School Improvement Plan (SIP) Form SIP-1 · Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership...

2011-2012 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

April 2011 1

Rule 6A-1.099811

Revised April 29, 2011

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

School Improvement Plan (SIP)

Form SIP-1

Proposed for 2011-2012


April 2011 2

Rule 6A-1.099811


2011 – 2012 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

PART I: SCHOOL INFORMATION

School Name: Polk Avenue Elementary District Name: Polk

Principal: Gail Quam Superintendent: Jesse Jackson

SAC Chair: Kelly Faro Date of School Board Approval: Pending board approval

Student Achievement Data:

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.)

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


April 2011 3

Rule 6A-1.099811


Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data (Use this data to complete Sections 5A-5D of the reading and mathematics goals and Section 3A-3D of the writing goals.)

http://schoolgrades.fldoe.org/default.asp?report=AYP


April 2011 4

Rule 6A-1.099811



April 2011 5

Rule 6A-1.099811



April 2011 6

Rule 6A-1.099811


Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data (Use this data to inform the problem-solving process when writing goals.)

Missing Data so I used the trend data worksheet

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


April 2011 7

Rule 6A-1.099811



April 2011 8

Rule 6A-1.099811



April 2011 9

Rule 6A-1.099811



April 2011 10

Rule 6A-1.099811


Highly Qualified Administrators

List your school‟s highly qualified 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 performance (Percentage data for Proficiency, Learning

Gains, Lowest 25%), and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

Position Name Degree(s)/

Certification(s)

Number of

Years at

Current School

Number of Years

as an

Administrator

Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT

(Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AYP information

along with the associated school year)

Principal

Gail Quam BA, Elementary Education

MS, Educational Leadership 26 5 years as assistant

principal

3 year as principal

YEAR GRADE AYP

1011 C 82%

0910 A 97%

0809 C 85%

0708 B 95%

0607 A 97%

0506 B 97%

0405 C 87%

0304 A 87%

Assistant

Principal

Metta O‟Bryant BA, Elementary Education

MS, Educational

Leadership

1 1 year as

assistant

principal

YEAR GRADE AYP

1011 C 82%

Highly Qualified Instructional Coaches

List your school‟s highly qualified 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 performance (Percentage data for Proficiency,

Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). 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.

Subject

Area

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

(Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AYP

information along with the associated school year) Math Ambica Randev Bachelors in Commerce

M.Ed. Elementary Education

7 1

YEAR GRADE AYP

1011 C 82%

0910 A 97%

0809 C 85%

0708 B 95%


April 2011 11

Rule 6A-1.099811


0607 A 97%

0506 B 97%

0405 C 87%

Science Melissa Kelly Bachelors in Education

National Board Certified

19 3 YEAR GRADE AYP

1011 C 82%

0910 A 97%

0809 C 85%

0708 B 95%

0607 A 97%

0506 B 97%

0405 C 87%

0304 A 87%

Technology Monty Harrington Bachelors in Art (Mass

Communications and minor

in Writing)

4 1 YEAR GRADE AYP

1011 C 82%

0910 A 97%

0809 C 85%

0708 B 95%

Highly Qualified Teachers Describe the school-based strategies that will be used to recruit and retain high quality, highly qualified teachers to the school.

Description of Strategy

Person Responsible Projected Completion Date Not Applicable

(If not, please explain why)

1. Partnership with local colleges with the placement of interns and

practicum students

Administrator Ongoing

2. To retain highly qualified teachers we participate in NBCT, and

Masters Programs.

Administrator Ongoing

3.

4.

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors List all instructional staff and paraprofessionals who are teaching out-of-field and/or who are NOT highly qualified. Name Certification Teaching Assignment Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified

Amy Alvarado Pre-K/Primary Ed (Age3-Gr.

3)

3rd

Grade ESOL classes

Kelly Harrington Elem. Ed (K-6) 3rd

Grade ESOL classes


April 2011 12

Rule 6A-1.099811


Dana Lewis Elem. Ed (K-6) 2nd

Grade ESOL classes

Lonnie Murphy Elem. Ed (K-6) Kindergarten ESOL classes

Caroline Rodriguez Pre-K/Primary Ed (Age3-Gr.

3)

2nd

Grade ESOL classes

Terese Ross Pre-K/Primary Ed (Age3-Gr.

3)

Kindergarten ESOL classes

Leah Spivey Elem. Ed (K-6) 5th

Grade ESOL classes

Monty Harrington Elem. Ed (K-6) Technology Resource ESOL classes

Staff Demographics

Please 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)).

Total Number

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

Qualified

Teachers

% Reading

Endorsed

Teachers

% National

Board Certified

Teachers

%

ESOL Endorsed

Teachers

37 5 35 35 29 16 81 0 14 81

Teacher Mentoring Program

Please describe the school‟s teacher mentoring program 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

Yolanda Murphy Sandy Altamirano Beginning Teacher Teacher Induction Program, Planning,

Coaching

Patricia Pittman Yini Schrieber Beginning Teacher Teacher Induction Program, Planning,

Coaching


April 2011 13

Rule 6A-1.099811


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 Title I, Part A, funds school-wide services to Polk Avenue Elementary. The Title I funds provide supplemental instructional resources and interventions for students with academic achievement needs.

Title I, Part A, support provides after-school and summer instructional programs, supplemental instructional materials, resource teachers, technology for students, professional development for the

staff, and resources for parents.

Title I, Part C- Migrant Migrant students enrolled in Polk Avenue Elementary will be assisted by LEA‟s Migrant Education Program (MEP). Students will be prioritized by the MEP for supplemental services based on need

and migrant status. MEP Teacher Advocates, assigned to schools with high percentages of migrant students, monitor the progress of these high need students and provide or coordinate supplemental

academic support. Migrant Home-School Liaisons identify and recruit migrant students and their families for the MEP. They provide support to both students and parents in locating services

necessary to ensure the academic success of these students whose education has been interrupted by numerous moves.

