/

850 Hungerford Drive RockVille. Maryland * 20850-1747

Telephone (301) 279-3626

May 16, 2005

:Mr. Thomas E. Perez

President, Montgomery County Council
Stella B.Werner Council Office Building
100 Maryland Avenue
Rockville, Maryland 20850

Dear Mr. Perez:

The attached document provides answers to the questions raised at the May 12, 2005, Budget
Worlcsession. We welcome the opportunity to address the operating and capital budget questions
raised by Council members.

The student performance improvement we have achieved over the past five years reflects the
implementation of the strategies and initiatives in Our Call to Action: Pursuit ofExcellence, the
school system's strategic plan. Our strategic plan has allowed us to build the foundation for long
.lasting student success systemwide. The challenge ahead is sustaining the momentum to achieve
increasingly higher achievement targets. If we are going to expand the reading achievement
successes .garnered over the past five years, we must continue to introduce effective diagnostic
and formative assessments as we have undertaken with the Technology for Curriculum Mastery
(TCM) initiative.

The full implementation of the new technology-enhanced assessments presents an opportunity to

consolidate several diagnostic tools into a single assessment. Additionally, since assessment

results and other student achievement data are accessible anytime, from anywhere, teachers can

easily access the data, drill down into specific assessments, analyze the information and identify

needs of individual students, and print reports for planning and to share with parents. The.

efficient and detailed feedback from these reliable assessments is crucial for preparing students

for success in meeting the outcomes of our rigorous curriculum and on standardized tests. The

TCM initiative i·s fully integrated with other Montgomery County Public Schools strategic

curriculum and technology initiatives and reforms.

Over the past two years, we have worked with the Education and Management and Fiscal Policy
committees, along with our Operation Excellence business partners, to properly define the scope
of:tne requirements and examine best practices for the replacement of our antiquated Financial
Information System (FIS). Although we have estimated the cost to implement the new FIS at
between $9 million and $13 million, we have communicated to both the Education and
Management and Fiscal Policy committees that it is necessary to complete the requirements
phase and issue the implementation request for proposal before a replacement cost can be
determined.
Mr. Thomas E. Perez 2 May 16, 2005

The $1.5 million request for the PIS is required to frrstcomplete the.requirements analysis phase
of the project and then initiate the selection and implementation of the new FIS. ·Since the
County Government did not include an appropriation request for their financial infonnation
replacement, the funding that was previously appropriated through the Technology Investment
Fund (TIP) for a joint County Government and MCPS requirements study phase lapsed. As a
result, MCPS will need $200,000 to fund our requirements study phase. The remaining money
will then be used to initiate the implementation of the solution tllat satisfies the specified
requirements.

If you have any additional questions, please contact me or Mr. John Q. Porter, deputy
superintendent for strategic technologies and accountability, at 301-279-3581.

Sincerely,

/C<#Jc<4~
Larry A. Bowers
Chief Operating Officer

LAB:csa

Copy to:
Members of the County Council
Members of the Board ofEducation
Dr. Weast
Dr. Lacey
Mr. 1. Porter
 Questions from the Montgomery County Public Schools Budget Worksession

May 12,2005

Operating Budget Questions

• Regarding entrepreneurial funds, 1 was looking for a policy on royalties, including an ethics
policy component.

Regulation GCA-RA, Employee Conflict of Interest, indicates in section II.E.2. Property of

Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS), "Supplies, equipment, or instructional
materials produced alone by an employee of MCPS, or produced in association with other
such employees, for which substantial time, facilities, or materials of MCPS have in any way
been used. shall become the property of Montgomery County Public Schools." The royalties
or other benefits received from the sale of such products will go to MCPS, and there will be
no benefits received by the employee.

• For category 81, there are no utilities. Is this not needed, especially for the print shop
operations ?

Utilities are budgeted in Category 10 Operation of Plant and Equipment. regardless of the
fund of the related program. This enables MCPS to track and analyze all utilities costs
centrally and provides the public with information in one place to understand how much
MCPS spends on utilities as a whole. It would be particularly difficult to budget for the
Entrepreneurial Fund print shop utilities separately bec,ause tax-supported and
entrepreneurial activities occur in the same location simultaneously.

• On the calculation of lapse - this is calculated differently than other agencies, say Park and
Planning. I understand that jobs in MCPS are different, but 1 think there should be a greater
contribution.

