Clayton Elementary School 2016-17 School Improvement Plan ... · Abbey L. Philpot, Principal . School Profile Clayton Elementary School is located in a rural setting in the northwest

Clayton Elementary School

2016-17

School Improvement Plan

Abbey L. Philpot, Principal

School Profile

Clayton Elementary School is located in a rural setting in the northwest corner of

Cherokee County. Clayton ES opened in 1948 as a GR 1 - 8 grade school and later became

K – 6. In 2014, Clayton ES became a K - 5 school as the sixth graders were districted to

the new Teasley Middle School. The current population of Clayton ES is 233 students for

the 2016-2017 school year; of the 233 students, 94% are white, 3% are Hispanic/Latino

and 3% are multi-racial. The school has 27 certified staff members, which includes 1

administrator, 12 general education homeroom teachers, 1 Early Intervention

Program/ESOL teacher, 3 specials teachers (art, music and physical education), 1 gifted

teacher, 1 counselor, 1 media specialist and 4 special education teachers; Forty-eight

percent of the staff hold SRT 5 or SRT 6 certification.

Clayton ES held Title I designation during the 2015-16 school year but was removed from

the Title I list for the 2016-17 school year because the free/reduced lunch rate declined

and is now at 39%.

Clayton ES currently serves kindergarten through fifth grades, with each grade level

having two homerooms. Clayton ES also provides one self-contained Special Education

unit. Kindergarten through third grade have heterogeneously grouped homerooms with

each teacher responsible for teaching every subject. Fourth and fifth grade students are

grouped within their grade level based on assessment data to provide targeted instruction.

Approximately 15% of the student body receive special education services.

Since first being built in 1948, the school has been an integral part of the Clayton

Community. Both the community and school work together to provide a challenging and

rewarding educational experience for the students. This relationship between the school

and community is one of Clayton ES’s unique characteristics.

School Improvement Plan Design Team:

Abbey Philpot, Principal Lisa DeHart, 3rd Grade Teacher Monica Tillery, Media Specialist (AA) Stephanie Vocks, 4th Grade Teacher Heather Chesnut, Counselor Amanda Blackwell, 5th Grade Teacher Nancy Walker, Kindergarten Teacher Andrea Ingham, Special Education Teacher Rebecca Heard, 1st Grade Teacher Joy Hyatt, EIP/ESOL Teacher Kimbra Satterfield, 2nd Grade Teacher Anne Cross, Physical Education Teacher

A. CHEROKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT’S MISSION STATEMENT:

We, the School Board of the Cherokee County School District, are committed to educating the emerging generation through learning environments designed to increase the performance of all students.

B. CHEROKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT’S BELIEF STATEMENTS:

All students deserve the opportunity to learn, achieve success and become productive citizens.

Education/learning is a shared responsibility and should take place in the home, at school and in the community. All students can learn; but they learn in different ways, at different rates and with different preferential learning styles. Learning is achieved through the use of a variety of effective teaching techniques. A safe and secure environment is essential for teaching and learning. All students should be taught by teachers and parents how to learn and how to become lifelong learners. g. All students deserve equal

access to a quality education. Quality education requires quality staff, programs, facilities, equipment and technology. Parent and community participation, support and responsibility are essential to the positive social, emotional, cultural and academic

development of every student. Student achievement is enhanced through partnerships with parents, businesses, community-based organizations and agencies, local

institutions of higher learning and other public entities. All policy, administrative, instructional and educational support decisions should be based on student needs and what is best for students. Diversity should be promoted so that isolation of racial, ethnic and socioeconomic groups is avoided and education is enhanced in a

diverse, inclusive setting. All schools should be accountable for improving student achievement. All schools should reflect school-based, participatory management. All students must be prepared to function effectively in a knowledge-based, technologically-rich and culturally-diverse 21st century. All staff should have access to results-driven professional development and training which is aligned with the School Board’s Major

System Priorities and School Improvement Plans. Such professional development and training must be standards-based, job-imbedded,collaborative and build an organizational culture that insures continuous improvement.

C. CHEROKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT’S MAJOR SYSTEM PRIORITIES:

1. Establishing internationally competitive standards for student performance and an accountability system and policy framework designedto insure that all students are challenged individually and collectively to meet more rigorous standards.

