wp.vcu.eduwp.vcu.edu/.../4613/2014/03/ADMS-618-SIP-Colon_Mar… · Web viewwp.vcu.edu

Laila Marshall, Octevia Torian, Valeriana Colon 1

School Improvement Plan (Assessment 7)Elizabeth D. Redd Elementary

1. Longitudinal Achievement Trends Accreditation Results for All StudentsDuring the 2011-2014 school years Elizabeth D. Redd Elementary met accreditation benchmarks in English, History and Science. In 2013-14 the school received a 68 of the required score of 70 in Mathematics, failing to meet the accreditation benchmark. Mathematic scores have steadily decreased over the years while History scores have shown a small degree of improvement. English and Science scores showed a similar trend marking slight improvement in 2012-13 then decreasing in 2013-14 with English receiving a 77 of the required 75. Although English and Science were below benchmarks in 2013-14 the goal was met through an average of the scores for all three years. History was the only subject to meet benchmarks for all years.

65

70

75

80

85

90Accreditation Results for All Students

English Mathematics History ScienceYear

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

Overall English PerformanceIn 2010-11 the subgroups clustered with passing rates between 88-93%. In 2011-12 the subgroups stratified with the Hispanic and LEP subgroups showing improvement before decreasing in 2012-13; Black and Economically Disadvantage assuming similar trends with a slight decrease in 2011-12 and a significant decrease in 2012-13; and Student with Disabilities marked a significant decrease in 2011-12 and 2012-13. The white subgroup population was below state definition for personally identifiable results.

English Math History Science1yr / 3yr 1yr / 3yr 1yr / 3yr 1yr / 3yr

2011-12 91 / 83 95 / 87 91 / 82 89 / 852012-13 88 / 87 57 / 79 89 / 84 83 / 882013-14 55 / 77 51 / 68 76 / 85 58 / 76Benchmark 75 70 70 70

White Black Hispanic SD ED LEP2010-11 < 90 88 93 90 872011-12 < 86 100 70 88 942012-13 < 48 50 30 47 42


20

40

60

80

100

Overall English Performance

Black Hispanic Students w/Disabilities Economically Disadvantage Limited English ProficientYear

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

Overall Mathematics PerformanceThe performance of all subgroups steadily decreased over the three years. In 2010-11 all subgroups were clustered with passing rates between 89-96%. In 2011-12 rates stratified with a 49 point gap between the highest achieving subgroup, Hispanics, and the lowest achieving subgroup Students with Disabilities; in 2011-12 the Limited English Speaking, Economically Disadvantaged and Black subgroups demonstrated a similar downward trend with a gap of 7 between each subgroup then they clustered again in 2012-13. The white subgroup population was below state definition for personally identifiable results.

10

40

70

100Overall Math Performance

Black Hispanic Students w/Disabilities Economically Disadvantage Limited English ProficientYear

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

3rd Grade ReadingIn 2010-11 all groups were slightly cluster with passing rates between 71-83%. In 2011-12 all subgroup demonstrated a degree of improvement and clustered with passing rates between 90-94%. In 2012-13 the subgroups stratified and all areas showed a decrease in passing rates. The Female subgroup performed 24 points higher than males while the black and economically disadvantage showed a similar trend throughout the three years. The White, Hispanic, Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient subgroups populations were below state definition for personally identifiable results.

White

Black Hispanic

SD ED LEP

2010-11 < 96 89 93 94 932011-12 < 51 86 37 58 652012-13 < 41 63 19 44 43

Female Male White

Black Hispanic SD ED LEP

2010-11 83 71 < 77 < < 78 <2011-12 94 90 < 90 < 92 91 <2012-13 69 45 < 58 < < 55 <


406080

100

3rd Grade Reading

Female Male Black Economically Disadvantage

YearPerc

enta

ge P

asse

d

3rd Grade MathThe performance of all subgroups steadily decreased over the three years. In 2010-11 all subgroups were clustered with passing rates between 89-93%; subgroups cluster again in 2012-13 with passing rates between 27-33%. In 2011-2012 the subgroups slightly stratified with a 15 point difference between the highest achieving subgroup, Female, and lowest achieving subgroup, Male; the Black and Economically Disadvantaged subgroups demonstrated a similar trend. The White, Hispanic, Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient subgroups populations were below state definition for personally identifiable results.

20

60

100

3rd Grade Math

Female Male Black Economically Disadvantage

YearPerc

enta

ge P

asse

d

4th Grade ReadingThe performance of all subgroups steadily decreased over the three years. In 2010-11 all subgroups were clustered with passing rates between 95-100%. The subgroups were clustered again in 2011-12 with passing rates between 79-81% with the exception of the Students with Disabilities subgroup which scored 43 points lower than the cluster. In 2012-13 scores stratified with an average of 9 point gap between each group. The White, Hispanic, and Limited English Proficient subgroups populations were below state definition for personally identifiable results.

Female Male White

Black Hispanic SD ED LEP

2010-11 90 93 < 90 < < 89 <2011-12 61 46 < 53 < 33 55 <2012-13 32 33 < 27 < < 28 <

Female Male

White Black Hispanic SD ED LEP

2010-11 96 96 < 95 < 100 97 <2011-12 81 79 < 79 < 36 81 <2012-13 58 32 < 43 < 21 50 <


10

40

70

100

4rd Grade Reading

Female Male Black Students w/Disabilities Economically DisadvantageYear

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

4th Grade MathIn 2010-11 all subgroups were clustered with passing rates of 100%. In 2011-12 passing rates in all subgroups lowered and stratified. In 2012-13 the Male and Students with Disabilities subgroup performed lower; the Female and Black subgroups assumed similar trends and slightly improved. The Students with Disabilities subgroup was again the lowest achieving group. The White, Hispanic, and Limited English Proficient subgroups populations were below state definition for personally identifiable results.

5th Grade ReadingThe performance of all subgroups decreased over the three years. In 2010-11 the subgroups were clustered with passing rates between 97-100%. Passing rates were clustered again in 2011-12 with passing rates between 88-92%. In 2012-13 the subgroups stratified with a 36 point difference between the highest achieving subgroup, Male, and lowest achieving subgroup, Students with Disabilities; the Female, Black, and Economically Disadvantaged subgroups demonstrated a similar trend. The White, Hispanic, and Limited English Proficient subgroups populations were below state definition for personally identifiable results.

1070

4rd Grade Math

Female Male BlackStudents w/Disabilities Economically Disadvantage

Year

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

Female Male White

Black Hispanic

SD ED LEP

2010-11 100 100 < 100 < 100 100 <2011-12 50 69 < 55 < 47 59 <2012-13 76 48 < 63 < 29 67 <

Female Male


2010-11 97 100 < 100 < 100 98 <2011-12 88 91 < 89 < 90 92 <2012-13 37 50 < 42 < 14 36 <


0

40

80

5rd Grade Reading


Year

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

5th Grade MathThe performance of all subgroups decreased over the three years. In 2010-11 the subgroups were clustered with passing rates between 94-100%. In 2011-12 the subgroups stratified with a 14 point difference between the highest achieving subgroup, Economically Disadvantaged, and lowest achieving subgroup, Black. In 2012-13 the subgroups stratified again with a 43 point difference between the highest achieving subgroup, Male, and lowest achieving subgroup, Students with Disabilities. The White, Hispanic, and Limited English Proficient subgroups populations were below state definition for personally identifiable results.

020406080

100

5rd Grade Math


Year

Perc

enta

ge P

asse

d

2. Strength and Weakness Highlighted in the DataStrengthsElizabeth D. Redd Elementary met benchmarks in all subjects (English, Math, History and Science) in the 2011-12 and 2012-13 school years. The school demonstrated steady improvement and met benchmarks in History all three years, making History the overall strongest subject for the school. Although scores declined from previous years, benchmarks were still met in 2013-14 in English and Science. In 2010-11 the subgroups were clustered in overall English and Math with passing rates, showing that all students were being educated equitably and to state standards. In 2011-12, the Black, Hispanic, LEP, and Economically Disadvantaged subgroups performed well overall in English.