Title I, Part D Title I, Part D, provides Transition Facilitators to assist students with transition from Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) facilities back into their zoned school. The Transition Facilitators

communicate with the Guidance Counselors at schools to facilitate the transfer of records and appropriate placement.

Title II Professional development resources are available to Title I schools through Title II funds. Polk Avenue will provide training for the staff as outlined in the LWCS Title II application.

Title III Title III provides supplemental resources for English Language Learners (ELL) and their teachers in Title I schools, as well as professional learning opportunities for school staff. Polk Avenue will

provide training for the staff as outlined in the LWCS Title III application.

Title X- Homeless The Hearth program, funded through Title X, provides support for identified homeless students. Title I provides support for this program, and many activities implemented by the Hearth program are

carried out in cooperation with the Migrant Education Program (MEP) funded through Title I, Part C.

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

N/A

Violence Prevention Programs Title IV provides violence and drug prevention programs in schools in order to promote a safe school environment. Examples of violence prevention programs include anti-bullying, gang awareness,

gun awareness, etc.

Nutrition Programs

N/A

Housing Programs

N/A


April 2011 14

Rule 6A-1.099811


Head Start N/A

Adult Education

N/A

Career and Technical Education

N/A

Job Training

N/A

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

School-Based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

In RTI Leadership Team consist of Gail Quam, Principal; Metta O’Bryant, Assistant Principal, Ambica Randev, Title 1 Facilitator, and Jeff Bachelder, Social Worker’ Guidance Counselor. The RTI core team members are: Jeff Bachelder, Guidance Counselor; Beth Campbell, ESE inclusion teacher, ELL paras, School Psychologist,

and Speech/Language Pathologist, and Regular Ed teachers.

Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions). How does it work with other school teams to

organize/coordinate RtI efforts?

The principal leads the meeting and each member has a turn at reviewing data pertinent to student achievement; i.e. the various resource teachers monitor data and student achievement in their assigned area of expertise, the Assistant Principal closely monitors the behavior interventions for the students and the Guidance

Counselor follows students both academically and behaviorally throughout the entire school and across subject areas. The leadership networks monthly with each

grade level to follow academic student progress and interventions and also meets at least monthly with the PBS team regarding behavioral interventions and data for the school.

Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership Team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan. Describe how the RtI

Problem-solving process is used in developing and implementing the SIP?

The Title I Facilitator helps to oversee the entire process of the development of the SIP with various areas assigned to those with particular expertise in that area.

The Principal and Assistant Principal have responsibility for the oversight of the entirety of the SIP and the draft document of the SIP is circulated to the entire

leadership team and school staff for review and comments. The Leadership Team then meets to make necessary changes and approves the final document. These procedures utilize the Problem Solving Process in developing and implementing the SIP by allowing team input, assigning certain areas to those with the

most expertise, staff involvement and buy in, and team collaboration.

RtI Implementation

Describe the data source(s) and the data management system(s) used to summarize data at each tier for reading, mathematics, science, writing, and behavior.

We utilize Discovery data system for following student achievement quarterly in Reading and Math for grades one through five and for Science grades three


April 2011 15

Rule 6A-1.099811


through five. Progress is also monitored by bi weekly testing in each area. For math this is Acaletics mini-assessments and for reading it is "Cold Read" grade

appropriate quizzes. Behavior is monitored through Request for Parental Support (RPS) documents as well as office referral and is managed in the Genesis Discipline data base.

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

During the first weeks of school the Guidance Counselor and School Psychologist meet individually with each grade level to train (and re-train if necessary) the teachers on the RTI process. We have found that these smaller group sessions allow for more focus by the teachers and well as allowing them the comfort to

freely ask questions, thus facilitating understanding.

Literacy Leadership Team (LLT) Q

Identify the school-based Literacy Leadership Team (LLT). Gail Quam, Principal; Metta O‟Bryant, Assistant Principal; Dr. Yvonne Morrow, Reading Consultant Describe how the school-based LLT functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions). Meetings will occur at least monthly to review reading strategies and

instruction that is occurring. What will be the major initiatives of the LLT this year? There will be a focus on the K-2 reading foundation, as well as targeted skills in grades 3-5.

NCLB Public School Choice

Notification of School in Need of Improvement (SINI) Status

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

Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification

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

Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification

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

*Elementary Title I Schools Only: Pre-School Transition Describe plans for assisting preschool children in transition from early childhood programs to local elementary school programs as applicable.

Strategy #1

Lake Wales Charter Schools has coordinated a program to work with Polk Community College to award CEU‟s to our local preschools for their participation in ongoing education. This ongoing


April 2011 16

Rule 6A-1.099811


education took place through professional development meetings monthly with the elementary/kindergarten teachers doing workshops with and for the preschool teachers/owners to inform them of

current strategies that are being used with the kindergarten students. Along with these strategies, it has been a great time to have quality articulation between the preschools, preschools and elementary

schools as well as between the elementary schools. The focus has been skills that the students would need to be successful in a kindergarten program.

Strategy #2

Our kindergarten team led by our K Support teacher assists preschool children in transition from Early Childhood programs to our elementary school by providing the following: Kindergarten

Roundup (pre-registration and visitation of Kindergarten classrooms); Distribute fliers to all local daycare facilities who filter children to our schools; Readiness screening in spring and summer prior

to Polk Avenue Elementary Kindergarten program; Kindergarten Week is provided for all incoming Kindergarten students during summer to ease the transition to school.

Strategy #3

Our K support teacher assesses each k student upon entry to Polk Avenue Elementary and places them according to their skills in their classrooms. They are heterogeneously grouped for homeroom,

but are ability grouped for reading.

Strategy #4

Polk Avenue Elementary disaggregates data to determine students‟ acquisition of specific skills and knowledge by breaking down the data from the Readiness Assessment into a variety of possible

subgroups.

Strategy #5

Polk Avenue Elementary helps the students to cultivate meaningful relationships by using peer interactions during the Kindergarten Round-up event and Kindergarten Week experience.

Strategy #6

The kindergarten teachers responsible for the kindergarten transition process are highly qualified teachers and paraeducators. Although this group is highly qualified, ongoing training of staff in

transition strategies will occur throughout the school year.

