web view · 2013-02-072012-2013 school improvement plan (sip)-form sip-1. june ... crt,...

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

DRAFT School Improvement Plan (SIP)Form SIP-1

Proposed for 2012-2013

June 2012Rule 6A-1.099811Revised April 29, 2011 1


2012-2013 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

School Information School Name: The Villages Elementary of Lady Lake District Name: Lake

Principal: David Bordenkircher Superintendent: Dr. Susan Moxley

SAC Chair: Jo Ann Applewhite Date of School Board Approval:

Student Achievement Data and Reference Materials: The following links will open in a separate browser window. School Grades Trend Data (Use this data to complete Sections 1-4 of the reading and mathematics goals and Sections 1 and 2 of the writing and science goals.)Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT)/Statewide Assessment Trend Data (Use this data to inform the problem-solving process when writing goals.)High School Feedback Report K-12 Comprehensive Research Based Reading Plan

AdministratorsList your school’s administrators and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an administrator, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of School Grades, FCAT/statewide assessment performance (percentage data for achievement levels, learning gains, Lowest 25%), and ambitious but achievable annual measurable objective (AMO) progress.


https://app1.fldoe.org/Reading_Plans/Narrative/NarrativeList.aspx

http://data.fldoe.org/readiness/

http://fcat.fldoe.org/results/default.asp

http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/default.asp


Position Name Degree(s)/Certification(s)

Number of Years at

Current School

Number ofYears as an

Administrator

Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT/statewide assessment Achievement Levels, learning gains, lowest 25%), and AMO progress, along with the associated school year)

Principal David Bordenkircher

Master’s Degree: University of South –

Educational Leadership. Bachelor of Science:

William Paterson College of New Jersey – Music

Education. Florida Professional Certificate: School Principal, Music

Education K-12.

0 17

Carver Middle School 2011-2012: School Grade-C. Meeting highstandards: Reading- 49%, Math-47%, Writing-77%, Science-49%.Carver Middle School 2010-2011: School Grade-B. Meeting high standards: Reading -63%, Math-63%, Writing-89%, Science-46%.Making learning gains: Readin-55%, Math-61%, LQ Reading-61%, LQ Math-65%. AYP- Met 77% of criteria.South Lake High School 2009-2010: School Grade-C. Meeting high standards: Reading-48%, Math-76%, Writing-80%, Science-33%.Making learning gains: Reading 49%, Math-72%, LQ Reading-41%, LQ Math-60%. AYP- met 82% of criteria.South Lake High School 2008-2009: School Grade-D. Meeting high standards: Reading-43%, Math-71%, Writing-67%, Science-32%Making learning gains: Reading-47%, Math-69%, LQ Reading-45%, LQ Math-58%. AYP- met 67% of criteria.

Assistant Principal

Charlotte Burkholder BA in Elementary Education, University of Central Florida; Master of Science in Special Education, Nova University; Ed. Leadership, University of Central Florida; Principal Certification, State of Florida

0 8 Assistant Principal of Villages Elementary of Lady Lake in 2011-2012; School Grade: A; Reading Mastery: 67%; Math Mastery: 72%; Science Mastery: 62%; Writing Mastery: 80%.Assistant Principal of Umatilla Elementary in 2009-2010, School Grade A; did not make AYP.



Instructional CoachesList your school’s instructional coaches and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an instructional coach, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of School Grades, FCAT/statewide assessment performance (percentage data for achievement levels, learning gains, Lowest 25%), and ambitious but achievable annual measurable objective (AMO) progress. Instructional coaches described in this section are only those who are fully released or part-time teachers in reading, mathematics, or science and work only at the school site.

SubjectArea Name Degree(s)/

Certification(s)

Number of Years at

Current School

Number of Years as an Instructional

Coach

Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT/Statewide Assessment Achievement Levels, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AMO progress along with the associated school year)

Reading Lee Ann Whipple

B.A.: Stetson University; Florida Professional

Educator’s Certificate: Elem. Ed., Primary Ed., Reading Endorsement,

ESOL Endorsement

.5Literacy Coach at Villages Elementary of Lady Lake in 2011-2012. School Grade: A; Reading Mastery: 67%; Math Mastery: 72%; Science Mastery: 62%; Writing Mastery: 80%.

Highly Effective TeachersDescribe the school-based strategies that will be used to recruit and retain high quality, highly effective teachers to the school.

Description of Strategy Person Responsible Projected Completion Date

1. Regular meetings of new teachers with Principal Principal On going

2. Partnering new teachers with veteran staff Principal On going

3. College campus job fairs and recruiting at Universities Principal On going

4. Weekly grade level team meetings

5. Soliciting referral from current employees

Principal

Principal

On going

On going


2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Non-Highly Effective InstructorsProvide the number of instructional staff and paraprofessionals that are teaching out-of-field and/or who are NOT highly effective. *When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Number of staff and paraprofessional that are teaching out-of-field/ and who are not highly effective.

Provide the strategies that are being implemented to support the staff in becoming highly effective

100% of our teachers are infield.Data is not available on highly effective status.

Professional Development is provided in research based best practices.

Staff DemographicsPlease complete the following demographic information about the instructional staff in the school.

*When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

TotalNumber of

Instructional Staff

% of First-Year

Teachers

% of Teachers with 1-5 Years of Experience

% of Teachers with 6-14 Years of Experience

% of Teachers with 15+ Years of Experience

% of Teachers with Advanced

Degrees

% Highly Effective Teachers

% Reading Endorsed Teachers

% National Board

Certified Teachers

% ESOL EndorsedTeachers

62 2% (1) 15% (9) 44% (27) 40% (25) 24% (15) 0% 3% (2) 13% (8) 74% (46)

Teacher Mentoring Program/PlanPlease describe the school’s teacher mentoring program/plan by including the names of mentors, the name(s) of mentees, rationale for the pairing, and the planned mentoring activities.

