School Profile

Published: 2021-03-15 13:33:40
1315 words
5 pages
11 min to read
letter-mark
B
letter
University/College: 
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

The Muskie Junior High School serves a diverse group of students studying in grade six to eight located in the Eisenhower school district. There are 1,619 students enrolled in the school during the 2012 2013 school year. The ethnicity of the students is as follows African American 39.5%, Hispanic 30.7%, White 29.8%, American Indian 0.2%, Asian 0%, and two or more races 1.9%. A large percentage of the students (61.6%) come from economically challenged backgrounds. 38.4% of the students are the school are also identified as non-educationally disadvantaged with 5.8% being identified as English Language Learners. The schools retention rates by grade is 1%, 2.2%, and 1.4% for grade six, seven, and eight respectively. The students identified with disciplinary placement (2011 2012) account for 0.9% of the schools population. Furthermore, 19.9% of the students were identified as being at risk. Student mobility from 2011 2012 is at 7.8%.

Vision Statement

The schools vision is to provide an all-inclusive school environment that allows all members of the school to be responsible for understanding the best practices around the use of excellent interpersonal in order to achieve excellent school performance results in personnel management, equipment and educational facilities, fiscal responsibility, and curriculum Implementation and instruction development and delivery. This implies that all stakeholders have specific responsibilities to play in order to ensure effective service delivery that benefits all members of the schools faculty.

Mission Statement

The schools mission is to provide students with an excellent environment and all resources required in order to allow for the exploration, development, and exploitation of individual abilities by students, which will be facilitated by the knowledge, learnt both in and out of class in order to produce an all-round productive citizens.

Needs Assessment (Use AEIS Report)

Performance Data

Strengths (2-3 strengths)

The schools total performance (at phase 1 level 11 or above) in all subjects is higher than state and district average

Total performance (at phase 1 level 11 or above) for all subjects improved from 2012 to 2013 for the school

Weaknesses- areas in need of improvement (2-3 weaknesses)

Science performance (at phase 1 level 11 or above) for all grades is lower than the state and district average

Social science performance (at phase 1 level 11 or above) for all grades is lower than the state and district average

Culture/Climate Data

Strengths (2-3 strengths)

The school has low absenteeism from students (as a result of high attendance rates noted (96.9%))

The school also has a low annual dropout rate (0.1% in 2011-12)

Weaknesses- areas in need of improvement (2-3 weaknesses)

The school pays its teachers lower average actual salaries as compared to district and state salary figures for teachers

A high number of students (19.9%) are identified to be at risk

Demographic Data Analysis (Use AEIS report and information from the Case Scenarios about Muskie Junior High School)

From the AEIS report, the ethnicity of the students is as follows African American 39.5%, Hispanic 30.7%, White 29.8%, American Indian 0.2%, Asian 0%, and two or more races 1.9%. A large percentage of the students (61.6%) come from economically challenged backgrounds. 38.4% of the students are the school are also identified as non-educationally disadvantaged with 5.8% being identified as English Language Learners. The schools retention rates by grade is 1%, 2.2%, and 1.4% for grade six, seven, and eight respectively. The students identified with disciplinary placement (2011 2012) account for 0.9% of the schools population. Furthermore, 19.9% of the students were identified as being at risk. Student mobility from 2011 2012 is at 7.8%.

Organizational Structure

Describe the purpose and function of the SDMC and how decisions are madeThe main purpose and function of the shared decision making committee at the institution is to allow for inclusive decision-making. This is mainly attributable to the fact that the SDMC is composed of individuals from diverse backgrounds, and professions, hence leading to diverse and inclusive decision-making. The SDMC is also composed of professionals (including staff members), who are responsible in guiding professional decisions and implementing decisions made by the committee is the classroom. The committee is also composed of parents, community and business representatives who are responsible in ensuring that the interests of the community around the school are considered during decision-making. Lastly, a district and campus representative is also a member of the committee with the responsibility of protecting the institutions interests on matters development and campus improvement.

