with the goal of constant improvement and, as stated by the principal, making the learning standards and expectations outlined in the curriculum frameworks accessible to all children. The Murphy School utilizes the following strategies to maintain a coherent instructional focus on standards and high expectations for all students: extensive professional development in literacy and mathematics for all classroom teachers, including support staff, specialists (such as art and computer teachers) and administrators; increased time for literacy and math instruction during the school day and alignment of literacy and math instruction with the frameworks; horizontal and vertical articulation within and across grade levels and between regular, special and bilingual education staff; clear and open lines of communication between staff, administration, parents and community resulting in shared decisionmaking; extended school day, week and year learning opportunities; and effective use of personnel and financial resources.

A. Which improvement initiatives have had the greatest impact on student performance results?

The Murphy School was selected for Compass School Panel Review based on its continuous record of improvement on MCAS results over the past three years. The school initiative that has had the greatest impact on student performance results is an intense focus on instruction in literacy (including reading and writing) and mathematics. This is accomplished through increased instructional time (two hours daily for literacy and 90 minutes for math); after school, Saturday, and summer learning opportunities; adoption of consistent instructional programs in literacy and math aligned with the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks and with accompanying intensive professional development for all staff (including support staff, specialists and administrators); and reallocation of resources to create smaller class sizes at all grade levels. To ensure uninterrupted instructional time in literacy and math, special subjects (art, music, swimming, French, physical education, French and technology) are scheduled in the afternoon.

The literacy program has been enriched by the use of a balanced literacy approach throughout the school, which is supported by adoption of Rigby's Developing Literacy First in K-2, Supporting Literacy in grades 3-5, the Open Court Phonics Program in K-1, and Writer's Workshop. Instruction includes shared reading, guided reading, reading aloud, reader's workshop, shared writing, interactive writing, peer editing, and independent reading and writing. Science and social studies are taught during the literacy block through content area readings. In math, the school adopted an inquiry approach to mathematics, Investigations, published by TERC, which trains students in the various strands of the Math Frameworks and teaches them to explain their problemsolving strategies orally and in writing. Another program in use is Developing Mathematical Ideas (DMI). The accompanying staff development for both literacy and math includes coaching, looking at student work, in-depth examination and practice of the above instructional modalities, and continual monitoring of student progress through data analysis. Coaching follows a clinical model, where there is pre-discussion, teachers then observe a lesson in one of the model classrooms that are set up for coaching, and follow-up with a debriefing session. These approaches for math and literacy are followed in all classrooms, at all grade levels, and in special needs and bilingual learning environments as well.

Extended learning activities take place after school, on Saturdays, and during the summer and are targeted to provide extra help in reading, writing, and math for students who need more time to meet the standards, including bilingual and special needs students. Homework begins in kindergarten and continues through the grades.

To reallocate resources to create smaller class sizes at all levels (less than 20:1), the Murphy School uses an "all-funds" approach to budgeting, combining local, state, federal (including Title I and SPED), and various grant funds. The school formed an Instructional Support Team to help teachers and students as the school changed its reading, writing and math practices. This team consists of the school's literacy, math and writing specialists, Reading Recovery teachers, and special education resource teachers. Each support teacher works, utilizing an inclusionary process, in grade level classes in the morning to reduce the student-teacher ratio further (from 20:1 to 10:1). In the afternoon, these team members work in classrooms directly with struggling learners. In addition, high teacher attendance rate at the Murphy School enables the regularly assigned building substitutes (five) to work in classrooms tutoring youngsters on a regular basis. They do, however, cover classes during the day when teachers are scheduled for coaching sessions and SPED team meetings, an example of effective use of personnel.

Ample evidence of the success of these initiatives is available through classroom observations, interviews, exhibits of student work and the test data. For example, students observed in math classes working either individually or in groups, demonstrated both orally and in writing that there were able to verbalize their strategies for problem solving and use the language of mathematics.

