2009 – 2010
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
School Name:
District Name: Alachua
Principal: Jennifer Wise
SAC Chair:
Superintendent: Dr. Daniel
Boyd
Date of School Board
Approval:
VISION and
|
The
mission of Kanapaha Middle School is to provide the opportunity for a quality
education to every student while ensuring a safe learning environment, high
academic standards, and focusing on student motivation and performance. The goal for the 2009-10 school year is for
Kanapaha to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) as defined by the No Child
Left Behind legislation. |
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL
STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
|
Brief History
and Background of the School |
|
Unique
School Strengths for Next Year Kanapaha’s
diversity is a definite strength for the upcoming school year. This diversity
is evident in the school’s student population as well as the wide range of
curriculum programs that it offers. Some of those programs include gifted
classes, advanced classes, regular education, and Exceptions Student
Education (ESE) programs. The school also offers many different forms of
extra-curricular activities. Whether sports teams or after-school enrichment,
Kanapaha offers a wide range of outlets in order to engage all students. |
|
Unique
School Weaknesses for Next Year Kanapha’s
weakness for the upcoming is the reoccurring issue of the lower quartile of
students performing poorly on the FCAT exams. This demographic of the
school’s student population has consistently performed at low level even throughout
the past years when the school has received an overall A grade for the school
year. These students’ FCAT scores either remain stagnant or fall even lower.
This is a problem that the administration and staff of Kanapaha refuse to
accept as the norm. |
|
Student
Demographics |
|
Student
Attendance Rates The
school attendance rate for Kanapaha Middle during the 08-09 school term was
94.13%. |
|
Student
Mobility Kanapaha’s
mobility rate is 29% |
|
Student
Suspension Rates 2006-2007:
In-school 295, Out-of-school 190; 2007-2008: In-school 284, Out-of-school
172; 2008-2009: In-school 373, Out-of-school 141 |
|
Student
Retention Rates The
retention rate for the state and district, repectively in 2007-08 were 5% and
5.6%. Kanapaha had no retentions in
07-08 and 1.7% retentions in 08-09. |
|
Class
Size Kanapaha’s
classes have an average of 18 students per class. |
|
Academic
Performance of Feeder Pattern Kanapaha
receives students from nine or more area elementary schools. Most students come from Wiles, |
|
Partnerships
and Grants |
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA
Note: The
following links will open in a separate browser window. Longitudinal data will be displayed in the
print view of the SIP.
Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data
Florida
Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data
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, including history of school grades, FCAT performance, and Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP).
|
Position |
Name |
Degree(s)/ Certification(s) |
Number of
Years at |
Number of
Years as an Administrator Educator |
Prior
Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT, and AYP information along
with the associated school year) |
|
Principal |
Jennifer
Wise |
Specialist
Degree in Educational Leadership & Masters Degree in Curriculum & Instruction |
9 years
as principal at Kanapaha |
17 years
as middle school educator |
Principal
Wise has led Kanapaha to 8 consecutive years as an A school. In 2008-09 KMS met 85% of AYP criteria, in
07-08 95%, and in 06-07 90%. Kanapaha
has not yet achieved AYP. |
|
Assistant
Principal |
Manda
Bessner |
Specialist
Degree in Educational Leadership & Masters Degree in Curriculum &
Instruction |
13 years
at Kanapaha, serving the past 6 as assistant principal for curriculum. |
14 years
as a middle school educator |
Ms.
Bessner has been an assistant principal at Kanapaha for the past six years,
all of which we have been awarded an A grade by the state of |
|
Assistant
Principal |
Aaron
Carter |
Master’s
Degree in Educational Leadership |
2 years
at Kanapaha. |
23 years
as professional educator |
Mr.
Carter has been an assistant principal at Kanapaha for the past two years,
while the school has been awarded an A by the state of |
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 a
coach, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement
at each school, including history of school grades, FCAT performance, 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 |
Number of
Years as a Coach |
Prior
Performance Record (including prior School Grades, FCAT, and AYP information along
with the associated school year) |
|
Reading/Language
Arts |
Diana Chance |
B.A. Language Arts,
English 6-12, English 5-9, |
12 years |
5 years |
“A” school grade for last
3 years, AYP% 08-09 – 85%, 07-08 –
95%, 06-07 – 90% |
|
Mentors
New Teachers |
Jeanne Clark |
Language Arts |
New to KMS |
1 year |
A school grade for the
last three years. |
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. Regularly scheduled meetings with
new teachers with administrators and support staff. |
Principal |
On-going |
|
|
2. Support from Mentor Coach weekly
for support in planning, instruction, assessment, and reflection. |
Mentor
Coach and principal |
On-going |
|
|
3. Peer observation and coaching,
pairing veteran teachers and teachers with expertise with newer to the
profession teachers, or veteran teachers seeking to learn new strategies. |
Principal,
Assistant Principals, Coaches |
On-going |
|
|
4. New teachers will participate in
the district Teacher Induction Program. |
Kathy
Shewey |
On-Going |
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
List all
instructional staff and paraprofessionals who are teaching out-of-field and/or
are NOT highly qualified.