Female Male


2010-11 94 100 < 100 < 100 95 <2011-12 50 53 < 46 < < 60 <2012-13 30 50 < 33 < 7 36 <


In reading and math the following strengths were observed: 3rd grade reading scores were high in all subgroups in 2011-12 4th, 5th grade reading scores were high in all subgroups in 2010-11 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade math scores were high in all subgroups in 2010-11

Federal AccountabilityReading Math

Students w/ Disabilities, ELL, Economically Disadvantaged Students

Met 3 Year Did not meet 3 year

Black Students Met 3 year Met 3 YearHispanic students TS-too small TS-too small

All students met federal accountability for reading and math

School SafetyOffense Category 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Offenses against

Students16 13 13

Other offenses against persons

21 89 49

Disorderly or disruptive

behavior offenses

92 78 79

Although ‘Other offenses against persons’ increased significantly in 2011-2012 overall behavioral problems decreased.

WeaknessesDue to declining scores Redd Elementary had to use the 3 year average to meet federal accountability requirements in reading. The school has been accredited with a warning due to not meeting federal accountability in Math for Students w/ Disabilities, ELL, and Economically Disadvantaged Students, although the school did meet standards using the 3 year average for the Black subgroup. As achievement scores have decreased, subgroups have stratified indicating a struggle to reach all the subgroup equitably. The accreditation results for all students indicate that the school scarcely reached the English requirement. In overall English and Math performance the students with disability subgroup is the lowest performing group in all three years. In 2012-13 all subgroups performed significantly low in English.

Academic Priorities for Redd Elementary: Mathematics & English

3. A More finely Grained Analysis of WeaknessesData was also analyzed by groups of students over time to identify trends in groups or grade levels. 2013-14 data would confirm any trends that have been found thus far.


Group 1: % of Students Proficient- Progress Tracked from 3rd through 5th Grade (same group of students)

2010-11 (3rd) 2011-12 (4th) 2012-13 (5th)Reading 77 80 (+3) 44 (-36)Math 92 59 (-33) 64 (+5)Possible reasons

Math: New SOLs tested with increase in rigor and relevance. First time teachers and students have been exposed to this type of assessment.

Reading: New SOLs with increase rigor and relevance in reading were implemented with this test. Increase in complexity with vocabulary and higher level inferring skills. Mandatory online testing implemented

Based on this group’s performance, a significant drop in both areas was observed when the new Standards of Learning were implemented. In each subsequent year, the group did show some growth in the percentage of students proficient, although minimal. Based on this trend, the expectation would be for continued increases in proficiency; however, there is a need for higher gains.

Group 2: % of Students Proficient- Progress Tracked from 4th through 5th Grade (same group of students)

2010-11 (4th) 2011-12 (5th)Reading 96 90 (-6)Math 100 52 (-48)Possible reasons


Although this is the first year for the new SOLs to be assessed, students proficient dropped significantly. Although this was the same group of students and the new SOLs in Reading were not being assessed, there was still a 6% drop in the Reading pass rate. Group 3: % of Students Proficient- Progress Tracked from 3rd through 4th Grade (same group of students)

2011-12 (3th) 2012-13 (4th)Reading 92 45 (-47)Math 54 63 (+9)Possible reasons


Reading: New SOLs with increase rigor and relevance in reading were implemented with this test. Increase in complexity with vocabulary and higher level inferring skills. Mandatory online testing implemented


There was an increase in the Math pass rates from 3rd to 4th grade of 9 %, slightly higher than Group 1 (5%). This, along with the data and pass rates prior to the new SOLs being implemented, demonstrates that the 4th grade level team may be instructionally stronger. Observations on the team of teachers may help glean information about strategies and instructional practices that can be utilized for school improvement. Certain teacher leaders may be found and utilized to provide peer coaching. Cross grade level meetings and planning may be beneficial to identify key problems of practice and student areas of need that may cross grade levels in order to determine possible solutions and strategies. This data indicates that both a school wide plan, especially in reading, may be necessary, while collaborative work and/or grade level autonomy in creating improvement plans and strategies could be utilized to promote teacher engagement. This will provide for both a school wide effort and teacher choice.

