Recommended Directions to Review this Document. 1. Download document to your computer (File.Save As.)

Transcription

1 Recommended Directions to Review this Document 1. Download document to your computer (File.Save As.) 2. Open file using Acrobat Reader or Acrobat Professional. 3. Select View Navigation Panels Use Bookmarks on left. 4. Select desired pages/information by clicking on Bookmarks.

2 School Improvement Plan (SIP) CHARTER SCHOOL VERSION Proposed for A charter school that receives a school grade of D or F pursuant to Section (2), F.S., must develop and submit a school improvement plan to its sponsor. School Name: Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy School Location Number: _5418 1

3 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS School Information Complete School Name: Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy District: Broward School Location Number: 5418 : Maxine Spence Governing Board Member(s): Gloria Allen, Board Chair Lacarenthia Anderson, Gloria Jackson, Sylvester Robinson Rev. Henry Green District Superintendent: Robert Runcie Date of School Board Charter Approval: September 2013 Student Achievement Data and Reference Materials: The following links will open in a separate browser window. School Grades Trend Data Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT)/Statewide Assessment Trend Data High School Feedback Report K-12 Comprehensive Research Based Reading Plan Administrators List your school s 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/statewide assessment performance (percentage data for achievement levels, learning gains, Lowest 25%), and ambitious but achievable annual measurable objective (AMO) progress. 2

4 Position Assistant Name Maxine Spence Candace Clark Degree(s)/ Certification(s) MSW Courses Taken: Advanced Reading CAT IV ESOL for Administration Foundation of Reading Facilitating Assessment Issues in Reading Word Walls in Action Rigor and Relevance Next Generation Centers K-2 Lead School Change to Improve Achievement Art for the Primary Child Leadership Standards *Leadership Development-in process M.S., Exceptional Student Education, Specialization: Reading State of Florida Professional Certificate: Elementary Education Grades K-6 Reading Endorsed Autism Endorsement ESOL Endorsement Online Teaching Certification Florida Department of Children and Families Director Credential Certification Clinical Educator Certification Number of Years at Current School Number of Years as an Administrator N/A Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT/statewide assessment Achievement Levels, learning gains, lowest 25%), and AMO progress, along with the associated school year) School Grade N, Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%) School Grade D Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%) According to the NO Child Left Behind School Public Accountability Reports: HMTLA was given an N for Prior Performance Record and AYP, which indicates that no test results were reported. 3

5 Instructional Coaches List your school s 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/statewide assessment performance (percentage data for achievement levels, learning gains, Lowest 25%), and ambitious but achievable annual measurable objective (AMO) progress. 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 Reading Mathematics Name Candace Clark Romulo Rojas Degree(s)/ Certification(s) M.S., Exceptional Student Education, Specialization: Reading State of Florida Professional Certificate: Elementary Education Grades K-6 Reading Endorsed K-6 Spanish K-12 Number of Years at Current School Number of Years as an Instructional Coach New Hire 0 N/A 1 0 Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT/Statewide Assessment Achievement Levels, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AMO progress along with the associated school year) FCAT Reading 45% of students scored proficient 79%Showed Reading Gains FCAT Math 32% of students scored proficient 68% Showed Math Gains FCAT Writing 15% of students scored proficient FCAT Science 44% of students scored proficient 4

6 Required components of the School Improvement Plan for Charter Schools: 1. Mission Statement Provide your school s mission statement: Mission Statement as written in HMTLA s Charter application: The mission of Henry McNeal Learning Academy is to provide superior academic instruction, in accordance with Florida Sunshine State Standards, while working with parents, that allow boys and girls to become exceptional students, positive role models, civic leaders and outstanding businessmen and women, by providing an innovative, enriching and individualized educational program that will stimulate and accelerate their learning and achievement in a safe and nurturing environment; utilizing innovative teaching techniques delivered by a highly qualified faculty, staff and administration. Revised Mission Statement as a result of academic standards changes by the Florida Department of Education: Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy s mission is to provide superior academic instruction that is aligned with the Florida Standards and the Florida Next Generation standards. The school will implement an effective Parental Involvement Plan, by provide an enriching and individualized educational program for every student. The teachers and staff will utilize innovative teaching techniques and deliver them in a safe and nurturing environment. 2. Academic Data Provide detailed student academic data by subgroups for the most recent three (3) years (FCAT, EOC, FAIR, BAT, etc.), if available: Subgroups Grade Level Target Annual Measurable Objective: Reading: 39% Mathematics: 33% Test Type Number of Students Tested Percentage of Students Scoring Satisfactory: Test Type Number of Students Tested Percentage of Students Scoring Satisfactory: ALL KG Students 13 77% Economically Disadvantaged 13 77% Black/ African American KG FAIR 12 75% N/A ESE 0 0 ELL 1 100% ALL 1 st Grade Students 18 61% 18 47% Economically Disadvantaged 18 61% 18 47% Black/ African American 1 st Primary 18 61% Primary 18 47% ESE ELL All 2 nd Grade Students 14 79% 14 78% Economically Disadvantaged 2 nd 14 79% 14 78% Primary Primary Black/ African American 14 79% 14 78% ESE

