PLYMOUTH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1105 E. Sugnet Midland MI SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN /12/09

Transcription

1 PLYMOUTH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1105 E. Sugnet Midland MI SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN /12/09

2 Plymouth School Improvement Summary Target Goal Review Plymouth Elementary continues to strive toward greater student achievement. Students, staff and parents have worked together in providing a comprehensive program for all students. During the our concentration was on writing and reading interventions. The majority of our professional development focused on these two areas. All staff has been involved in 6+1 Traits training and we have focused on writing across the curriculum. Our writing scores are still in need of improvement. In the area of reading intervention, every teacher this year incorporated at least one new strategy to improve fluency and comprehension. Last year (07-08), we did not qualify for Title funding. We are a targeted Title I building, and this year received Title funding. We had five temporary teachers who worked with identified students using the following interventions. Road to the Code Orton Gillingham Recipe for Reading Phonics for Reading Reading A-Z 6 Minute Solution Reader s Theatre Parent Involvement Plymouth s Title I Parent Night consisted of a presentation on 6+1 Traits of Writing. The students were in another room working on literacy activities. The parents and students came together for dinner and all students received a writing kit. The surveys from that presentation were very positive. A June parent meeting will be held to assess the program as a whole. Next Needs Plans The staff meets three times a year to determine progress and interventions for targeted students. We are aware that there will be changes to both the science and social studies curriculum in the future. We will need to revise for those changes. We have had informal discussions with our feeder middle school and they have expressed concern of student s lack of knowledge with math facts. We have incorporated additional practice school-wide. In summary, we will continue to focus on these goals, use data to drive our instruction and implement strategies to increase our student achievement.

3 PLYMOUTH ELEMENTARY AREA: Language Arts Focus Goal: Approaching 100% of all students tested will perform at satisfactory levels. (All data is one year behind) Benchmarks Target Measures (3) MEAP: * Status (Scores) Plymouth Baseline (04-05 Scores) Reading 95% Writing 79% ELA 91% (05-06 Scores) 3 rd 97% 46% 89% 4 th 97% 80% 97% 5th 74% 89% June 2007 (06-07 Scores) 3 rd 92% 69% 85% 4 th 92% 53% 89% 5th 98% 86% 95% June 2008 (07-08 Scores) 3 rd 93% 60% 86% 4 th 93% 64% 87% 5th 93% 69% 88% (08-09 Scores) 3 rd 93% 71% 95% 4 th 92% 47% 86% 5th 91% 75% 86% (09-10 Scores) % by rd, 4 th, 5 th grades * Compared to MPS Avg. Reading 95% Writing 62% ELA 87% 3 rd +2% -14% +11% 4 th +3% +13% +9% 5 th % +5% -2% 3 rd -2% +2% -4% 4 th -2% -1% +2% 5 th +2% +10% +3% 3 rd 0% -9% -2% 4 th +2% +5% +2% 5 th +1% -2% 0% 3 rd -1% +2% +3% 4 th 0% -12% -2% 5 th +1% -1% -2% * Compared to State Avg. Reading +13 % Writing +33 % ELA +22 % 3 rd +10% -5% +11% 4 th +14% +25% +21% 5 th +14$ +12% +14% rd +5% +17% +6% th +7% +8% +11% th +14% +29% +17% 3 rd +7% +3% +5 th % +9 5 th +11% +10% +10% 3 rd +7% +10% +12 th % +9 5 th +9% +12% +8% 20% points above the state * District Assessments: Reading Comp 79.9% Writing 77.1% Reading Writing 1 st 90% 75% 2 nd 96.7% 83% 3 rd 67.7% 67% 4 th 79.7% 71% 5 th 77.9% 71% School Avg. 82.4% 73% scores Reading 1 st grade 94.2% 2 nd grade 82.3% 3 rd grade 82.5%% 4 th grade 59.1%% 5 th grade 80% Average grades 1-5= 79.7% Writing 1 st grade 73.5% 2 nd grade 69.4% 3 rd grade 61.9% 4 th grade 50% 5 th grade 60.9% Average grades 1-5= 63.% District Reading 1 st grade 83.3% 2 nd grade 87.8% 3 rd grade 76.7% 4 th grade 76.9% 5 th grade 76.6% Average grades 1-5= 80.6% Writing 1 st grade 73.6% 2 nd grade 64.9% 3 rd grade 53.3% 4 th grade 67.7% 5 th grade 60.9% Average grades 1-5= 64.5.% District Not Yet Available % by st -5 th grade 0% gap in all three grade levels 1