Mentor Name Mentee Assigned Rationale for Pairing Planned Mentoring Activities

Paige Simmons Kathryn Backman Common Planning and P.L.C. Meet weekly and individual meetings

Paige Simmons Melissa Spell Common Planning and P.L.C. Meet weekly and individual meetings

Crystal Watkins Lisa Deffenbaugh Common Planning and P.L.C. Meet weekly and individual meetings



Additional Requirements

Coordination and Integration-Title I Schools Only Please describe how federal, state, and local services and programs will be coordinated and integrated in the school. Include other Title programs, Migrant and Homeless, Supplemental Academic Instruction funds, as well as violence prevention programs, nutrition programs, housing programs, Head Start, adult education, career and technical education, and/or job training, as applicable.

Title I, Part A Funds are provided for opportunities and remediation to students to assist them to achieve the standards in the local curriculum, Common Core Standards, and the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards. The district coordinates all parts of Title services for educational services and staff development. The opportunities include: before and after school programs and resource assistance during the school day. Title 1 provides two reading teachers, a writing teacher, a math teacher and one full and one half time teacher assistants. In addition, SES (Supplemental Educational Services) tutoring is available after school for fourth and fifth grade students who scored a Level 1 or 2 on the FCAT and require additional assistance in reading and math. Title 1 funds our Parent Resource Center which is available at varied hours for parents to check out materials to help their students. Our Family/School Liaison takes an active part in all parent workshops, keeps parents apprised of attendance issues, coordinates the Parent Resource Center, and facilitates communication between teachers and parents.

Title I, Part C- Migrant Migrant Liaisons provide services and support to students and parents on an as-needed basis. The liaison (district based) coordinates with all Title services to ensure student needs are met.

Title I, Part D District receives funds for Neglected and Delinquent services for students in need. Services are coordinated with drop-out prevention programs.

Title II District receives funds for technology to increase instructional strategies. Also, funding is provided for professional development and is coordinated with the curriculum department.

Title III Services are provided through the district’s curriculum department for educational materials and support for E.L.L. students.

Title X- Homeless School Counselors and Social Worker assist to provide resources for students identified as homeless under the McKinney-Vento Act to eliminate barriers for a free and appropriate education. The Homeless Liaison at the district and the homeless contact at the school level collaborate to ensure that students receive the necessary services and resources.

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI) Academic tutoring for struggling students. Enhance technology software and hardware.

Violence Prevention Programs The school offers a non-violence and anti-drug program to students through “Too Good for Drugs” and “Too Good for Violence” curriculum.

Nutrition Programs

Housing Programs

Head Start


2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Adult Education

Career and Technical Education

Job Training

Other


2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) /Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

School-Based MTSS/RtI TeamIdentify the school-based MTSS leadership team. The leadership team will include the principal, assistant principal, grade level chairs, teachers, curriculum specialist, literacy coach, ESE specialist, school psychologist, guidance counselors, speech/language pathologist and student services personnel.

Describe how the school-based MTSS leadership team functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions). How does it work with other school teams to organize/coordinate MTSS efforts? The MTSS Team meets monthly to review student data and identify students in need of academic or behavioral intervention. Working cooperatively, the team will plan instructional strategies, determine the effectiveness of interventions and create a system for continued monitoring of student progress.

Describe the role of the school-based MTSS leadership team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan (SIP). Describe how the RtI problem-solving process is used in developing and implementing the SIP? The team meets during the summer to disaggregate test scores, student achievement, and school goals. The leadership team met with the principal to help develop the SIP, which will be presented to the SAC for discussion and approval. The team will provide data and information regarding academic areas that need to be addressed and help set clear expectations for relevant instruction. Grade levels will present weekly reports to the principal on meetings regarding aligned process and procedures that include tiered intervention.

MTSS ImplementationDescribe the data source(s) and the data management system(s) used to summarize data at each tier for reading, mathematics, science, writing, and behavior. After analysis, the team will assist in developing the new school improvement goals and problem solving methods to bring out the best in our school, our teachers, and our students. The team will collaborate regularly through the MTSS and RSN (Reading Success Network) process to disseminate best practices for review of progress monitoring, data collection, and tiered interventions. (MTSS meetings will be held two times a month; RSN will meet once a month, and PLC’s by grade level will meet weekly.)

Describe the plan to train staff on MTSS.Professional development will be provided during pre planning, teachers’ common plan time, small sessions will occur throughout the year, and monthly Reading Success Network meetings will address the MTSS process. Professional development will occur during pre-planning to update MTSS information and charting.

Describe the plan to support MTSS. The MTSS Leadership team will support teachers through data collection and review. Title 1 teachers will help facilitate the MTSS process.

Literacy Leadership Team (LLT)


2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1School-Based Literacy Leadership Team

Identify the school-based Literacy Leadership Team (LLT).The team consists of the principal, assistant principal, CRT, Literacy Coach, media specialist, Title 1 reading and writing instructors and model classroom teachers.

Describe how the school-based LLT functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions).LLT functions with monthly meetings to review test data, teacher requests, and RSN reports in order to plan student activities and staff development to improve student achievement in Literacy.

What will be the major initiatives of the LLT this year?Our Literacy Initiative for 2012 – 2013 is to increase informational reading and the level of text complexity.