MCPS calculates lapse, including both lapse and turnover savings, by bargaining unit and job
type based on historical experience. Lapse constitutes savings during the period a position is
vacant. Turnover savings reflect the difference between the budgeted salary for a position
and the amount that a new hire will be paid for the remainder of a fiscal year. This
experience is reviewed annually to determine salary costs. Regular financial monitoring of
salary costs enables MCPS to make necessary corrections in lapse calculations each year for
each unit. The chart below shows the change in budgeted lapse from FY 2005 to FY 2006 by
. Q?Igaining unit. Budgeted lapse has increased by $2,089,954 from $16,901,078 to
-=$18,991,032.
 2

MCPS Lapse and Turnover

FY 2005-2009

Bargaining Unit

MCAASP $460,000 $460,000 $0

MCEA 11,322,912 12,018,630 695,718
SEIU 5,118,166 6,512,402 1,394,236

Total $16,901,078 $18,991,032 $2,089,954

• I would like information on consultants and contractors in MCPS at this point in time.

Contractual services, including consultant services, will increase from $19,785,026 in

FY 2005 to $24,847,118 in FY 2006, an increase of $5,062,092. The attached chart
(Attachment A) shows the total of contractual services by state category. It also provides
detail on the increases in contractual services that include consultant services.

• Please clarify College Institute participation with regard to Mr. Campbell's remark that.
students must exhaust their AP option before they take a college class. I have a concern that
this program is replacing AP and that the costs of college courses is much more than the fee
for AP, which is paid after completion.

As Dr. Weast noted at the Council worksession on May 12, 2005, the College Institute
program currently offered at Thomas S. Wootton and Gaithersburg high schools provides an
academically rigorous alternative for talented high school students to gain valuable
experience of college standards while still in high schoo1. Students must earn a minimum
score of 550 on the verbal and 550 on the math SAT exams, or 24 or higher on the ACT
exam. They must maintain a cumulative weighted GPA of 3.5 or highet, or place into
college level classes on the Montgomery College assessment tests. Completion of, or
enrollment in, relevant AP classes is a prerequisite for some College Institute courses.

As Mr. Campbell said, when the program was established many students at the two schools
had exhausted available Advanced Placement courses in their areas of interest. The College
=. Institute offers those students an opportunity to get college credits toward a degree at
- Montgomery College or another college. It was not the intention to establish a prerequisite
that students must already have completed a certain number of AP classes or all available AP
classes at their school. Students in the College Institute program often take AP classes
during the same semester. As Dr. Nunley noted in her letter of May 11, 2005, that these
courses alIeady were available to MCPS students at the Montgomery College campuses. The
College Institute offers the same rigorous courses without forcing students to drive to a
 5-"

( 3

college campus and then return to their high school for the remainder of the school day.
Financial assistance is available for needy students.

• Regarding answers· to PDA concerns, I did not feel I got an answer to my question, how does
this fit in with all other technology priorities? Also, will there be competition later? Will
there be other companies offering the same services to bring down the costs?

The major MCPS technology priorities (Technology Modernization, Integrated Quality

Management System, and TeM) have remained focused on facilitating the access and
transformation of data into information and knowledge to inform and guide instructional and
operational decisions. As a result, the Technology Modernization program has supported the
development and refreshment of the technology infrastructure to provide staff and students
with access to the resources to support teaching, learning, and operational effectiveness.
Similarly, the Integrated Quality Management System (the Data Warehouse and Instructional
Management System) provides access to knowledge systems to inform. data-driven decision
making. The Technology for Curriculum Mastery (TCM) initiative is directly integrated
with and is a logical extension to the Technology Modernization and Integrated Quality
Management technology priorities.

The technology-enhanced assessments of the TCM initiative support and simplify the work
of teachers and principals in diagnosing and monitoring students' academic progress. This
automated assessment initiative replaces long-standing paper-based assessments with
intuitive technology used to monitor and analyze student performance. This is consistent
with the school system's strategic plan and accountability framework. The technology
enables teachers to administer assessments efficiently by dramatically altering the time
required to prepare materials and also by significantly simplifying actual administration of
the assessment. Data from the assessments are immediately available online and are being
integrated into the Integrated Quality Management System to use with other student data in
diagnosing and programming individual student instruction. Additionally, teachers have
access to instructional resources to enhance their instructional pro grams and automated
reports and correspondence to communicate more effectively with parents.