B. How did the school plan their improvement initiatives and put them into practice?

Even before the results were in for the first administration of MCAS, the Murphy faculty had asked for more training in literacy. The starting point, however, for the Murphy School's improvement efforts was the examination of the results of the first (1998) MCAS assessments. At that time, based on MCAS results, one in every three students at the Murphy School could not read at grade level and over 50% failed the math portion of the test.

During two all-day professional development sessions in the fall of 1999, teachers (including teachers of bilingual and special needs students and specialists) examined MCAS test items in relation to student achievement, examined the school's instructional programming for teaching reading, writing, and math, and began to develop a strategic plan for improving curriculum, instruction and assessment. School teams were formed to develop action plans in the areas of increasing time for learning; aligning curriculum with state standards; improving teaching through professional development; reducing class size; and ongoing measurement of student learning. School teams now include Grade Level Teaching Teams (for horizontal planning) and an Instructional Leadership Team (that includes representation from each grade level team to allow for vertical articulation and feedback) to make decisions about whole school planning and development of the School Improvement Plan. There is also a Specialist Teachers Team, Literacy Team and a Math Team. There is grade level (and specialist) representation on the School Based Management Team (School Site Council), which sets the school's priorities and conducts the budget process.

One of the components of the improvement initiative is ongoing assessment of student learning. This takes place through the state assessment, standardized tests, district assessments and grade level and classroom examination of student progress and work, including portfolios. Students not only learn test-taking skills but also are constantly asked to explain their thinking and the strategies they use to solve problems. Students at risk are identified by the Student Support Team at regular meetings, and no student is allowed to fall through the cracks. Exemplars of student work are posted in hallways and are frequently examined by other students. Younger students, in particular, like to peruse the work of students in the next grade. One student said, "Next year, I will do that project." Test data receive extensive item analysis to improve instruction. Results of data analysis are presented to the Instructional Leadership Team, Grade Level Teaching Teams and the School Site Council.

In addition to students reflecting on their own work and the work of fellow students, teachers at the Murphy School also reflect on their work. Model classrooms have been established where literacy and math coaches present lessons to students while being observed by other teachers. These lessons are then discussed and strategies replicated by teachers in their own classes. Teachers report back on results after the lessons are used in their own classrooms. This is one form of intense professional development that is job-embedded throughout the curriculum. Teachers also have an opportunity to present professional development workshops to their colleagues. Most teachers complete 70 or more hours in professional development each year, some of which occurs during the school day, some before or after school, and some during release days and during the summer.

The staff members at the Murphy School consider themselves in a state of continuous improvement. They never say that they have "arrived" but continue to look at what the next step may be in the process. Designation as a Compass School is looked at as another opportunity for feedback and improvement. Next steps articulated by faculty are improvement of implementation of the math curriculum and formulation of rubrics for good student work, i.e., what does it take to get an "A" in math in this class? Another area to examine is alignment of the standards with instruction in science. They are in the process of creating a science lab using funds from a recent grant award. This is part of the emphasis on coherence and the thrust toward high expectations that are held in common throughout the school, as well as incorporation of a process of shared decision-making that creates a sense of community.

C. Does the school think these initiatives can be successfully used in similar schools? Why?

The school is very eager to disseminate initiatives and strategies that can easily be replicated with organizational change at little or no additional expense, particularly for schools with similar staffing and resources. Teachers and administrators are open to having visitors in their school and have begun to do so since they have been named a Vanguard School last year in Mass Insight Education's Building Blocks initiative. The school is also one of Boston's Effective Practices Schools. Many on staff are comfortable presenting information about their instructional strategies, procedures for data analysis, and looking at student work to teachers and administrators from other schools.