Strategy #7

Programs are currently offered to assist preschoolers with low readiness rates through the Lake Wales Charter School‟s Even Start Program and the Polk Avenue Elementary Preschool Program.

Strategy #8

Polk Avenue Elementary differentiates between orientation to school using Kindergarten Round-Up and Kindergarten Orientation Day and transition to school using Polk Avenue Elementary

Kindergarten Week Program

Strategy #9

Parental involvement and communication is provided by news releases; flyers, neighborhood sites for parents; phone calls prior to Kindergarten Week; home visits as needed; From Your Nest to

Ours, a coffee time for parents on the first day of school; and a 30 minutes Parent Component is provided for all parents during Kindergarten Week. Parents will complete an evaluation of the

transition programs at this time.

Strategy #10

The Kindergarten Support grant was given through the Lake Wales Charter Schools Foundation. This grant allows us to make this program possible.

Strategy #11

The Kindergarten teachers assess students using the FLKRS to determine school readiness for the state of Florida.

Strategy #12

A K Support study was completed to determine the meaningfulness of this grant. The study supports the use of this program.

The return on investment was overwhelming in the benefit of this program to our students. The donor making this grant possible was delighted to see the effect of the program with the children and

has given one additional paraprofessional to enable the program to serve more students.

*Grades 6-12 Only Sec. 1003.413(b) F.S For schools with Grades 6-12, describe the plan to ensure that teaching reading strategies is the responsibility of every teacher.


April 2011 17

Rule 6A-1.099811


*High Schools Only

Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S., Sec. 1003.413(g)(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 Transition

Note: 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.

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

Reading Goals

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


April 2011 18

Rule 6A-1.099811


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

READING GOALS Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

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:

Anticipated Barrier Strategy Process Used to

Determine Effectiveness

of Strategy

Evaluation Tool Person or Position

Responsible for Monitoring

1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in

reading

Reading Goal #1:

1.1

Alignment of curriculum

resources school wide

1.1

Hire a reading consultant to

align curriculum, Super Star

program for K-2, follow LFS

curriculum maps; Monthly

Vertical Team meetings to

share resources

1.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

1.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,

Bi-weekly mini assessments

1.1. Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 38% (93) of

students will achieve proficiency

(FCAT Level 3) in reading

2011 Current

Level of Performance:*

2012 Expected


35 % (85) of

students achieved

proficiency

(FCAT Level 3) in

reading

38% (93) of

students will

achieve

proficiency

(FCAT Level 3) in

reading

1.2.

Time constraints for

intervention and iii;

1.2

Daily schedule changed to

allow for 120 minutes

reading instruction for lowest

reading groups, SES and

after school tutoring for

struggling students

1.2.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

1.2.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


1.2.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

1.3.

Lack of vocabulary

1.3.

Previewing, using Word

Walls, Rosetta Stone for

ESOL students

1.3.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

1.3.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


1.3. Reading Teachers,

Administration






of

Strategy



2. Students achieving above proficiency

(FCAT Levels 4 and 5) in reading

Reading Goal #2:

2.1.

Lack of enrichment

activities

2..1 Novel studies, LFS extended

thinking strategies use

technology in reading,

Ability grouping and

departmentalization, Leader

in Me program

2.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

2.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


2.1.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 21% (51 ) students

2011 Current Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected Level of

Performance:*


April 2011 19

Rule 6A-1.099811


will achieve above proficiency

(FCAT Level 4 & 5) in reading

18 % (43)

students achieved

above proficiency

(FCAT Level 4 &

5) in reading

21% (51 )

students will

achieve above

proficiency

(FCAT Level 4 &

5) in reading

2.2.

2.2.

2.2.

2.2.

2.2.

2.3

2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3


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


Determine Effectiveness of

Strategy



3. Percentage of students making Learning Gains in

reading

Reading Goal #3:

3.1.

Students enter third grade reading below grade level

3.1.

Strengthen foundational skill in K-2 by using the Rowland

reading program, provide SES

& after schools tutoring for struggling students

3.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

3.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


3.1.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 65% (158) of

students made learning gains in

reading


Performance:*


Performance:*

62% (151)of

students made

learning gains in

reading

65% (158) of

students made

learning gains in

reading

3.2.

Attendance concerns

3.2.

Attendance policy will be

implemented with fidelity

3.2.

Grade level and

leadership meetings

3.2.

Administrative monitoring

3.2.

Classroom Teachers, Administration

3.3. 3.3. 3.3. 3..3. 3.3.

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


Anticipated Barrier Strategy Process Used to Determine Effectiveness

of

Strategy

Evaluation Tool Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring

4. Percentage of students in Lowest 25% making

learning gains in reading

Reading Goal #4:

4.1. Lack of motivation

4.1. Use variety of teaching

techniques such as, modeling;

think aloud, graphic organizers, collaborative pairs, etc.

Leader in Me program and

Positive Behavior Strategies to

4.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

4.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


4.1.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 61% of students in

2011 Current

Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*


April 2011 20

Rule 6A-1.099811


lowest 25 % will make learning

gains in reading

58% of students

in lowest 25 %

made learning

gains in reading

61% of students

in lowest 25 %

will make

learning gains in

reading

help students become

responsible for their learning.

4.2. Attendance concerns

4.2. Attendance policy will be

implemented with fidelity

4.2. Grade level and

leadership meetings

4.2 Administrative monitoring

.

4.2 Classroom Teachers,

Administration.

4.3

4.3

4.3

4.3

4.3


“Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the applicable subgroup(s):



Strategy



5A. Student subgroups

not making Adequate

Yearly Progress (AYP) in

reading

Reading Goal #5A:

Reading Goal #5A:

Ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)

5A.1.

Lack of experiential background and oral language

skills

5A.1.