2. In collaboration with technical colleges, other institutions of higher learning and the local business community, insuring thatvocational/technical education programs prepare students for a diverse and technologically rich society.

3. Insuring that all students and staff have a safe and secure environment for teaching and learning.4. Attracting, retaining, and training the best teachers, principals, and support staff.5. Utilizing technology both to improve student achievement and to increase the school district’s productivity and efficiency as a major

business enterprise.6. Increasing parental and community involvement through public engagement policies and practices that treat parents, businesses,

community-based organizations and agencies, local institutions of higher learning and other public entities as true partners in theeducational process.

7. Addressing exploding student population growth, recognizing that there is a large gap between the school district’s facilities andtechnology needs and available capital outlay revenue.

D. ADVANCED STANDARDS FOR QUALITY:

Standard 1: Purpose and Direction. The School District maintains and communicates a purpose and direction that commit to high expectations for learning as well as shared values and beliefs about teaching and learning.

Standard 2: Governance and Leadership. The School District operates under governance and leadership that promote and support student performance and school effectiveness.

Standard 3: Teaching and Assessing for Learning. The School District’s curriculum, instructional design and assessment practices guide and ensure teacher effectiveness and student learning.

Standard 4: Resources and Support Systems. The School District has resources and provides services that support its purpose and direction to ensure success for all students.

Standard 5: Using Results for Continuous Improvement. The School District implements a comprehensive assessment system that generates a range of data about student learning and school effectiveness and uses the results to guide continuous improvement.

E. SCHOOL MISSION STATEMENT: Clayton Elementary School is dedicated to providing students the opportunity to reach their highest level of achievement. We strive to provide a quality education which enables students to be internationally competitive.

F. SCHOOL VISION STATEMENT: Clayton Elementary will be a school which provides a positive and rigorous learning environment tailored to individual instructional needs. Through stakeholder collaboration, Clayton ES will provide a social/emotional, academic and behavioral foundation to encourage well-rounded, independent and critical thinkers. Students at Clayton ES will be positive contributors to our community and live with integrity.

G. SCHOOL BELIEF STATEMENTS: All staff will create a positive learning environment where students are encouraged to ask questions, participate and investigate in

order to become critical thinkers. All staff will participate in professional learning communities in an effort to use data to drive instruction and employ research-based,

effective instructional strategies to improve student achievement. All staff will maintain a high level of academic and behavioural expectations for all students. All stakeholders will collaborate to ensure specific student needs are met.

Clayton Elementary School - School Improvement Plan - Part III

Needs Assessment

CCRPI Overall Score 2015 Score Gap

College and Career Readiness Performance Index (CCRPI)

Target Score 100

School 75.6

Like Georgia Elementary Schools 81.1 Yes No

All CCSD Elementary Schools 74.6 Yes No

Georgia 76 Yes No

*Although our overall 2015 CCRPI score is slightly above the district score, the achievement component andsubgroup performance is causing us to score below our GA like-schools and state overall score. Clayton's CCRPI overall score in 2014 was 74.8. Our projected 2016 CCRPI score is 75.9 if we receive the same number of progress points on the 2016 Georgia Milestones Assessment as we did in 2015.

Gap Analysis / Longitudinal Trends

CCRPI Achievement Points 2015 Score Gap


Target Score 50

School 26.8



Georgia 29.7 Yes No

*Although the percentage of students scoring at level 1 (by grade level and student cohort from 2015 to 2016) decreased, our percentage of students scoring at level 2 is high compared to our GA like-schools and the CCSD and state average. (CCRPI - performance level 2 only earns 0.5 points - performance level 1 earns 0 points.)*When looking at content mastery points, we only earned approximately 4.86 points for SS, 5.4 points forscience, 5.6 for ELA, and 5.9 for Math. (Note: SWD and EIP students were not pulled during Science/SS in grades 3-5.)*While we received all 40 progress points on the 2015 CCRPI report, we only had 64.6% of students meetingtypical/high growth in ELA compared to 91.2% in math, and 83.8% in Science and SS.