Public School Choice Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification

Upload a copy of the SES Notification to Parents in the designated upload link on the “Upload” page.


2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1*Elementary Title I Schools Only: Pre-School TransitionDescribe plans for assisting preschool children in transition from early childhood programs to local elementary school programs as applicable.The Villages Elementary is a Title 1 school and has one Pre-K unit with 20 students to help prepare students for Kindergarten. This VPK unit is ½ funded by Title 1 and ½ State funded.

Parents and preschool students are invited to tour our school, especially the kindergarten classrooms, during the spring proceeding each school year. In addition, a two night program is conducted each spring for the parents of incoming Kindergarten students to better prepare them for the transition into Kindergarten.

At The Villages Elementary of Lady Lake, all incoming kindergarten students are assessed prior to, or upon entering, kindergarten with a form of the Brigance K & 1 screening instrument. In addition, the Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener will be administered within the first 30 school days. Parents complete a "Tell Us About Your Child" questionnaire upon registering a kindergarten student. Information from these sources will be used to plan for the academic and social/emotional instruction for all students.

*Grades 6-12 Only Sec. 1003.413 (2)(b) F.SFor schools with grades 6-12, how does the school ensure that every teacher contributes to the reading improvement of every student?

*High Schools OnlyNote: Required for High School-Sec. 1003.413(2)(g), (2)(j) F.S.

How does the school incorporate applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between subjects and relevance to their future?

How does the school incorporate students’ academic and career planning, as well as promote student course selections, so that students’ course of study is personally meaningful?

Postsecondary TransitionNote: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S. Describe strategies for improving student readiness for the public postsecondary level based on annual analysis of the High School Feedback Report.

June 2012Rule 6A-1.099811Revised April 29, 2011

10

http://data.fldoe.org/readiness/



11


PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTSReading Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Reading Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:

Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring

Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in reading. 67%

1A.1.

An increase in the level of text complexity and percentages of informational text.

1A.1.

Continue current instructional strategies and practices using Reading Success Network school wide.

1A.1.

Administration and Curriculum SpecialistLiteracy Coach

1A.1.

FAIR testingEdusoft Testing

1A.1.

FCAT test results.Reading Goal #1A:

Maintain or improve current student proficiency of 67% (Continue to maintain proficiency levels above district and state levels)

2012 Current Level of Performance:*

2013 Expected Level of Performance:*

67% (264)

≥ 67% (261)

1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in reading.

1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1.

Reading Goal #1B:

Providing this data violates student confidentiality.



Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.

Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.

1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.


12

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Based on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 in reading. 36%

2A.1.

An increase in the level of text complexity and percentage of informational text.

2A.1.

Use reading instructional materials including level readers and supplemental reading materials.

2A.1.

AdministrationCurriculum SpecialistLiteracy Coach

2A.1.

FAIR TestingEdusoft Testing

2A.1.

FCAT Test ResultsReading Goal #2A:

Improve the percentage of students scoring at or above level 4 in reading by one percentage point.



36% (142)

≥ 37% (145)

2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2.

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at or above Level 7 in reading.

2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1.

Reading Goal #2B:






2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2.

2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3.


13




Evaluation Tool

3A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students making learning gains in reading. 61%

3A.1.

The State’s continued increase of text complexity and percentage of informational text.

3A.1.

Full implementation of the resources available in the reading series, including strategic interventions and “Ticket to Read”.

3A.1.

Administration Curriculum SpecialistLiteracy Coach

3A.1.


3A.1.

FCAT ResultsReading Goal #3A:

Increase percentage of students making learning gains by 2% to 63%.



61% (240)

≥63% (246)

3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2.

3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3.

3B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students making learning gains in reading.

3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1.

Reading Goal #3B:






3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.


14




Evaluation Tool

4A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in reading. 62%

4A.1.

A large percentage of students in the lowest quartile are students with disabilities.

4A.1.

To provide Title 1 remedial reading services during and after school.

4A.1.

Administration Curriculum SpecialistLiteracy Coach

4A.1.


4A.1.

FCAT Results

Reading Goal #4A:

Increase the percentage of students making learning gains by 2% to 64%.



62% (40)

≥64% (41)

4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2.

4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3.

4B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in reading.

4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1.

Reading Goal #4B:






4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2.

4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3.


15

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Based on ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs), identify reading and mathematics

performance target for the following years

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017

5A. In six years school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%.

Baseline data2010-2011

70% (270) 67% (264) 75% (293) 78% 80% 83% 85%

Reading Goal #5A:

Meet or exceed annual AMO increases in students demonstrating proficiency in reading each year.

Based on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define

areas in need of improvement for the following subgroups:



Evaluation Tool

5B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not making satisfactory progress in reading.

5B.1.White:Black:Hispanic:Asian:American Indian:


5B.1


5B.1


5B.1


5B.1

FCAT test results.

Reading Goal #5B:

Maintain or improve student proficiency levels in sub-groups by levels indicated by subgroups.



Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.White: 68%Black: 61%Hispanic: 51%Asian: -American Indian: -

Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.White: 78%Black: 61%Hispanic: 62%Asian:American Indian:

5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2.

5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3.


16

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Based on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define

areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:



Evaluation Tool

5C. English Language Learners (ELL) not making satisfactory progress in reading.

5C.1.


5C.1.


5C.1.


5C.1.


5C.1.

FCAT test results.Reading Goal #5C:

Improve the percent of ELL students demonstrating proficiency as indicated.



41% 52%

5C.2. 5C.2. Instructional support provided by ESOL assistant.