|
Name |
Certification |
Teaching
Assignment |
Professional
Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
|
Kanapaha
does not have any teachers who are NOT highly qualified at this time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Staff Demographics
Please complete
the following demographic information about the instructional staff in the
school who are teaching at least one academic course:
|
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 |
% |
% National Board Certified
Teachers |
% ESOL Endorsed |
|
54 |
5% |
40% |
31% |
24% |
44% |
100% |
28% |
9% |
13% |
Teacher Mentoring Program
Please
describe the school’s teacher mentoring program for new and struggling teachers
by including the names of mentors, the name(s) of mentees, rationale for the
pairing, and the planned mentoring activities.
|
|
Mentee Assigned |
Rationale for Pairing |
Planned Mentoring Activities |
|
Jeanne Clark |
Jessica Gosser |
|
Classroom observations, coaching sessions, goal setting,
modeling of best practice, weekly meeting and discussion. |
|
Jeanne
Clark |
Michael
Ossenbeck |
|
Classroom
observations, coaching sessions, goal setting, modeling of best practice,
weekly meeting and discussion. |
|
Jeanne |
Laura Pyle |
|
Classroom observations, coaching sessions, goal setting,
modeling of best practice, weekly meeting and discussion. |
Response to Instruction/Intervention
(RtI)
|
School-based RtI Team |
|
Identify
the school-based RtI Leadership Team. Aaron Carter, Phyllis Erney, Kyle Konkol, Jodi Joseph.
Lynn Jones, Amelia Hall, and two regular education teachers. |
|
Describe
how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g. meeting processes and
roles/functions). The team meets monthly to monitor the progress of
interventions already in place and to analyze current data about additional
students experiencing difficulties. |
|
Describe
the role of the school-based RtI Leadership Team in the development and
implementation of the school improvement plan. The team shares data with our SAC, the instructional
coaches, department chairs, and team leaders.
They also analyze discipline data and share that with the appropriate
committees and teams. All of these
stakeholders have input into the School Improvement Plan regarding the
interventions that have worked with specific subgroups and individuals, as
well as ideas for new strategies. |
|
RtI Implementation |
|
Describe
the data management system used to summarize tiered data. We utilize On-Track, district benchmark testing, FCTA
Testmaker Pro assessment, teacher-created mini-assessments, and fluency test
results in addition to disaggregated FCAT data. |
|
Describe
the plan to train staff on RtI. School guidance counselors, the assistant principal for
curriculum, and the school psychologist will train the whole faculty and
small groups as needed. The district
will also offer training on RTI. |
School Wide
Describe the continuous
school improvement model at your school. Please describe the following:
|
PLAN |
|
Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data |
|
What
strengths and weaknesses were identified in the 2009 data by grade level,
subject area, and clusters/strands? |
|
In reading, the relative weaknesses are in the words/phrases
at the 6th grade reference/research at 7th grade, and
comparisons, main idea/purpose at 8th grade. For math, the weaknesses include
measurement at 6th and 8th grades, and geometry at 7th. For 8th grade science we need
improvement in all strands, especially in earth and space, and scientific
thinking. The strengths are writing in
the whole school, main idea/purpose at 6th grade, comparisons at
the 7th grade, and words/phrases and reference/research at 8th
grade. In math the strongest strands
are number sense for the 8th grade and data analysis for the 7th
grade. |
|
Instructional Calendar Development |
|
What is
the process for developing, implementing, and monitoring an Instructional Focus
Calendar for reading, writing, mathematics, and science? |
|
The district has provided instructional calendars for
reading, math, and science. Our
teachers meet monthly in departments to discuss the calendars and the needs
of the students as well as to plan for enrichment and remediation. Department chairs meet monthly with the
assistant principal for curriculum to discuss the implementation of the
calendars. Social studies and
exploratory teachers are given the reading calendars to reinforce reading in
those content areas as well as their subject calendars developed as a
department. Grade level teams meet
weekly to discuss calendars and students of concern. |
|
Which
instructional Benchmarks will be given priority focus, based on need, for
each content area (reading, writing, mathematics, and science)? |
|
For |
|
What is the process to ensure
instruction is based on individual students’ needs, as opposed to the master
schedule? |
|
Administrators,
department chairs, and teachers review learning gains by teacher, by class,
and by school to identify classes and/or individual students who are not
making gains at the same rate as the rest of the school. These students are then targeted for
appropriate interventions and curriculum.