In order to gain a better understanding of the factors that may be influencing student achievement, more information would need to be gathered in the planning process. The number of teachers on improvement plans can indicate if ineffective teaching methods are contributing to the decline. Reviewing content curriculum to confirm its alignment to state standards would be beneficial to determine if curriculum revision or development is needed. This information coupled with state assessment results can help frame the improvement plan and increase its effectiveness. 4. Plan for improving student success, learning and achievement

Plan for Improving Student SuccessGoal # 1 Increase Student Achievement in Reading/English

Objectives:3rd Grade - Increase % of students scoring proficient from an average of 57% in 2012-213 to 80%.4th Grade - Increase % of students scoring proficient from an average of 41% in 2012-213 to 75%.5th Grade - Increase % of students scoring proficient from an average of 36% in 2012-213 to 75%.

Goal # 2 Increase Student Achievement in Mathematicswith a focus on Students w/ Disabilities, ELL, Economically Disadvantaged Students

Objectives:3rd Grade - Increase % of students scoring proficient from an average of 30% in 2012-213 to 70%.4th Grade - Increase % of students scoring proficient from an average of 57% in 2012-213 to 75%.5th Grade - Increase % of students scoring proficient from an average of 31% in 2012-213 to 70%.Scientifically Based Research Strategies: Data Driven Decision Making- is the process of gathering student data (academic performance, attendance, demographics, etc) to adjust teaching styles and curriculum to gain measurable improvements. This process helps identify struggling students/subgroup for earlier intervention procedures. Active Learning- are strategies that use in low-risk activities to encourage participation by all students. This ensures students are interacting with the curriculum -- reading, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating class content.Performance Measures: Students: formative and summative assessments, academic performance, attendance; increased participation in after-school tutoring opportunities; participation at parent information sessions. Teachers/Staff: informal and formal observations; review of lesson plans; meeting agendas; professional development activities; participation in professional learning communities.The objectives are aggressive to raise proficiency rates to meet state standards. Benchmarks will be needed to outline the percentage of increase required for each quarter to meet the annual


objective. Each grade level, by subject, would need to evaluate specific student needs to determine how teachers would implement the above-mentioned strategies and supports in their classroom. As a school the following activities were identified to improve academic performance:

Activity ReasonNew-revised Math/English core curriculum the align curriculum with standards,

encourage effective instruction at all levels for all groups

Website/ newsletter with student/parent resources

provide additional resources to continue independent learning

Positive Behavior Intervention Support System

create a responsive environment

Intervention/ enrichment block meet the needs of special education/ELLs/other identified groups without interrupting key instruction time

Parent meetings increase communication between home & school to continue learning at home

5. Timeline for Implementing the Improvement PlanImplementation Timeline

Activity Resources Person(s) Involved

Cost Date

Design new-revised math/reading core curriculum along with benchmarks. Design a positive behavior support system

assessment data of the areas of weakness for each subject, curriculum developer, feedback from stakeholders

Coaches, lead teacher, administrative representative

20,000 May-June

Design a Positive Behavior Intervention SupportSystem

research, an assessment of school needs

Principal, school based team

11,000 July

District content trainers will facilitate training during the summer to familiarize principal, teachers, and the math/reading coaches with the new-revised core

Training materials, training room

principal, teachers, and the new coaches

23,000 June-July

Coaches will work with teachers and paraprofessionals weekly in the classroom on the new-revised math/reading core. (i.e. model lessons, interventions, etc.)