CCRPI Progress Points 2015 Score Gap


Target Score 40

School 40



Georgia 33.8 Yes No



CCRPI Achievement Gap Points 2015 Score Gap


Target Score 10

School 8.3



Georgia 6.7 Yes No


CCRPI Challenge (ED/EL/SWD) Points 2015 Score Gap


Target Score 10

School 0.5



Georgia 5.8 Yes No

*Out of a possible 5.8 challenge points, we earned 0.5 exceeding the bar points and zero points for our ED andSWD subgroups. We received no flag points for these two subgroups in any content area which means they are not meeting the state performance target or subgroup performance target. The largest gap for the SWD and ED subgroups was in ELA and SS.*SWD 2015 Subgroup Performance Targets:

ELA 31.6 (20 points) / Math 36.9 (30 points) / Science 36.2 (34 points) / SS 37.1 (24)*ED 2015 Subgroup Performance Targets: ELA 47.5 (37.5) / Math 51.2 (44.6) / Science 44.9 (38.3) / SS 47.1 (34.8)*The 2015 Median Growth Percentile for the SWD subgroup was 28. The 2015 MGP for the ED subgroup was52.5.



Needs Assessment

English/Language Arts (Students Scoring at Levels 3 & 4)

2016 % Gap

Georgia Milestones End-of-Grade Results (CCRPI)

School 35

Like CCSD Elementary Schools 41 Yes No

All CCSD Elementary Schools 50 Yes No

Georgia 38 Yes No

*While 35% was a 3% increase from 2015, there is a 3-15% gap between our school and CCSD like-schools anddistrict average for 2016. The gap between our school and district performance increased from 13% in 2015 to 15% in 2016.*SWD -We had 37% scoring at levels 2/3/4 which is the same as CCSD and 5% more than the state. Our schoolhad 3% scoring at levels 3/4 compared to the 11% CCSD average and 8% state average. *ED - We had 14% of students scoring at levels 3/4 which is 16% below the CCSD average and 13% below thestate average.


Mathematics (Students Scoring at Levels 3 & 4) 2016 % Gap


School 26



Georgia 38 Yes No

*In 2015, 35% of students scored at levels 3 and 4. This is a 9% decrease for the 2016 test administration.Additionally, there is a 23% gap between our school and CCSD like-schools performance and a 12% gap between our school and district/state average. The gap between our school and district performance decreased from 14% in 2015 to 12% in 2016.*SWD -We had 44% scoring at levels 2/3/4 which is 6% less than the CCSD average and 2% higher than the stateaverage. Our school had 3% scoring at levels 3/4 compared to the 16% CCSD average and 12% state average.*ED - We had 18% scoring at levels 3/4 which is 14% below CCSD average and 10% below the state average.


Science (Students Scoring at Levels 3 & 4) 2016 % Gap


School 37



Georgia 36 Yes No

*While 37% was a 5% increase from 2015, the gap between our school and district performance increasedfrom 3% in 2015 to 9% in 2016. There is a 6-9% gap between our school and CCSD like-schools and district average for 2016. However, our 2016 performance was above the state average.*SWD - We had 44% scoring at levels 2/3/4 which is 1% higher than the CCSD average and 6% higher than thestate average. We had 10% scoring at levels 3/4 compared to the 16% CCSD average and 13% state average.*ED - We had 23% scoring at levels 3/4 which is 3% below the CCSD average and 2% below the state average.



Social Studies (Students Scoring at Levels 3 & 4) 2016 % Gap


School 31



Georgia 35 Yes No

* 31% was a 9% increase from 2015. The gap between our school and district performance decreased from 14%in 2015 to 13% in 2016. There is a 4-13% gap between our school and CCSD like schools and district average for 2016.*SWD - We had 47% scoring at levels 2/3/4 which is 10% higher than the CCSD average and 6% higher than thestate average. We had 6% scoring at levels 3/4 compared to the 15% CCSD average and 11% state average.*ED - We had 22% scoring at levels 3/4 which is 4% below the CCSD average and 1% below the state average.


Percent Typical/High Growth 2015 Avg. Gap


School 81



Georgia 65 Yes No



Needs Assessment

Percent of ED Students % Gap

Student Demographic Data

School 39.2

Like CCSD Elementary Schools 43.1 Yes No


Georgia 0 Yes No

*Our ED population is slightly below that of our CCSD like-schools.


Percent of EL Students % Gap


School 0.8



Georgia 0 Yes No

*Our EL population is consistently low at Clayton ES. We currently only have one student who is served as"consult" due to Special Education services.