Individual student data is collected and used to make subsequent
instructional decisions. FCIM calendar
calls for periodic assessment to measure growth. |
|
How does the school incorporate
applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between
subjects and relevance to their future? |
|
Most
students experience business education or technology education classes, which
provide real world, relevant applications for academic skills. Additionally, all students develop an ePEP
plan based on their interests and needs through social studies classes by the
8th grade. |
|
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? |
|
Guidance
counselors facilitate through social studies classes opportunities for
students to explore their areas of interest and aptitude. Students have several choices to make in
their exploratory classes. 8th
grade students participate in an annual Career Day each spring. |
|
DO |
|
Direct the Instructional Focus |
|
How are
lesson plans and instructional delivery aligned across grade levels and
subject areas? |
|
Every department meets monthly during the school
year to align the curriculum for all grade levels. Another purpose of these
meetings is to ensure a course of study aligns with standards and benchmarks
and follows the instructional calendars, utilizes research
based-instructional strategies, and maintains natural progression between the
grade levels to build on prior knowledge while building future knowledge and
skills. |
|
How are
instructional focus lessons developed and delivered? |
|
The department heads meet to discuss instructional focus
lessons and make decisions based upon the benchmark standards and also
sunshine state standards. The focus lessons are then presented to teachers at
each respective department meeting to ensure standard alignment across each
grade level. The instructional focus lessons will be taught as daily warm-up
exercises in |
|
How will
instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored? |
|
The lessons will be monitored by teachers and
administrators throughout the school year. Benchmark testing will serve as a
measuring tool to assess instructional validity. Also, teachers will analyze
daily exercise scores to determining whether there has been progress or
stagnant learning. If the instructional focus lessons are not proving to be
effective, department chairs will meet to revise focus lessons according to
Benchmark Standards. |
|
CHECK |
|
Assessment |
|
Describe the types of ongoing
formative assessments to be used during the school year to measure student
progress in core, supplemental, and intensive instruction/intervention. |
|
On Track
Benchmark assessments will be administered for |
|
How are
assessments used to identify students reaching mastery and those not reaching
mastery? |
|
Students will be required to score an 80% or better on
these assessments in order to obtain mastery. This standard is set above the
normal average in order to ensure that every students reaches beyond the
normal standards. The assessment scores will be analyzed to determine the
most pressing need for instructional focus. The skills and questions that
students answer incorrectly most frequently on the assessments will be
targeted for re-teaching in the instructional focus lessons. Differential
instruction will be utilized within each classroom based on assessment
results. For instance, students that reach mastery will receive enrichment
exercises to enhance their strong learning abilities while students that do
not reach mastery will receive remediation in different instructional focus
areas. |
|
Maintenance |
|
How is
ongoing assessment and maintenance of Benchmark mastery for each grade level
and content area built into the Instructional Focus Calendar? |
|
Each focus calendar provides and opportunity for
remediation or enrichment based on assessment results. |
|
Describe
the process and schedule for teams to review progress monitoring data (summative
and mini assessments) to identify the required instructional modifications that
are needed to increase student achievement. |
|
Teachers from each department will meet monthly to assess
the assessment scores as well as the instructional focus lessons’
effectiveness. The meetings will be facilitated by department chairs, team
leaders, and reading coaches, Members of the administration will rotate
attending different subject area meetings each month. Suggestions and notes
from each meeting will be kept on file by each team leader. |
|
Monitoring |
|
Describe
the Principal’s and Leadership Team’s roles as instructional leaders and how
they will be continuously involved in the teaching and learning process. |
|
Principals and team leaders will meet once every week to
discuss instructional progress. Team leaders will meet with their respective
teams every week to address areas of concern and also to recognize effective
practices that should be set as standards throughout each grade level. Team
leaders will file all team notes in order to keep documentation of all
instructional progress and also instructional deficits as well. |
|
ACT |
|
Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions |
|
Identify
the core, supplemental, and intensive instruction and interventions. |
|
The core instruction is based upon the district adopted
curriculum materials and benchmarks provided by the state. Supplemental instruction is provided within
the classroom and can include a variety of graphic organizers, kinesthetic
materials, restatement of the content in simpler language, reciprocal
teaching, games emphasizing repetition and application of the skills and more
frequent, shorter assessments.