Although Wireless Generation currently holds an exclusive rights agreement to deploy the
DIBELS assessment on handheld devices, it is important to note that the MCPS is paying
heavily discounted student licensing fees (60 percent less) compared to pricing available to
other school districts nationally. This also is true for the computer-based Measures of
Academic Progress-Reading (MAP-R) assessment. Additionally, since the jointly
d~veloped mCLASS: Reading 3D assessment integrates requirements from the Running
=Records, MCPS Assessment Program for Primary Reading (MCPSAP-PR), and Dynamic
Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) into a single assessment, this greatly
simplifies the work process for teachers and enables MCPS to realize student licensing
savings. We will continue to be mindful of the changing educational technology market and
pursue those products and services that meet our needs and negotiate for the best price and
value for the county.
 4

• PDAs sound desirable. My question is, can the rollout be over a few years rather than now
in FY06? Must it all be done in 06?

.As we communicated in the May lO, 2005, memorandum to the County Council titled
Montgomery County Public Schools: FY 2006 Operating Budget, circle 47, "Between
January and May 2005, mCLASS: Reading is being deployed to the remaining elementary
schools." The handheld-based mCLASS: Reading formative' reading a,ssessment alltomates
the Running Records assessment that MCPS teachers have used for several years. It can be
used everyday by teachers of kindergarten and Grades 1 and 2. Since this assessment is
deployed on a handheld device (PDA), all 125 elementary schools currently have the
required number of handheld devices to administer the new mCLASS: Reading 3D this fall.

• What is the rollout schedule pfthese assessments?

Please see Attachment B: Rollout Plan for Reading Assessment Initiatives for specific
details.

• What are the options short offull roll out? Need an answer benveen now and Tuesday?

The handheld-based (FDA) mCLASS: DIBELS (23 Reading First and Horizon Intervention
schools) and mCLASS: Reading assessments are fully implemented. The new mCLASS:
Reading 3D assessment (which combines the Running Records, MCPS.AP-PR, and DIBELS
into a single assessment) has been. implemented in 19 schools and training for the remaining
schools is scheduled for this summer to permit complete implementation this fall. Delaying
the scheduled implementation extends the time frame during which MCPS would have two
different assessment instruments to measure reading performance in the primary grades. As
a result we risk limiting the reading achievement gains 'Of our primary grade students and we
will not reach the strategic milestones for supporting our teachers with effective tools to
support instruction. Delaying implementation of the new mCLASS: Reading 3D assessment
also would prevent us from sharing the benefits of this assessment with schools throughout
the county, particularly Green Zone schools.

The MAP-R assessment-a computer-adaptive test for all students in Grades 3-5 that
quickly measures' reading proficiency-is currently in all elementary schools.
Implementation plans call for all middle schools to begin using the MAP-R assessment in
January 2006. The MAP-R assessment provides valuable progress monitoring feedback to
inform instructional decisions that middle schools need to adopt. Using this MAP-R
a.J?sessment at the middle school level is an important element of the middle school reform
=process. The Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test (SDRT4). is currently used for selected
students in elementary schools. The middle school roll-out is scheduled for this fall and this
implementation also provides excellent information about the instructional needs of students
that are most struggling readers. MAP-R is the only consistent, equitable method for
collecting and analyzing formative reading assessment data at the middle school level. This
instantaneous· data supports individual student instructional planning and monitoring for
student progress toward meeting proficiency on Maryland School Assessment. As a result
 5

delaying implementation of MAP-R in the middle schools will reduce our ability to
meaningfully support the middle school curriculum reform efforts.

• This says most ofthe money isfor assessments. Has the test changed?

The Maryland School Assessment (MSA) 'and Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS)
tests have not changed. However, to maintain and expand the reading achievement successes
garnered over the past five years, we must continue to introduce effective diagnostic and
formative assessments. The assessments of the TCM initiative improve, support, and
simplify the work of teachers and principals in diagnosing the academic progress of students.
The full implementation of the new mCLASS: Reading 3D assessment presents a dramatic
opportunity to consolidate the Running Records, MCPSAP-PR, and DIBELS tools into a
single assessment .

