Name: Lake Street Elementary/ Deb Ciochina Date: 18 June 2010 1. Status Reports and Seize the Moment report due June 18, 2010. (3 copies of all documents) 2. Draft goals are submitted no later than one week before Performance Appraisal Conference. 3. Schedule Performance Appraisal Conference with supervisor to be completed by end of September 4. Supervisor sends the copies of final forms combined in a Performance Appraisal Packet to Superintendent of Schools. 5. Packets include 2009-2010 Status Reports, Seize the Moment, and 2010-2011 goals approved by supervisor. Improvement Goal #1: Math achievement and scores will improve so that 90% of students will pass the math portion of the ISTEP exam and all student will show improvement from pre to post skill group assessment. Benchmark: Grades 3-5: On average, students will pass the math portion of the ISTEP at a rate of 90% or above Grades 3-5: Students will show improvement on the Acuity series A-C What intervention was implemented? Describe evidence of implementation during the 2009-2010 school year: INTERVENTION and EVIDENCE: Teachers analyzed Acuity testing and used data in new ways to determine course of instruction for students o Wednesday morning professional development time was used o Teachers learned about Acuity data and its implications for instruction o Provided charts for analysis and small group discussion vertically and horizontally for analysis during Wednesday meetings and during common plan time. Teachers (grades 4 and 5) met in small group with professors from PUC and in a lesson study group to improve instruction o Grade 4 and 5 engaged in a specific lesson study of Cindy Wise during and Inquiry Math lesson. o PUC professors and teachers dissected teaching and learning for the lesson and engaged in professional discussion for implementation and improvement LASER (Lake Street After School Enrichment and Remediation) program interventions were implemented by invitation for bubble students to improve achievement. o Teachers designed and implemented LASER programming for math remediation by grade level o Teachers identified students using testing data and classroom performance/achievement data to determine invitations for needy students. o 94 students enrolled in LASER math remediation groups throughout the school year receiving nearly 200 hours of add l. instruction o Teachers also designed and implemented math enrichment programming for students in need. o 89 students enrolled in LASER math enrichment groups throughout the school year receiving nearly 100 hours of add l instruction DreamBox Math was implemented on a trial basis for selected grades 1 and 2 students. o Approximately 60 students took part in this digital learning program.
Evaluation data Minimum 3-year trend data. (Compare to League Schools if data is available) Sources of data include student achievement data, absenteeism, dropout rates, graduation rates, promotion and retentions, student engagement surveys, Core 40 and Academic Honors Diplomas, information and data on teacher instructional practices used, information and data on technology use by students and teachers, perception data about school effectiveness (opinion surveys from students, teachers, support staff, parents), grade distribution, hours of professional development FOR ALL STUDENTS TESTED THIS SUMMARY DOES NOT DISAGGREGATE THE SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS FROM THE TOTALS. (Please note No comparison to League Schools here as the test is new as of Spring 09 and no state data released yet.) 3 rd grade ISTEP Math 2008-2009 (Spring) Pass + 19% Pass 62% Total Pass 82% Total DNP 17% 2009-2010 Pass + 39% Pass 51% Total Pass 90% Total DNP 10% 4 th grade ISTEP Math 2008-2009 (Spring) Pass + 48% Pass 42% Total Pass 90% Total DNP 10% 2009-2010 Pass + 29% Pass 52% Total Pass 81% Total DNP 17% 5 th grade ISTEP Math 2008-2009 (Spring) Pass + 38% Pass 45% Total Pass 83% Total DNP 17% 2009-2010 Pass + 65% Pass 30% Total Pass 95% Total DNP 5% The goal has been Achieved The goal is Progressing X The goal is Targeted for Future The goal has been Abandoned Name: Lake Street Elementary / Deb Ciochina Date: 18 June 2010 6. Status Reports and Seize the Moment report due June 18, 2010. (3 copies of all documents) 7. Draft goals are submitted no later than one week before Performance Appraisal Conference. 8. Schedule Performance Appraisal Conference with supervisor to be completed by end of September 9. Supervisor sends the copies of final forms combined in a Performance Appraisal Packet to Superintendent of Schools. 10. Packets include 2009-2010 Status Reports, Seize the Moment, and 2010-2011 goals approved by supervisor. Improvement Goal #2: Language Arts achievement and scores in reading and comprehension will improve so that 90% of the students will pass the ISTEP+ language arts test. Benchmark: Grades 3-5: On average, students will pass the math portion of the ISTEP at a rate of 90% or above.