7 ELL 1 100% 1 100% All 3 rd Grade Students 17 18% FCAT Math 17 18% Economically Disadvantaged 16 13% 16 13% Black/ African American 3 rd FCAT Reading 16 13% 16 13% ESE ELL All 4 th Grade Students 13 38% FCAT Math 13 23% Economically Disadvantaged 13 38% 13 23% Black/ African American 4 th FCAT Reading 13 38% 13 23% ESE ELL All 5 th Grade Students 9 56% FCAT Math 9 44% Economically Disadvantaged 9 56% 9 44% Black/ African American 5 th FCAT Reading 9 56% 9 44% ESE 2 0% 2 0% ELL All 3 rd 5 th Grade Students 39 37% 39 28% Economically Disadvantaged 38 36% 38 26% Black/ African American 3 rd 5 th 38 36% 38 26% ESE Grade FCAT Reading 5 11% FCAT Math 5 11% Students ELL 6 0% 6 0 Subgroups Grade Level Target Annual Measurable Objective: Reading: 33% Mathematics: 25% Test Type Number of Students Tested Percentage of Students Scoring Satisfactory: Test Type Number of Students Tested Percentage of Students Scoring Satisfactory: ALL KG Students 21 81% 21 Economically Disadvantaged 21 81% 21 Black/ African American KG FAIR 21 81% n/a 21 ESE ELL ALL 1 st Grade Students 16 88% 16 88% Economically Disadvantaged 15 87% 15 87% Black/ African American 1 st PRIMARY 15 87% PRIMARY 15 87% ESE ELL 2 100% 2 100% All 2 nd Grade Students 2 nd PRIMARY 19 53% PRIMARY 19 42% 6

8 Economically Disadvantaged 18 50% 18 39% Black/ African American 18 50% 18 39% ESE ELL 5 40% 5 60% All 3 rd Grade Students 21 23% FCAT Math 21 24% Economically Disadvantaged 19 14% 19 26% Black/ African American 3 rd FCAT Reading 21 23% 21 24% ESE ELL All 4 th Grade Students 10 40% FCAT Math 10 30% Economically Disadvantaged 9 33% 9 33% Black/ African American 4 th FCAT Reading 10 40% 10 30% ESE ELL All 5 th Grade Students 8 50% FCAT Math 8 25% Economically Disadvantaged 7 43% 7 14% Black/ African American 5 th FCAT Reading 8 50% 8 25% ESE ELL All 3 rd 5 th Grade Students 40 36% 40 28% Economically Disadvantaged 3 rd 5 th 36 30% 36 25% Black/ African American Grade FCAT Reading 40 36% FCAT Math 40 26% ESE Students ELL