Using technology-facilitated assessments (both handheld and computer-based) eliminates the

need for teachers to score each student's assessment, perform computations, and transfer the
scores onto individual student information sheets and classroom summary sheets. In essence,
the repetitive tasks (administering, scoring, and recording assessment data) that are simple to
do but take time are eliminated. Additionally, since the assessment results and other student
achievement data are accessible anytime, from anywhere, teachers can easily access the data,
drill down into specific assessments, analyze the information and identify needs of individual
students, and print reports for planning and to share with parents. The efficient and detailed
feedback from these reliable assessments is crucial for preparing students for success in
meeting the outcomes of the district's rigorous curriculum. and on the standardized tests.

• I would like to know which school gets which test. Which get them now; which next year. I'
think elementary schools get some ofthese and middle schools get a different test?

All of the assessments are designed to measure reading, and are designed for different age
groups, reading proficiency levels, and frequency of administration. Attachments B and C
summarize the MCPS assessments and rollout schedule.

• What about the missing $400,000 mentioned in earlier questions?

The $400,000 difference is in continuing costs for teacher substitutes and staff to support the
TCM program. Continuing costs refer to expenditure items that were in the FY 2005
spending plan that will be used for the same cost object in the following year. Since MCPS
_ .. was asked previously to show only new program costs for FY 2006, we did not include the
= ~alary and fringe benefits costs for the two permanent staff or for the substitutes that ~ere
included in the FY 2005 initiative spending plan and that continued into FY 2006. These
costs are as follows:
• $151,142 in continuing s::jlaries and fringe benefits for 2.0 instructional specialists
who provide TCMtraining and support to teachers
• $243,381 in continuing salaries and fringe benefits for the substitutes needed
when teachers across the school system participate in TCM training
 6

• What is the $1.5 million in the FISfor? What is the breakdown of this funding? Why $1.5
versus $750,OOO? By the end of Tuesday I would like to know the breakdown of the $1.5
million. What part did MCBRE scry needed to be done now?

The $1.5 million appropriation request for the Financial Information System (FIS) is required
tq first complete the requirements analysis and development phase then initiate the selection
and implementation of the financial information solution. Since the County Government did
not include an appropriation request for their financial information replacement, the funding
that was previously appropriated through the Technology Investment Fund (TIP) for a joint
County and MCPS requirements study phase lapsed. As a result, MCPS will use a portion of
the $1.5 million appropriation request to fund our requirements study phase.

Given the scope of our requirements, the substantial work we have already completed
internally and in examining financial best practices of Operation Excellence companies, we
do not expect that this requirements study would require more than $200,000. The remaining
money will be used to initiate the proj ect. Although we have estimated the cost to implement
the new FrS at between $9 million and $13 million, we have communicated to both the
Education and Management and Fiscal Policy committees that it is necessary to first
complete the requirements phase and issue the implementation request for proposal before a
definitive replacement cost can be determined.

During the requirements phase, the selected vendor will complete functional requirements
analyses ofMCPS accounting, budget, and procurement functions. In addition to contracting
for the preparation of functional requirements analyses, the selected vendor also will deliver
a Requirements Definition Document (RDD), and prepare one or two RFPs to acquire and
implement a FIS. The number of RFPs to be issued will depend on the vendor's
recommendation on whether or not to combine so:ftvvrare acquisition with implementation
services. The vendor also will assist MCPS in preparing a Change Management Plan for
migrating from its current systems to the new system. We also are seeking advisory services
to assist in the evaluation and selection of the FIS and implementation services; and to assist
MCPS in the development of a change management plan for migrating to a Frs.

MCPS currently uses the Budget Management Application (BMA), FIS, and Materials
Management System (MMS). BMA, the budget system at MCPS, is a contracted custom
developed system written in· PowerBuilder. PowerBuilder is obscure software that has
limited vendor support and is not commonly used, making it difficult and expensive to
modify or update. BMA was designed aroUnd the FIS account and responsibility structure
a;nd has never been able to provide the necessary capability for the MCPS budget analysts to
; build and monitor budgets online. FIS is an old mainframe system that was developed in the.
mid 1980's and is inadequate to meet the needs of MCPS to comply with Governmental
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requirements as well as provide needed management
reporting. MMS was developed in the early 1990's and must also be replaced as it shares
many Frs database records and global processes.
 7

Currently, the 11M:S online ordering system is used for approximately half of all purchase
orders, while the remaining purchase orders must be typewritten and manually processed.
Both Frs and M:MS use a CA-IDMS database, a :I;letwork (non-relational) database that is no
longer actively marketed by its vendor, Computer Associates (CA). Of greater concern are
the functional inadequacies in the current systems which are preventing MCPS from
improving and streamlining the operations of its business systems. The inadequacies include
the inconsistency of data between B11A, Human Resources Information System (HRlS), and
FrS; the inability to perform rapid queries against the database to meet reporting needs; poor
cash management functionality; lack of automated workflow; an inability to automate the
purchase order process; and the absence of an accounts payable system. Another major
concern is the limited availability of technical resources to support these systems. Currently,
support is provided by a cadre of retirees. Technical expertise in these products is not
available. MCPS installed the Lawson Human Resources Information System in 2001. This
system must be integrated with the new FrS. This is particularly critical since a large
percentage of the MCPS budget is spent for salaries and benefits.

Capital Budget Questions

• I would like information on what happens if some or all of the funds requested doesn 't find
its way into the budget.

As shown on Attachment D, the schools scheduled to receive FY 2006 Technology

Modernization services include:
• 26 elementary schools last served in 2000,
• 12 middle schools served in 1998 and 1999,
• John F. Kennedy High School served in 1999, and
• Thomas A. Edison which had half of its computers refreshed in 2004 and the remainder
provided in 1999.

These schools have been notified that they are on the FY 2006 schedule for technology
refreshment (pending budget appropriation) and they anticipate receiving updated technology
this summer. For schools being refreshed for the first time, the general practice is to provide
services in the same order schools received their original technology. Ibis would mean that
the middle and high schools would be served first, followed by the elementary schools.
Because middle and high schools generally have much larger student populations, the cost of
serving al114 secondary schools is roughly the same as the cost of serving the 26 elementary
schools.
=
: if the requested amendment for $2.3 million is not approved by the Council, this would
essentially bring the program to a halt for FY 2006. There would be enough funding to do
the two high school projects-Kennedy High School and the remaining half of Thomas A.
Edison. However, the 26 elementary and 12 middle schools could not be served in FY 2006,
and the technology refr~shment they expect to receive over the summer would have to be
delayed until FY 2007. If half of the requested funds were provided, there would be enough
 8

funding to do the two high schools and the 12 middle schools, which have the oldest
equipment of the 40 schools scheduled for services.

Delaying technology refreshment for the middle and elementary schools would not meet the
intent of 'the Council's policy of a 4-year refreshment cycle. This technology refreshment
policy is based on 'the Interagency Technology Policy and Coordination Committee (ITPCC)
Asset Management study and recommendation. A one year delay in technology refreshment
would result in schools' continued use of outdated equipment:
• Four of the middle schools would have eight year old equipment,
• Seven middle schools would have seven-year old equipment,
• Wood middle school would have five-year old equipment, and
• All of the elementary schools would have six-year old equipment.

• What commitments have already been made out ofthe $9.475 million?

The commitments already made out of the $9,473,000 are for the FY 2004 and FY 2005
finance payments, which will cost a total of $6,868,496.

• What is the average cost for elementary, middle and high schools?

The FY 2006 average firs.t yeat costs and the average finance costs paid each year for the
next three years (Years 2-4) are as follows:

School Level Average r t Year Costs Finance Costs: Years 2-4

Elementary Schools $ 51,925 $ 47,047
Middle Schools 84,964 75,849
High Schools 140,202 110,490
 "--.........

AMOUN NO EXPLANTION OF MAJOR CHANGES IN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES

FY 2006 OPERATING BUDGET (Adopted by the BOE, March 2005)

..
h ..
Changes Changes
Category " FY2005 FY 2006 Change FY 05-06 FY 05-06

Current Request Items Amount

Category 1 Administration $ 3,620,161 $ 5,753,325 $' 2,133,164 Legal Fees $ (125,000)

