Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Improvement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conroe ISD outlines targeted improvement plan for Grangerland Intermediate after federal identification
Summary
District and Grangerland leaders presented a federally required targeted improvement plan after the campus was identified among the state’s bottom 5% for a domain; the plan emphasizes instructional coaching, observation-feedback cycles and targeted interventions with a February 28 submission deadline to TEA.
Conroe ISD staff and Grangerland Intermediate School leaders presented a targeted improvement plan Thursday after the campus was identified under federal requirements as needing focused support. The board heard a timeline for community feedback and implementation steps aimed at moving the campus out of the state’s bottom 5% for the applicable accountability domain.
“Year one, which is this year, we must no longer be in the bottom 5% of domain 3,” said the district presenter describing TEA’s identification process. The federal identification triggers a focused planning and monitoring process; if the campus exits the bottom 5% in year one it moves to “comprehensive progress” and then must show a higher score in year two than the score that produced the identification.
District and campus staff said the improvement plan narrows to a set of high-leverage activities: building an instructional leadership team, instituting a frequent observation-and-feedback coaching cycle, ensuring curriculum materials and lesson planning align to grade-level standards, and scaling interventions for students who need accelerated growth. “We identified the need, they came up with the plan, and our job is to implement and monitor that plan,” said the district presenter.
Practical supports listed in the plan include district coaches on campus multiple days a week, a human-resources assistant director present Thursdays to support staffing and teacher coaching, additional intervention staffing and substitutes to reduce classroom disruption, and enhanced data dashboards to target instruction to students. District leaders said some supports already were in place and that staff were working “down to the student” level to identify small groups of pupils whose gains would move the school’s score.
A public meeting on Jan. 23 solicited parent and student feedback; presenters said turnout was limited and the district will distribute the recorded presentation and a survey to every parent via the district’s VeiL (parent communication) system. The board was asked to provide feedback at Thursday’s meeting; trustees offered suggestions that district staff said they would fold into the final submission.
Timeline and compliance details: Conroe named a district coordinator for the school (Jeff Fuller) on Dec. 6; the plan must be submitted to TEA by Feb. 28. Staff said they will return to the board for approval of the final plan after collecting additional stakeholder input and revising the document accordingly.
Trustees asked for clarifications on root causes and district lessons learned. Presenters described Grangerland’s recent history — a large enrollment increase, campus split and significant staff turnover — as among the factors that complicated continuity and instructional coherence. District staff said they are applying lessons learned from recent school openings and splits to avoid similar disruptions in future campus transitions.
Trustees and staff discussed metrics and near-term expectations. Some trustees pushed for an aggressive timeline; district staff said they were seeing momentum in classroom observations and early assessment data and described a “full-court press” of morning, in-school and afternoon intervention blocks to accelerate progress. One trustee asked whether a jump to a C by May was realistic; a district leader said that would be a stretch but that staff were aiming for visible growth and would report interim progress to the board.
Trustees offered practical support and asked staff to keep communication lines open with parents, including posting the full presentation and survey online. District leaders said the plan is both the narrowly required TEA submission and the broader campus-improvement plan that includes dozens of strategies for the school and will be monitored by district teams.
The board did not vote on the plan Thursday; staff will return with a revised submission that incorporates public and trustee feedback and a final request for formal approval before the Feb. 28 deadline.