4 What will be done to raise achievement? STRATEGY/INTERVENTION What information/training/support to staff need to implement the strategy? Completed in Planning Phase Activities & Timelines What will be completed when? (Begin /End) Responsible Person(s) Who is responsible? Resources What will you need? Expectations What will the strategy look like when completely implemented? Verification What will be examined (and by whom) to determine if this strategy is in place? Completed at End of Year Assessment Progress Has the strategy Did the strategy been move achievement implemented as toward the target? planned? Next Needs meetings for targeted students and resource room students to set instructional goals. Process reviewed at staff meetings and additional information from Reading Sequence Training Team. Meetings will occur 3 times a year following the District Assessment schedule. Classroom teacher, principal, ICT facilitator, school psychologist and special education teacher Next Needs sheets Intervention lists Next Needs plan will be filled out with Classroom Data Instructional strategies will be provided for each student. Principal will collect Next Need sheets and store in office and set dates for meetings. The use of the ICT personnel has been very effective in assisting and supporting new interventions.. Classroom teachers are learning how to use the ICT process in order to meet the individual needs of students. The analysis of DIBELS assessments has been supported by in-services of the 95% group, Reading Sequence Training and ICT has resulted in small intervention groups and progress monitoring. All students grade 1-5 will be assessed quarterly using a grade level rubric to score a writing prompt provided by Language Arts School Improvement Committee Any Student that did not pass MEAP or District writing assessment will be monitored with a Next Needs plan. Teachers have received additional training in writing scoring through district 6+1 Traits initiative Teachers have received additional training and resources for the at-risk writer, including 6+1 Traits, Sentence Writing Fluency and Vocabulary Building Will correspond with report card schedules. After reported fall MEAP scores and after District Assessments Prompt provided by principal or Language Arts Committee. Principal shares Results with ICT facilitator Classroom Teacher, Title I person and/or Reading Recovery teacher. District or MEAP writing rubric. 6+1 traits resources including books, tapes, Temporary Title I staff and ICT facilitator. Classroom teacher will give the prompt during writing time for one writing session (draft, revision, and final copy). MEAP or District writing rubric will be used to score the papers. Completed and scored papers will be shared at Next Needs Meetings and staff meetings. Student writing samples, review MEAP school and district writing assessments All grade levels gave and scored a minimum of 4 prompts. MEAP scores demonstrated that continued improvement and support is needed. The staff has all participated in the 6+1 Traits giving us common language among the grade levels. We have purchased additional books to serve as springboards to the traits writing lessons. All students will complete a Bare Book that will be shared with parents. Classroom teachers are teaching students to assess their own writing using 2

5 Implement a set of strategic, research based interventions (Florida Center for Reading Research) to increase reading and comprehension. Staff professional development meetings, Reading Sequence Training, district inservices, conferences, college courses Through professional development all staff members will implement a reading intervention for identified students. Prinicpal, Teachers, ICT facilitator materials associated with strategies. IC Team support, Title I support All students will increase literacy achievement Principal/teacher observation, DIBEL s data, MEAP results, DAR results DIBEL s data What was learned? We need to increase the amount of time devoted to interventions. rubrics. Rubrics are displayed within the classroom on large charts and written in student friendly language. The result of professional development has resulted in an increase of small group instruction At Risk/Title I Grade Level Meetings Title I temporary teacher Classroom support IC Team support Differentiated Instruction Reading Strategies implemented by classroom teachers and temporary Title I teachers Road to the Code PALS Reading A-Z website Phonics For Reading Six Minute Solution Orton Gillingham Collaborative planning, grade level meetings, conferences Continued through Principal, Instructional Consultation Team, Temporary Title I teachers Title I funding, Temporary Title I teachers All students will achieve grade-level benchmarks. Grade level meetings, staff consultation. MEAP scores District assessments DIBEL s Progress Monitoring results. What did we learn? Title I funding provides necessary support for our at-risk population and has increased achievement. In lower grades. Reading scores show an increase in K-1, but 2-5 scores indicate need for improvement 3