Decisions made by the committee follow a number of steps. The first is identifying the specific problem facing the institution that is hampering development and progress. The second step is formulating different alternatives that can help solve the problem identified in the first step. The third step involves evaluating the alternatives in order to determine the most effective if implemented in solving the problem identified. The fourth step involves choosing the best alternative from the previous step. The next step is the implementation of the decision. This involves ensuring availability of all resources needed to implement the specific decision. The last step in the decision making process is evaluating the effectiveness of the decision implemented. This is critical since it provides an excellent measure on whether the decision made solves the initial problem. In case the decision implemented is not effective, other alternatives can be considered.

Membership Composition of the Shared Decision-Making Committee

Number of Teachers (Use AEIS Report) 4 Number of Parents (at least 2) 3

Number of School-based Staff

(Half the number of classroom teachers) 2 Number of Community Members

(at least 2)

3

Number of Non-Instructional Staff 1 Number of Business Members 1

Name of SDMC Member Position (Term Expires)

James Brown Teachers representative (1/1/2017)

Karen Civil Teachers representative (1/1/2017)

Brian Greene Teachers representative (1/1/2017)

Veronica VearTeachers representative (1/1/2017)

Christine Beth Parents representative (1/1/2017)

Robert Brian Parents representative (1/1/2017)

Caleb Lukas Parents representative (1/1/2017)

Brain Smith School-based Staff representative (1/1/2017)

Grace Mathers School-based Staff representative (1/1/2017)

Kim Mitchel Community member representative (1/1/2017)

Liam Mathew Community member representative (1/1/2017)

Logan Jaden Community member representative (1/1/2017)

Andrew David Non-Instructional Staff representative (1/1/2017)

Jackson Ryan Business Members representative (1/1/2017)

Muskie Junior High Professional Development Plan

Date Name of Training Purpose of Training Who Should Attend

10/12/2015 Shared Decision-Making Committee Communication Improving communication between the member of the shared decision making committee All member of the Shared Decision-Making Committee

15/12/2015 The decision making process for the SDMC Improving the decision making process used by the SDMC All member of the SDMC

5/1/2016 Improving staff satisfaction Improving staff satisfaction through ensuring that they properly remunerated for services offered All staff members

10/1/2016 Service delivery Improving the level of service delivery of staff members All staff members

30/1/2016 Academic improvement Seeking new ways through which to improve student performance in particular subjects All teaching staff, parents, and students

Plan must be based on the Needs Assessment of Muskie Junior High School.

Name: ___________________________________

Personal Professional Development Plan

Professional Goal

(Type of Professional Development Needed) Name of Training Purpose of Training Timeline

(When you plan to complete the Professional Development)

Communication Shared Decision-Making Committee Communication Improving communication between the member of the shared decision making committee 11/12/2015

Decision making The decision making process for the SDMC Improving the decision making process used by the SDMC 16/12/2015

Staff satisfaction Improving staff satisfaction Improving staff satisfaction through ensuring that they properly remunerated for services offered 6/1/2016

Service delivery Service delivery Improving the level of service delivery of staff members 11/1/2016

Academic improvement Academic improvement Seeking new ways through which to improve student performance in particular subjects 31/1/2016

Goal Improving communication between SDMC members, decision making strategies used by the SDMC, service delivery, academic performance and staff satisfaction

Strategy/Action Responsible Resources Timeline Evaluation

Providing training on communication strategies All members of the SDMC, Communication specialists Funds, meeting room, and projector. 10/12/2015 Level of communication between SDMC members

Providing training on decision making strategies All members of the SDMC, decision making expert Funds, meeting room, and projector. 15/12/2015 Evaluation of the methods used by the SDMC in making decisions

Providing training on service delivery All staff members, service delivery expert Funds, meeting room, and projector. 5/1/2016 Level of service offered by staff members

Providing training on effective methods of improving academic performance All teaching staff and academic experts Funds, meeting room, and projector.10/1/2016 Level of student academic performance at the institutions

Providing training on improving staff satisfaction All staff members, human resource expert Funds, meeting room, and projector. 30/1/2016 Level of satisfaction among staff members

References

Kepner, C.H., & Tregoe, B.B. (2005). The New Rational Manager(rev.ed). New York. NY: Kepner-Tregoe.

sheldon

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: