West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

80
West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

description

West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012. Agenda. Annual Yearly Progress(AYP) West Haven vs. District Reference Group(DRG) Matched Cohorts: Same Student Analysis Performance Level: Same Grade Analysis. Agenda Continued. Subgroup Data 2011 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Page 1: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement”

2011-2012

Page 2: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Agenda

• Annual Yearly Progress(AYP)

• West Haven vs. District Reference Group(DRG)

• Matched Cohorts: Same Student Analysis

• Performance Level: Same Grade Analysis

Page 3: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Agenda Continued

• Subgroup Data 2011

• District Improvement Plan 2009-2013

• Kindergarten-Grade 2

• Reading and Mathematics

• English Language Learners and Special Education

• Professional Development

Page 4: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Annual Yearly Progress(AYP)

Page 5: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Performance Levels

There are 5 levels of performance on the CMT/CAPT tests

• Advanced• Goal• Proficient• Basic• Below Basic

Students scoring in the top three levels have met AYP requirements

Page 6: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

District Reference Group(DRG) Comparison

• Other school districts in our DRG:– Ansonia– Danbury– Derby– East Hartford– Meriden– Norwalk– Norwich– Stamford

Page 7: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 3rd Grade MathTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Danbury 788 88.6

Norwalk 814 83.7

Stamford 1110 80.4

Ansonia 176 79.0

Meriden 632 75.5

West Haven 460 75.2

Derby 92 69.6

Norwich 360 68.3

East Hartford 482 67.0

Page 8: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 3rd Grade ReadingTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 810 70.9

Danbury 780 70.5

Stamford 1087 67.7

West Haven 451 63.4

Ansonia 177 61.0

Derby 91 57.1

Norwich 355 56.9

Meriden 622 56.6

East Hartford 478 47.3

Page 9: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 3rd Grade WritingTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 825 79.6

Danbury 805 78.5

Stamford 1129 77.1

Ansonia 183 76.5

West Haven 474 74.3

Derby 93 72.0

Meriden 648 65.4

Norwich 373 63.8

East Hartford 493 60.9

Page 10: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 4th Grade MathTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Danbury 738 86.9

Ansonia 201 85.6

Norwalk 744 84.3

Stamford 1090 81.3

West Haven 457 79.0

Derby 109 75.2

Meriden 620 73.9

Norwich 366 68.9

East Hartford 519 66.9

Page 11: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 4th Grade Reading

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 738 70.1

Ansonia 196 69.4

West Haven 450 68.0

Danbury 716 68.0

Stamford 1071 67.0

Derby 107 61.7

Meriden 608 60.7

East Hartford 514 50.4

Norwich 363 53.2

Page 12: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 4th Grade Writing

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Ansonia 207 89.9

Norwalk 753 85.7

Danbury 768 82.8

Stamford 1152 82.6

Derby 114 81.6

West Haven 488 80.9

East Hartford 530 78.1

Meriden 638 74.8

Norwich 383 66.8

Page 13: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 5th Grade MathTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Danbury 751 91.7

Norwalk 741 88.4

Stamford 1057 87.4

Ansonia 192 86.5

Meriden 640 77.7

West Haven 472 75.6

Norwich 325 74.8

East Hartford 498 68.7

Derby 124 63.7

Page 14: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 5th Grade Reading

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 737 76.0

Danbury 734 71.3

Stamford 1049 64.2

Ansonia 193 62.7

West Haven 468 59.6

Norwich 324 57.1

Meriden 624 56.7

Derby 124 54.0

East Hartford 496 44.2

Page 15: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 5th Grade Writing

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 774 90.6

Ansonia 200 90.0

Danbury 773 85.8

Stamford 1116 85.7

West Haven 497 84.1

Derby 129 82.9

East Hartford 517 76.4

Meriden 680 75.6

Norwich 345 74.8

Page 16: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 5th Grade Science

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 741 87.3

Danbury 751 79.6

Stamford 1057 76.3

West Haven 472 72.7

Ansonia 192 71.8

Derby 124 70.8

Norwich 344 67.7

Meriden 640 65.6

East Hartford 498 61.5

Page 17: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 6th Grade MathTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Ansonia 193 91.2