6 STRATEGY/INTERVENTION Activities & Timelines Responsible Person(s) Resources Expectations Verification Assessment Progress In order to enhance student achievement on GLCE in narrative text, comprehension and word recognition: Staff will: a) Study & Review GLCE each marking period. b) 06-07: Grades K-5 will create year long story theme boards or anchor charts in their classrooms with a variety of genre. DIBEL s result s will be posted and discussed at each staff meetings. Grade levels will collaborate to develop interventions. Progress monitoring will be charted monthly. a) GLCE s discussed at staff meetings. b) List of themes given to staff members. c) Researched based materials or video series. All staff is receiving DIBEL s training a) Follow schedule for marking periods b) Fall c) PD days school year. d) PD days school year. e) Continued PD in f) Continued PD Monthly staff meetings a) Principal provides time and committee provides GLCE s. b) School Improvement c) Team. d) Principal and school improvement team. Principal and staff. 95% group charts DIBEL s graphs Reading Sequence a) Staff will read the GLCE s and a short discussion will follow about classroom instruction. b) Staff will choose a poster, bulletin board or chart paper to plot out themes. c) Materials will be selected by LA team and principal Monthly collaboration and increased interventions which should increase reading scores. a) Staff meeting agendas. b) Principal observations and teacher survey. c) Agendas and evaluations Staff meeting agendas, collaborative agendas PD agendas Annual district spring assessments and DIBEL scores were used to determine needs of students. The analysis of DIBELS assessment and in-services by the 95% group has resulted in small intervention groups and progress monitoring Reading Sequence training as well as intervention training has enabled every teacher to incorporate a reading intervention. DIBEL s, DAR, MEAP Staff participated in professional development in 6 +1 Traits and collaborated with two other schools The result of professional development has resulted in an increase of small group instruction. 4

7 PLYMOUTH ELEMENTARY AREA: Math Focus Goal: Approaching 100% of all student tested will perform at satisfactory levels. (All data is one year behind) Benchmarks Target Measures (3) MEAP: * Status (Scores) Baseline (04-05 Scores) 87% (4 th grade) (05-06 Scores) 3 rd 97% 4 th 97% 5 th 88% June 2007 (06-07 Scores) 3 rd 98% 4 th 94% 5 th 95% June 2008 (07-08 Scores) % proficient 3 rd 98% 4 th 94% 5 th 86% (08-09 Scores) % proficient 3 rd 96% 4 th 95% 5 th 84% (09-10 Scores) % by rd, 4 th and 5 th grades. * Compared to State Avg. +14% 3 rd +9.9% 4 th +15.3% 5 th +14.6% 3 rd +10% 4 th +9% 5 th +19% 3 rd State +6% 4 th State +5% 5 th State 10% 3 rd State +5% 4 th State +7% 5 th State 9% 20% points above the state. * Compared to MPS Avg. 3 rd +3% 4 th +1% 5 th +3% 3 rd +2% 4 th +3% 5 th -3% 3 rd +1% 4 th +0% 5 th -11% District Assessments 1-5= 82.3% 1 st 94.8% 2 nd 93.8% 3 rd 81.4% 4 th 84.4% 5 th 70% Average =84.9% st % nd 96.7% 2 rd 93.7% 3 th 65.2% 4 th 79.7% 5 Average= 82.2% st % nd 100% 2 rd 83.6% 3 th 66.2% 4 th 71.4% 5 Average= 83.2% % by st -5 th grade pass district spring assessment. 7

8 What will be done to raise achievement? STRATEGY/INTERVENTION Analysis of the results of the District Math Assessments and MEAP mathematics test will be communicated to the staff (annual goal ). Completed in Planning Phase What information/training/ support to staff need to implement the strategy? Math committee will meet and analyze Fall 2008 MEAP tests. Activities & Timelines What will be completed when? (Begin /End) Analysis of Fall 2008 tests will be done after we get the results. Responsible Person(s) Who is responsible? School Improvement Mathematics Committee and PD Representatives. Resources What will you need? Released MEAP items. Expectations What will the strategy look like when completely implemented? Staff will receive MEAP and district test results and analysis from the math committee. Staff will receive updated information about targeted areas. Staff will then focus on targeted areas. Completed at End of Year Verification Assessment What will be examined Has the strategy (and by whom) to been determine if this implemented as strategy is in place? planned? Attendance logs and agendas from staff meetings will be submitted to school improvement for verification. The information was studied and presented during professional development. What did we learn? Our 5 th grade students had lower scores than expected. Progress Did the strategy move achievement toward the target? Analysis of groups of students were tracked and presented to staff during professional development. Staff looked at trends. STRATEGY/INTERVENTION New State Grade Level Content Expectations (GCLE) will be communicated to the staff and parents (ongoing goal as changes occur). Teacher s will collaborate at staff meetings to identify math trends using DAR. Grade level teachers will develop strategies based on the findings with input from the Math Coordinator Math Committee members will obtain the most recent copy of the State s Grade Level Content Expectations. Math Coordinator and staff will determine trends and need. Activities & Timelines Grade Level Content Expectations will be distributed at a staff meeting as changes are announced. The new grade level expectations will be communicated to parents via the school website and fall parent teacher conferences and meetings. In Sept. Grade levels will be given last year s DAR data and identify need. Responsible Person(s) Math School Improvement Committees and teachers. Teachers, principal and Math Coordinator Resources Expectations Verification Assessment Progress Copies of DAR results for all teachers. We will communicate new State Grade Level Content Expectations to staff and parents. Grade level and cross grade level collaboration. Identify strengths and weaknesses of Math Attendance logs and agendas from staff meetings will be submitted to school improvement for verification. Agendas All staff members have attended to be trained in the current grade level content area expectations and have been given the district standard assessment for each item. What did we learn? Reteaching the GLCE s that are not mastered is key. DAR, MEAP and quarterly assessments All grade levels are now assessing and checking off the GLCE s on a District Assessment Report Teachers have identified trends and are working on systems to reteach the GLCE s not mastered 8