Intensive interventions include one-on-one repetition and practice,
flashcards, use of neumonic devices and other strategies. |
|
How are
supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions and tutorials structured
to re-teach non-mastered target areas? |
|
Teachers
will utilize all forms of remediation tools that are readily available to
them. The computer labs will be used throughout the year for students to take
advantage of internet programs such as FCAT Explorer as well as FCAT Focus. Lowering
the teacher-pupil ration in intensive classes provides the opportunity for
deeper remediation and greater variety of activities. Each
grade level will form teacher learning teams that will share ideas for
successful teaching strategies. Each teacher learning team will target areas
of non-mastery in each subject area. |
|
How does the school identify
staff’s professional development needs to improve their instructional
strategies? |
|
The school will identify the most pressing needs for
professional development through administrative observation, teacher request,
school discipline reports, assessment scores, etc. Areas of professional
development that will help the largest majority of the faculty and staff
population will be addressed most urgently. The means for determining these
need will be administrative walkthroughs, data analysis, teacher appraisals
and goal pages, etc. |
|
Which
students will be targeted for supplemental and intensive
instruction/interventions? |
|
Students who consistently perform below mastery level on
benchmark assessments will be targeted for intensive instruction/interventions.
Teachers will also mention possible target students during weekly team
meetings. At the end of each team meeting, team leaders will write down
possible students of concern as a form of academic/behavioral progress
monitoring. Once identified, these students’ parents will be notified and the
school will offer intervention methods such as after-school tutoring by a
certified teacher, before-school peer tutoring, and assistance during school
ours administered by instructional coaches and hired para-professionals. |
|
How will
the effectiveness of the interventions be measured throughout the year? |
|
Students receiving intensive instruction/intervention will
be tracked for academic progress. Each one of these students will be placed
on an academic check-sheet during the intervention time period. Frequent
assessment will track academic progress. Any issues of misbehavior, attendance, or
lack of academic progress will be addressed in these meetings, and a plan for
further intervention will be set in place by the intervention team. |
|
Enrichment |
|
Describe alternative instructional
delivery methods to support acceleration and enrichment activities. |
|
Students
that consistently display mastery of all benchmark assessments and also
perform well above average on the FCAT exams will be recommended for
advanced/gifted level core academic classes. These students will also have
the opportunity to take Spanish in the place of a |
|
Describe how students are
identified for enrichment strategies. |
|
FCAT
results, benchmark assessment scores, quarterly and semester grades, and
teacher recommendation are the main tools that will be used to identify
students for enrichment strategies. |
Professional Learning Communities
Describe
the school’s use of Professional Learning Communities as a vehicle for
maintaining and improving the instructional focus. Include the following:
|
PLC
Organization (grade level, subject, etc.) |
PLC
Leader |
Frequency
of PLC Meetings |
Schedule
(when) |
Primary
Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis) |
|
Grade Level
Teams |
Kate
Corder, Daniel Burney, Collin Whitlock |
Weekly |
Tuesdays
@ 8:15 AM |
Plan for
any upcoming events, discuss students of concern on the grade level, align
test and project scheduling to avoid student over-load, discuss over-all need
of the grade level team |
|
Subject
Area Departments |
Diane
Anding, Sara Sutfin, Maria Olsen, Elizabeth Freeman, Debra West, LaVelle
Oswalt, Manda Bessner |
Monthly |
Wednesday
@ 8:15 AM |
Review/revise
instructional calendar, frequent assessment, focus of instruction, analyze student
data, create lesson plans, review best practices, determine effectiveness of
remediation, share ideas for enrichment |
|
Mentor/Coaches |
Diana
Chance, Jeanne Clark |
Monthly |
Wednesdays
@ 8:15 AM |
Professional
development, learn research-based instructional strategies, provide
opportunities for peer observation and coaching, reflection, and
brainstorming. |
PART II: EXPECTED
IMPROVEMENTS
Reading Goal
Needs Assessment:
Based on
School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total
percent proficient increase or decrease?