Percent of SWD Students % Gap


School 15.5



Georgia 0 Yes No


Percent of RTI (Tier 2 & 3) Students % Gap


School 32.1



Georgia 0 Yes No



Percent of Gifted Students % Gap


School 4



Georgia 0 Yes No

*The Gifted Eligibility Team and Clayton ES staff will actively seek students to screen during the 16-17 testing window.


All Students Attendance Rate % Gap


School 95.9



Georgia 0 Yes No

*Attendance rate is comparable to CCSD like-schools and district average.


SWD Attendance Rate % Gap


School 95.7



Georgia 0 Yes No



Needs Assessment

Teacher Average Year of Experience Avg. Gap

Faculty/Staff Demographic Data

School 0



Georgia 0 Yes No


First Year Teacher % Gap


School 13.6



Georgia 17.2 Yes No

*The number of first-year teachers is comparable to our district and like-school percentages.


Gifted Endorsed Teachers % Gap


School 10



Georgia 0 Yes No

*We currently have 10 teachers with Gifted endorsement which is approximately 50% of our certified teachingstaff.


ESOL Endorsed Teachers % Gap


School 3



Georgia 0 Yes No

*The student population at Clayton ES does not support the need for increasing the number of staff endorsed atthis time.



Teacher Average Days Absent Avg. Gap


School 0



Georgia 0 Yes No


Teacher Retention Avg. Gap


School 90.9



Georgia 83 Yes No

*Not a significant gap


Percent of Teachers at TKES Levels 3 & 4 (Overall)

% Gap


School 100



Georgia 0 Yes No



Needs Assessment

Discipline: Not SWD Out-of-School Suspension Avg. Gap

Discipline Data

School 0



Georgia 0 Yes No

*We had no non-SWD students receiving OSS for the 15-16 SY.


Discipline: SWD Out-of-School Suspension % Gap

Discipline Data

School 4.1



Georgia 0 Yes No

*This one student was found eligible for Special Education services (EBD) at the end of the 15-16 SY.


Discipline: Minority Out-of-School Suspension % Gap

Discipline Data

School 5.2



Georgia 0 Yes No


Discipline: Not SWD In-School Suspension % Gap

Discipline Data

School 2.5



Georgia 0 Yes No

*Not a significant gap.



Discipline: SWD In-School Suspension Avg. Gap

Discipline Data

School 6.2



Georgia 0 Yes No

*Not a significant gap.


Discipline: Minority In-School Suspension Avg. Gap

Discipline Data

School 10.5



Georgia 0 Yes No



Needs Assessment

Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) Percentage % Gap

Other Data Influences

School 60



Georgia 65.3 Yes No

*While below the state average, the % of SWD in a LRE environment is comparable to CCSD like-schools and thedistrict average. The staff will continue to monitor SWD student progress and transition students to a lessrestrictive environment when appropriate.


Clayton Elementary School - School Improvement Plan - Part IV

Goals and Action Plans

Goal #1 - Clayton Elementary School

To increase the percentage of students, in grades three through five, scoring at achievement levels 3 or 4 in English Language Arts from 35% to 50% on the Georgia Milestones Assessment by the 2018-2019 school year.

Applicable AdvancED Standards

1.1 - The school engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate a school purpose for student success.1.2 - The school leadership and staff commit to a culture that is based on shared values and beliefs about teaching and learning and supports challenging, equitable educational programs and learning experiences for all students that include achievement of learning, thinking, and life skills.1.3 - The school’s leadership implements a continuous improvement process that provides clear direction for improving conditions that support student learning.2.3 - The governing body ensures that the school leadership has the autonomy to meet goals for achievement and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations effectively.2.4 - Leadership and staff foster a culture consistent with the school’s purpose and direction.2.6 - Leadership and staff supervision and evaluation processes result in improved professional practice and student success.3.1 - The school’s curriculum provides equitable and challenging learning experiences that ensure all students have sufficient opportunities to develop learning, thinking, and life skills that lead to success at the next level.3.2 - Curriculum, instruction, and assessment are monitored and adjusted systematically in response to data from multiple assessment of student learning and an examination of professional practice.3.3 - Teachers engage students in their learning through instructional strategies that ensure achievement of learning expectations.3.4 - School leaders monitor and support the improvement of instructional practices of teachers to ensure student success.3.5 - Teachers participate in collaborative learning communities to improve instruction and student learning.3.6 - Teachers implement the school’s instructional process in support of student learning.3.7 - Mentoring, coaching, and induction programs support instructional improvement consistent with the school’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning.3.11 - All staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning.4.2 - Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are sufficient to support the purpose and direction of the school.4.4 - Students and school personnel use a range of media and information resources to support the school’s educational programs.4.5 - The technology infrastructure supports the school’s teaching, learning, and operational needs.5.2 - Professional and support staff continuously collect, analyze, and apply learning from a range of data sources, including comparison and trend data about student learning, instruction, program evaluation, and organizational conditions.5.4 - The school engages in a continuous process to determine verifiable improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.5.5 - Leadership monitors and communicates comprehensive information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals to stakeholders.