9 Staff will utilize MPS Math Curriculum Coach. Math committee will explain who MC3 are and how they can help staff. Staff new to a grade level will meet with MC3 at least twice during that year. New staff and MC3 person. Teachers will be following the GLCE s and the latest curriculum development. Math committee will verify that staff is utilizing the MC2 by using a checklist. We had one teacher utilize the resource.. We have used the Differentiated Instruction teacher to facilitate more curriculum alignment and differentiation. Title I/At Risk Grade level meetings Temporary Title Teachers Differentiated instruction Instructional Consultation Teams Collaborative planning time, conferences, grade level meetings Principal, IC Team Temporary Title I teachers Title I funding Temporary Title teachers All students will achieve grade level benchmarks Teachers, Principal grade level meetings MEAP, DAR data What did we learn? Title I funding provides necessary support for at risk learners. MEAP scores went down slightly, 1%-2%. 9

10 PLYMOUTH ELEMENTARY AREA: Science Focus Goal: All Students will be proficient at demonstrating science knowledge, skills and strategies. (All data is one year behind) Benchmarks Target Measures (3) MEAP: * Status (Scores) Baseline (04-05 Scores) 90% proficient (05-06 Scores) 96% proficient (06-07 Scores) 98% proficient (07-08 Scores) 86% proficient (08-09 Scores) 92% proficient (09-10 Scores) % of tested students will perform at satisfactory levels (end of year 2008) * Compared to State Avg. +11% +19.2% +17% +4% +9% +20% * Compared to MPS Avg. +4% -6% -2% Title I Needs Assessment 78% have low need or no need in K % have low or no need in K had a low or no need in K-4 Not receiving TITLE I funds % of students will have low needs or no needs. What will be done to raise achievement? STRATEGY/INTERVENTION What information/training / support to staff need to implement the strategy? Completed in Planning Phase Activities & Timelines What will be completed when? (Begin /End) Responsible Person(s) Who is responsible? Resources What will you need? Expectations What will the strategy look like when completely implemented? Verification What will be examined (and by whom) to determine if this strategy is in place? Completed at End of Year Assessment Progress Has the strategy Did the been strategy implemented as move planned? achievement toward the target? Plymouth teachers will review released MEAP items pertinent to their grade level at a fall staff meeting. During staff meeting time teachers will review released time. Begin Fall 2006 Plymouth Staff, Science subcommittee and Principal Release MEAP items. All staff will be presented with released items that are pertinent to their teaching. Materials will be presented to teachers. Released MEAP items were made available for teacher to view and discuss. Science scores are up 6% from last year. Staff collaboration on how to reteach science concepts have been explored. 10

11 STRATEGY/INTERVENTION Teachers will receive professional development updates 4 times per year from their science representatives during staff meetings. Support the district in aligning state grade level expectations with the current Midland Public Schools science curriculum (All K-4 science module pre and post assessments will be revised to align with assigned benchmarks.) Title I Implementing language arts/literacy strategies within the science curriculum in order to promote comprehension During Staff meeting time teachers will be updated. Time providing release time Staff Meetings, Collaborative planning Activities & Timelines Begin Fall 2006 Support district as the benchmark rubrics and data templates are piloted in During the school year, the classrooms and the building will support unit assessments aligned to benchmark rubrics district wide implementation continue implementation Responsible Person(s) Science Vertical Committee members, Principal PD committee classroom teachers Principal, teachers, Title I temporary Resources Expectations Verification Assessment Progress Collaboration time, district and state data. A-Z books Quick Reads beginning (09-10) All staff will be present with updates on information. District curriculum development funds and report card alignment. Increased Student Achievement agendas and sign ins. DAR results MEAP Ongoing DAR assessments MEAP scores Teachers have been informed that the district is waiting on the state to release the elementary GLCE s and then will begin a multiple year process of revising and spiraling curriculum. All K-4 teachers have been using the newly designed pre and post assessments that align with the Big Ideas and then recording the results on the district DAR. DAR, MEAP The Science District committees have begun work on realigning our current kits to match the GLCE s. According to a staff survey teachers are using the pre and post assessments and writing more within science. Science MEAP scores increased 6% this year. 11