- Increase focus on vocabulary and oral language skills,

- use of Rosetta stone for ELL

students, incorporate Shirley English, language program, in

grades 1-5 to build language

skills, - Modeling think aloud

5A.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

5A.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


5A.1.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, the percentage of

student in each subgroup scoring

at or above proficiency will

increase by 3%. White:

75% (64) of White students scored

at or above grade level

Black: 51% (29)of black students

scored at or above grade level in reading

Hispanic: 42% (37) of students scored at or

above grade level in reading

2011 Current

Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*

White: 72% (61) of

White students

scored at or above grade level

in reading

meeting the Safe

Harbor criteria

for AYP

Black: 48%

(27)of black

students scored at or above grade

level in reading

Hispanic:

39% (35)of

White: 75% (64)of

White students

scored at or above grade level

Black: 51% (29)

of black students

scored at or


Hispanic: 42% (37)of

students scored at

or above grade level in reading


April 2011 21

Rule 6A-1.099811


students scored at

or above grade

level in reading

Asian: N/A

American Indian: N/A

Asian: N/A

American Indian:

N/A

5A.2. 5A.2. 5A.2. 5A.2. 5A.2.

5A.3. 5A.3. 5A.3. 5A.3. 5A.3.



improvement for the following subgroup:



of Strategy



5B. Student subgroups

not making Adequate


reading

Reading Goal #5B:

Reading Goal #5B:

English Language

Learners (ELL)

5B.1.

Lack of English language proficiency

5B.1.

Visual aids, consistent academic language used by all staff

5B.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

5B.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


5B.1.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 26% (11) of ELL

students will score at or above

grade level in reading.


Performance:*


Performance:*

23% (10) of ELL

students scored at

or above grade

level in reading.

26% (11) of ELL

students will score

at or above grade

level in reading.

5B.2. High student mobility

5B.2. Emphasize the need to students

and parents; the importance of

consistent attendance

5B.2. Grade level and

leadership meeting

5B.2.

Attendance issues discussed in

grade level and leadership

meetings

5B.2.

Classroom Teachers,

Administration

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


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



Strategy



5C. Student subgroups

not making Adequate


reading

Reading Goal #5C:

Reading Goal #5C:

Students with Disabilities

(SWD)

5C.1.

5C.1. 5C.1.

5C.1.

5C.1.

N/A

2011 Current

Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*


April 2011 22

Rule 6A-1.099811


Professional 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.

N/A N/A

5C.2.

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

5C.3.

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





Strategy



5D. Student subgroups

not making Adequate


reading

Reading Goal #5D:

Reading Goal #5D:

Economically

Disadvantaged

5D.1.

Lack of vocabulary and

language skills,

5D.1.

Struggling students will receive 30 minutes of reading

intervention in the computer lab

through Fast ForWard program

5D.1.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

5D.1.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


5D.1.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 54% (114) of

students in Economically

disadvantaged subgroup will score

at or above grade level.

2011 Current


2012 Expected


51% (108) of

students scored at

or above grade

level in reading.

54% (114) of

students will score

at or above grade

level in reading.

5D.2.

Lack of extended support

at home

5D.2. - 5 parent involvement nights

will be held to educate parent in

ways to support their child education

- SES & after school tutoring

program will be provided to

struggling students

5D.2.

Mini- assessments,

Monthly Grade Level

Meeting, Vertical

team (PLC) mtgs.,

Leadership meetings

5D.2.

Progress monitoring

assessments,


5D.2.

Reading Teachers,

Administration

5D.3.

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


April 2011 23

Rule 6A-1.099811


PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade

Level/Subject

PD Facilitator and/or

PLC Leader

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

school-wide)

Target Dates and Schedules

(e.g. , Early Release) and

Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings)

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

Monitoring

LFS Strategies School Wide

Ambica Randev

K-5 Vertical Team Meetings Observations and Progress Monitoring Leadership Team

Reading Strategies School Wide

Reading Consultant

K-5 Vertical Team Meetings Observations and Progress Monitoring Leadership Team

Reading 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

Rowland Reading Program (K-2) Materials/textbooks General Budget 33,920.00

Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:

Professional Development


Reading Consultant Personnel General Budget 20,000.00

Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

53,920.00 Total:

End of Reading Goals


April 2011 24

Rule 6A-1.099811


Mathematics Goals

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

MATHEMATICS GOALS Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement





Strategy



1. Students achieving proficiency (Level 3) in

mathematics

Mathematics Goal #1:

1.1.

Lack of basic fact fluency

and inadequate knowledge

of fundamental concepts.

1.1.

Build opportunity to practice basic facts and implement Math

Party in grades 3-5.

Continued to implement the

Acaletics program that has

shown results, a more intense

focus on data driven

instruction through the use of

activotes to target deficient

skills.

1.1.

Progress monitoring data, Acaletics data, Monthly

vertical team meeting

(PLC), Leadership meetings

1.1.

Progress Monitoring assessment, Acaletics assessments, and


1.1

Math teachers, Math Resource teacher,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 40% (98) of


(FCAT Level 3) in Mathematics


Performance:*


Performance:*

37 % (90) of

students

achieved

proficiency

(FCAT level 3)

in mathematics

40% (98) of

students will

achieve

proficiency

(FCAT level 3)

in mathematics

1.2.

Lack of familiarization

with math vocabulary

words.

1.2.

Increased focus on teaching

math vocabulary through

math word walls,

manipulatives, foldable,

summarization, and

encourage writing in math

1.2.

Progress monitoring data,

Acaletics data, Monthly

vertical team meeting (PLC), Leadership

meetings

1.2.

Progress Monitoring assessment,

Acaletics assessments, and


1.2.

Math teachers, Math

Resource teacher,

Administration

1.3.

Challenges brought on by

high LEP population.

1.3.

Additional programs such as

SES and after school

tutoring,

ESOL services will focus on

vocabulary acquisition

1.3. Progress monitoring data,



meetings

1.3. Progress Monitoring assessment,



1.3. Math teachers, Math

Resource teacher,

Administration





Strategy




(Levels 4 and 5) in mathematics


2.1.

Lack of enrichment

activities

2.1.

