Summit Middle School (SMS) serves grades 6-8 located in the resort community of Summit County. Summit County includes the towns of Breckenridge, Frisco, Dillon and Silverthorne. Additionally, SMS is centered between Arapahoe Basin, Keystone, Breckenridge and Copper Mountain ski resorts. SMS serves six feeder elementary schools and itself feeds into two high schools, Summit High School and Snowy Peaks. We have been an full IB school for almost 20 years and just finished our evaluation year with t…
he International Baccalaureate Organization. Enrollment for the 24/25 school year ~750 students. Within the student population we are 43.5% Latinx, 52.8% white, and 2.7% two or more races. 25.9% of our students are Multilingual Learners identified as Non-English Proficient or Limited English Proficiency. 343 students are in some phase of English Language Acquisition, 19.8% are identified for Special Education, 14% Gifted and Talented, and 38.3% are on Free and Reduced Lunch. We have goals around hiring staff that match the demographics of our students population and have made some small growth in that area. Currently, we have 63 licensed staff that are white and 4 that are Hispanic or Latino. We assess students using STAR in reading, math and Spanish reading. We use AAPPL for our students that have participated in our Dual Language programming. All students are also surveyed with Panorama, with a focus on belonging, environments, engagement, and student-teacher relationships. As a middle school we believe in a teams approach. Students are placed on teams and have the same teachers for their four core subjects; ELA, math, humanities, and science. The MYP framework requires 8 subject areas which require, in addition to the core classes; Fine Arts, Design, PE, and Language Acquisition. These additional four classes are provided through essentials teachers and enrichments. Much of our curriculum is teacher created, centered around district approved resources. We use Study Sync as a resource in ELA and Envisions in math as our primary resources. Families can work with school leadership with our School Accountability Committee and PTA/O. Through these groups, we collaborate on school data dives, and partnering around major decisions centered on truancy and progress monitoring centered around academic achievement throughout the year. One example that came from this group, which has helped frame this UIP, is the focus on student clubs. From community engagement in SY22-23, and from Youth Connections surveys, we found that many students were interested in participating in clubs; however, given transportation issues, our former model was unable to accommodate students whose parents were unable to pick them up after school. As a result, we built in time to our schedule, for students to engage with a variety of clubs of their choosing. Ultimately, our hope is that we can provide opportunities for students to create their own clubs they wish to see happen. During SY23-24, as we began review last year's UIP, families and staff indicated they appreciated the direction we were going and asked that we continue that momentum another year. We are in year three of participating in the Youth Connections grant through Colorado Cares and run by Colorado Education Initiative. This grant focuses on building positive learning environments, helping struggling students, empower student voice, and creating family and community partnerships. Building leadership (admin and ILT) reflect on the UIP from the previous years in building the current year's plan. The goal and focus of the UIP are designed to be implemented over several years to build capacity and see impact on student success. Goals and action steps are shared with the staff and SAC for feedback before the final version is submitted. The UIP goals are a portion of the collective part of the teacher evaluations and teachers take advantage of our middle school model to implement goals and find impact. Teachers meet regularly in various Professional Learning Community forms throughout the week to collaborate: co-planning instruction, reviewing common assessments and analyzing broader data as we engage in our UIP process. These processes overlap with collaboration of the Building Leadership Team, the School Accountability Committee and the building leadership's participation in the district level Administrative Team. The three year model allows us to build upon previous goals and strategies to focus on the continued improvement and growth for our students.
Accredited with Distinction - This is assigned to the highest performing districts. These districts are meeting or exceeding expectations on the majority of performance tasks.
Accredited - Districts with an overall rating of Accredited are meeting expectations on the majority of performance metrics.
Accredited with Improvement Plan - These districts are identified as lower performing. They may be meeting expectations on some performance metrics, but they are not meeting or are only approaching expectations on many.
Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan - These districts are identified as low performing. They are not meeting or are only approaching expectations on most performance metrics. The state will provide support and oversight to these districts until they improve.
Accredited with Turnaround Plan - These districts are identified as among the lowest performing districts in the state. They are not meeting or are only approaching expectations on most performance metrics. The state will provide support and oversight to these districts until they improve.
Accredited with Insufficient State Data - These districts are assigned this accreditation rating when the state does not have enough data to report publicly. To better understand why a district received an Insufficient State Data rating, all publicly reportable data are reflected in the performance framework report. More information about these ratings is available here.
School Ratings
Performance Plan - Schools with a Performance Plan are meeting expectations on the majority of performance metrics.
Improvement Plan - These schools are identified as lower performing. They may be meeting expectations on some performance metrics, but they are not meeting or are only approaching expectations on many.
Priority Improvement Plan - These schools are identified as low performing. They are not meeting or are only approaching expectations on most performance metrics. The state will provide support and oversight to these schools until they improve.
Turnaround Plan - These schools are identified as among the lowest performing schools in the state. They are not meeting or are only approaching expectations on most performance metrics. The state will provide support and oversight to these schools until they improve.
Insufficient State Data - These schools are assigned this plan type when the state does not have enough data to report publicly. To better understand why a school received an Insufficient State Data rating, all publicly reportable data are reflected in the performance framework report. More information about these ratings is available here.