Ware Elementary
-
Upload
morpheus-zephyr -
Category
Documents
-
view
68 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Ware Elementary
SITE COUNCIL MEMBERS
• Alicia Scofield , Jared Larson- Co-Chairs
• Michaela Larson, Deb Gustafson, Dana Williamson, Nancy Norris, Kathy Sheffield, Melanie Gray, Tiffany Kelsay, Lynn Kruse, Erica Flenoury, Tonia Horton, Veronica Wait, Lindsay Lokodi, Erin Taylor, Jamie Deville, Sharon Harrison, Jennifer Black, Amy Madetzke, Jenny Harper, Melanie Gray, Kathy Sheffield
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MEMBERS
• All Certified Staff Members
SIP and Site Council meet monthly for regular meetings.
MTSS is part of the SIP process.
School Improvement Process
API increase by 5 points to 677
– State assessment data
– Formative assessment data – SRI
Reduce Non Proficient by .48
– State assessment data
– Formative assessment data-SRI
Reading Goals
Kindercorner strategies– Learning Labs to increase vocabulary development
– Placement of students in Roots if achieving passing ROOTS assessment.
Roots strategies
– Aggressive placement of students
– Reading Counts assessment
– SRI assessments once passed story 48.
– Cooperative Learning
Wings strategies
– Aggressive placement of students
– Reading Counts assessment
– Cooperative Learning
– Posting objectives and goals
Strategies for Supporting Goals
2013 Reading Achievement by
Performance Groups
All Free & Reduced Disabilities Hispanic0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Academic Warning (%) Approaches Standard (%) Meets Standard (%) Exceeds Standard (%) Exemplary (%)
2012 Reading Achievement by
Performance Groups
All Free & Reduced Disabilities African American Hispanic0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Academic Warning (%) Approaches Standard (%) Meets Standard (%) Exceeds Standard (%) Exemplary (%)
READING AMO Progress CategoriesOne area must be achieved for accreditation.
Achievement GapReading Reading
NO NO
Growth ProficiencyReading Reading
YES NO
Reduction of Non-ProficientReading
NO
Elementary Annual Measureable Objective
2012 % Below
Proficient2013 % Below Proficient Goal
2013 % Below Proficient
Actual ChangeReach AMO
Goal?
Reading 5.8 5.32 10.98 +5.18 NO
API increase by 5 points to 729
– State assessment data
– Formative assessment data – Unit assessments
– SMI for lowest 20%
Reduce Non Proficient by .18
– State assessment data
– Formative assessment data – Unit assessments
– SMI for lowest 20%
Math Goals
• Implementation of district common core strategies as outlined by the grade level task force.
• Depth of knowledge questions.
• Increase student explanation of math answers.
• Multi-step math problems.
Share your strategies for supporting your goals
2013 Math Achievement by Performance Groups
All Free & Reduced Disabilities Hispanic0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Academic Warning (%) Approaches Standard (%) Meets Standard (%) Exceeds Standard (%) Exemplary (%)
2012 Math Achievement by Performance Groups
All Free & Reduced Disabilities African American Hispanic0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Academic Warning (%) Approaches Standard (%) Meets Standard (%) Exceeds Standard (%) Exemplary (%)
MATH AMO Progress CategoriesOne area must be achieved for accreditation.
Achievement GapReading Reading
NO NO
Growth ProficiencyReading Reading
YES NO
AchievementMath
NO Elementary Annual Measureable Objective
2012 API2013
Goal API2013
Actual API 2013 CategoryReach AMO
Goal?
Math 755 757 724 Transitioning NO
Reduction of Non- ProficientMath
NO Elementary Annual Measureable Objective
2012 % Below
Proficient2013 % Below Proficient Goal
2013 % Below Proficient
Actual ChangeReach AMO
Goal?
Math 2.17 1.69 5.45 +3.76 NO