9 Subgroups Grade Level Target Annual Measurable Objective: Reading: 26% Mathematics: 18% Test Type Number of Students Tested Percentage of Students Scoring Satisfactory: Test Type Number of Students Tested Percentage of Students Scoring Satisfactory: ALL KG Students 17 76% 17 Economically Disadvantaged 15 73% 15 Black/ African American KG FAIR 16 75% n/a 16 ESE ELL 2 100% 2 ALL 1 st Grade Students 18 89% 18 78% Economically Disadvantaged 16 88% 16 81% Black/ African American 1 st PRIMARY 18 89% PRIMARY 18 78% ESE ELL 2 50% 2 0 All 2 nd Grade Students 27 81% 27 70% Economically Disadvantaged 27 81% 27 70% Black/ African American 2 nd PRIMARY 27 81% PRIMARY 27 70% ESE % ELL % All 3 rd Grade Students 16 41% FCAT Math 17 44% Economically Disadvantaged 16 41% 17 44% Black/ African American 3 rd FCAT Reading 16 41% 17 44% ESE ELL All 4 th Grade Students 12 25% FCAT Math 12 17% Economically Disadvantaged 12 25% 12 17% Black/ African American 4 th FCAT Reading 12 25% 12 17% ESE ELL All 5 th Grade Students 4 25% FCAT Math 4 0 Economically Disadvantaged 4 25% 4 0 Black/ African American 5 th FCAT Reading 4 25% 4 0 ESE ELL All 3 rd 5 th Grade Students 3 rd 5 th 33 42% 33 28% Economically Disadvantaged 33 42% 33 28% Grade FCAT Reading FCAT Math Black/ African American 33 42% 33 28% Students ESE

10 ELL Student Achievement Objectives Provide the student achievement objectives included in the charter contract or most recent sponsor approved school improvement plan: Meet high standards of student achievement while providing parent flexibility to choose among diverse educational opportunities within the state s public school system. Charter Schools are recognized as mechanisms for testing a variety of educational approaches because they can embody a range of school choices exempt from restrictive regulations, while focusing on improved student performance. This principal will guide The Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy in its daily operations. While the school will adopt the Broward County Public School s (BCPS) Core Curriculum, it is not restricted in the various types of teaching methods and strategies it can employ The Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy educational program will utilize multi-sensory learning, individual educational plans, whole experiential learning, interdisciplinary arts and critical thinking skills, recreational and athletic activities and life skills training so that each student will have the opportunity to reach his potential. Our educational plan will include the use of reading enhancement software and research-based reading curricula. The Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy will expand the pool of quality academic programs and give parents another option for educating their students. The school will use assessment data that once compiled, will be disseminated in accordance with individual student assessment. Analysis of such data will provide the and teachers with specific information relative to specific areas of need that can be targeted by teachers of specific students to facilitate learning enhancement of such students thereby elevating academic achievement. Testing and achievement data will be collected on all current and matriculating students at the beginning of each school year. This data will be used to determine where each student falls academically in terms of expected academic level in comparison with beginning year assessment tests, making individual education plans more strategic. Academic assessment data will be discussed with individual parents in order to draw parents into the overall academic instructional plan for each student. Parents will be encouraged to express their comments regarding assessment and will be given an understanding of the overall academic plan for the student during the next grading period. Parents will be encouraged to participate in this process by reviewing future progress with individual teacher and student. Promote enhanced academic success and financial efficiency by aligning responsibility and accountability. The board of directors, faculty, staff and all stakeholders will share the responsibility of accountability for the academic success and financial efficiency of Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy. The academic success and financial efficiency will be assessed by our state grade, meeting AYP, and in our various operating reviews, financial reports and audits. To achieve this, we will put in place a budgeting and allocation system that provides for student and teacher needs while including continuous oversight of financial operations with appropriate checks and balances. An independent audit, performed by a certified public account, at year end, will provide the assurance that the school operates in 9