5C.2. ESOL AssistantSchool Administration

5C.2. Lake Benchmark Assessments

5C.2. FCAT

5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3.





Evaluation Tool

5D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not making satisfactory progress in reading.

5D.1.


5D.1.


5D.1.


5D.1.


5D.1.

FCAT test results.Reading Goal #5D:

Improve the percent of Students With Disabilities demonstrating proficiency as indicated.



31% 53%

5D.2. 5D.2. Instructional support provided by ESE teachers

5D.2. ESE TeachersSchool Administration

5D.2. Lake Benchmark Assessments

5D.2. FCAT

5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3.


17





Evaluation Tool

5E. Economically Disadvantaged students not making satisfactory progress in reading.

5E.1.


5E.1.


5E.1.


5E.1.


5E.1.

FCAT test results.Reading Goal #5E:

Improve the percent of Economically Disadvantaged Students demonstrating proficiency as indicated.



62% 74%

5E.2 5E.2 . Instructional support provided by Title 1

5E.2. .Title 1 TeachersAdministration

5E.2. Lake Benchmark Assessments

5E.2. FCAT

5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3.

Reading Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activities

Please note that each strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.

PD Content/Topicand/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/ Subject

PD Facilitatorand/or

PLC Leader

PD Participants(e.g., PLC, subject, grade level,

or school-wide)

Target Dates (e.g., early release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of

meetings)Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Person or Position Responsible

for Monitoring

Reading Success Network K-5 Jessica Anderson All faculty Monthly Meetings Action Research Plan Administration


18


Reading Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountReading Success Network Stipends for in-service Title 1 $9,000.00

Subtotal: $9,000.00TechnologyStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountIncrease Independent Reading Ticket to Read S.A.I. $3500.00

Subtotal: $3,500.00Professional DevelopmentStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal:OtherStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: $12,500.00

End of Reading Goals


19


Comprehensive English Language Learning Assessment (CELLA) Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

CELLA Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Language AcquisitionStudents speak in English and understand spoken English at grade level in a manner similar to non-ELL students.



Evaluation Tool

1. Students scoring proficient in listening/speaking. 43%

1.1.

The mobility rate of ELL students and the limited use of English in the homes.

1.1.

ELL strategies implemented in class and documented in lesson plans.Continued use of ESOL assistant to support students and families.

1.1.

Administration

1.1.

FAIR TestingEdusoft TestingClassroom Observations

1.1.

CELLA TestCELLA Goal #1:

All ELL students entering in kindergarten will be proficient in listening/speaking by the time they exit the 5th grade.

2012 Current Percent of Students Proficient in Listening/Speaking:

43%

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Students read grade-level text in English in a manner similar to non-ELL students.



Evaluation Tool

2. Students scoring proficient in reading. 32%

2.1.


2.1.

ELL strategies implemented in class and documented in lesson plans.Continued use of ESOL assistant to support students and families.Title 1 Reading Resources

2.1.

Administration

2.1.


2.1.


All ELL students entering in kindergarten will be proficient in reading by the time they exit the 5th grade.

2012 Current Percent of Students Proficient in Reading:

32%.

2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


20

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Students write in English at grade level in a manner

similar to non-ELL students.Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position

Responsible for MonitoringProcess Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy

Evaluation Tool

3. Students scoring proficient in writing. 30%

2.1.


2.1.

ELL strategies implemented in class and documented in lesson plans.Continued use of ESOL assistant to support students and families.

2.1.

Administration

2.1.


2.1.


All ELL students entering in kindergarten will increase by one proficiency level by the time they exit the fifth grade.

2012 Current Percent of Students Proficient in Writing :

30%

2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


21


CELLA Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal:TechnologyStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal:Professional DevelopmentStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount


Subtotal: Total:

End of CELLA Goals


22


Elementary School Mathematics Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Elementary Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and

reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in mathematics. 72%

1A.1.

Computerized test at the 5th grade level.

Insufficient current school technology.

1A.1.

Continue full implementation the resources available in the new math series.Implement more computerized testing.

1A.1.

AdministrationCurriculum Specialist

1A.1.

Edusoft Testing

1A.1.

FCAT results.Mathematics Goal #1A:

To maintain or increase student proficiency of 72%.(Continue to maintain proficiency level above district and state average.)



72% (284)

≥ 72% (281)

1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in mathematics. 40%

1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1.

Mathematics Goal #1B:




1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.


23


Elementary School Mathematics Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Elementary Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and




Evaluation Tool

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in mathematics.

1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1.

Mathematics Goal #1A:

Enter narrative for the goal in this box.





1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in mathematics.

1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1.







1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.


24

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Based on the analysis of student achievement data and




Evaluation Tool

2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in mathematics. 40%

2A.1.



2A.1.

Continue full implementation of the resources available in the new math series.

Implement more computerized testing.

Enrichment instructional strategies provided by teachers.

2A.1.


2A.1.

Edusoft Testing

2A.1.

FCAT results


Increase the percentage of students scoring at or above level 4 in mathematics by one percent.



41% (162)

≥42% (164)

2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2.

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at or above Level 7 in mathematics.

2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1.







2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2.

2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3.


25





Evaluation Tool

3A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students making learning gains in mathematics. 75%

3A.1.

Computerized test at 5th grade level.


3A.1.

Continue full implementation the resources available in the new math series.

Implement more computerized testing.

Enrichment instructional strategies provided by teachers.

3A.1.

Administration Curriculum Specialist

3A.1.

Edusoft Testing

3A.1.

FCAT ResultsMathematics Goal #3A:

Maintain or increase student proficiency of 75%.

Continue to maintain proficiency level above district and state averages.