New Financial System 1,500,000
OSTA Contractual Maintenance 760,610 (1)
Category 2 Mid-Level Administration 1,540,717 1,698,544 157,827 Legal Fees 125,000
Category 5 Other Instructional Costs 7,767,174 10,129,461 2,362,287 TCM - Ucensing Fees for Assessments 1,613,089
Staff Development- Online Learning Project 391,330 (2)
Adult Interpreters 55,000
I-PAS/Challenge Program 75,000 (3)
Category 6 Special Educalion 1,286,354 1,286,354 ­
Category 7 StUdent Personnel Services 31,151 31,151 ­
Category 8 Student Health Services 20,500 20,500 ­
Category 9 Transportation 783,563 969,563 166,000 Taxi Service for Spec Ed/Homeless Students 110,000
Bus Repairs 76,000
Category 10 Operation of Plant & Equipment 298,178 315,801 17,623
Category 11 Maintenance of Plant 2,834,341 3,044,365 210,024 Maintenance for HVAC Systems 200,000
Category 14 Community Services 122,000 122,000 ­
Category 37 . Cable Television Special Rev Fund 16,500 16,500 ­
Category 41 Adult Education Fund 331,941 331,941 ­
Category 51 Real Estate Management Fund 120,055 140,055 20,000
Category 61 Food Services Fund 910,040 927,558 17,518
Category 71 Field Services Fund 72,351 30,000 (42,351)
Category 81 Entrepreneurial Fund 30,000 30,000 ­
Total $ 19,785,026 $ 24,847,118 $ 5,062,092

(1) Maintenance for N2H2 & Ironmail used to support Children's Internet Protection Act by filtering out inappropriate content from Websites
& SPAM e-mail; mairitenance for recovery and resumplion of key student & adminlstralive systems in case of disaster; maintenance
of Connect ED - the automatic emergency notification system used by schools/offices to contact parents; maintenance for major
enterprise software that runa key management, portal, database, and other applications.
(2) Amount reflects a realignment of funds for the training plan. Supplies and materials are reduced by $304,976; part-time salaries
by $298,984
>­
(3) Amount for I-PAS/Challenge program is currently recommended for reclucUon from the bUdge!. £=
o
::r
a
m
~
Ix>
 ..

tJ)
(1)

.->
~
.-
.-
+'

-1:
t:

Q)
E
en
en
Q)
en
~
en
c
.-
-c
co
~
~

~
o
c
-COO
D-
+'
:J

--~o
..
al
1(1:)'

=;'
.Ec
..:0
~
+'

<
 ,.,,~.

"~ l~"

- 1

Attaohment 8: Rollout Plan for Reading Assessment Initiatives

Assessment Spring FY04 FallFYOS SpringFY05 FallFY06 Spring FY06 Fall FY07

mCLASS: DffiELS
Grades K-3 *

3D Integration
mCLASS: Reading
GradesK:2
~}.{{~.~~~~;~;~1@1iM~i;
. "".;:·~"t~~~l'.~.~f."'j!:;
. . ". l-:i:~~~~.
."

mCLASS: 3D
Grades K-2

MAP-R

SDRT4

* Four Reading First schools will continue to use mClass:DIBELS and only the running record component of mClass:3D
 Attachment B: Rollout Plan for Reading Assessment Initiatives

,. - Co~pon~{ -":':. _: ~. Descri~tiop' - .'" _ "_ S~hools . "~ __---- ., '. _

• > - • _ - _ _ • _ _..l _ _ • _.." "'-- ,~ ,F~.