Stamford 962 86.9

Norwalk 724 85.9

Danbury 681 84.6

West Haven 413 81.8

Derby 98 78.6

Meriden 426 75.4

East Hartford 438 71.2

Norwich 355 68.2

Page 18: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 6th Grade Reading

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Ansonia 187 88.8

Norwalk 723 84.1

Stamford 951 82.2

West Haven 407 82.1

Danbury 673 80.2

Norwich 350 75.7

Derby 98 75.5

East Hartford 435 72.2

Meriden 441 68.0

Page 19: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 6th Grade Writing

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Ansonia 201 89.6

West Haven 438 84.2

Stamford 1030 82.7

Norwalk 747 81.9

Danbury 714 78.6

Derby 101 78.2

Norwich 381 77.2

East Hartford 461 76.4

Meriden 473 74.8

Page 20: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 7th Grade MathTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 736 86.8

Ansonia 177 84.7

Danbury 659 82.7

Stamford 973 82.6

West Haven 479 82.3

Derby 96 77.1

Norwich 355 74.9

East Hartford 438 74.7

Meriden 483 73.3

Page 21: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 7th Grade Reading

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 727 84.5

Danbury 663 81.9

Stamford 963 81.5

West Haven 482 79.3

Derby 95 78.9

Ansonia 175 74.9

Norwich 358 70.7

Meriden 490 66.5

East Hartford 441 63.0

Page 22: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 7th Grade Writing

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Derby 102 77.5

Norwalk 751 75.1

Danbury 674 74.8

Stamford 1036 73.6

Ansonia 180 72.2

West Haven 513 71.2

East Hartford 460 70.2

Norwich 371 61.7

Meriden 513 61.4

Page 23: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 8th Grade MathTown Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Ansonia 178 86.5

Danbury 677 85.4

Norwalk 788 82.4

Stamford 954 80.9

Norwich 352 79.3

Meriden 504 75.6

West Haven 444 73.6

Derby 116 73.3

East Hartford 477 65.0

Page 24: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 8th Grade Reading

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Danbury 669 83.0

Stamford 949 78.0

Norwalk 785 75.5

West Haven 447 74.3

Derby 118 73.7

Ansonia 178 71.3

Norwich 347 67.7

Meriden 518 66.0

East Hartford 480 57.3

Page 25: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 8th Grade Writing

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Danbury 701 80.7

Derby 119 79.8

Norwalk 815 76.8

Stamford 1018 76.7

West Haven 470 72.3

East Hartford 488 71.5

Ansonia 182 71.4

Meriden 547 61.4

Norwich 359 58.5

Page 26: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

DRG Comparison 8th Grade Science

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Danbury 677 73.3

Norwalk 788 71.2

Stamford 954 68.4

West Haven 444 67.2

Norwich 361 61.8

Derby 116 55.5

Ansonia 178 53.8

Meriden 504 50.4

East Hartford 477 42.2

Page 27: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

CAPTDRG Comparison 10th Grade Math

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Norwalk 762 72.8

Stamford 1105 68.9

Meriden 480 62.7

Danbury 751 61.3

West Haven 355 60.3

Ansonia 187 56.1

East Hartford 472 50.2

Derby 68 42.6

Norwich 25 24.0

Page 28: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

CAPTDRG Comparison 10th Grade Reading

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

Stamford 1102 79.2

Norwalk 760 75.9

West Haven 363 70.8

Meriden 488 65.2

Derby 69 65.2

Ansonia 180 62.8

Danbury 717 61.6

East Hartford 470 54.9

Norwich 26 15.4

Page 29: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

CAPTDRG Comparison 10th Grade Writing

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

West Haven 366 87.4

Stamford 1121 87.3

Norwalk 752 85.2

Derby 71 81.7

Meriden 499 79.0

Ansonia 175 74.3

East Hartford 469 74.2

Danbury 737 68.7

Norwich 28 17.9

Page 30: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

CAPTDRG Comparison 10th Grade Science

Town Number Tested % At/Above Proficiency

West Haven 374 76.2

Norwalk 756 72.4

Stamford 1135 75.5

Derby 73 69.9

East Hartford 482 66.4

Ansonia 185 65.9

Danbury 774 64.3

Meriden 501 63.1

Norwich 29 34.5

Page 31: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison

Provides a two way table to show the number/percent of students in each performance level across two years/grades for matched cohorts