lesson plans, scheduled uninterrupted time for collaboration

Coaches, teachers, specialists and paraprofessionals

$11,000 Aug-Dec

Implement core classroom math/reading instruction

course materials (books, visual aide,

Coaches, teachers, and

Staff salary

Aug-May


using the new core assessments etc.), lesson plans

paraprofessionals

Develop support content for school website which includes: student, parent resources and “at home” activities

research materials IT teacher, content teacher, administrator

Staff salary

Aug

Adjust school calendar to include intervention/enrichment block to decrease pull out of students during key instruction times

school master schedule

administrator Staff salary

Aug

Ensure school website includes: student, parent resources and “at home” activities

website, website content

IT teacher Staff salary

Sept

Implement intervention/enrichment block to decrease pull out of students during key instruction times

school master schedule

students, teachers, administrator

Staff salary

Sept

Implement the Positive Behavior Intervention SupportSystem

the plan, staff support, consistent execution

Principal, school based team

Staff salary

Aug-May

Host a Family Literacy Night to discuss reading strategies used in the classroom and strategies that can be used at home.

transportation, daycare, materials (brochures, fliers, samples strategies), refreshments

Classroom teachers, students, parents

$4,000 Sept

After school tutoring groups will be set up based on the need of the students.

teacher volunteers, sign up system, curriculum

Classroom teachers, students

$10,000 Sept-May

Host a pre-assessment meeting with parent to discuss strategies used in the classroom and strategies that can be used at home.

transportation, daycare, materials (brochures, fliers, samples strategies), refreshments

Principal, Guidance Counselor 3rd, 5th grade teachers

$4,000 Jan, Apr

Create a monthly newsletter that will include: academic tips, current events, school calendar, and school news.

word processing program, email distribution list, mailing list for parents w/out computer access, printer, paper, stamps, envelops

Secretaries and paraprofessionals

No cost Monthly


Organize team for plan review/ revision and build assessment literacy

staff members, scheduling, buy-in

Principals, coaches, lead ESL specialist, lead special education teacher, assessment administrator, lead content teachers

No cost May

Benchmark and Plan evaluation (review of test scores, curriculum implementation, plan effectiveness)

assessment criteria, staff to conduct evaluation


No cost Oct, Jan, Apr

Collect data, update/revise plan for coming year

assessments, staff Principals, coaches, lead ESL specialist, lead special education teacher, assessment administrator, lead content teachers

No cost June

6. Strategies to Facilitate School And Faculty Engagement In order to promote teacher “buy-in”, they must be part of the SIP plan process. Working collaboratively as a faculty and in grade level teams is key to successfully implementing a plan. When teachers are part of the problem solving process, they are more likely to implement the strategies and follow through.

This proposal implements both school and district based decisions through implementing a new curriculum and collaboration with teachers through the process discussed below. A unified school based curriculum was needed; however, grade level teams would be part of the decision making process when deciding what to implement during the Enrichment/Intervention block, along with deciding on the strategies and timeline. While the written plan already states the decided upon strategy, this is the recommended process to facilitate school and faculty engagement.

1) Create an SIP team to review and discuss the data. Allow teachers to volunteer or attend the SIP meetings; however, each grade level must have at least one representative. Decide on draft goals for SIP (long term proficiency and improvement goals). Disseminate draft goals and create survey for faculty feedback. Meet again as an SIP team to finalize goals.


2) Assemble faculty in a pre-school meeting where the analyzed data and long term goals are shared. Teachers will work in grade level groups to brainstorm problems of practice that are contributing to the issues with student growth and proficiency. They will brainstorm ideas and write them on chart paper. Teachers then break into cross-curricular teams: K&1, 2&3, 4&5 to bring new ideas. Teachers will then move back to grade level teams and rate their top three problems of practice. This will be presented to the staff and recorded. It would expected for there to be similarities between problems, especially with between the primary and secondary levels. Staff will be asked to consider possible solutions or strategies to share a few days later.