75% (296)

≥ 75% (293)

3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2.

3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3.

3B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students making learning gains in mathematics.

3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1.







3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.


26





Evaluation Tool

4A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics. 69%

4A.1.

Computerized test at 5th grade level.


4A.1.

Continue full implementation of the resources available in the new math series. For example: Go Math

Implement Instructional support through technology.

Morning Math – Intensive Instruction

4A.1.


4A.1.

Edusoft Testing

4A.1.

FCAT Results


Maintain or increase student proficiency of 69%.

Continue to maintain proficiency level above district and state averages.



69% (93)

≥69% (93)

4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2.

4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3.

4B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics.

4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1.







4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2.

4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3.


27



2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017

5A. In six years school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%.

Baseline data 2010-2011

74%(285) 72%

(284) 78% (304)

81% 83% 85% 87%


Meet or exceed the annual AMO increases in students demonstrating proficiency in Math each year.

Based on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas

in need of improvement for the following subgroups:



Evaluation Tool

5B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.


Computerized test at the 5th grade level

Insufficient current school technology

5B.1.

Continue full implementation of the resources available in the new math series.

Implement more computerized testing

Morning Math – Intensive Instruction

5B.1.


5B.1.

Edusoft Testing

5B.1.

FCAT results


Maintain or improve student proficiency levels in subgroups by levels indicated by subgroups.



Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.White: 73%Black: 61%Hispanic: 70%Asian:American Indian:

Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.White: 80%Black: 63%Hispanic: 77%Asian:American Indian:

5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2.

5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3.


28


reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:



Evaluation Tool

5C. English Language Learners (ELL) not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.

5C.1.



5C.1.

Continue full implementation the resources available in the new math series.Implement more computerized testing.Morning Math – Intensive Instruction

5C.1.


5C.1.

Edusoft Testing

5C.1.

FCAT results.Mathematics Goal #5C:

Improve the percent of ELL students demonstrating proficiency as indicated



64% ≥64%

5C.2.



5C.2. Instructional support provided by ESOL Assistant

5C.2. ESOL AssistantSchool Administration

5C.2. Lake Benchmark Assessments

5C.2. FCAT

5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3.


in need of improvement for the following subgroup:



Evaluation Tool

5D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.

5D.1.



5D.1.

Continue full implementation the resources available in the new math series.Implement more computerized testing.Morning Math – Intensive Instruction

5D.1.


5D.1.

Edusoft Testing

5D.1.

FCAT results.Mathematics Goal #5D:

Improve the percent of Students With Disabilities demonstrating proficiency as indicated.



37% 55%

5D.2.



5D.2. Instructional support provided by ESE teachers.

5D.2. ESE TeachersSchool Administration

5D.2. Lake Benchmark Assessments

5D.2. FCAT

5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3.


29





Evaluation Tool

5E. Economically Disadvantaged students not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.

5E.1.



5E.1.

Continue full implementation the resources available in the new math series.Implement more computerized testing.

5E.1.


5E.1.

Edusoft Testing

5E.1.

FCAT results.Mathematics Goal #5E:

Improve the percent of Economically Disadvantaged Students demonstrating proficiency as indicated.



67% 77%

5E.2.Computerized test at the 5th grade level.


5E.2. Morning Math Tutoring – Intensive Instruction

5E.2 Curriculum Resource TeacherSchool Administration

5E.2. . Lake Benchmark Assessments

5E.2. FCAT

5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3.

End of Elementary School Mathematics Goals


30


Middle School Mathematics Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Middle School Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and




Evaluation Tool

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in mathematics.

1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1.







1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in mathematics.

1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1.







1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.


31





Evaluation Tool

2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in mathematics.

2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1.







2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2.

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at or above Level 7 in mathematics.

2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1.







2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2.

2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3.


32





Evaluation Tool

3A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students making learning gains in mathematics.

3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1.







3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2.

3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3.

3B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students making learning gains in mathematics.

3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1.







3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.


33





Evaluation Tool

4A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics.

4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1.







4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2.

4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3.

4B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics.

4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1.







4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2.

4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3.


34



2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017

5A. In six years, school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%.





in need of improvement for the following subgroups:



Evaluation Tool

5B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.


5B.1. 5B.1. 5B.1. 5B.1.





Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.White:Black:Hispanic:Asian:American Indian:

Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.White:Black:Hispanic:Asian:American Indian:

5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2.

5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3.


35





Evaluation Tool

5C. English Language Learners (ELL) not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.

5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1.

Mathematics Goal #5C:






5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2.

5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3.


in need of improvement for the following subgroup:



Evaluation Tool

5D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.

5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1.

Mathematics Goal #5D:






5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2.

5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3.


36





Evaluation Tool

5E. Economically Disadvantaged students not making satisfactory progress in mathematics.

5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1.

Mathematics Goal #5E:






5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2.

5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3.

End of Middle School Mathematics Goals


37


Florida Alternate Assessment High School Mathematics Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

High School Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and




Evaluation Tool

1. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in mathematics.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Mathematics Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.


in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

2. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at or above Level 7 in mathematics.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.







2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


38





Evaluation Tool

3. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students making learning gains in mathematics.

3.1. 3.1. 3.1. 3.1. 3.1.







3.2. 3.2. 3.2. 3.2. 3.2.

3.3. 3.3. 3.3. 3.3. 3.3.


in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

4. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics.

4.1. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1.







4.2. 4.2. 4.2. 4.2. 4.2.

4.3. 4.3. 4.3. 4.3. 4.3.