2004-2005 Academic Year

MCPSAP-PR MCPS developed AJl125 elementary schools, excluding four Reading First Schools
benchmarking assessment- of Highland, Summit Hall, Wheaton Woods, Rosemont, through
paper!pencil administration December. 102 elementary schools after December.
mCLASS: Provides simple probes to The following 21 schools have 10. Kemp Mill
DIBELS screen for reading been using handhelds for the. 11. Rolling Terrace
difficulties and monitors' DIBELS assessments the entire 12. Twinbrook
student progress. year: 13. East Silver Spring
1. Highland 14. Glen Haven
2. Summit Hall 15. Washington Grove
3. Wheaton Woods 16. Highland View
4. Rosemont 17. Montgomery Knolls
5.. Harmony Hills 18. Pine Crest
6. Oak. View 19. C10pper Mill
7. Viers Mill 20. Meadow Hall
8.' Gaithersburg 21. Maryvale
9. WellerRoad
mCLASS: Enables teachers to capture Over the course of the current academic year all elementary schools
Reading running records data. were trained and are now using mCLASS: Reading-eompleted
Integral component of mid-May 2005
balanced literacy program.
.CLASS: Hybrid assessment The following 19 schools began 9. Glen Haven
Reading 3D consisting of five subtests a pilot ofmCLASS: Reading 10. Washington Grove
from MCPSAP-PR and five 3D in January 2005: 1 L Highland View
subteSts from DIBELS. 1. Harmony Hills 12. Montgomery Knolls
2. Viers Mill 13. Clopper Mill
3. Gaithersburg 14. Meadow Hall
4. Weller Road 15. Maryvale
5. Kemp Mill 16. Broad Acres
6. Rolling Terrace 17. New Hampshire Estates
7. Twinbrook 18. Burnt Mills
8. East Silver Spring 19. Jackson Road
Measurement of Computer adaptive All elementary schools, except four Reading First schools, began
Academic achievement test providing using MAP-R in the fall of 2004.
Progress- results in reading skill areas.
Reading (MAP-R) Extension of MCPS
Assessment Program to
upper elementary and
middle school.
Stanford Diagnostic reading test to All elementary schools, except four Reading First schools, began
Diagno;ti=c: diagnose students' strengths using SDRT in the fall of 2004. .
Reading Test and weaknesses in reading
(SDRT) skills. Enables teachers to
better plan reading
instruction for struggling
students.

5/17/05
( Attachment B: Rollout Plan for Reading Assessment Initiatives

I
~
/ ~.' S~~po~~~~i~ ~,:·.~;~C·~:~ti~~hP~~~~~~,;::,~:>:~:~~ --!:~-~i: ~:~·:~. '!~L~~:·e~>':."s-~;~~l(~.
2005--2006 Academic Year
MCPSAP-PR MCPS developed
-.: ~ ~\.-' ~- '. '.' :'-'.
The MCPSAP-PR will be replaced bymCLASS: Reading 3D.
c :. ~~.

benchmarking assessment The functionality ofmCLASS: Reading and mCLASS: DrnELS

-paper/pencil will be integrated into mCLASS: Reading 3D. The four Reading
administration First schools will continue to use mCLASS: DIBELS which has
the full compliment ofDIBELS assessment components.
mCLASS: Provides simple probes to 1. Highland
DIBELS screen for reading 2. Summit Hall
difficulties and monitors 3. Wheaton Woods
student progress. 4. Rosemont
mCLASS: Hybrid assessment All elementary schools except the four Reading First schools.
Reading 3D consisting of five subtests The four Reading First schools will continue to use mCLASS:
from MCPSAP-PR and DIBELS which has the full compliment ofDIBELS assessment
five subtests from components
DIBELS. Includes
progress monitoring and
benchmarking
capabilities
Measurement of Computer adaptive All elementary schools, except four Reading First schools. All
Academic achievement test 38 middle schools will begin using the assessment in January
Progress '"'- providing results in 2006.
Reading (}v{AP-R) reading skill areas.
Extension ofMCPS
Assessment Program to
upper elementary and
middle school.
Stanford Diagnostic reading test to All ele~entary schools, except four Reading First schools, and
Diagnostic diagnose students' all 38 middle schools
Reading Test strengths and wealmesses
(SDRT) in reading skills. Enables
teachers to better plan
reading instruction for
struggling students.