Strategy # 1

Goal 1 - Year 1

Implement Professional Learning Communities to increase achievement in ELA. WHAT?Research-Based Strategies to Achieve

Goal

HOW? Designated meeting time/day for shared instructional planning, development of common formative assessments, data and error analysis, and selection of instructional strategies positively impacting student performancePD: DT4L, PLTL Support, District Feedback

Plan of Implementation of the Strategies (Programs / PD Activities /

Source of Funds / Est. Cost)

WHO?Impacted Staff

WHO?Impacted Students (RTI Tier)

K-5 Teachers

All Students

WHEN?Timeline

November 2016-May 2017

Actio

n P

lan

WHY?

WHY?

Planned Measurement to Assess Progress on Strategy Implementation

Data Assessing Strategy Implementation and Impact

Evide

nce

of E

ffective

ne

ss of

the

Imp

lem

en

ted

Strategie

s

CFA Pre/Post ScoresPLC Team Meeting MinutesAdmin Observation Checklist





Strategy # 2

Goal 1 - Year 1

Provide direct phonics instruction to increase mastery of early literacy skills. WHAT?Research-Based Strategies to Achieve

Goal

HOW? Fundations ProgramPD: District Training, Observation/Coaching SessionsOrton Gillingham/Wilson ProgramPD: District Training



WHO?Impacted Staff


K-2 General Education TeachersSpecial Education Teachers

Tier 1 (K-2)Tier 4 (SWD)

WHEN?Timeline

September 2016-May 2017

Actio

n P

lan

WHY?

WHY?



Evide

nce

of E

ffective

ne

ss of

the

Imp

lem

en

ted

Strategie

s

Observation Checklists and FeedbackeasyCBM benchmark data





Strategy # 3

Goal 1 - Year 1

Provide differentiated small group reading instruction based on assessment data.WHAT?Research-Based Strategies to Achieve

Goal

HOW? Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark System (K-2), Lexile Levels (3-5)PD: Guided Reading Modules, Book and Reader Behaviors, Running Records Coaching/Feedback



WHO?Impacted Staff


K-5 Teachers

All Students

WHEN?Timeline


Actio

n P

lan

WHY?

WHY?



Evide

nce

of E

ffective

ne

ss of

the

Imp

lem

en

ted

Strategie

s

Observation, Lesson Plans, Coaching/Feedback Sessions, Lexile and F&P Benchmark Levels (student growth measurements)

Year 1 Impact of Strategies and Action Plan on Goal #1

Mid-Year Impact Check

End-of-Year Impact Check




To increase the percentage of students, in grades three through five, scoring at achievement levels 3 or 4 in Mathematics from 26% to 41% on the Georgia Milestones Assessment by the 2018-2019 school year.