11 accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Provide parents with sufficient information on whether their child is reading at grade level and whether the child gains at least a year s worth learning for every year spent in the charter school. Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy will provide parents with sufficient information on whether or not their child is reading at grade level and whether or not the child gains at least a year s worth of learning for every year spent in the charter school. Progress reports, report cards, parent/teacher conferences, pre and posttests, FCAT assessments and results, weekly online grade book postings, academic participation assemblies and parent tele-conferences will be provided to parents. Improve student learning and academic achievement. For students who are low-performing, intervention materials that are researched-based will be used to teach directly to their weaknesses as determined by a diagnostic assessment. Intervention materials are different from the core reading program and from the supplemental materials. These materials focus on specific skills and strategies and allow for explicit and systematic direct instruction designed accelerate the rate of student achievement in reading. Teachers will be trained to provide instruction within the classes to account for different rates of learning. Increase learning opportunities for all students, with special emphasis on low-performing students and reading Henry McNeal Turner Charter School believes that its educational structure provides exciting new opportunities for students, particularly those who are low performing. This is because teachers will be trained in research proven pedagogical strategies tailored to the students learning styles. The result is teachers will be better able to determine students educational levels and empowered to use the most effective strategies to meet their needs. The curriculum will be selected from a program that includes individual educational plans, whole experiential learning, interdisciplinary arts, critical thinking skills, languages, recreational and athletic activities, life skills and technology. Each student will be provided with the opportunity to reach his potential. Students will receive intervention services based on their FCAT and/or Leveled Reading Assessment level. Additional instruction will be given outside the 90-minute uninterrupted reading block. Student instruction will determined by data gathered from the diagnostic assessments. Based on the area of need, students will receive instruction and utilize specific materials designed to remediate the identified area of need. Our classrooms will be furnished with a variety of intervention materials. Our low-performing students will receive an additional 45 minutes of small group instruction each day above the 90 minute uninterrupted reading block. Encourage the use of innovative learning methods HMTLA will train our teachers in CRISS (Creating Independence through Student owned Strategies), the latest research-based pedagogy on gender learning styles. We will use technology, promote collegiality, and provide teachers with the opportunity to take risks so that continual learning will form the basis of the school s professional development strategy. A major component of our professional development plan will be ongoing teacher training so that they will understand and shape their teaching methods to different learning styles. For example, teachers will be 10

12 exposed to research showing that girls are generally drawn to narratives that focus on relationships, while boys tend to prefer adventure, science fiction, war stories, history and sports. Teachers will implement the Sunshine Standards using research based materials. Teachers will supplement assignments with non-fiction, magazines, newspapers and biographies. (Reference: LITERACY- SECTION/PAGE: p.11, p.17)edit: HMTLA acknowledges that CRISS is not a gender-specific learning pedagogy. This information was included in HMTLA s original charter contract and therefore required to be included in section 3 of this document. Section 3 requests that HMTLA provide the student achievement objectives as included in the school s original charter contract or in the school s most recent sponsor approved school improvement plan. HMTLA has no previous SIP plan. Require the measurement of learning outcomes. The assessment and measurement of learning will be infused into the culture of The Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy. Learning outcomes will be measured by state approved instruments such as the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) and the Stanford Achievement Test, 10 th Edition (SAT-10). The Henry McNeal Turner Learning Academy will use Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Resultsoriented and Time-bound (SMART) objectives, as laid out above to: 1) identify the educational strengths and needs of students, and 2) determine the extent to which educational goals and performance standards are being met. At the beginning of the school year, students will complete the Brigance Comprehensive Inventory of Basic Skills-Revised (CIBS-R) and the results will be compared to a post-test administered at the end of the school year. Henry McNeal Turner emphasizes data-driven decision making with two complimentary assessment processes. Formal Assessments which are large scale standardized assessments and Classroom-based Assessments which re selected or designed and implemented by the classroom teacher. 4. Student Performance Data Analysis Provide a detailed analysis of the student performance data including academic performance by each subgroup: HMTLA Student Performance Data Analysis- Reading Content Area Performance HMTLA s overall Reading Performance for school years 2011 through 2014 has averaged 55%, below what would be considered a Reading Proficient school by the Florida Department of Education. Students categorized in the following subgroups, ESE, ELL, Economically Disadvantaged, and Black or African American have consistently performed below grade level expectations throughout all Reading content areas. While the majority of HMTLA s students have not performed to grade level expectations, more than 75% of students enrolled during the 2011 through 2014 school years, have made significant learning gains as evidenced when students previous year test performance was compared to current year performance HMTLA s Annual Measurable Objective for Reading was 39%. HMTLA did not meet AMOs for the school year- student performance on the FCAT 2.0 in Reading was 37% of students (grades 3-5) scoring proficient. School-wide student performance in Reading was 54% of students (grades KG-5) scoring proficient. This data was used to restructure HMTLA instructional strategies, academic interventions, and timetable for implantation of remediation. This data to schedule Extended Learning Opportunities, studentteacher conferences, parent-teacher conferences, set student goals, and to review student goals from the previous year. School Year All Students ESE Students ELL Students Economically Black/African KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor kindergarten student s KG- FAIR There were no ESE students in the KG class KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, Disadvantaged KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, American KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, 11