What is the percent change?
What
clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all
student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the
targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students
making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the
percent of students making learning gains?
|
Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
||||
|
In grades
6-8, 66% of students made a year’s growth in reading |
In grades
6-8, 76% of students will make a year’s growth in reading |
1. Utilize
an instructional calendar for reading that includes frequent assessment for
progress monitoring. |
1.
Principal, APC, and Reading Coach |
1. Review benchmark
assessment scores, Classroom Walkthrough observations and data analysis. |
1. AYP and Benchmark Score printouts, CWT
data. |
||||
|
2. Student
placement will be determined by utilizing such data as FCAT scores, Benchmark
Assessments, and rate of fluency. Teacher recommendations will also be
considered |
2.
Principal, APC, and Reading Coach |
2.
Students’ benchmark assessment scores will be monitored for improvement or
decline in scores |
2. Infinite Campus reports will be analyzed |
||||||
|
3.
Teachers will implement differentiated instruction strategies, research-based
instructional strategies such as Kagan Structures, and CRISS, 12 Powerful
Words |
3.
Principal, APC, Reading Coach, & Reading Chair |
3.
Administration will do periodic walkthroughs to observe teaching practices
and student engagement |
3. Walk-through forms will be kept on file
and observed teachers will receive a copy of this informal document |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
In grades
6-8, 38% of Black, 49% ofeconomically
disadvantaged, and 41% ofstudents with disabilities (SWD) met reading
proficiency |
In grades
6-8, the Black, economically disadvantaged, and SWD subgroups will have a 15%
increase in students that meet reading proficiency |
1.
School-wide Silent Sustained Reading program (DEAR) on every Wednesday during
an extended homeroom for 40 minutes |
1. Reading
Coach, Principal, and Homeroom Teachers |
1.
Administration and Reading Coach will
ask teachers and students for their reactions to DEAR. Reading teachers will
report any positive results stemming from the DEAR program |
1. Book Bins, Closed Circuit TV for Closed
Caption Viewing |
||||
|
2. Student
conferences for all students to discuss FCAT scores and goal setting |
2. Reading
Coach, Administration, and Reading Teachers |
2. Goal
pages will be revisited periodically throughout the school term to evaluate progress |
2. FCAT scores readily available to all |
||||||
|
3.
Teachers will identify changes in instructional practices based on
professional development learning activities |
3. Reading
Teachers, Administration, and Reading Coach |
3.
Teachers will monitor student performance on formal and informal assessments
to evaluate instructional validity |
3. Literature from literacy meetings.
Student assessment scores |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
In grades
6-8, 76% of students read at or above grade level |
In grades
6-8, 86% of students will read at or above grade level |
1. Offer
six-minute solution as a supplement to students needing more support in
fluency skills |
1. Reading
Coach and Reading Chair |
1. Reading
teachers and reading coach will evaluate the six-minute solution charts to
monitor improvement |
1. Six-minute solution progression charts
for students |
||||
|
2. Offer
reading courses utilizing Read 180, Bridges, and Literature curriculum |
2.
Principal, APC, and Reading Coach |
2.
Administration will hold teacher conferences to discuss the effectiveness of
the set curriculum |
2. Textbooks from Bridges, Read 180, and
Literature curriculum. Conference forms. |
||||||
|
3.
Teachers are encouraged to participate in school-based professional
development focusing on brain-based teaching and learning |
3.
Principal, APC, and Reading Coach |
3.
Professional development opportunities will be available for teacher groups.
After the teacher groups receive training, they will present the knowledge
they have learned to school faculty during faculty meeting. The teacher group
will explain the effectiveness and validity of brain-based teaching and
learning |
3. Wiorkshop materials along with current
literature about brain-based learning and teaching |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Professional
Development Aligned with Objective |
|||||
|
Objective Addressed |
Content/Topic |
Facilitator |
Target Date |
Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring |
Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By 2010
65% or more of all students, including those in subgroups will pass the FCAT
reading. |
Effective implementation
of research based curriculum, instructional strategies such as Kagan
Structures, and the 12 Powerful Words. |
Reading
Coach |
Year-long |
PDP
process, formal and informal administrative observations, including CWT, and
lesson plan monitoring. |
All school-based
administrators, the Reading Coach and the Mentor Coach. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of
Teaching Reading for Every Teacher |
|
The Reading
Coach offers monthly professional development to all teachers. The primary focus of the trainings are
Kagan Structures this year, but previously used, school-wide literacy
strategies and the 12 Powerful Words will also be reviewed during these
monthly trainings. The school
participates in a One Book, |
|
Budget |
|||
|
Evidence-based
Program(s)/Materials(s) |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Technology |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Professional
Development |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Other |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
End of Reading Goal
Mathematics Goal
Based on
School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total
percent proficient increase or decrease?