Grades 3-5: Students will show improvement on the Acuity series A-C. What intervention was implemented? Describe evidence of implementation during the 2009-2010 school year. Teachers analyzed Acuity testing and used data in new ways to drive English/Language Arts instruction for students. o Wednesday morning professional development time was used o Teachers learned about Acuity data and its implications for ELA instruction o Provided charts for analysis and small group discussion vertically and horizontally for analysis during Wednesday mornings and during common plan time. Teachers observed various reading instruction within the building to enhance their own classroom instruction. o Teachers identified programs and strategies they wished to observe o A calendar was created so that subs could cover multiple teachers during specific days to facilitate the observations. LASER (Lake Street After School Enrichment and Remediation) program interventions were implemented by invitation for bubble students to improve ELA achievement. o Teachers designed and implemented LASER programming for ELA remediation by grade level o Teachers identified students using testing data and classroom performance/achievement data to determine invitations for needy students. o 118 students enrolled in LASER ELA remediation groups throughout the school year receiving nearly 236 hours of add l. instruction o Teachers also designed and implemented ELA enrichment programming for students in need. o 120 students enrolled in LASER math enrichment groups throughout the school year receiving nearly 150 hours of add l instruction Evaluation data Minimum 3-year trend data. (Compare to League Schools if data is available) Sources of data include student achievement data, absenteeism, dropout rates, graduation rates, promotion and retentions, student engagement surveys, Core 40 and Academic Honors Diplomas, information and data on teacher instructional practices used, information and data on technology use by students and teachers, perception data about school effectiveness (opinion surveys from students, teachers, support staff, parents), grade distribution, hours of professional development FOR ALL STUDENTS TESTED THIS SUMMARY DOES NOT DISAGGREGATE THE SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS FROM THE TOTALS. (Please note No comparison to League School here as the test is new as of Spring 09 and no state data released yet.) 3 rd grade ISTEP ELA 2008-2009 (Spring) Pass + 9% Pass 70% Total Pass 79% Total DNP 21%
2009-2010 Pass + 24% Pass 64% Total Pass 88% Total DNP 13% 4 th grade ISTEP ELA 2008-2009 (Spring) Pass + 32% Pass 61% Total Pass 93% Total DNP 4% 2009-2010 Pass + 21% Pass 65% Total Pass 87% Total DNP 10% 5 th grade ISTEP ELA 2008-2009 (Spring) Pass + 19% Pass 62% Total Pass 81% Total DNP 18% 2009-2010 Pass + 46% Pass 45% Total Pass 91% Total DNP 9% The goal has been Achieved The goal is Progressing X The goal is Targeted for Future Part of this goal has been Abandoned X --see strike through in the main goal Name: Lake Street Elementary / Deb Ciochina Date: 18 June 2010 11. Status Reports and Seize the Moment report due June 18, 2010. (3 copies of all documents) 12. Draft goals are submitted no later than one week before Performance Appraisal Conference. 13. Schedule Performance Appraisal Conference with supervisor to be completed by end of September 14. Supervisor sends the copies of final forms combined in a Performance Appraisal Packet to Superintendent of Schools. 15. Packets include 2009-2010 Status Reports, Seize the Moment, and 2010-2011 goals approved by supervisor. Improvement Goal #3: Writing achievement / scores will improve. Ninety percent of students will score a 4-6 on the ISTEP+ Writing Development Assessment. Benchmark: Grades 3-5: On average, students will score a 4-6 on the ISTEP Writing Assessment All Grades 3-5: Students will show improvement on the 6+1 Traits of Writing.
What intervention was implemented? SCHOOL/DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT STATUS REPORT Describe evidence of implementation during the 2009-2010 school year. All staff trained on the K. Smeckens 6+1 Traits of Writing program o Sent to outside professional development Newly developed in-house training on the Traits as developed by a teacher leadership team who created the professional development o Training occurred on Wednesday morning PD sessions o Led by a team of educators representing all grade levels from Lake Street o Trained the outside tutors as well as ALL Lake Street staff members Highly developed SWAT (School Wide Academic Thursdays) program where intensive writing skills were taught and practiced in very small groups utilizing all teachers, all staff, the principal, and outside tutors Print rich classroom environments encouraged DOLs used in most classrooms to encourage active work on writing conventions Teachers observed other teachers within the building to see new strategies and lessons Evaluation data Minimum 3-year trend data. (Compare to League Schools if data is available) Sources of data include student achievement data, absenteeism, dropout rates, graduation rates, promotion and retentions, student engagement surveys, Core 40 and Academic Honors Diplomas, information and data on teacher instructional practices used, information and data on technology use by students and teachers, perception data about school effectiveness (opinion surveys from students, teachers, support staff, parents), grade distribution, hours of professional development Grade Level ISTEP+ Writing Assessment as Compared to last year SPRING 2009 % scoring a 4, 5, or 6 on the ISTEP writing assessment SPRING 2010 % scoring a 4, 5, or 6 on the ISTEP writing assessment Grade 3 57% 73% Grade 4 38% 71% Grade 5 66% 94%
Growth of the Cohort Group 3 rd to 4 th Total Improvement -- 14% more students scoring a 4, 5, or 6 4 th to 5 th Total Improvement 56% more students scoring a 4, 5, or 6 SWAT DATA FROM PRE-TEST TO POST-TEST, GRADED ON A 6 POINT SCALE INDICATES A SCHOOL-WIDE (GRADES 1-5) 20% GROWTH IN OVERALL WRITING SKILLS FROM NOVEMBER OF 2009 WHEN THE PROGRAM WAS INITIATED UNTIL MAY OF 2010 WHEN THE POST-TEST WAS ADMINISTERED. The goal has been Achieved The goal is Progressing _x The goal is Targeted for Future Part of this goal has been Abandoned x (see strike through on main goal)