12 PLYMOUTH ELEMENTARY AREA: Social Studies Focus Goal: Approaching 100% of all students tested will perform at satisfactory levels. (All data is one year behind) Benchmarks Target Measures (3) MEAP: * Status (Scores) Baseline (04-05 Scores) 28% (05-06 Scores) 96% proficient For feeder school students. June 2007 (06-07 Scores) 89% For feeder school students June 2008 (07-08 Scores) 97% For feeder school students (08-09 Scores) 91% For feeder school students (09-10 Scores) % proficient * Compared to State Avg. * Compared to MPS Avg. +2% +17.7% +15% -4% +57% (GOAL OBTAINED) +7% +16% 20% above the state Title 1 Needs Assessment 79% of students had a low or no need. 83.2% of students had a low or no need. 86.6% of students had a low or no need. No longer receiving TITLE I funds What will be done to raise achievement? STRATEGY/INTERVENTION What information/training / support to staff need to implement the strategy? Completed in Planning Phase Activities & Timelines What will be completed when? (Begin /End) Responsible Person(s) Who is responsible? Resources What will you need? Expectations What will the strategy look like when completely implemented? Verification What will be examined (and by whom) to determine if this strategy is in place? Completed at End of Year Assessment Progress Has the strategy Did the strategy been implemented move as planned? achievement toward the target? K-5 Teachers will implement a curriculum guide that is aligned to the state benchmarks. Teachers will attend a workshop that will instruct them o how to use the curriculum guides social studies coordinator and K-5 teachers. Curriculum guides containing benchmarks, activities, assessments, and rubrics will be utilized by the K-5 staff. Checklist will be given to check if this strategy is in place. All teachers have been trained on the new curriculum guides. Teachers are assessing and recording GLCE achievements on a district assessment report. K-5 teachers will use supplementary materials to support the benchmarks. Staff will need to refer back to their guides for the supplemental materials that are available to use with each unit of study Instructional Staff All teachers will continue to utilize the resources available to increase students performance on the benchmarks. Checklist will be given to check off materials that they have used during the year. Teachers at Plymouth have purchase materials and have been trained and given an account to use the United Video Streaming. Teachers are using the video streaming and the new curriculum resources that have been purchased. 5

13 Title I Implementing language arts within social studies curriculum in order to promote comprehension Staff and collaborative planning Instructional staff Title I funds and Temporary Title I teachers. A-Z expository text selections. Teachers will use interventions to increase comprehension. A-Z books to coordinate with units taught. Quick Reads has been purchase for next year to supplement. Students will write 3-5 facts learned after each unit. Teacher and principal observation. MEAP, DAR and increased science achievement DAR, MEAP Social Studies scores show a decline from last year. We will implement comprehension and writing strategies to increase achievement. STRATEGY/INTERVENTION K-5 teachers will collaborate with teachers at their grade level in the content area of social studies. K-5 teachers will preview released MEAP social studies test questions. K-5 teachers will use common assessments at their grade level. Teachers will need released time to collaborate with one another. Teachers will need released MEAP items from the state to review Teachers will be informed of how to use the common assessments Activities & Timelines Responsible Person(s) Principal and Teaching Staff Principal and Teaching Staff PD Committee members, Curriculum Coordinator and K-5 teachers. Resources Expectations Verification Assessment Progress Teachers will collaborate with their grade level to discuss social studies content areas. Teachers will have a better understanding of the kinds of questions that the children are expected to answer on the sixth grade MEAP test. Teachers are encouraged to implement those types of questions in their own classroom. Teachers will use the common assessments, rubrics to score them and will report the results on a electronic data sheet. Check the records in the collaborating sign up book for social studies for collaborative planning sessions. Attend staff meetings when the released items will be studied. Staff will focus on the strengths and weaknesses at each grade level. MEAP results A MEAP gap analysis has been conducted and presented to staff at a PD. Grades that have been given the completed common assessments are efficiently using the electronic data sheet. Collaborative planning days along with district collaborative days for differentiated instruction have been utilized by staff. Released items were shared with teachers. Teachers use the common assessments and record data on the DAR and continue to reteach GLCE s not met. 6