While it could be costly for a school to purchase new materials or add staffing to duplicate the Murphy School's reading and math programs exactly, the strategy of extending learning time for literacy and math might be done for no additional outlay of funds. What follows is a list of some of the Murphy efforts at improving instruction and achievement that could be adopted (or adapted) by any school seeking to attain higher achievement:

• Displays of student work with content standards.
• Grade level planning teams (including bilingual and SPED teachers).
• Common planning time.
• Training in Looking at Student Work (LASW).
• Effective use of substitutes and specialists to focus on whole school improvement.
• Rules posted in each area.
• Full disclosure of the budget process where every group brings sets of priorities to the budgeting team.
• Agendas are made collaboratively and minutes from each team meeting are disseminated throughout the school. Meetings are open for all who care to attend.
• Reports from specialists may occur at grade level meetings; for example, at the fifth grade team meeting attended by a panel review member, the math specialist reported on the creation of a district assessment in mathematics.
• Strands are identified vertically in the instructional program. Teachers know what comes at the next grade level and ensure that students are taught what they need before moving on.
• Data and standards are used to drive curriculum and instruction.
• Word walls in every classroom, including specialists' room where the focus is on content words.
• Meetings are scheduled at different times of day (early morning, after school, evenings, during school) to accommodate a variety of individual schedules.
• Model of Collaborative Coaching and Learning (CCL) ensures that teachers don't have to leave the school for training; they can watch and learn from colleagues.
• Improve student-teacher ratios with interns, substitutes and inclusion of specialists rather than pullout.
• Professional development follows a number of different models such as: whole school training events; school-based courses and workshops; an instructional resource team for coaching and mentoring; literacy and math coaches; model classrooms; whole grade demonstration lessons; and grade-level study groups.
• A six-week cycle of assessments that enables teacher teams to collect data on student achievement, and use results quickly to suggest changes in instruction or make recommendations for tutoring.

KEY QUESTION 2: Are The Conditions In Place For This School To Serve As A Model Of Effective Practices And Successful Improvement Initiatives?

The staff and leaders of the Murphy School are proud of their accomplishments and look forward to sharing their achievement with others. Staff members can articulate the vision and have the ability to reflect upon and share their improvement initiatives and while realizing that their work requires constant monitoring and examination to ensure continuously increasing student achievement. The school has a strong sense of "family" and is invested in knowing each student. They have a comfort level with having their practices scrutinized. There is an institutionalized process of continuous learning, reflection and feedback that was established, and continues to be guided and sustained, by the principal. Facilities are available to make visitors feel welcome and comfortable.

A. Do leadership and staff have a shared understanding and use a common language to describe the changes/initiatives that have led to improvements in teaching and learning?

The strong and articulate leadership at the Murphy School has inspired the staff to excel in its commitment to the school and its initiatives. Staff members are able to describe the instructional program and processes in a way that is enthusiastic and reflects a school culture that embodies a model of shared leadership where all points of view are heard and considered. Both staff and principal see the school as a "work in progress" and look toward continual improvement. Systems of communication have been established in the building that put everyone "on the same page" in terms of their understanding of the changes that have been made and continue to be implemented. Staff is committed to raising the bar for all children including SPED and English language learners.

The Murphy School has had little staff turnover in the past several years. One staff member indicated that she was a member of the cadre of substitute teachers when a teacher left and she took her place. The former substitute was thus fully aware of the Murphy school culture and methodologies. The grade level team meetings and collaborative coaching provide opportunities for new staff to become assimilated and for veteran staff to continue to refine practice. Staff has confidence in the strong school leadership that has been established by the principal and each is dedicated to the school's mission of high expectations and achievement for all students.

B. How effectively do leadership and staff articulate the connections between specific changes and improvement initiatives they have implemented, and the improvements made in teaching and learning?

One of the requirements of the Whole School Improvement Planning (WSIP) process of the Boston Public Schools is for each school to examine itself with respect to the rubrics for school success in six essential areas. This annual process is taken very seriously at the Murphy School as the staff examines its accomplishments against the rubrics and determines next steps for improvement and change. Leadership and staff know that data, curriculum and learning standards need to be tied together on a daily basis to create a continuum of learning. Thus staff can articulate what they are doing and reflect on their practice during the common planning time set aside for collaboration.