Applicable AdvancED Standards

1.1 - The school engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate a school purpose for student success.1.2 - The school leadership and staff commit to a culture that is based on shared values and beliefs about teaching and learning and supports challenging, equitable educational programs and learning experiences for all students that include achievement of learning, thinking, and life skills.1.3 - The school’s leadership implements a continuous improvement process that provides clear direction for improving conditions that support student learning.2.3 - The governing body ensures that the school leadership has the autonomy to meet goals for achievement and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations effectively.2.4 - Leadership and staff foster a culture consistent with the school’s purpose and direction.2.6 - Leadership and staff supervision and evaluation processes result in improved professional practice and student success.3.1 - The school’s curriculum provides equitable and challenging learning experiences that ensure all students have sufficient opportunities to develop learning, thinking, and life skills that lead to success at the next level.3.2 - Curriculum, instruction, and assessment are monitored and adjusted systematically in response to data from multiple assessment of student learning and an examination of professional practice.3.3 - Teachers engage students in their learning through instructional strategies that ensure achievement of learning expectations.3.4 - School leaders monitor and support the improvement of instructional practices of teachers to ensure student success.3.5 - Teachers participate in collaborative learning communities to improve instruction and student learning.3.6 - Teachers implement the school’s instructional process in support of student learning.3.7 - Mentoring, coaching, and induction programs support instructional improvement consistent with the school’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning.3.11 - All staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning.4.2 - Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are sufficient to support the purpose and direction of the school.4.4 - Students and school personnel use a range of media and information resources to support the school’s educational programs.4.5 - The technology infrastructure supports the school’s teaching, learning, and operational needs.5.2 - Professional and support staff continuously collect, analyze, and apply learning from a range of data sources, including comparison and trend data about student learning, instruction, program evaluation, and organizational conditions.5.4 - The school engages in a continuous process to determine verifiable improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.5.5 - Leadership monitors and communicates comprehensive information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals to stakeholders.




To increase the percentage of students, in grades three through five, scoring at achievement levels 3 or 4 in Mathematics from 26% to 41% on the Georgia Milestones Assessment by the 2018-2019 school year.

Strategy # 1

Goal 2 - Year 1

Increase students' metacognitive awareness including an understanding of math task demands and the ability to self-monitor/evaluate progress.

WHAT?Research-Based Strategies to Achieve

Goal

HOW? Ready Math, GA Frameworks, Use of self-checklists/rubricsPD: Observation/Coaching Sessions



WHO?Impacted Staff


K-5 Teachers

All Students

WHEN?Timeline


Actio

n P

lan

WHY?

WHY?



Evide

nce

of E

ffective

ne

ss of

the

Imp

lem

en

ted

Strategie

s

Observation/Math Coach Feedback, Lesson Plans

Year 1 Impact of Strategies and Action Plan on Goal #2

Mid-Year Impact Check

End-of-Year Impact Check

Section 5 – Locally Required Plans A. REVIEW OF CHEROKEE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOCUS/TARGETS 2016-19

Offer professional growth opportunities designed to produce teachers and support staff prepared to promote the success of all studentsthrough effective classroom instruction.

Support the improvement of the performance of students, staff, and the organization through results-driven professional development,which is standards-based, job embedded, and collaborative, i.e., Professional Learning Communities (PLC).

Support teachers’ effective use of formative, summative and diagnostic assessments as well as the collection, analyzation and reporting ofdata as a means of determining effective instruction and equitable access to student support programs.

Provide professional learning opportunities for all staff which will support students' academic needs through the integration of technologyin standards-based lessons.

Build capacity for instructional leadership through consistent and pervasive models of teacher and administrator training and collaborationthat lead to effective school improvement and increase student achievement.

B. ANALYSIS OF PREVIOUS YEAR’S SCHOOL-BASED PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Complete the following analysis as it relates to the effectiveness of school-based professional development activities for the 2015-16 school year:

Professional Development Activity

Statement of Effectiveness/Impact on Student

Achievement Continue Discontinue Rationale FIP Modules 3-5 Teachers gained knowledge

regarding formative instructional practices including documenting student learning and providing effective feedback.

X Modules completed

GASC Conference Provided school-based counselor ideas for supporting students’ social/emotional growth in an elementary setting.

X

Peer Observations Provided teachers modeling/mentoring to improve targeted instructional practices.

X Mentoring/modeling will be provided based on specific needs identified by Professional Learning Communities.

Fundations Training Teachers acquired an understanding of the Fundations resources and key components of the program.

X Modeling/mentoring and ongoing observation and feedback are necessary to support implementation of the program.