13 Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 77% of all Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor First Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 61% of all First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 79% of all Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 4.5 out of 8 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 8.5 out of 17 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6.6 out of 12 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 5 out of 8 questions correct 3 out of 17 third grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading portion of the test Grade 4-FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 5.3 out of 9 questions correct Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the st Grade Class Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the nd Grade Class Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 2 out of 8 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 9 out of 17 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6 out of 12 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 4 out of 8 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT test- the average score was a level 1 Grade 4- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 3 out of 9 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 6 out of 14 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6 out of 11 and progress monitor ELL kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 100% of all ELL Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary There were no ELL students in the st Grade Class Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 100% of all ELL Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 2 out of 8 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 7 out of 17 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 3 out of 12 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 2.5 out of 8 and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 77% of all Economically Disadvantaged Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged First Grade student s Reading development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 61% of all Economically Disadvantaged First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade student s Reading development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 79% and progress monitor Black/African American kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year 75% of all Black/African American Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American First Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 61% of all Black/African American First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 79% of all Black/African American Second Grade students tested met expectations.. 12

14 Reading Application- students averaged 8.5 out of 14 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6.3 out of 11 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 6.6 out of 11 questions correct 5 out of 13 4 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading Portion of the test Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 6.7 out of 10 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 10.4 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 7.8 out of 11 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 5.5 out of 8 questions correct Only 5 out of 9 5 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading Portion of the test questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 7 out of 11 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading test- The average score was a level 2 Grade FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 3 out of 10 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 7.5 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6.5 out of 11 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 4.5 out of 8 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading test- The average score was a level 1.5 questions correct No ELL students scored proficient on the FCAT test- the average score was a level 1 Grade 4- FCAT 2.0 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class. Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class of all Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT out of 17 or 94% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 2 out of 16 or 13% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 5 out 13 or 38% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 5 out 9 or 56% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 3-FCAT out of 17 or 94% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 2 out of 16 or 13% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 5 out 13 or 38% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 5 out 9 or 56% percent of these students scored proficient HMTLA s Annual Measurable Objective for Reading was 33%. HMTLA met and exceeded Reading AMOs for the school year- student performance on the FCAT 2.0 in Reading was 36% of students (grades 3-5) scoring proficient. School-wide student performance in Reading was 56% of students (grades KG-5) scoring proficient. School Year All Students ESE Students ELL Students Economically Disadvantaged KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, and KG- FAIR There were no ESE students in the KG- FAIR There were no ELL students in the KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was Black/African American KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR testing was 13

15 progress monitor kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 81% of all Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor First Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 88% of all First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 53%of all Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 4.4 out of 8 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 8 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 8 out of 13 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 4.4 out of 8 questions correct 5 out of 21 third grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading portion of the test Grade 4-FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 4.9 out of KG class Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the st Grade Class Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the nd Grade Class Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 3 out of 8 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 3 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 8 out of 13 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 2 out of 8 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT test- the average score was a level 1 Grade 4- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 4.5 out of 9 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 6 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students KG class Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL First Grade student s Reading development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 0% of all ELL First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 40% of all ELL Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT 2.0 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s 3 rd grade class Grade 4 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class. Grade 5 used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 81% of all Economically Disadvantaged Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged First Grade student s Reading development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 87% of all Economically Disadvantaged First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade student s Reading development. On the Endused to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 81% of all Black/African American Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American First Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 87% of all Black/African American First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 50% of all Black/African American Second Grade students 14

16 9 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 10 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 7.4 out of 12 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 3.8 out of 8 questions correct 4 out of 10 4 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading Portion of the test Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 5.9 out of 10 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 8 out of 15 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 7.4 out of 11 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 6.1 out of 9 questions correct Only 4 out of 8 5 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading Portion of the test averaged 7.5 out of 12 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 2.5 out of 8 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading test- The average score was a level 1.5 Grade 5 FCAT 2.0 There were no ESE students in HMTLA s th grade class There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class of-year Primary Test, 50% of all Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT out of 22 or 91% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out of 20 or 14% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT out of 10 or 90% percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out 9 or 33% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT out of 8 or 88% percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out 7 or 43% percent of these students scored proficient. tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT out of 22 or 91% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 5 out of 22 or 23% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 4 out 10 or 40% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 4 out 8 or 50% percent of these students scored proficient HMTLA s Annual Measurable Objective for Reading was 26%. HMTLA met and exceeded Reading AMOs for the school year- student performance on the FCAT 2.0 in Reading was 42% of students (grades 3-5) scoring proficient. School-wide student performance in Reading was 56% of students (grades KG-5) scoring proficient. School Year All Students ESE Students ELL Students Economically Disadvantaged KG- FAIR Throughout the school year, FAIR KG- FAIR There were no ESE KG- FAIR Throughout the school KG- FAIR Throughout the school Black/African American KG- FAIR Throughout the school 15