3) At a separate meeting, the same approach will be utilized, except the staff will now brainstorm for possible solutions to solve the finalized problem of practice for each grade level in reading and math. A district specialist in reading and math will also provide a brief presentation on some possible solutions based on the identified problems of practice. The top ideas will be sent out to the staff.

4) Grade level teams will meet to decide on their strategy they choose to implement. If a grade level asks for guidance, administration may assist or set up a time for the district specialist to come meet with individual teams. Each team will create an impact-feasibility chart for their possible solutions in order to help them choose a strategy. This will be submitted to administration via Google Drive. Administration will sit in on the final meeting order to ensure that the strategy is feasible, consensus is reached, and to help arrange for support and common planning time for the team. This will be completed by September 15th.

5) On the first scheduled half-day in September, grade level teams will be given the entire time to discuss their strategy and plan for implementation and follow-up. They will fill in an action plan form that summarizes the strategy, timeline for implementation, responsibilities, and a vision of what implementation will look like in the classroom. They will also submit a proposal for resource and time needs. They will receive coverage for any training and for scheduled peer observations for learning and to ensure implementation. Grade level teams will also be given two extra half-day planning times this year to review the plan and data and make any adjustments.

6) A survey will also be sent to teachers to determine their level of comfort with the new strategies and to ask them what they need to support them. Staff development sessions can be geared toward groups of teachers with common needs, not necessarily by grade level. For example, provide a staff development that addresses four common themes or areas of growth found from the data and survey. Teachers will choose based on their individual growth needs.

By having grade level teams work collaboratively to come up with the solutions and plan of action, they will be more accountable to implement and follow through with the plan. Support for the teachers will need to be ongoing, with follow through by administration, the SIP team, and the district.


7. Strategies to facilitate external community engagement

Ensuring full stakeholder support is pivotal to the success of a school improvement plan. A critical piece of the stakeholder support system is the local community. By sharing in the plan and becoming actively involved, community members share ownership of their local school.

The plan calls for involving parents and supporting students through newsletters, a website, parent meetings, and after school support. In order to help implement these actions and reach student improvement goals, the following strategies would be utilized to engage the community in helping to support our students and school. The first step would be to have a staff based team come together to work on community engagement. The team will approach various organizations (VCU, State Commission Office, Bank of America, etc) to discuss how volunteering at Redd Elementary will improve student achievement and empower the students. The volunteers would mentor a student and engage the students in reading and math activities provided by the teachers.

Community Engagement Strategy

Get Pre-service teachers from VCU to do interventions (weekly)

Pre-service teachers from VCU that will tutor students in reading and math intervention.

More programs for ESL population (Cultural diversity)---Mainly for the Hispanic community. (weekly or monthly)

Start a Spanish club with a translator. Parents and students can come to the club to improve reading and math skills.

Have professionals (lawyers, doctors, etc.) or corporations in Richmond volunteer to be a mentor to a student. (weekly)

Professionals will volunteer and mentor a student using enrichment activities to support rigor in the classroom.

Have black male role models come to the school to conduct a boys’ mentoring program. (Mt. Gilead International Ministries) (Monthly)

Churches will mentor boys that have behavioral problems. They will empower them to become successful young men.

Micah/Church Volunteers (weekly) Volunteers come to the school to support the teachers and assist in small groups helping students as needed.

Community in Schools (on site) A program that supports the students with counseling services, school supplies, and other items. This program also makes the connection between home and school to get parents involved in school and home.


8. Proposal for Evaluation Types of Assessments

Term Time Frame Assessments Used PeopleShort Term Ongoing

throughout yearClasswork, homework, pre/posttests, quizzes, journals, observations, student conferencing

Teachers, Administration, Interventionists

Medium- Term Once per nine weeks (3)

District Benchmarks, PALS


Long Term End of year Standards of Learning State Tests, District Tests


Reading and Math Progress Assessment PlanData Type

Measurement Task

Who is Responsible

Schedule for Gathering

Schedule for Interpreting/

Sharing

Goals

Short term

Classwork/ homework assessing reading and math growth

Classroom Teachers

Once per week, entered on Excel sheet in Google Drive

Teachers share findings at grade level meetings 1/month

Assess student improvement. All students should demonstrate at least 75% accuracy on graded class and home work.