Section 5 – Locally Required Plans

C. DEVELOPMENT OF 2016-17 STATE STAFF DEVELOPMENT BUDGET ALLOCATION PLAN ALIGNED TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Complete the following chart for your school-based Professional Development Plan for the 2016-17 school year: Total Allocation: $778.54

Professional Learning Activity

SIP Goal(s)

# Participant(s) Timeline Resources Needed

Cost (should equal

allocation) Fundations Peer Observations 1 K-2/EIP/SPED

teachers August 2016 Fundations Teacher

Manuals $96.89

Ready Math Resource Collaboration/Planning

2 K-5 Math teachers

September 2016 Ready/i-Ready Math Resources

$322.96

Instructional Leadership Team Work Session – Self-Assessment/Student Performance Data Analysis/Review

1 and 2 Instructional Leadership Team

September 2016 Internal review components/student assessment results

$358.69


D. PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Provide a summary of school-based Professional Learning Community activities planned for the 2016-17 school year (limited to 250 words):

Due to the small size of Clayton Elementary, we formed three vertical Professional Learning Community (PLC) teams with a focus on improving student achievement in English Language Arts (ELA). Our Professional Learning Community teams are structured as follows:

Two Kindergarten teachers, two First grade teachers, one Special Education teacher, and an Early Intervention Program teacher Two Second grade teachers, two Third grade teachers, two Special Education teachers Two Fourth grade teachers, two Fifth grade teachers, one Special Education teacher

While the 2016-2017 school year is the initial year of implementation, our staff is highly committed to working collaboratively to improve instructional practices and the academic performance of students. Our PLC teams have established norms and agreed to meet for a minimum of one hour each week in efforts to prioritize and unwrap ELA curriculum standards, create common formative assessments at the appropriate level of rigor, analyze student assessment data, identify effective instructional practices, and ensure vertical alignment between grade levels. Our Professional Learning Teacher Leader (PLTL) and one of our PLC teams attended a Data Teams 4 Learning training in October 2016 and will be leading the efforts in implementing data-driven decision making at the instructional level.

E. TECHNOLOGY DRIVEN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND PLAN

Provide a summary of school-based, technology-focused Professional Development activities planned for the 2016-17 school year with the following considerations (limit response to 250 words): Needs of audience type (administrators, teachers, clerical, etc.); action plan to address needs; planned training times/schedule for training; and include numbers trained as MIE and/or Apple Vanguard (included number of certified in the program)

Clayton Elementary teachers participated in training on Microsoft OneNote in the fall, with a more in-depth training scheduled for the spring. Teachers will also have an opportunity in the spring to be trained on new elements of Office 365, particularly the use of Forms. Additionally, select teachers will be provided follow-up training regarding resources available through the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) site. The media specialist completed MIE certification in the fall, and the principal will complete the certification in the spring. Clayton also has one teacher who will participate in phase two of the Canvas, a learning management system, pilot, and both the principal and the media specialist will receive advanced training on the use of Canvas.


F. DIGITAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION PLAN

LEA’s that receive federal fund are required to actively deliver digital citizenship education to all students. In CCSD, we all use these funds in the form of ERATE discounts which offset our costs for Internet Services. Please describe activities within your school that support this. Include details of (limit response to 1000 words): A. who teaches the course; B. how much time is committed; and C. how often and how many/which students (and at which grade levels) they receive this instruction?

(Also include evidence by embedding any links to resources used or attaching samples of lesson plans, etc.) The media specialist at Clayton Elementary will teach lessons and offer activities on digital citizenship during the spring semester. Third, fourth, and fifth grade students, approximately 120, will participate in the lessons, which will span a period of at least three weeks and will take place in both the media center and the computer lab.

G. BRING YOUR LEARNING DEVICE (BYLD) PLAN

Describe how the school promotes personalized learning through the use of mobile, wireless technologies, either provided by CCSD or through the Bring Your Learning Device initiative. Include (limit respond to 500 words): A. gap analysis of the number of your teachers who actively allow/do not allow BYLD in the classroom, and B. identify any need for training in this area.

Clayton Elementary does not currently participate in the BLYD initiative.

H. INNOVATION ZONE GOAL

Each school in the CIZ will improve the Median Growth Percentile for students in at least one subgroup (ED, EL, SWD) in ELA by 3%. The school's targeted subgroup will be determined by each schools' individual school data.

Documents

Clayton Elementary School 2016-17 School Improvement Plan ... · Abbey L. Philpot, Principal . School Profile Clayton Elementary School is located in a rural setting in the northwest