What is the percent change?
What
clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all
student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the
targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students
making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the
percent of students making learning gains?
|
Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
||||
|
Seventy
percent of students in grades 6-8 scored a 3 or above on FCAT math. |
In 2010
77% of all students will score a 3 or higher on FCAT math. |
1. Focus
on the writing process needed to describe/explain the steps used for problem
solving in math. |
1. Math teachers |
1. Monitor lesson plans, CWT, formal and
informal classroom observations, assessment results. |
1.
FCAT, benchmark testing. |
||||
|
2. Increase the use of manipulatives and
technology to increase engagement and differentiation. |
2. Math teachers |
2. Monitor lesson plans, CWT, formal and
informal classroom observations, assessment results. |
2.
FCAT, benchmark testing. |
||||||
|
3. Make lesson objectives explicit to
students. |
3. Math teachers |
3. Monitor
lesson plans, CWT, formal and informal classroom observations, assessment
results. |
3.
FCAT, benchmark testing. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
All
subgroups need to improve their performance on FCAT math. In 08-09 38% black students, 49%
economically disadvantaged, and 41% students with disabilities were on grade
level on FCAT math. |
In 2010
all subgroups will decrease by 10% or more the number who do not pass the
FCAT math. |
1. Increase the use of manipulatives and
technology to increase engagement and differentiation. |
1. Math teachers |
1. Monitor lesson plans, CWT, formal and
informal classroom observations, assessment results |
1.
FCAT, benchmark testing. |
||||
|
2. Utilize the FCIM to identify students in
core curriculum needing intervention or enrichment |
2. Math teachers, Math department chair,
Administrators |
2. Monitor lesson plans, CWT, formal and
informal classroom observations, assessment results |
2.
FCAT, benchmark testing. |
||||||
|
3. Share best practices and instructional
strategies that improve engagement and differentiation for students. |
3. Math teachers, Math department chair,
Administrators |
3. Monitor lesson plans, CWT, formal and
informal classroom observations, assessment results |
3.
FCAT, benchmark testing. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Professional Development Aligned
with Objective |
|||||
|
Objective
Addressed |
Content/Topic |
Facilitator |
Target
Date |
Strategy
for Follow-up/ Monitoring |
Person
Responsible for Monitoring |
|
Improve
the performance of all subgroups on FCAT math. |
Learning
about the FCIM process to make instruction better planned, aligned,
evaluated, and effective. |
Principal |
On-going |
Regular
faculty and math department meetings. |
Principal
and assistant principal for curriculum. |
|
Improve
performance of all students on FCAT math. |
Effective
instructional strategies, web-based software, and assessment. |
District
supervisor, math department chair, assistant principal for curriculum. |
On-going |
Data
monitoring from benchmark testing and teacher assessment. |
Principal
and assistant principal for curriculum, math department chair. |
|
Budget |
|||
|
Evidence-based
Program(s)/Materials(s) |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Technology |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Professional
Development |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Other |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
End of Mathematics Goal
Science Goal
Needs Assessment:
Based on
School Grade Data:
Did the total
percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What
clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
||||
|
56% of all
8th grade students tested scored a 3 or higher on FCAT Science. |
In 2010
61% or more will score a 3 or above on FCAT Science. |
1. Implement a variety of research-based
instructional strategies including Kagan Structures, CRISS strategies, and
school-wide literacy strategies. |
1. Science teachers, science department chair,
Administrators, Reading Coach |
1. PDP Process, CWT, lesson plan monitoring,
formal and informal observations. |
1.