Use multitude of resource to

provide enrichment for

higher level thinkers, such as








Resource teacher,

Administration


April 2011 25

Rule 6A-1.099811


By Spring 2012, 37% (90) of


(FCAT level 4 & 5) in

mathematics

2011 Current

Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*

Math Superstar,

incorporating real life

problem that require problem

solving strategies, Go Math

Enrichment curriculum in

grade K-5, provide

opportunities of reciprocal

teaching between grade

levels for students

performing above

proficiency

(PLC), Leadership

meetings

34% (83) of

students

achieved

proficiency

(FCAT level 4 &

5) in

mathematics

37% (90) of

students will

achieve

proficiency

(FCAT level 4 &

5) in

mathematics

2.2.

Lack of immediate

feedback on student

knowledge level

2.2.

A more intense focus on data

driven instructions through

the use of activotes to

monitor student progress,

continued use of Acaletics

program, weekly mini

assessments

2.2.




2.2.



2.2.


Administration

2.3

2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3






of

Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

3. Percentage of students making learning gains in

mathematics (excluding 9th

grade; learning gains will

not be available for this grade)


3.1.

Inadequate knowledge of

foundational skills and key concepts

3.1.

Continued use of Acaletics

program, implementation on hands on learning using

manipulative in primary grade

levels (K-2), use of Promethean board to show student visual

representation of math concepts.

3.1.

Monthly vertical team

meeting (PLC), Leadership meetings

3.1.


Acaletics assessments, and Administrative monitoring


Resource teacher, Administration

By Spring 2012, 59% (144) of

students will make learning gains

in mathematics

2011 Current


2012Expected


56% (137) of

students made

learning gains in

mathematics

59% (144) of

students will

make learning

gains in

mathematics

3.2.

Lack of motivation to

learn new skills

3.2. Build prior knowledge and use

real world examples,

collaborative pairs, differentiate








Resource teacher,

Administration


April 2011 26

Rule 6A-1.099811


instruction, and technology to

increase engagement

(PLC), Leadership

meetings

3.3.

3.3. 3.3. 3..3. 3.3.




of

Strategy

Evaluation Tool Person or Position Responsible for

Monitoring

4. Percentage of students in Lowest 25% making

learning gains in mathematics


4.1.

Huge gaps in knowledge

base

4.1.

Math parent involvement

night to show parent ways to

help their children at home

with math skills, additional

programs such as SES

tutoring and After School

tutoring




meetings





Resource teacher,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 66% of students

in lowest 25% will make learning

gains in mathematics

2011 Current

Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*

63% of students

in lowest 25%

made learning

gains in

mathematics

66% of students

in lowest 25%

will make

learning gains in

mathematics

4.2.

Lack of motivation to

learn

4.2. Build prior knowledge and use

real world examples,

collaborative pairs, differentiate instruction, and technology to

increase engagement




meetings





Resource teacher,

Administration

4.3.

4.3. 4.3. 4.3. 4.3.


improvement for the applicable subgroup(s):


of

Strategy


Monitoring

5A. Student subgroups

not making Adequate


mathematics

Mathematics Goal #5A:

Mathematics Goal #5A:

Ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian,

American Indian)

5A.1.

Lack of familiarization

with math vocabulary

words.

5A.1.

Increased focus on teaching

math vocabulary through

math word walls,

manipulatives, foldable, and

summarization

ESOL services will focus on

vocabulary acquisition

5A.1. Progress monitoring data,



meetings

5A.1. Progress Monitoring assessment,



5A.1. Math teachers, Math

Resource teacher,

Administration

By Spring 2012, the percentage of

student in each subgroup scoring

at or above proficiency will

increase by 3%. White:

81% (69) of White students scored

2011 Current


2012 Expected


White:

78% (66) of

White students scored at or

White:

81% (69) of

White students scored at or


April 2011 27

Rule 6A-1.099811


at or above grade level

Black: 70% (39) of black students scored at or above grade level in

reading

Hispanic:

76% (68) of students scored at or


Asian: N/A

American Indian: N/A

above grade level

making AYP

under safe harbor criteria

Black: 67% (38) of black students

scored at or


Hispanic: 73% (65)of

students scored at


Asian: N/A American Indian:

N/A

above grade level

Black: 70% (39) of black students

scored at or


Hispanic: 76% (68) of

students scored at


Asian: N/A American Indian:

N/A

5A.2.

Inadequate knowledge of foundational skills and key

concepts

5A.2.

Continued use of Acaletics program, implementation on

hands on learning using

manipulative in primary grade levels (K-2), use of Promethean

board to show student visual

representation of math concepts.

5A.2.




5A.2.



5A.2.


Administration

5A.3. 5A.3. 5A.3. 5A.3. 5A.3.






of Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring


not making Adequate


mathematics

Mathematics Goal #5B:

Mathematics Goal #5B:

English Language

Learners (ELL)

5B.1.

Lack of knowledge of key

concepts, and math vocabulary

5B.1.

Differentiate instruction,

Collaborative pairs, summarization, visual

representation on math concepts

through the use of technology

5B.1.

Progress monitoring data,

Acaletics data, Monthly vertical team meeting

(PLC), Leadership

meetings

5B.1.


Acaletics assessments, and Administrative monitoring

5B.1.

Math teachers, Math

Resource teacher, Administration

By Spring 2012, 72% (30)of ELL


grade level in mathematics


Performance:*


Performance:*

69% (29)of ELL

students scored

at or above

grade level in

mathematics

72% (30)of ELL

students will

score at or above

grade level in

mathematics


April 2011 28

Rule 6A-1.099811


5B.2.

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

5B.3

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




of

Strategy


Monitoring


not making Adequate


mathematics

Mathematics Goal #5C:

Mathematics Goal #5C:

Students with Disabilities

(SWD)

5C.1.

5C.1. 5C.1.

5C.1. 5C.1.

N/A

2011 Current


2012 Expected


N/A N/A

5C.2.

5C.2. 5C.2.

5C.2. 5C.2.

5C.3.

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





Strategy




not making Adequate


mathematics

Mathematics Goal #5D:

Mathematics Goal #5D:

Economically

Disadvantaged

5D.1.

