Principal Wenning outlines improvements, instructional practice guide use as school aims to move from level 1 to level 3 or 4

Principal Wenning, principal of the host school, told the Cheatham County Board of Education during its roadshow meeting that the school has been rated level 1 for two years and is aiming to reach level 3 or 4 this year after recent changes and interventions.

“we were level 1 actually for the last 2 years in a row, and none of us are happy about that,” Principal Wenning said, adding that a single subject area had depressed the school's overall rating and that midyear benchmark data suggest the school “will be a level 3 or 4 school this year” if gains hold.

The school has pursued several steps to raise student performance, Wenning said: personnel reassignments, expanded use of the district's high‑quality instructional materials (HQIM) in math and English, collaborative planning among teachers, and targeted intervention programs. He described a literacy pilot and daily short practice for reading, and emphasized incentives tied to ACT performance.

“if I can get 5 to 10 minutes just kind of engage this every day, that that's a huge jump,” Wenning said of the literacy pilot. He said the school is using small, tangible rewards — food coupons, lunches, and larger district incentives for higher scores — to motivate students toward the district goal of a school average ACT of 21.

District staff described how the Instructional Practice Guide (IPG) is being used across schools. Rachel, a district staff member who presented the IPG to the board, said the guide is an observational tool that helps leaders and teachers use common language and evidence to support instruction.

“One of the reasons that we love this tool … is it has a lot of common language, so we're all speaking the same language,” Rachel said, explaining that the IPG includes core actions (culture of learning, use of HQIM, question/task design, and student engagement) and a rating scale used to identify trends and prioritize professional development.

Rachel said the district conducts beginning, middle and end‑of‑year walkthroughs with the IPG and that principals and academic specialists may use the tool for targeted goals or peer observations. She added the district is beginning to collect enough data to move toward trend analysis but that it is the first robust year of district‑level data collection.

Principal Wenning also updated the board on facilities and recent capital work. He said bleacher parts for a concrete pathway by the home‑side bleachers are expected to arrive soon and thanked the board for approval of the auditorium air‑conditioning replacement, which he said made the evening's meeting comfortable.

“We also wanna say thank you for the AC system replacement because, honestly, if you were here tonight, without that, y'all would be freezing to death,” Wenning said.

The presentation included descriptions of classroom data use and interventions, and district staff said the IPG aligns with state encouragement for observable, research‑based instructional practices. Board members asked whether the IPG has produced measurable correlations with test scores; presenters said it is too early for district‑wide causal analysis but that local schools are using the tool to target instruction and professional development.

The board thanked the host school for the presentation and for hosting the roadshow meeting.

Looking ahead, Wenning said the school expects continued implementation of the interventions and monitoring of benchmark data to track whether the projected improvement to level 3 or 4 is realized.