End of Florida Alternate Assessment High School Mathematics Goals


39


Algebra 1 End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (this section needs to be completed by all schools that have students taking the Algebra I EOC)* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Algebra 1 EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:


Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of

Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in Algebra 1.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Algebra 1 Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Based on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in Algebra 1.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.

Algebra Goal #2:






2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


40



2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017



Algebra 1 Goal #3A:






Evaluation Tool

3B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1.


3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1.

Algebra 1 Goal #3B:




Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.White:Black:Hispanic:Asian:American Indian:


3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.


41





Evaluation Tool

3C. English Language Learners (ELL) not making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1.

3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1.

Algebra 1 Goal #3C:






3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2.

3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3.





Evaluation Tool

3D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1.

3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1.

Algebra 1 Goal #3D:






3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2.

3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3.


42





Evaluation Tool

3E. Economically Disadvantaged students not making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1.

3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1.

Algebra 1 Goal #3E:






3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2.

3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3.

End of Algebra 1 EOC Goals


43


Geometry End-of-Course Goals (this section needs to be completed by all schools that have students taking the Geometry EOC)* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Geometry EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in Geometry.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Geometry Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.




Evaluation Tool

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in Geometry.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.

Geometry Goal #2:






2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


44



2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017



Geometry Goal #3A:






Evaluation Tool

3B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not making satisfactory progress in Geometry.


3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1.

Geometry Goal #3B:




Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box. White:Black:Hispanic:Asian:American Indian:


3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.


45





Evaluation Tool

3C. English Language Learners (ELL) not making satisfactory progress in Geometry.

3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1.

Geometry Goal #3C:






3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2.

3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3.





Evaluation Tool

3D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not making satisfactory progress in Geometry.

3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1.

Geometry Goal #3D:






3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2.

3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3.


46





Evaluation Tool

3E. Economically Disadvantaged students not making satisfactory progress in Geometry.

3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1.

Geometry Goal #3E:






3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2.

3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3.

End of Geometry EOC Goals

Mathematics Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activities

Please note that each strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.

PD Content/Topicand/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/ Subject


PLC Leader

PD Participants(e.g., PLC, subject, grade level,

or school-wide)

Target Dates (e.g., early release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of

meetings)Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Person or Position Responsible

for Monitoring

Grade level meetings focus on Math Strategies and

Interventions.K – 5 Grade Chairs K – 5 Weekly meetings during planning

periodsWeekly strategies implemented, reviewed

and discussed. Administration

Common Core Awareness K – 5 Julie Stanton K – 5 First Semester Classroom observations and teacher lesson plans

AdministrationCurriculum Resource Teacher

Grade Level Chair


47


Mathematics Budget (Insert rows as needed)

Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountUtilize Harcourt Math series and intervention kit Harcourt Materials District Budget

Subtotal:TechnologyStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountUtilize computer materials and programs provided with the Harcourt Math Harcourt Materials District Budget

1XL Math On-line Resources S.A.I. $3,500.00 Subtotal: $3,500.00

Professional DevelopmentStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal:OtherStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountMorning Math Tutoring Tutoring in Math S.A.I. $3,200.00 Subtotal: $3,200.00 Total: $6,700.00End of Mathematics Goals


48


Elementary and Middle School Science Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Elementary and Middle Science Goals

Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement




Evaluation Tool

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in science. 62%

1A.1.

Limited time allotted for science.

1A.1.

Continue implementation of allotted time for science.

Continue implementation of Pearson science curriculum

Experiments using hands-on equipment

Integrate science non-fiction in reading block

1A.1.


1A.1.

Edusoft TestingClassroom Walk Throughs

1A.1.

FCAT ResultsScience Goal #1A:

Continue to maintain proficiency level above district and state average.



62% (81)

≥ 62% (78)

1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in science.

1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1.

Science Goal #1B:






1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.


49




Evaluation Tool

2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in science. 17%

2A.1.

Limited time allotted for science

2A.1.

Continue implementation of allotted time for science

Continue implementation of adopted Pearson science curriculum

Experiments using hands-on equipment

Integrate science non-fiction in reading block

2A.1.


2A.1.

Edusoft TestingClassroom walk throughs

2A.1.

FCAT ResultsScience Goal #2A:

To increase proficiency by 1% or more


2013Expected Level of Performance:*

17% (22)

≥18% (23)

2A.2. 2A.2.

Utilize Weekly Reader’s “Science Spin” magazine.

2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2.

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at or above Level 7 in science.

2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1.

Science Goal #2B:






2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2.

2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3.

End of Elementary and Middle School Science Goals


50


Florida Alternate Assessment High School Science Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

High School Science Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

1. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in science.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Science Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

2. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at or above Level 7 in science.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.

Science Goal #2:






2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

End of Florida Alternate Assessment High School Science GoalsBiology 1 End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (this section needs to be completed by all schools that have students taking the Biology I EOC)June 2012Rule 6A-1.099811Revised April 29, 2011

51


* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Biology 1 EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in Biology 1.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Biology 1 Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.




Evaluation Tool

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in Biology 1.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.

Biology 1 Goal #2:






2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

End of Biology 1 EOC Goals


52


Science Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity

Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.PD Content /Topicand/or PLC Focus Grade

Level/Subject


PLC Leader

PD Participants (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or

school-wide)

Target Dates (e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g.,

frequency of meetings)Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Person or Position Responsible for

Monitoring

Grade level meetings to review and implement science strategies

Grades 4 – 5 Grade Chairs Grades 4 - 5 Weekly meetings Review students’ science test

scores Administration

Science Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:


53

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1End of Science Goals


54


Writing Goals* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Writing Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and




Evaluation Tool

1A. FCAT: Students scoring at Achievement Level 3.0 and higher in writing. 80%

1A.1.