A matched cohort is the same group of students tested over a defined period, better indicator of district growth

Page 32: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 3, 2010 to Grade 4, 2011

Page 33: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 3, 2010 to Grade 4, 2011

Mathematics

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 20 students - 9 students 11 students

Basic 54 students 11 students 22 students 21 students

Proficient 137 students 25 students 71 students 41 students

Goal 135 students 30 students 84 students 21 students

Advanced 65 students 24 students 41 students -

Page 34: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 3, 2010 to Grade 4, 2011

Reading

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 81 students x 59 students 22 students

Basic 48 students 9 students 16 students 23 students

Proficient 56 students 20 students 10 students 26 students

Goal 168 students 29 students 123 students 16 students

Advanced 52 students 26 students 26 students x

Page 35: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 3, 2010 to Grade 4, 2011

Writing

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 37 students x 21 students 16 students

Basic 55 students 6 students 19 students 30 students

Proficient 107 students 17 students 39 students 51 students

Goal 150 students 36 students 93 students 21 students

Advanced 88 students 47 students 41 students x

Page 36: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grades 4, 2010 to Grade 5, 2011

Page 37: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 4, 2010 to Grade 5, 2011

Math

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 19 students x 13 students 6 students

Basic 68 students 17 students 30 students 21 students

Proficient 127 students 30 students 59 students 38 students

Goal 144 students 31 students 95 students 18 students

Advanced 61 students 19 students 42 students x

Page 38: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 4, 2010 to Grade 5, 2011

Reading

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 87 students x 64 students 25 students

Basic 55 students 25 students 10 students 20 students

Proficient 87 students 30 students 38 students 19 students

Goal 144 students 31 students 97 students 16 students

Advanced 40 students 11 students 29 students x

Page 39: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 4, 2010 to Grade 5, 2011

Writing

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 22 students x 15 students 7 students

Basic 58 students 11 students 14 students 33 students

Proficient 157 students 17 students 62 students 78 students

Goal 161 students 37 students 88 students 36 students

Advanced 44 students 15 students 29 students x

Page 40: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grades 5 2010 to Grade 6 2011

Page 41: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 5, 2010 to Grade 6, 2011

Math

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 16 students x 8 students 8 students

Basic 37 students 7 students 19 students 11 students

Proficient 111 students 24 students 65 students 22 students

Goal 159 students 39 students 106 students 14 students

Advanced 60 students 24 students 36 students x

Page 42: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 5, 2010 to Grade 6, 2011

Reading

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 75 students x 22 students 53 students

Basic 41 students 1 student 6 students 34 students

Proficient 87 students 8 students 28 students 51 students

Goal 134 students 7 students 101 students 26 students

Advanced 40 students 4 students 36 students x

Page 43: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 5, 2010 to Grade 6, 2011

Writing

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 18 students x 13 students 5 students

Basic 42 students 7 students 15 students 20 students

Proficient 88 students 17 students 42 students 29 students

Goal 187 students 54 students 101 students 32 students

Advanced 73 students 39 students 34 students x

Page 44: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 6 2010 to Grade 7 2011

Page 45: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 6, 2010 to Grade 7, 2011

Math

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 23 students x 9 students 14 students

Basic 49 students 9 students 20 students 20 students

Proficient 133 students 15 students 78 students 40 students

Goal 171 students 24 students 118 students 29 students

Advanced 59 students 10 students 49 students x

Page 46: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 6, 2010 to Grade 7, 2011

Reading

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 44 students x 29 students 15 students

Basic 48 students 14 students 7 students 27 students

Proficient 69 students 16 students 17 students 36 students

Goal 211 students 22 students 145 students 44 students

Advanced 62 students 5 students 57 students x

Page 47: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 6, 2010 to Grade 7, 2011

Writing

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 22 students x 14 students 8 students

Basic 76 students 28 students 27 students 21 students

Proficient 128 students 38 students 56 students 34 students

Goal 175 students 58 students 89 students 28 students

Advanced 67 students 22 students 45 students x

Page 48: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 7 2010 to Grade 8 2011