5/17/05
 II
Attachl it C
Description of Reading Assessment Initiatives

MCPSAP-PR I MCPS developed Three times a Grade K-2 Paper/pencil-based assessment scored by teachers with
benchmarkin.g year. students manual data entry into instructional management
-
assessment s stem.
mCLASS: DIBELS Provides simple probes Three times a Selected Grade Administered with handheld device, replaced prior
to screen for reading year. 2 & 3 students paper/pencil administration of assessment. Web based
difficulties and monitors in intervention data reports enable access to real time data.
student ro ress. ro ram.
mCLASS: Reading Enables teachers to Throughout Grade K - 2 Administered with handheld device, replaced prior
capture running records year on a students paper/pencil administration of assessment. Web based
data. Integral progress data reports enable access to real time data.
component of balanced monitoring
litera ro ram. basis.
mCLASS: Hybrid assessment Three times a Grade K- 2 Administered with handheld device, replaced prior
Reading 3D consisting of 5 subtests year. students paper/pencil administration of assessment. Web based
from MCPS AP-PR and 5 (FY 06) data reports enable access to real time data.
subtests from DIBELs.
Measurement of Computer adaptive Three times a Grade 3 - 5 Browser based assessment accessed through Internet
Academic achievement test year. students connected computer. Students sit at computers,
Progress - providing results in answering questions and inputting answers via
Reading (MAP-R) reading skill areas. keyboard. Data;s available within 24 hours via
Extension of MCPS Twice a year Grade 6 - 8 Internet. Provides consistent scale to measure reading
Assessment Program to (FY 06) progression on a long term basis.
upper elementary and
middle school.
Stanford Diagnostic reading test Twice a year Selected Currently administered paper and pencil. Scored by
Diagnostic to diagnose students' struggling vendor and scores sent to individual schools.
Reading Test strengths and readers Approximately a 4 week turnaround for scores. An
(SORT) weaknesses in reading (Grades 3 - 9) electronic version of assessment, enabling qUick access
skills. Enables teachers to data, is being reviewed.
to better plan reading
instruction for
struqqlinq students.

5/17/05

 Attachment D

I NEW & MODERNIZED .SCHOOLS

School Name

...
FYOS Tech Mod by School Level

Year of Global
Access
Sepl30
Enrollment
Sepl30
FARMS
Percent

1 Kensington-Parkwood Elementary (Modemized) Never Served 425 8.24%

2 Somerset Elementary School (Modemized) Never Served 389 3.60%
3 Quince Orchard Middle School #2 (New) BOO
4 Wheaton Middle School #2 (New/Belt JHS) 700
.,
ELEMENTARY SCHools .,.

1 Brown Station Elementary School 2000 394 53.81%

2 Captain James E. Daly Elementary School 2000 606 40.92%
3 Chevy Chase Elementary School 2000 370 20.00%
4 Clopper Mill Elementary School 2000 477 49.69%
5 Dr. Sally K. Ride Elementary School 2000 606 32.34%
6 East Silver Spring Elementary School 2000 267 5B.43%
7 Flower Hill Elementary School 2000 552 44.20%
8 Fox: Chapel Elementary School 2000 553 39.06%
9 Garrett Park Elementary School 2000 454 20.04%
10 Glenallan Elementary School 2000 429 50.12%
11 Greencastle Elementary School 2000 637 43.96%
12 Highland View Elementary School 2000 350 57.71 %
13 Judith A. Resnik Elementary School 2000 618 37.54%
14 Maryvale Elementary School 2000 622 37.78%
15 Meadow Hall Elementary School 2000 385 35.84%
16 Mill Creek Towne Elementary School 2000 450 32.00%
17 Montgomery Knolls Elementary School 2000 383 62.14%
18 Piney Branch Elementary School 2000 545 43.12%
19 Rolling Terrace Elementary School 2000 693 56.42%
20 Strathmore Elementary School 2000 464 45.04%
21 StraWberry Knoll Elementary School 2000 561 31.19%
22 Takoma Park Elementary School 2000 406 30.05%
23 Washington Grove Elementary School 2000 392 52.55%
24 Watkins Mill Elementary School 2000 575 41.74%
25 Weller Road Elementary School 2000 564 63.83%
26 Whetstone Elementary School 2000 597 45.90%
.
MIDDU~'SCHb<6ts~/;;i : ':." ;~".,.",
' '.
'. ".", .

1 Earle B. Wood Middle School 2001 985 24.37%

2 North Bethesda Middle School 1999 699 7.73%
3 Redland Middle School 1998 866 24.94%
4 Ridgeview Middle School 1998 1,015 17.64%
5 Rosa M. Parks Middle School 1999 969 6.71%
6 Shady Grove Middle School 1999 720 25.97%
7 Silver Spring International Middle School 1999 828 45.05%
o'
8 Sligo Middle School 199B 636 39.94%
9 Takoma Pari< Middle School 1999 986 21.20%
10 Thomas W. Pyle Middle School 1999 1,280 1.48%
11 Tilden Middle School 1998 772 11.53%
12 White Oak Middle School 1999 902 38.69%
, . '.
HIGH SCHOOLS': .
1 John F. Kennedy High School 1999 1,513 27.03%
2 Thomas Edison High School of Technology 1999/2004 • 700

* Refreshed 1/2 of computers in 2004 - remainder were put in in 1999

511712005