17 testing was used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 76% of all Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor First Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 89% of all First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 81% of all Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 5 out of 7 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 11.1 out of 20 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6.9 out of 10 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 5 out of 8 questions correct 7 out of 16 third grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading portion of the test Grade 4-FCAT 2.0 students in the KG class Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the st Grade Class Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ESE Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 0% of all ESE Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 5 out of 7 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 8 out of 20 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 4 out of 10 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 2 out of 8 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT test- the average score was a level 1 year, FAIR Year testing was used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL Kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR Test, 100% of all ELL Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL First Grade student s Reading development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 50% of all ELL First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 0% of all ELL Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 6 out of 7 year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 73% of all Economically Disadvantaged Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged First Grade student s Reading development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 88% of all Economically Disadvantaged First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade student s Reading year, FAIR testing was used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American kindergarten student s Reading development. On the final FAIR test for the school year, 75% of all Black/African American Kindergarten students tested met expectations. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American First Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 89% of all Black/African American First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, FAIR and Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American Second Grade student s Reading development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 81% of all Black/African American 16

18 Vocabulary- students averaged 4.7 out of 8 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 9.6 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6.6 out of 13 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 4.6 out of 8 questions correct 3 out of 12 4 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading Portion of the test Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 4 out of 10 questions correct Reading Application- students averaged 7.3 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 4 out of 16 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 4.5 out of 14 questions correct 1 out of 4 5 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading Portion of the test Grade 4- FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 4 out of 8 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 5 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 6 out of 13 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 5 out of 8 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Reading test- The average score was a level 1 Grade 5 FCAT 2.0 Vocabulary- students averaged 3 out of 10 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 6 out of 16 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 4 out of 16 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 3 out of 14 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.o Reading test- The average score was a level 1 questions correct Reading Applicationstudents averaged 15 out of 20 questions correct Literary Analysis: Fiction and Nonfiction- students averaged 9 out of 10 questions correct Informational Text and Research Process- students averaged 5 out of 8 questions correct There was only 1 ELL student in the rd grade class- the student scored a level 3/ proficient on the FCAT Reading test Grade 4 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class. Grade 5 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class development. On the Endof-Year Primary Test, 81% of all Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT out of 22 or 91% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out of 20 or 14% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT out of 10 or 90% percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out 9 or 33% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT out of 8 or 88% percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out 7 or 43% percent of these students scored proficient. Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT out of 22 or 91% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 5 out of 22 or 23% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 4 out 10 or 40% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 4 out 8 or 50% percent of these students scored proficient. HMTLA Student Performance Data Analysis- Mathematics Content Area Performance HMTLA s overall Mathematics Performance for school years 2011 through 2014 has averaged 42%, below what would be considered a Mathematics Proficient school by the Florida 17

