Grade level data 2010 – 2011 (FCAT) 2011 – 2012 ( FCAT) 2012-2013 (FCAT) 2013-2014 (FCAT) Third grade Reading 74% 71% 62% 59% Math 88% 69% 50% 55% 4th grade Reading 74% 55% 60% 55% Math 78% 61% 60% 63% Writing 95% 67% 3.0> 44% 3.5> 39% 3.5> 5th grade Reading 70% 55% 56% 64% Math 56% 48% 45% 66% Science 71% 57% 47% 67% 6th grade Reading 73% 64% 62% 67% Math 70% 64% 60% 67% 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 % meeting High Standards in Reading 74% 63% 61% 61% % meeting High Standards Math 73% 61% 55% 64% + 9 S% meeting High Standards Writing 88% 67% 45% 38% % meeting High Standards Science 58% 57% 46% 65% + 19 % making Reading Gains 66% 67% 69% 74% + 6 % making Math Gains 70% 70% 70% 83% + 13 % of lowest 25% Making Learning gains in Reading 58% 65% 79% 75% % of lowest 25% Making Learning gains in Math 57% 65% 65% 72% +7 Our school went form a “C” to and “A” . Our points went from 490 to 532 an increase in 42% tile points. Analysis of Current Practice: (How do we currently conduct business?) FCAT, FAIR, and District assessment data for the past years indicated that we needed to change our instructional strategies to those that are proven to be most effective through research. Over the past three years we have provided professional development for
questions , standards based instruction included in lesson plans C. Reading coach, peer teachers,and district resource teachers will model lessons for MAFS, and LAFS . D. Review various lesson plan templates so teachers can choose one that works for them. Modeling provided as needed by peer teachers. C. Observation, inservice, and discussion notes. District resource teachers have been scheduled for PDD, walkthroughs and all PLC meetings. Teacher collaborations and feedback. D. Lesson plans Teacher collaboration and feedback 3. Lack of consistency and knowledge of resources for response to interventuion 3.A Provide SMART Time instruction, including the use of summarization and Graphic Organizers including Thinking Maps, and extended thinking question with fidelity to provide differentiated enrichment and intervention instruction for all students K-6th B. Conduct K-6th MTSS meetings to discuss and document student progress and response to academic and behavior interventions. C. Conduct K-6th Individual Problem A. All instructional staff. B.Guidance counselor Classroom teachers Principal Literacy and Math and Science resource teacher AP C. IPST Team MTSS team August 2014 – May -2015 Bi-monthly meetings. A.Teacher observations and classroom walk throughs B. Meeting notes C. Meeting notes Referral paperwork
Solving Team (IPST) meetings as needed to refer students who have received interventions but are not making adequate progress for further evaluation and determine who may qualify for GSP. SMART time data IPST and MTSS notes 4. Lack of consistency 4 A.Discuss grade level formative assessments in grade level PLCs to ensure consistency across each grade level and to modify assessments to test higher order thinking skills as required by FSA. Teachers will be required to updated data notebooks to PLCs B. Focus on regular timely feedback with teachers regarding student achievement on district assessments C. Ongoing training on DATA analysis, Florida Standards LAFS and MAFS and Performance Matters training A.All teachers Principal Leadership team Launch teams AP Literacy coach Title 1 math and science resource teacher B. All instructional staff C. September 22, 2014 Francis will demonstrate the data located on Performance Matters with all teachers and adminstrators. Review data at PLC meetings twice a month from August – May 2014-15 August – May A.Classroom walk throughs Teacher observations PLC meeting notes B. Meeting notes. PLC and Kid Talk, Data notebooks Administrative observations and walk through provided to all teachers C. Sign in sheets, use of information in teachers’ data notebooks Teacher collaboration and feedback 5. Lack of consistency Data Notebooks will be kept by all students to teachers August – May Administrative observations 2015