class assignments, assessments, FCAT |
||||
|
2. Increase the use of hands on activiites to
reinforce science concepts. |
2. science teachers, science department chair |
2. PDP Process, CWT, lesson plan monitoring,
formal and informal observations. |
2. class assignments, assessments, FCAT |
||||||
|
3. Utilize the FCIM process to align
curriculum with benchmarks, follow an in structional calendar, administer
regular assessment, review instruction as needed, and offer remediation and
enrichment. |
3. science teachers, administrators. |
3. PDP Process, CWT, lesson plan monitoring,
formal and informal observations. |
3. class assignments, assessments, FCAT |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Professional Development Aligned
with Objective |
|||||
|
Objective
Addressed |
Content/Topic |
Facilitator |
Target
Date |
Strategy
for Follow-up/ Monitoring |
Person
Responsible for Monitoring |
|
In 2010
61% or more will score a 3 or above on FCAT Science. |
Effective
implementation of the Kagan Structures and the FCIM process. |
Reading
Coach, Principal, Assistant Principal for Curriculum. |
On-Going |
Lesson
plan monitoring, CWT, formal and informal observations. |
Administrators. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Budget |
|||
|
Evidence-based
Program(s)/Materials(s) |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
Incorporate
FCIM model into all science classes in order to increase science proficiency
and modify instruction based on assessment results. |
FCIM
binders, FCIM training, |
Internal
accounts and School Improvement Monies. |
$300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Technology |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
Improve
student performance in science classes through remediation and enrichment
based on assessment results. |
SMART
boards, Web-based software such as Discover Education, Brainpop, and FCAT
Testmaker Pro |
District
Technology monies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Professional
Development |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Other |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
End of Science Goal
Writing Goal
Needs Assessment:
Based on
School Grade Data:
Did the total
percent proficient increase or decrease?
What is the percent change?
|
Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
||||
|
On the
2009 administration of the FCAT writing test 97% of the students in 8th
grade scored level 3.5 or above in writing |
On the
2010 administration of the FCAT writing test 98% of the 8th grade
students will achieve a 3.5 or above |
1.
Students will use the writing process daily through structured journal entries during language
arts classes |
1.
Language Arts Chair and all Language Arts Teachers |
1. Random
journal checks for writing structure |
1. Student Journals |
||||
|
2. Teachers will implement peer scoring essay
sessions. Students will be educated on what constitutes a strong essay |
2. APC,
Language Arts Chair, and All Language Arts Teachers |
2.
Teachers will grade essays after peer grading sessions to check each
student’s ability to accurately score essays |
2. Student Essays and Peer Editing Forms |
||||||
|
3.
Language Arts department will meet to discuss effective instructional
practices for the upcoming 8th graders |
3.
Language Arts Chair, Principal, All Language Arts Teachers |
3. Eighth
grade students will show improvement in the specific areas that the teachers
set as target instructional goals |
3. Teacher Lesson Plans and Student Essay
Scores |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
8th
grade students did not display a strong command of all the different forms of
essay writing. The biggest deficit was shown in persuasive essays. |
All 8th
grade students will become proficient
in writing persuasive essays |
1. Present
debating techniques through written literature and other forms of media |
1.
Language Arts Teachers |
1.
Students’ scores on persuasive writing will improve |
1. Student Persuasive Essays and Grading Rubric |
||||
|
2. Allow
students to read and analyze famous, persuasive speeches |
2.
Language Arts Chair, and Language Arts Teachers |
2.
Students will be able to identify good and bad points within the persuasive
speeches |
2. Famous Speeches and Student Repsonse Discussion
Forms |
||||||
|
3.
Teachers will attend a professional development workshop on instructional
techniques for persuasive writing |
3.
Principal, Language Arts Teachers |
3.
Administrative walkthroughs and diverse lesson plan strategies |
3. Walkthrough Forms and Lesson Plans |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Students
are not motivated to create a planning diagram before writing an essay draft |
100% of
students taking the FCAT writing exam will create a planning sheet before
writing the actual essay |
1.
Planning sheets will be a requirement for every in-class written essay |
1.
Language Arts Teachers |
1. More
organized, focused, and well written student essays |
1. Student Essays and Grading Rubric |
||||
|
2. Teacher
different formats for planning sheets |
2.
Language Arts Chair and Language Arts Teachers |
2.
Students will use a a variety of different planning sheet formats (Harvard
Outline, Venn Diagram, Bubble Diagram, Etc.) |
2. Student Planning Sheet Diagrams |
||||||
|
3. Create
Planning Sheet Drills |
3.
Language Arts Chair and Language Arts Teachers |
3. Student
will be able to quickly create an extensive planning sheet for an essay |
3. Student Planning Sheets |
||||||
|
Professional Development Aligned
with Objective |
|||||
|
Objective
Addressed |
Content/Topic |
Facilitator |
Target
Date |
Strategy
for Follow-up/ Monitoring |
Person Responsible
for Monitoring |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Budget |
|||
|
Evidence-based
Program(s)/Materials(s) |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Technology |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Professional
Development |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Other |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
End of Writing Goal
Parent Involvement Goal
Needs Assessment:
Based on
information from
Were parent
involvement activities and strategies targeted to areas of academic need?