Scoring of writing has changed to include conventions.

A greater emphasis is placed on the quality of the supporting details

1A.1.

Writing in-service for parents of 4th and 5th grade students.

DBQ’s (Document Based Questions) will continue in Social Studies classes.

Writing Coach offers 2 hours per week of direct instruction to each 4th grade class.

1A.1.

AdministrationCurriculum Resource TeacherWriting Coach

1A.1.

Pre / Post and Mid-year baseline tests.

1A.1.

FCAT ResultsEdusoft Bench Mark testing in writing

Writing Goal #1A:

Increase student proficiency (Percent scoring 3.0 and above) by 2%



80% (104)

≥82%(103)

1A.2. 1A.2. Writing Coach provides teachers with periodic writing prompts so that student progress can be periodically monitored.

1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students scoring at 4 or higher in writing.

1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1.

Writing Goal #1B:






1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.


55


Writing Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

Writing Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountImprove language, grammar and mechanics

“Quick-Word Handbook for Everyday Writers”

Title 1 $238.50

Subtotal: $238.50TechnologyStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount



Subtotal: Total: $238.50

End of Writing Goals


56


Civics End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (required in year 2014-2015) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Civics EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in Civics.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Civics Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.




Evaluation Tool

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in Civics.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.

Civics Goal #2:






2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


57


Civics Professional Development

Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD ActivityPlease note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.

PD Content /Topicand/or PLC Focus Grade

Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

Civics Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:

End of Civics Goals


58


U.S. History End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (required in year 2013-2014) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

U.S. History EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of student achievement data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:



Evaluation Tool

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in U.S. History.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

U.S. History Goal #1:






1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.




Evaluation Tool

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in U.S. History.

2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1.

U.S. History Goal #2:






2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.


59


U.S. History Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

U.S. History Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:

End of U.S. History Goals


60


Attendance Goal(s)* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Attendance Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Increase AttendanceBased on the analysis of attendance data and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of

improvement:



Evaluation Tool

1. Attendance 1.1.

Childhood illnesses

1.1.

Involve Parent Liaison to monitor attendance and coordinate with parents and school personnel

1.1.

AdministrationSchool LiaisonCounselorsSocial Worker

1.1.

Average Daily Attendance will be monitored bi-monthly to determine if program is successful.

1.1.

District Attendance Report

Attendance Goal #1:

To maintain 95% or higher on average daily attendance data report.

2012 Current Attendance Rate:*

2013 Expected Attendance Rate:*

95.24% ≥95%

2012 Current Number of Students with Excessive Absences (10 or more)

2013 Expected Number of Students with Excessive Absences (10 or more)

31.33%(250 students)

≤30%(250 students)

2012 Current Number of Students with Excessive Tardies (10 or more)

2013 Expected Number of Students with Excessive Tardies (10 or more)

15%(108 students)

≤12%(100 students)

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.


61


Attendance Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

AS400 and FIDO Training for attendance and reports

K - 5 MIS School Counselors and CRT 1st semester of 2012-2013 school year

Check attendance reports bi-monthly Administration

Attendance Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountPostage for home/school communication School personnel School budget $200.00

Subtotal: $200.00TechnologyStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal:Professional DevelopmentStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountAS400 and FIDO training MIS $0.00


Subtotal:


62

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Total: $200.00

End of Attendance Goals


63


Suspension Goal(s)* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)).

Suspension Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Decrease SuspensionBased on the analysis of suspension data, and reference to “Guiding

Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement:Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position

Responsible for Monitoring


Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1. Suspension 1.1.

Misconduct occurs during unstructured time.

1.1.

Leadership team will discuss and disseminate ways to increase supervision during unstructured time (i.e. Dismissal time)

Utilize the Safety Patrol

Continue implementation of School Plus (Saturday School)

Continue implementation of Core Essentials Character Education Program through the Guidance Department.

1.1.

AdministrationLeadership Team

1.1.

Data review of suspension rate. Monitor problem areas and review written referrals

1.1.

FIDO and AS400 Discipline ReportsSuspension Goal #1:

Reduce suspensions by 10%

2012 Total Number of In –School Suspensions

2013 Expected Number of In- School Suspensions

33 ≤302012 Total Number of Students Suspended In-School

2013 Expected Number of Students Suspended In -School

18 ≤162012 Total Number of Out-of-School Suspensions

2013 Expected Number of Out-of-School Suspensions

45 ≤402012 Total Number of Students Suspended Out- of- School

2013 Expected Number of Students Suspended Out- of-School

38 ≤341.2. Limited disciplinary options

1.2. Breakfast in the classroom 1.2. Administration 1.2. Review of discipline referals 1.2. AS400 and FIDO Discipline reports

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.


64


Suspension Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

Safety Patrol Training K – 5 Administration Safety Patrol and Grade Level

leaders Beginning of 2012 – 2013 Monitor hallways Administration

Faculty In-Service K - 5 Administration Faculty and Staff Beginning of 2012 - 2013 In-Service / monthly grade level meetings Administration

Suspension Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:

End of Suspension GoalsJune 2012Rule 6A-1.099811Revised April 29, 2011

65



66


Dropout Prevention Goal(s) Note: Required for High School- F.S., Sec. 1003.53

* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)). Dropout Prevention Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Dropout Prevention

Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of

improvement:

Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Responsible for

Monitoring


Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1. Dropout Prevention 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Dropout Prevention Goal #1:


*Please refer to the percentage of students who dropped out during the 2011-2012 school year.