19 Department of Education. Students categorized in the following subgroups, ESE, ELL, Economically Disadvantaged, and Black or African American have consistently performed below grade level expectations throughout all Mathematics grade level content areas. While the majority of HMTLA s students have not performed to grade level expectations, more than 60% of students enrolled during the 2011 through 2014 school years, have made significant learning gains as evidenced when students previous year test performance was compared to current year performance HMTLA s Annual Measurable Objective for Mathematics was 33%. HMTLA did not meet AMOs for the school year- student performance on the FCAT 2.0 in Mathematics was 28% of students (grades 3-5) scoring proficient. School-wide student performance in Mathematics was 42% of students (grades KG-5) scoring proficient. This data was used to restructure HMTLA instructional strategies, academic interventions, and timetable for implementation of remediation. This data was also used to schedule Extended Learning Opportunities, student-teacher conferences, parent-teacher conferences, set student goals, and to review student goals from the previous year. School All Students ESE Students ELL Students Economically Black/African American Year KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for Mathematics proficiency. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor First Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 47% of all First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Second Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 78% of all Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Number: Operations, Problems, and Statistics- students averaged 11.9 out of 21 questions correct Number: Fractions- students averaged 3.9 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurement- students averaged 6.1 out of 13 questions KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for Mathematics proficiency. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the st Grade Class Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary There were no ESE students in the nd Grade Class Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Number: Operations, Problems, and Statisticsstudents averaged 12 out of 21 questions correct Number: Fractions- students averaged 4 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurementstudents averaged 4 out of 13 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT testthe average score was a level 1 Grade 4-FCAT 2.0 Number: Operations Problems and Statistics - students averaged out 10 of KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for Mathematics proficiency. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary There were no ELL students in the st Grade Class Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and End-of-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor ELL Second Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 100% of all ELL Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3- FCAT 2.0 Number: Operations, Problems, and Statisticsstudents averaged 8.3 out Disadvantaged KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for Mathematics proficiency. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and End-of- Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged First Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of- Year Primary Test, 47% of all Economically Disadvantaged First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and End-of- Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of- Year Primary Test, 78% of all Economically Disadvantaged Second Grade students tested met expectations. KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for Mathematics proficiency. Grade 1- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and Endof-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American First Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of-Year Primary Test, 47% of all Black/African American First Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 2- End-of-Year Primary Throughout the school year, Primary Mid-Year and Endof-Year testing were used to diagnose, screen, and progress monitor Black/African American Second Grade student s Mathematics development. On the End-of-Year Primary 18

20 correct 3 out of 17 third grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Mathematics portion of the test Grade 4-FCAT 2.0 Number: Operations Problems and Statistics - students averaged out 11.5 of 18 questions correct Number: Fractions- students averaged 6.6 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurement- students averaged out of 12 questions correct 3 out of 13 4 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Mathematics portion of the test Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 Number: Fractions- students averaged 10.8 out of 22 questions correct Expressions, Equations, and Statisticsstudents averaged 4.6 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurement- students averaged 7.2 out of 14 questions correct 4 out of 9 5 th grade students scored proficient on the FCAT 2.0 Mathematics portion of the test 18 questions correct Number: Fractions- students averaged 5 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurementstudents averaged 4 out of 12 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT testthe average score was a level 2 Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 Number: Fractions- students averaged 3 out of 22 questions correct Expressions, Equations, and Statistics- students averaged 1 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurementstudents averaged 3.5 out of 14 questions correct No ESE students scored proficient on the FCAT testthe average score was a level 1 of 21 questions correct Number: Fractionsstudents averaged 3 out of 10 questions correct Geometry and Measurement- students averaged 4.3 out of 13 questions correct No ELL students scored proficient on the FCAT test- the average score was a level 1 Grade 4- FCAT 2.0 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class. Grade 5- FCAT 2.0 There were no ELL students in HMTLA s th grade class Grade 3-FCAT out of 17 or 94% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 2 out of 16 or 13% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 3 out 13 or 23% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 4 out 9 or 44% percent of these students scored proficient. Test, 78% of all Black/African American Second Grade students tested met expectations. Grade 3-FCAT out of 17 or 94% percent of HMTLA 3 rd grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 2 out of 16 or 13% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 4- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 4 th grade students tested were a part of the Black/African American subgroup. 3 out 13 or 23% percent of these students scored proficient. Grade 5- FCAT % percent of HMTLA 5 th grade students tested were a part of the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup. 4 out 9 or 44% percent of these students scored proficient HMTLA s Annual Measurable Objective for Mathematics was 25%. HMTLA met and exceeded Mathematics AMOs for the school year- student performance on the FCAT 2.0 in Mathematics was 28% of students (grades 3-5) scoring proficient. School-wide student performance in Mathematics was 42% of students (grades KG-5) scoring proficient. School Year KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for Mathematics proficiency. All Students ESE Students ELL Students Economically Disadvantaged KG- KG- KG- Kindergarten students were Kindergarten students were Kindergarten students were not assessed for not assessed for not assessed for Mathematics Black/African American KG- Kindergarten students were not assessed for 19