Lack of extended support

at home

5D.1.

Provide Math Parent Involvement night to educate

parent in ways to help their

children, neighborhood visits, Additional programs such as

SES and after school tutoring

5D.1.

Monthly vertical team meeting (PLC),

Leadership meetings

5D.1.

Parent Involvement Night

evaluation

5D.1.

Math teachers, math resource teacher,

Administration

By Spring 2012, 76% (161) of

Economically Disadvantage


proficiency

2011 Current

Level of

Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*

73% (155) of

Economically

Disadvantage

students scored

at or above

proficiency

76% (161) of

Economically

Disadvantage

students will

score at or above

proficiency


April 2011 29

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade

Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or

PLC Leader

PD Participants

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

school-wide)





Monitoring

Acaletics

K-5

Kim Kieffer

Ambica Randev

All math teacher (K-5)

Ongoing throughout the year

Observation, ongoing progress

monitoring

Ambica Randev

Leadership team

Vocabulary Instruction

Strategies

K-5

Ambica Randev


Monthly Vertical Team

Meetings


monitoring

Ambica Randev

Leadership team

Use of Technology &

in Math

K-5

Ambica Randev



Meetings


monitoring

Ambica Randev

Leadership team

Mathematics Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.



ACALETICS Textbook General Budget 20,000.00

Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:


5D.2.

5D.2. 5D.2.

5D.2. 5D.2.

5D.3.

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


April 2011 30

Rule 6A-1.099811



Ambica Randev Personnel / Math Resource Title I 40,077.00

Mike Bell Consultant for Acaletics General Budget 10,000.00

Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

70,077.00 Total:

End of Mathematics Goals

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

SCIENCE GOALS Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement






of Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in

science

Science Goal #1:

1.1.

Lack of background

knowledge

1.1.

- More support for students

in terms of pictures,

vocabulary instruction, and

science demonstrations

- Practice test taking skills

through Science dailies and

use of activotes and/ or cards

1.1. Progress monitoring data, Monthly vertical team

meeting (PLC),

Leadership meetings

1.1.

Progress monitoring

assessment, administrative

monitoring

1.1.

Science teachers,

Science resource

teacher, Administration.

By Spring 2012, 28% (17) of


(FCAT level 3) in science.

2011 Current


2012 Expected


25% (15) of

students achieved

proficiency

(FCAT level 3) in

science.

28% ((17) of

students will

achieve

proficiency

(FCAT level 3) in

science.

1.2.

Lack of instruction time

due to pull out programs

that limit Science

instruction EX: Fast

Forward

1.2.

Try to rework on the

schedule, work on integrating


Monthly vertical team

meeting (PLC), Leadership meetings

1.2.


1.2.

Science teachers,

Science resource

teacher, Administration.


April 2011 31

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade

Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or

PD Participants



(e.g. , Early Release) and Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring

Person or Position Responsible for

Monitoring

1.3.

Lack of motivation

1.3.

- More engaging lessons and

„Leader in Me‟ instruction,

professional development –

„Teach Like a Champion‟

strategies.

- More hands on science

activities

1.3. Progress monitoring data, Monthly vertical team

meeting (PLC),

Leadership meetings

1.3.


1.3.

Science teachers,

Science resource

teacher,

Administrations





Strategy




(FCAT Levels 4 and 5) in science

Science Goal #2:

2.1.

Lack of enrichment

activities

2.1.

a. Provide enrichment

activities and assign

leadership roles in

classroom.

b. Students performing

above grade level will

use mini lesson and

PowerPoint to explain

concepts to struggling

learner

c. K-2 students performing

above grade level can re

teach/ summarize the

lesson taught previously

or lead the science

dailies



Leadership meetings

2.1.


2.1.

Science teachers,

Science resource

teacher,

Administrations

By Spring 2012, 12% of students

will achieve proficiency (FCAT level

4 & 5) in science.


Performance:*


Performance:*

9 %( 5) of

students achieved

proficiency

(FCAT level 4 &

5) in science.

12% (7) of

students will

achieve

proficiency

(FCAT level 4 &

5) in science.

2.2.

Behavior

2.2.

More engaging lessons and

„Leader in Me‟ instruction.

Professional development-

„Teach Like a Champion‟

Book study.



Leadership meetings

2.2.


2.2.

Science teachers,

Science resource

teacher,

Administrations

2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3


April 2011 32

Rule 6A-1.099811


PLC Leader school-wide) Schedules (e.g., frequency of

meetings)

Leader in Me

All

Consultant

School-wide

Ongoing for 2010-2011

school year

Observations Administration

New Generation SSS

1-5

K Core

standards

Melissa Kelly

All Grade Levels


school year

Observations

Administration

Classroom Teachers

Support Staff

New Generation SSS

K Core

standards

Melissa Kelly

All Grade Levels


school year

Observations

Administration

Classroom Teachers

Support Staff


Meeting All Science

Teachers Melissa Kelly All Grade Levels


school year

Walk through & Observation

Administration

Classroom Teachers

Support Staff

Collaboration through the

Vertical Team Meetings All Melissa Kelly School-wide Ongoing for 2010-2011

school year Observations

Administration

Classroom Teachers

Support Staff

Science Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials.



Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:



Science Resource Teacher Resource Teacher Title I 45,215.00

Subtotal:


April 2011 33

Rule 6A-1.099811


Other


Subtotal: 45,215.00 Total:

End of Science Goals

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

WRITING GOALS Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

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:

Anticipated

Barrier

Strategy Process Used to


of Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

1. Students achieving Adequate Yearly Progress

(FCAT Level 4.0 and higher) in writing

Writing Goal #1:

1.1.

Anticipated

barriers are a

higher

proficiency

level, students‟

lack of command

of language, and

scheduling.

1.1.

Lesson plan template

embedded with LFS

strategies which will

promote student

engagement while

following the Cardinal

Writes Program.

Integrate Shurley English

Program at all grade

levels.