2012 Current Dropout Rate:*

2013 Expected Dropout Rate:*

Enter numerical data for dropout rate in this box.

Enter numerical data for expected dropout rate in this box.

2012 Current Graduation Rate:*

2013 Expected Graduation Rate:*

Enter numerical data for graduation rate in this box.

Enter numerical data for expected graduation rate in this box.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Dropout Prevention Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring


67


Dropout Prevention Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal:Total:

End of Dropout Prevention Goal(s)


68


Parent Involvement Goal(s)Upload Option-For schools completing the Parental Involvement Policy/Plan (PIP) please include a copy for this section. Online Template- For schools completing the PIP a link will be provided that will direct you to this plan.* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)).

Parent Involvement Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Parent InvolvementBased on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to

“Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement:

Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Responsible for

Monitoring


Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1. Parent Involvement 1.1.

Parents having financial difficulties and working more.

1.1.

Continue Reading, Math and Writing Parent workshops and continue use of Parent Resource CenterFood and clothing pantry available for students

1.1.

Family / School Liaison

1.1.

Collect participation data and survey parents

1.1.

Attendance sign-in sheets and surveysParent Involvement Goal

#1:

Increase the percentage of parents participating in school activities by 5% or more.

2012 Current Level of Parent Involvement:*

2013 Expected Level of Parent Involvement:*

80% ≥85%

1.2. 1.2.Offer flexible meeting dates and times.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Parent Involvement Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

Staff awareness on communication strategies with parents.

All Grades

Title 1AdministrationC.R.T.Family/School Liaison

All Staff Throughout the yearReport Card NightTeacher Communication LogsOpen House

Administration


69

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1Parent Involvement BudgetInclude only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountFollow Title 1 Parent Involvement Plan Title 1 $2,916.00

Subtotal: $2,916.00TechnologyStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount


Subtotal:OtherStrategy Description of Resources Funding Source AmountParent Workshops Title 1 $3,800.00 Subtotal: $3,800.00 Total: $6,716.00End of Parent Involvement Goal(s)


70


Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Goal(s)

STEM Goal(s) Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of school data, identify and define

areas in need of improvement:Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position



Strategy

Evaluation Tool

STEM Goal #1:


1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

STEM Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring


71

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1STEM Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:

End of STEM Goal(s)


72


Career and Technical Education (CTE) Goal(s)

CTE Goal(s) Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of school data, identify and define




Strategy

Evaluation Tool

CTE Goal #1:


1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

CTE Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring


73


CTE Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:

End of CTE Goal(s)


74


Additional Goal(s)* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)).

Additional Goal(s) Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student AchievementBased on the analysis of school data, identify and define




Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1. Additional Goal: Bullying 1.1.

We have Choice Students and Opportunity Scholarship Students who are on the bus for one hour.

1.1.

Counselors will incorporate Anti-bullying strategies in the Counselor’s Corner on KVN morning news.

1.1

AdministrationGuidance Counselors.

1.1.

Monitor FIDO to review the number of referrals for bullying.

1.1.

Monitor FIDO for the number of referrals.Additional Goal #1:

100% of students will be aware of our anti-bullying / zero tolerance policy.

2012 Current Level :*

2013 Expected Level :*

0% 0%

1.2. 1.2.Utilize Materials: Too Good for Violence

1.2.C.R.T.

1.2.Pre and Post tests for Too Good for Violence

1.2.Pre and Post tests for Too Good for Violence

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Additional Goals Professional DevelopmentProfessional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity


Level/Subject


PLC Leader


school-wide)



Monitoring

PLC Meetings K-5 Grade Chairs School Wide Monthly Meetings Review discipline plans for grade levels and classrooms. Administration


75


Additional Goal(s) Budget (Insert rows as needed)Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s)Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount




Subtotal: Total:

End of Additional Goal(s)


76


Final Budget (Insert rows as needed)Please provide the total budget from each section. Reading Budget Total: $12,500.00

CELLA BudgetTotal:

Mathematics Budget Total: $3,500.00

Science BudgetTotal:

Writing Budget Total: $238.50

Civics BudgetTotal:

U.S. History BudgetTotal:

Attendance Budget Total: $200.00

Suspension BudgetTotal:

Dropout Prevention BudgetTotal:

Parent Involvement Budget Total: $6,716.00

STEM BudgetTotal:

CTE BudgetTotal:

Additional GoalsTotal:

Grand Total: $23,154.50


77


Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability (DA) CompliancePlease choose the school’s DA Status. (To activate the checkbox: 1. Double click the desired box; 2.When the menu pops up, select Checked under “Default value” header; 3. Select OK, this will place an “x” in the box.)

School Differentiated Accountability StatusPriority Focus Prevent

Upload a copy of the Differentiated Accountability Checklist in the designated upload link on the Upload page

School Advisory Council (SAC)SAC Membership ComplianceThe majority of the SAC members are not employed by the school district. The SAC is composed of the principal and an appropriately balanced number of teachers, education support employees, students (for middle and high school only), parents, and other business and community members who are representative of the ethnic, racial, and economic community served by the school. Please verify the statement above by selecting Yes or No below.

Yes NoIf No, describe the measures being taken to comply with SAC requirements.

Describe the activities of the SAC for the upcoming school year.Review and input regarding School BudgetReview and input regarding School Improvement PlanPeriodic review and discussion of Student Achievement DataOngoing support of school events and initiatives

Describe the projected use of SAC funds. AmountSupport Instructional Activities and Interventions $2,534.56


78



79

web view · 2013-02-072012-2013 school improvement plan (sip)-form sip-1. june ... crt,...

Documents