This is particularly evident throughout the school as displays of student work are labeled with the standards the work reflects as well as a description of the assignment. It is also evident in the expectations that are held for special needs students and English language learners who are also expected to move toward meeting the standards. Teachers can point to changes they have implemented and corresponding improvements in student learning. They can show how analysis of test data has resulted in changes in instruction and student achievement. They believe that looking at student work on a regular basis serves a diagnostic purpose that advances student achievement. Behavior management has been developed through the whole school planning process as well and can be described by all staff.

In addition, the Murphy School principal is a learner along with the teachers and is willing to involve everyone in decision making on a collaborative basis. As a result, the teaching staff shares ownership of the improvement process with the principal and can articulate its features. There is a stable and cohesive faculty that has confidence in the principal's strong and dedicated leadership in a climate of shared responsibility, no blame, and high expectations for academic excellence.

C. Is there a school wide focus on, and sufficient investment in, continued improvement of student performance?

All of the initiatives cited in the school's reports and described during the interview with the principal were clearly visible in the classrooms, on the walls of the halls, and in conversations with staff. Financially, the school receives the same allocation as other Boston Public Schools that are also Title I Schoolwide Projects. The school has augmented its funding through writing a number of grants, including a grant for after-school programming.

A significant change during the coming years will be the incorporation of grades 6-8 in this K-5 school. Parents and community lobbied the Boston School Committee to change the grade structure of the school. Beginning in September 2002, the 6th grade will be added, to be followed with a 7th grade in September 2003 and an 8th grade in 2004. The planning process for this endeavor is already under way. The school anticipates few problems with this transition, as the students will be those already in the school moving up through the grades. They will already have internalized the school's standards for discipline and education. The accomplishment of this change is indicative of the commitment and involvement of Murphy School parents and their vote of confidence in the school. They prefer their children to remain in the building rather than moving on to a middle school.

D. Does the school appear to have the capacity to host future visitations?

The Murphy School is proud of its achievements and has already demonstrated the capacity to host visitors from other schools and districts. The school has been a site for a number of summer training programs. There is a climate or orderliness and respect in the building between staff and administration and between the adults and children. Classes are clustered in fairly open pods and teachers and students are accustomed to having visitors present. Children are happy to interact with visitors and share their work. The commitment to students is evident in the caring environment of the Murphy School and visitors leave with a sense that important and valued work is taking place and that everybody takes responsibility for all the students.

There is a room in the adjacent community center where teams of visitors could meet for briefing with Murphy School personnel. The staff would like to know what visitors would like to see and offered, for example, to provide demonstrations and explanations of the collaborative coaching model for staff development. They plan to conduct walk-throughs for administrators who could see first hand student work on the walls, observe classes, and begin to think of next steps for their own schools. They want to present themselves as colleagues who had the same problems as their visitors and share their strategies for approaching those problems and their own next steps for continuous improvement. The Murphy School principal is a very articulate presenter of the school's process for change and improvement.

E. Are there any reasons why the school should not be used as a Commonwealth Compass School?

There are no reasons why the Richard Murphy School should not be used as a Commonwealth Compass School. The staff and leadership have the commitment, facilities, and energy to disseminate information about their process and practice to other educators. They would demonstrate their effective practices by hosting visitors, and conducting demonstration lessons and workshops. The team was in strong agreement, without reservation, that the Murphy School would be an excellent choice to be a Commonwealth Compass School. Administrators, teachers, parents, and students have created a welcoming environment for all and have demonstrated that working together for academic improvement is critical.

Appendix A
Team Members

Geri-Lyn Ajemian, Ed.D, Coordinator, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Zita Samuels, Consultant, SchoolWorks
Kate Fenton, Director of Professional Development, Springfield, MA
Cindy McKay, Guidance Counselor, Foxborough, MA
Susan Cullen, Title I Director, Northbridge MA

Appendix B
Compass School Panel Review Visit Schedule

All activities take place at the school.