The instructional focus

calendar will be used to

highlight dates to instruct

benchmarks and skills to

be taught or remediated

prior to spring testing.

1.1.

Teacher

observation,

conferencing, and

monitoring of

student progress to

determine growth

and needs.

1.1.

Bi-monthly assessments

(essays)

1.1.

Writing Teachers,

Administration,

Leadership Team

By Spring 2011, 85

% (66) or more of

the 4th

grade students

will be at AL 4.0 or

above in writing as

evidenced by the

School Grade

Report.

2011 Current Level

of Performance:*

2012 Expected

Level of

Performance:*

97% (88) of the 4th

grade students

scored 3.0 or

higher on 2010-

2011 writing

assessment.

By Spring 2012,

85% (66)) or more

of the students in

the 4th

grade will be

at AL 4.0 or above

in writing.

1.2.

Struggling

1.2.

Small instruction will be

1.2.

Teacher

1.2.

Weekly mini-assessments

1.2.

Writing Teachers,


April 2011 34

Rule 6A-1.099811


students with

language

deficiencies and

limited

vocabularies can

be a barrier.

provided for struggling

students as identified by

progress monitoring

during the school day,

voc. notebooks,

PowerPoint presentations,

games, word match

activities.

observation,

conferencing, and

monitoring of

student progress to

determine growth

and needs.

(essays) Administration,

Leadership Team

1.3.

Students have a

limited life

experiences

1.3.

Real or virtual field trips,

hands-on experiences,

project based learning

(extended thinking),

games, editable teacher-

made activities.

1.3.

Teacher observation

and monitoring to

determine progress.

1.3.

Student essays

1.3.

Writing Teachers,

Administration,

Leadership Team

Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding


group:

Anticipated

Barrier


Determine

Effectiveness of

Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

2A. Student

subgroups not

making Adequate

Yearly Progress

(AYP) in writing

Writing Goal #2A:

Writing Goal #2A:

Ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Asian,

American Indian)

2A.1.

White:

Black:

Hispanic:

Asian:

American

Indian:

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

Enter narrative for the

goal in this box.


Performance:*


Performance:*

Enter numerical data for

current level of

performance in this box.

White: Black:

Hispanic:

Asian: American Indian:


expected level of


White: Black:

Hispanic:

Asian: American Indian:

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

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding


subgroup:

Anticipated

Barrier


Determine

Effectiveness of

Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring


April 2011 35

Rule 6A-1.099811



not making Adequate


writing

Writing Goal #2B:

Writing Goal #2B:

English Language Learners

(ELL)

2B.1.

3B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1.

Enter narrative for the goal in

this box.


Performance:*

2012 Expected Level of Performance:*

Enter numerical

data for current

level of

performance in

this box.


expected level of


2B.2.

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

2B.3.

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

subgroup:

Anticipated Barrier

Strategy Process Used to Determine Effectiveness

of

Strategy


Monitoring


not making Adequate


writing

Writing Goal #2C:

Writing Goal #2C:

Students with Disabilities (SWD)

2C.1.

2C.1. 2C.1. 2C.1. 2C.1.


this box.

2011 Current



Performance:*

Enter numerical

data for current

level of

performance in

this box.


expected level of


2C.2.

2C.2. 2C.2. 2C.2. 2C.2.

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

subgroup:

Anticipated Barrier

Strategy Process Used to Determine Effectiveness

of

Strategy


Monitoring


not making Adequate


Writing Goal #2D:

Economically Disadvantaged

2D.1.

2D.1. 2D.1. 2D.1. 2D.1.


April 2011 36

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or

PLC Leader

PD Participants


school-wide)


(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of

meetings)


Monitoring

Shurley English / grammar, structure, conventions

Writing Teachers

Consultant

School wide


Meetings

Sample monthly essays from grade

lsevels.

Administration

Leadership Team

Writing Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials.



Subtotal:

writing

Writing Goal #2D:


this box.


Performance:*

2012 Expected Level of Performance:*

Enter numerical

data for current

level of

performance in

this box.


expected level of


2D.2.

2D.2. 2D.2. 2D.2. 2D.2.

2D.3.

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


April 2011 37

Rule 6A-1.099811


Technology


Subtotal:



Consultant Consultant General 10,000.00

10,000.00 Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

10,000.00 Total:

End of Writing Goals

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

ATTENDANCE GOAL(S) Problem-solving Process to Increase Attendance

Based on the analysis of attendance data, and reference to “Guiding

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



of Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

1. Attendance

Attendance Goal #1:

1.1. Lack of Parental Support 1.1. Instill a love for school in

our student population.

1.2 Attendance policy will be enforced.

1.3 Positive Behavior Support

for being in attendance. 1.4 Cinnamon rolls for parents in

the car rider line for parents who

get their children to school on time.

1.5 Promote responsibility in

students through the Leader In

1.1. Gail Quam

Metta O‟Bryant 1.1. Attendance Records 1.1. Attendance

Records

95% of the student

population will attend

school regularly during the 2010-2011 school year as

reported by Genesis.

2010 Current

Attendance Rate:*

2011 Expected

Attendance Rate:*

94.3 95

2010 Current

Number of Students with Excessive

Absences

2011 Expected

Number of Students with Excessive

Absences


April 2011 38

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or

PLC Leader

PD Participants


school-wide)



meetings)


Monitoring

Leader in Me

Prek-5

Gail Quam

School-wide

Monthly Meetings

Observations/Conversations/PLCs

Gail Quam

PBS PreK-5 Metta O’Bryant School-wide

Monthly Meetings

PLC‟s/Lesson Plans/Observations

Metta O‟Bryant

Reading

K-5

Yvonne Morrow

Reading Teachers

Monthly Meetings


Gail Quam

Math K-5 Ambica Randev Math Teachers Monthly Meetings


Gail Quam

Writing K-5 Marian Middleton Writing Teachers Monthly Meetings


Gail Quam

Science

K-5

Melissa Kelly

Science Teachers

Monthly Meetings


Gail Quam

Attendance Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.



(10 or more)

(10 or more) Me program.