Page 49: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 7, 2010 to Grade 8, 2011

Math

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 18 students x 11 students 7 students

Basic 62 students 16 students 36 students 10 students

Proficient 88 students 22 students 58 students 8 students

Goal 151 students 42 students 101 students 8 students

Advanced 76 students 38 students 38 students x

Page 50: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort Comparison Grade 7, 2010 to Grade 8, 2011

Reading

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 40 students x 30 students 10 students

Basic 36 students 14 students 14 students 8 students

Proficient 44 students 18 students 10 students 16 students

Goal 187 students 44 students 134 students 9 students

Advanced 93 students 28 students 65 students x

Page 51: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Matched Cohort ComparisonGrade 7, 2010 to Grade 8, 2011

Writing

Performance Levels

Total Number Tested

Decreased Maintained Increased

Below Basic 40 students x 20 students 20 students

Basic 58 students 9 students 22 students 27 students

Proficient 94 students 27 students 34 students 33 students

Goal 143 students 45 students 92 students 6 students

Advanced 81 students 58 students 23 students x

Page 52: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade Level Comparison

• Performance level comparison for grade levels

• The following percentages are students scoring at or above Proficiency

Page 53: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade 3 and 4 2009-2011

% at/above proficiency

Grade Math Reading Writing

Grade 3

2009 78% 67% 86%

2010 80% 66% 78%

2011 75% 63% 74%

Grade 4

2009 81% 67% 84%

2010 78% 65% 81%

2011 79% 68% 81%

Page 54: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade Math Reading Writing ScienceGrade 5

2009 81% 73% 89% 84%2010 87% 69% 86% 80%2011 76% 60% 84% 73%

Grade 62009 77% 70% 82% NT2010 81% 77% 78% NT2011 82% 82% 84% NT

Grade 5 and 6 2009-2011

% at/above proficiency

Page 55: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade 7 and 8 2009-2011

% at/above proficiencyGrade Math Reading Writing ScienceGrade 7

2009 75% 78% 73% NT2010 76% 79% 73% NT2011 82% 79% 71% NT

Grade 82009 76% 71% 79% 72%2010 76% 75% 71% 69%2011 74% 74% 72% 67%

Page 56: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

CAPT - Performance Level Analysis2009-2011

Page 57: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Subgroup Data

• The following data indicates how our subgroups performed on the CMT/CAPT in 2011.

• Focus on ALL students

Page 58: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Black or African American Subgroup Data

2011At or Above Proficiency

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade10

Math

60%

74%

65%

70% 71%

63% 49%

Reading 54% 62% 43% 72% 70% 67% 66%

Writing 75% 76% 80% 74% 66% 64% 82%

Science N/A N/A 66% N/A N/A 57% 63%

Page 59: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade10

Math

75% 71% 71% 79% 77% 68% 51%

Reading 53% 57% 49% 79% 76% 66% 70%

Writing 64% 80% 81% 79% 64% 67% 89%

Science N/A N/A 66% N/A N/A 61% 74%

Hispanic/Latino Subgroup Data

At or Above Proficiency 2011

Page 60: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade10

Math 70% 74% 73% 75% 77% 67% 52%

Reading 57% 60% 50% 77% 74% 66% 65%

Writing 69% 76% 81% 79% 65% 65% 83%

Science N/A N/A 66% N/A N/A 58% 69%

Free/Reduced MealsSubgroup Data

At or Above Proficiency2011

Page 61: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade10

Math 57% 42% 31% 56% 50% 29% 28%

Reading 26% 11% 23% 38% 55% 36% 17%

Writing 23% 23% 37% 46% 22% 12% 41%

Science N/A N/A 33% N/A N/A 9% 41%

Special EducationSubgroup Data

At or Above Proficiency 2011

Page 62: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

English Language LearnersSubgroup Data

At or Above Proficiency 2011

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

Grade10

Math 66% 56% 53% 45% 61% 47% 21%

Reading 13% 16% 14% 17% 32% 26% 36%

Writing 33% 63% 62% 42% 30% 30% 60%

Science N/A N/A 18% N/A N/A 24% 47%

Page 63: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

And so. . .