Based on
information from surveys, evaluations, agendas, or sign-ins:
Was the
percent of parent participation in school activities maintained or increased
from the prior year?
Generally,
what strategies or activities can be employed to increase parent involvement?
|
Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
||||
|
Approximately
50% of classroom teachers have websites that parents and students can access
for information about their course. |
Improve
communication between home and school by having a website for each classroom
teacher. |
1.The
faculty will receive training on setting up their own professional websites. |
1. Administration |
1. Track teachers who are trained in website
design. |
1.
List of websites |
||||
|
2. The
teacher websites will be advertised in the school newsletter and linked to
the school website. |
2. Administration |
2. Keep roster of active and updated teacher
websites. |
2.
List of websites |
||||||
|
3. |
3. |
3. |
3. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
We want
more parent involvement for parents of students in identified subgroups. |
Involve
parents in an evening meeting to offer support and suggestions for helping
their students at home. |
1. Offer
an evening in the fall to Teen Zone parents for food, entertainment and
parent education information. |
1. Teen Zone administrators, Deans, and
Guidance Counselors. |
1. Parent attendance at the Parent Night. |
1.
Data collection of subgroup FCAT performance. |
||||
|
2. |
2. |
2. |
2. |
||||||
|
3. |
3. |
3. |
3. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
1. |
1. |
1. |
1. |
||||
|
2. |
2. |
2. |
2. |
||||||
|
3. |
3. |
3. |
3. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
1. |
1. |
1. |
1. |
||||
|
2. |
2. |
2. |
2. |
||||||
|
3. |
3. |
3. |
3. |
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
1. |
1. |
1. |
1. |
||||
|
2. |
2. |
2. |
2. |
||||||
|
3. |
3. |
3. |
3. |
||||||
|
Professional Development Aligned
with this Objective |
|||||
|
Objective
Addressed |
Content/Topic |
Facilitator |
Target
Date |
Strategy
for Follow-up/ Monitoring |
Person
Responsible for Monitoring |
|
Improve
communication between home and school by having a website for each classroom
teacher. |
Web page
design. |
In-house
teacher experts or the Alachua County Digital Educators. |
On-Going |
Monitor
websites as they are established. |
Teach
support, administrators. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Budget |
|||
|
Evidence-based
Program(s)/Materials(s) |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Technology |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Professional
Development |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Other |
|||
|
Objective |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
End of Parent
Involvement Goal
FINAL BUDGET (Insert Rows as Needed)
|
Budget |
|||
|
Evidence-based
Program(s)/Materials(s) |
|||
|
Goal |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Technology |
|||
|
Goal |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Professional
Development |
|||
|
Goal |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
|
Other |
|||
|
Goal |
Description
of Resources |
Funding
Source |
Available
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|||
Differentiated Accountability
School-level
Differentiated Accountability Compliance
|
School Differentiated
Accountability Status |
||||
|
Intervene
£ |
Correct
II £ |
Prevent
II £ |
Correct I
£X |
Prevent I
£ |
5 Attach
school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance
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.
|
|
|
Yes
No|
If No, Measures
Being Taken to Comply with SAC Requirement |
|
|
|
Projected
use of SAC Funds |
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Describe
the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year |
|
Monitor
implementation of the 2009-10 School Improvement Plan. Review budget requests for SAC monies,
approving those most closely aligned to the goals and strategies of the SIP,
and having greatest potential for improving student performance in all
academic areas. |
SAC Membership Roster
List of
Members
|
Member
Name |
Role
Represented (SAC
Chair, Principal, Parent, Student, Business Member, Community Member,
Teacher, or School Support Staff) |
|
Jennifer
Wise |
Principal |
|
Jane
Calabrese |
Teacher |
|
Terry
Hoffer |
Teacher |
|
Maria
Olsen |
Teacher |
|
Vanessa
Acevedo |
Parent |
|
Tami
Fuchs |
Parent |
|
Linda
Stanfill |
Parent |
|
Chris
Turner |
Career
Service |
|
Darby
Delane |
Other
Citizen |
|
Robert
Goetz |
Other Citizen |
|
April
Griffin |
Other
Citizen |