Short term

Teacher quizzes and tests for reading and math growth and proficiency

Classroom Teachers

Pre and Post Tests and weekly quizzes will be created by grade level teams. Scores entered onto Excel sheet in Google Drive

Teachers share findings at grade level meetings 1/month

All students score 75% or better on post-test or demonstrate a minimum of 50% improvement.

Short term

Student journals for reading and math

Classroom Teachers

Students will journal their demonstrating their understanding of reading and math skills

Teachers choose 5 samples to share at grade level meetings 1/month

Students are able to demonstrate knowledge of skill. Data to assist with teacher decision


making.Short term

Observation during reading and math instruction. Observation will assess teacher implementation of curriculum strategies and student understanding of skill

Classroom Teachers, Coaches, Interventionists, Administration

Observations scheduled from October to May by administration using created form on iPad, Teacher peer observations conducted 2x per year.

Teacher observations will be brought to grade level meetings in January and April, Administration observations will be scheduled 1:1 with teachers and summaries will be brought to grade level meeting in Jan. and Apr.

To ensure new curriculum and strategies are being utilized. Students are able to demonstrate knowledge of skill.

Med-ium Term

Assessing reading and math skill growth and proficiency using district benchmark assessments, PALS

Assessment administrator, teachers, data team

Administer benchmark tests to all students in grade 3-5 per the district schedule (end of first 3 nine weeks). Administer PALS to all students in grades K-2.Teachers will run item analysis and enter student scores onto their data progress recordAssessment administrator will receive scores from district and create grade level analysis to distribute to teachers

Data will be discussed and shared during a separate team meeting with administration during the months of November, February, and April.

Benchmark 1: 55% of students demonstrate proficiency on Reading andMath.

Benchmark 2:60% of students demonstrate proficiency on Reading andMath.

Benchmark 3:70% of students demonstrate proficiency on Reading andMath.


Long Term

Assessing reading and math proficiency


Gather results from previous year SOL testing over summer. Sort and email to all staff. Work with data team to discuss implications.Administer current year’s SOLs in May and June

Data will be shared with entire faculty during the first faculty staff development meeting led by the principal in August.

Reading:3rd: 80% proficiency4th: 75% proficiency5th: 75% proficiency

Math:3rd: 70%

Each classroom teacher will keep a uniform data sheet on each student in his or her class. This data sheet will be created by the SIP team and will be accessed through Google Drive. Data will be kept over time in order to analyze trends and implement any necessary enrichment or interventions. The information will be able to be accessed by grade level team members, interventionists, administration, and parents, with parents only having access to their child’s data. Data will be shared with only the teacher having editing access. Assessments are used to track student both student growth or improvement and student proficiency.

9. Alignment with 2010-2015 Richmond Public Schools Strategic Plan:The concepts detailed in this school improvement plan align with the following RPS action plan:

Action Plan 1.2 Integrated developmentally appropriate, hands-on math activities will be incorporated into the curriculum that will guarantee mastery of both basic and advanced skills at all grade levels.

Action Plan 1.6 A continuum of extended school day options for students will be implemented that will provide opportunities for intervention and enrichment.

Action Plan 2.3 Provide additional and relevant support to increase student performance for identified AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) subgroups.

Action Plan 2.5 Create Community Learning Centers that will offer and coordinate a variety of support services and programs for children and families.

Action Plan 6.3 A comprehensive employee training model, aligned with industry standards and best practices, maximizing employee performance will be established.

Action Plan 6.5 Increase the involvement of parents as partners with the schools to foster increased student achievement.

Action Plan 6.6 All children will be provided with rigorous academic programs that meet or exceed local, state and national standards.


Documents

wp.vcu.eduwp.vcu.edu/.../4613/2014/03/ADMS-618-SIP-Colon_Mar… · Web viewwp.vcu.edu