Page 64: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012
Page 65: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

District Improvement Plan2009-2013

1. To increase math proficiency by a minimum of 10 % as measured by CMT/CAPT in order to meet or increase AYP targets established by the Connecticut State Department of Education for whole group and sub-groups

2. To increase reading and writing proficiency by a minimum of 10% as measured by CMT/CAPT in order to meet AYP targets established by the Connecticut State Department of Education for whole group and sub-group

3. To actively engage parents of students in the educational process and planning for students

4. To meet the AMAO targets established by the Connecticut State Department of Education for achievement in English Proficiency

Page 66: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

District Improvement Plan2009-2013

• Focus on research based instructional strategies – explicitly and deliberately included throughout the curriculum

• Triangulation of data from state tests, universal screens, and common formative assessments

• Nonfiction Reading/Writing across the content areas

• Organization of effective school based data teams

• Instructional Rounds- Are we all looking for the same things?

Page 67: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Kindergarten Plans2011-2012

• What does kindergarten registration look like in our district?

• How are we using the results of the Pre-Literacy Assessment?

Page 68: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Kindergarten Plans2011-2012

Who will be involved in the support services for ALL kindergarten students?

• Reading department• Speech and Language Pathologist• ELL teacher• Special Education teacher• Classroom teacher

Page 69: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Kindergarten Plans2011-2012

Literacy Stations

• Oral Language• Phonemic Awareness• Letter/Sound Identification• Words Their Way

Page 70: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Grade 1 and 2 Plans2011-2012

• Revised assessment plan to be more focused• Implemented Words Their Way• Focus on nonfiction reading and writing across

the content areas• Increased language arts instruction time to

120 minutes per day

Page 71: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Reading Plans2011-2012

• Focus on nonfiction reading/writing in all content areas

• Words Their Way- Grades K-6

• New vocabulary resources Grades 5 & 6

• Increased focus on Guided Reading and Independent Reading

• Literacy How Wireless Generation K-3

Page 72: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Reading Plans2011-2012

• Beginning adoption process for new reading resources

• Reading staff in classrooms (Push-In Model) • More targeted intervention• Revised assessments• Focus on instructional strategies• WHHS- Gains analysis through focus groups

Page 73: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Mathematics Plans2011-2012

• Curriculum- K and 1 now aligned with Common Core State Standards – transition process will continue until 2014

• Universal Screens/Common Formative Assessments –revised, in place and being used to better meet the needs of ALL students

• District Wide Math Coach and Facilitators- utilize resources, model lessons, write/revise curriculum/assessments, analyze data/document progress, assist with integration of technology

• Small Guided Math Groups- differentiate instruction in a meaningful way, review, reteach and enrich, creates a more balanced math program

Page 74: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

English Language LearnersPlans

2011-2012

• Professional development on strategies for ELL students for ALL teachers

• Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) training

• ELL teachers will help support Kindergarten program (literacy stations)

• ELL teachers will conduct Guided Reading -Grades 1-4

• Increased ELL staff from 10 teachers to 12 teachers

Page 75: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Special Education Plans2011-2012

• Co-Teaching Model• “Push-In” vs. “Pull-Out”• Continue to actively participate in all district

professional development• Identify other professional development needs specific

to special education staff(i.e. IEP’s, restraint training)• Embedded professional development through

collaborative team meetings• Strengthening of partnership/communication between

special education, reading, and math support staff

Page 76: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Special Education Plans2011-2012

• Deliberate alignment of remediation with core curriculum

• Utilization of research based strategies and interventions

• Support staff teaching whole group lessons to increase positive school climate

• Modifications to assessments being addressed at the district level

Page 77: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Professional Development

Stay the Course. . .

Page 78: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Professional Development 2011-2012

CALI

• Data Driven Decision Making/Data Teams, Power Strategies for Effective Teaching, Making Standards Work

• School Climate to Increase Student Achievement/National Survey

• Scientific Research Based Interventions(SRBI) Implementation

• CSDE/SERC /CAS– In district Data Team Facilitator and Executive Coaches – to assist with fidelity of implementation

Page 79: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

“We need to learn to set our course by the stars, not by the light of every

passing ship.”-Omar N. Bradley

Page 80: West Haven School District “Monitoring for Improvement” 2011-2012

Thank You