182 80

2010 Current

Number of Students with

Excessive Tardies

(10 or more)

2011 Expected

Number of Students with

Excessive Tardies

(10 or more)

1.2.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.


April 2011 39

Rule 6A-1.099811


Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:



Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

Total:

End of Attendance Goals

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 Suspension

Based on the analysis of suspension data, and reference to “Guiding

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



of

Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

1. Suspension

Suspension Goal #1:

1.1. Comunication barriers between home and school.

1.1. Community Outreach through monthly Parent

Involvement Nights to build

relationships between home and school.

1.2 Behavior Management

Training through the

1.1.Tile One Program Facilitator, Ambica Saran

1.2 Metta O‟Bryant

1.3 Metta O‟Bryant, Gail Quam

1.4 Metta O‟Bryant, Gail

Quam

1.1. Monitoring of discipline reports and evaluations.

1.2 Discipline reports

1.3 Discipline reports 1.4 Discipline reports

1.1.Reports and evaluations.

1.2 Observations

1.3 Observations 1.4 Observations

We will reduce the

number of in-school and out of school suspension

rates by 10% through the

1.1. Comunication

barriers between

home and school.

2012 Expected Number of

In- School

Suspensions


April 2011 40

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or

PLC Leader

PD Participants


school-wide)



meetings)


Monitoring

Leader in Me

School-wide

Lonnie Moore

Gail Quam

School-wide

Bi-monthly meetings

Walk-through and observations

Gail Quam

Positive Behavior

Support

School-wide

Metta

O’Bryant

School-wide

Bi-monthly Meetings

Observations and Behavior Reports

Metta O‟Bryant

Suspension Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.



Subtotal:

integration of Leader in

Me and Positive Behavior

Support.

implementation of Positive

Behavior Support.

1.3 Implementation of In School Suspension.

1.4 Implementation of The

Leader in Me program.

2012 Expected

Number of Students

Suspended In -School

2012 Expected

Number of

Out-of-School Suspensions

2012 Expected

Number of Students

Suspended Out- of-School

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.


April 2011 41

Rule 6A-1.099811


Technology


Subtotal:



Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

Total:

End of Suspension Goals

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:


of

Strategy


Monitoring

1. Dropout Prevention

Dropout Prevention Goal #1:

*Please refer to the percentage of students who dropped

out during the 2010-2011 school year.

1.1.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Enter narrative for the goal

in this box.

2011 Current

Dropout Rate:*

2012 Expected

Dropout Rate:*

Enter numerical Enter numerical data


April 2011 42

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus

Grade

Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or PLC Leader

PD Participants

(e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or school-wide)

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

Schedules (e.g., frequency of

meetings)


Monitoring

Dropout Prevention Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.



Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:



data for dropout

rate in this box.

for expected dropout

rate in this box.

2011 Current

Graduation Rate:*

2012 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.


April 2011 43

Rule 6A-1.099811


Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

Total:

End of Dropout Prevention Goal(s)

Parent Involvement Goal(s) * 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 Involvement

Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to


improvement:



of Strategy


Responsible for

Monitoring

1. Parent Involvement

Parent Involvement Goal #1:

*Please refer to the percentage of parents who

participated in school activities, duplicated or

unduplicated.

1.1.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.


this box.

2011 Current

level of Parent

Involvement:*

2012 Expected

level of Parent

Involvement:*

Enter numerical

data for current

level of parent

involvement in

this box.

Enter numerical

data for expected

level of parent

involvement in

this box.

1.2.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

See School Parent Involvement Plan Uploaded on the State Website.


April 2011 44

Rule 6A-1.099811



PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade

Level/Subject

PD Facilitator and/or

PLC Leader

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

school-wide)





Monitoring

Parent Involvement Budget

* Please ensure that items included in the Parental Involvement Policy/Plan (PIP) are outlined in the following budget section. Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.



Parent Involvement Nights Materials/Food Title I 8,000.00

Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:



Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:


April 2011 45

Rule 6A-1.099811


Total:

End of Parent Involvement Goal(s)

Additional Goal(s)

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


PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade

Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or PLC Leader

PD Participants

(e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or school-wide)



Schedules (e.g., frequency of

meetings)


Monitoring

ADDITIONAL GOAL(S) Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

Based on the analysis of school data, identify and define

areas in need of improvement:



of Strategy

Evaluation Tool Evaluation Tool Person or

Position Responsible for

Monitoring

1. Additional Goal

Additional Goal #1:

1.1.

1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.


this box.

2011 Current Level :*

2012 Expected Level :*

Enter numerical

data for current

goal in this box.

Enter numerical

data for expected

goal in this box.

1.2.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.


April 2011 46

Rule 6A-1.099811


Additional Goal(s) Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials.



Subtotal:

Technology


Subtotal:



Subtotal:

Other


Subtotal:

Total:

End of Additional Goal(s)


April 2011 47

Rule 6A-1.099811


FINAL BUDGET (Insert rows as needed) Please provide the total budget from each section.

Reading Budget

Total: 53,920.00

Mathematics Budget

Total: 70,077.00

Science Budget

Total: 45,215.00

Writing Budget

Total: 10,000.00

Attendance Budget

Total:

Suspension Budget

Total:

Dropout Prevention Budget

Total:

Parent Involvement Budget

Total: 8,000.00

Additional Goals

Total:

Grand Total:187,212.00

Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability (DA) Compliance

Please 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 Status


April 2011 48

Rule 6A-1.099811


Intervene Correct II Prevent II Correct I Prevent I N/A

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

School Advisory Council School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

The 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 citizens 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 No

If No, describe measures being taken to comply with SAC requirement.

Describe the activities of the School Advisory Council for the upcoming year. Approve lottery budget, A plus money, school improvement plan, parent involvement plan, School Parent Compact, and result of climate survey

Describe projected use of SAC funds. Amount We have no funds designated for SAC. However, we do get SAC approval for the funds listed below.

School Improvement Plan (SIP) Form SIP-1 · Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership...

Documents

Transcript of School Improvement Plan (SIP) Form SIP-1 · Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership...