Brevard County Public Schools
School Improvement Plan
2014-15
Name of School:
Area:
Central Area
Spessard Holland
Principal:
Area Superintendent:
Nancy H. West, Ed.D.
Jane Cline
SAC Chairperson:
Paula Law
Superintendent: Dr. Brian Binggeli
Mission Statement:
To help all students develop skills, concepts, attitudes and values which enable them to be
successful members of society.
Vision Statement:
Looking toward our children’s future with challenging learning experiences that will lead
to success.
Communication of School Improvement Plan:
Briefly explain how the mission, vision and school improvement plan is communicated to all stakeholders.
The school mission and vision are posted throughout the building and on our webpage.
The School Advisory Council also reviews the vision and mission statement at the same
time the SIP is being reviewed and modified. The SIP is also posted on our webpage and
a copy is available in the front office for our stakeholders to review.
Final Version 8.12.14
Brevard County Public Schools
School Improvement Plan
2014-15
Part 1: Planning for Student Achievement
RATIONALE – Continuous Improvement Cycle Process
Data Analysis from multiple data sources: (Needs assessment that supports the need for improvement-Examples may be,
but are NOT limited to survey data, walk-through data, minutes from PLC’s or Dept. Mtgs. Move away from talking about every single
data source and determine your rationale. Much like the PGP, what is your focus and why?)
Considerations/Examples: What are the areas of success? Where are concerns? What trends do you see? What kind of data are you
looking at within your school? What data do you use for teacher practice? How are teachers planning? Are plans Standards Driven? Are
Essential Questions meaningful? What do CWT tell you about instruction? How will you monitor the depth of implementation?
FCAT data shows that Holland areas of success continue to be in our writing scores and
science scores. These two areas have shown slow, but continued growth. Holland has
also made improvement in the Math Learning Gains category.
A four year comparison of FCAT data does reveal, however, that we are losing ground in
all other areas. We are not helping our lowest 25% students to achieve learning gains,
and our students at the top levels are showing little improvement.
Walk-through data reveals that Holland teachers are not utilizing small group
differentiated instruction in math and reading on a daily basis. Two teachers have been
noted to use “Math Talks” or “Math Workshop” daily. In these classes, math scores were a
strength.
During Data Meetings, teachers are gaining an understanding and desire to look at item
analysis data from reading assessments. Holland teachers need to continue to grow in
this area in order to apply different strategies in the classroom based on the item analysis.
Response to Intervention (RtI) has been successfully and fully implemented in 1st and 2nd
grades. Other grade levels are not implementing RtI with fidelity due to a lack of support
staff availability and involvement and a set scheduled time for implementation.
Final Version 8.12.14
Analysis of Current Practice: (How do we currently conduct business?)
Move any Action Steps that have become standard practice to this section.
Lesson Study was conducted by every teacher in grades 3-6 last year revealing some
important insights about instruction and strategies that are most effective. A group of
teachers in grades K-2 also conducted a lesson study that focused on reading. This group
was able to change the way they taught character traits based on what they learned from
their Lesson Study. This year, Holland teachers will continue to have opportunities to
improve their craft through Lesson Studies.
Response to Intervention (RtI) has been successfully and fully implemented in 1st and 2nd
grades. Other grade levels are not implementing RtI with fidelity due to a lack of support
staff availability and involvement and a set scheduled time for implementation.
Last year, all primary grades implemented an interest inventory and three classrooms
from K-2 used that data to implement clusters. Feedback from the teachers and students
that participated was very positive and the students could not wait to move to their
cluster group each week.
Teachers in grades 2 – 6 have started to explore curriculum enhancement through
Holland’s new IPad Lab. Unfortunately, there has not been school wide training on
specific technology apps and programs that can be used to accompany the curriculum.
This year, Holland will continue to work on finding talents and interests of all students in
order to improvement achievement across all content areas. Last year, all primary grades
implemented an interest inventory and three classrooms from K-2 used that data to
implement clusters. Feedback from the teachers and students that participated was very
positive and the students could not wait to move to their cluster group each week. This
year we will work to expand the use of clusters throughout the building not only utilizing
teachers, but parental involvement, as well.
Administration will monitor implementation this year by creating a master schedule
where RtI in implemented at the same time in grades K – 4. Walk-through data will focus
on small group differentiated instruction in reading and math. Parental involvement will
be utilized this year to have a greater impact on implementation of clusters for Holland
students.
Final Version 8.12.14
Best Practice: (What does research tell us we should be doing as it relates to data analysis above?)
What does the research say about your findings? Evidenced based? What practices can you put into place to work on what the data says is
impeding student achievement?
Based on what you are seeing; what teachers are doing well; what you need to change and improve…RESEARCH SAYS YOU SHOULD…
Gardner (1993) developed the concept of multiple intelligences as a way to broaden the
giftedness definition and Renzulli (1978) built the case to include motivation and
creativity into gifted programs. Many Holland students continue to have high ability in
one area while ordinary or even low ability in other areas.
In the past 20 years, school effectiveness researchers have also looked beyond the
traditional schooling paradigm in an attempt to impact whole school reform. Toffler
(1980) compared the different sociological eras of schools to waves. The first mindset or
wave was agricultural based, the second wave was industrial and the current third wave
is synthesis. These trends have impacted both schooling and gifted programs over the
years. Common in the industrial framework, teachers developed the useful parts of
children that could serve an industrial system (Shantz & Rideout, 2003). Entrenched in
this cycle during the twentieth century, a narrow perception of intelligence was valued.
To date, the industrial second wave has promulgated a nature perspective in the
formation of gifted programs across the nation. In the twenty-first century, current
definitions of gifted are being challenged while program delivery models come under
analysis. This is due to traditional gifted programs that predominately service only one
ethnic group of students while other minorities, exceptional education and average
students are left behind.
In Brevard, four criteria must be considered before a student is placed in the gifted
program (School Board of Brevard County {SBBC},1994); an IQ Intelligence Test like the
Kaufman Brief (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1990), Otis-Lennon (Otis & Lennon, 1967), or
Slosson Intelligence Test (Slosson, 1963). Then a norm referenced test, similar to the
Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) that gives achievement test percentiles,
must be given. A standard score at or above two standard deviations from the mean
must be obtained on the test of intelligence. A Parent Checklist of Characteristics and a
Scale for Rating Behavior Characteristics of Superior Students must also be
administered. Other screening devices may be used, but are not required, like the
Checklist of Creative Positives, Torrance, or the Environmental Indicators in Florida.
The challenge, then, for Holland Elementary, in light of current efforts in school
improvement, is how to provide gifted and talented services to those students who do
Final Version 8.12.14
not meet the current gifted criteria. Faculty at Holland embrace the belief that a gifted
education is good for all children. Research on gifted education concludes that no single
criteria can be used to determine giftedness. Instead a well-defined set of clusters
indicate success; creativity, task commitment and above average ability (Renzulli, 1978).
The application of gifted program know-how into general education is supported by a
wide variety of research on human abilities (Bloom, 1985; Gardner, 1983, Renzulli, 1986
and Sternberg, 1985). This research clearly provides a justification for a broader
conception of talent development.
By focusing on giftedness as a process; opportunities, resources and encouragement,
instead of as a state of being, more students can be reached. (In this manner, giftedness
is used only as an adjective in a developmental perspective.)
The School Wide Enrichment Model (SEM) has been in use since the 1970’s and is
currently being used in hundreds of districts around the country including; St. Paul, New
York City, Detroit and Fort Worth to name a few. Holland’s school improvement plan
emphasizes the act of learning as the center for increased achievement and positive
change.
Holland continues to struggle with increasing student movement into the level 4 and 5
range and in increasing learning gains of students in our lowest 25% range. In order to do
this, Holland will implement lesson study, clusters and talent portfolios over the next three
years.
The basis of lesson study is that there is always more to learn about the practice of
teaching. Lesson study is a way to bring teachers together to study and solve problems. It
is a way to reshape school culture where teachers work collaboratively to understand how
new ideas look in practice. Teachers carefully study student thinking and then revisit the
standards in light of actual instruction.
Lesson study begins with teachers studying the curriculum and formulating a goal. They
then plan a research lesson collaboratively that includes anticipated student thinking and
the rational for the chosen approach. One teacher then conducts the research lesson while
the others observe and collect data. Finally the group reflects on the lesson and what
practices led to or inhibited the desired student outcomes. Changes are discussed and
made and the lesson study cycle begins again.
Lesson study does not just target academic development, it also focuses on habits and
personal qualities that contribute to student motivation, learning, and long term academic
success. It looks to see if students build upon each other’s ideas during discussions, take
Final Version 8.12.14
notes, work effectively with group members, and take initiative as learners. The focus is
on student thinking, uncovering student misconceptions, and understanding student
strategies. Knowledge is gained about what stimulates students’ interest and inspired
them to persist through a challenging task.
Test results and student work samples show what needs to improve, but lesson study
offers teachers opportunity to explore how to improve. The feedback from lesson study is
immediate and provides teachers a basis for changes in classroom practice and approach.
The cycles of the lesson study are like a pebble tossed into a lake, creating ripples of
influence across the whole school. (Lewis and Tsuchida 1997) Working collaboratively in
designing a lesson that will be taught in front of others creates a strong sense of
accountability, time to work through differences of opinion, and desire to utilize the best
educational research.
Enrichment clusters are groups of students and adults who share common interests and
come together during specially designed time blocks to pursue interests. This model for
enrichment is based on an inductive approach to the pursuit of real world problems. It is
student centered and is based on research that challenges the assertion that important
intellectual growth can only be charted through an information transfer and standardized
approach to education (Gentry, Reis, & Morgan, 1999 Reis & Gentry, 1998). Prescribed,
text book driven, deductive learning is important but needs the balance of inductive
learning to give students the opportunity to develop their own abilities, interests, and
learning styles. Research on clusters indicate that the more time a teacher spends on
clusters, the more advanced the content and the more diverse the products and services
become. Archambault et al. (1993) and Westberg, Archambault, Dobyns, and Salvin
(1993) found that the experience of teaching clusters greatly increased a teacher’s use of
differentiated strategies in their own classrooms and led to more advanced content study.
As a logical expansion to student data notebooks and student led conferences, the Total
Talent Portfolio (TTP) acts as a systematic way to gather, record, and use information
about each student’s strengths and abilities. Two questions guide TTP’s, what can
teachers learn about each student’s interests and talents? How can teachers use this
information to develop student interests and talents? Talent portfolios assist teachers in
data collection, classification, analyzing data profiles and making decisions about the most
appropriate options (an action plan). Students document and keep evidence of attaining
small steps toward their goal(s) and are able to articulate their progress during
conferences.
Shute & Becker, 2010 states that Children today live in a “highly technological and
globally competitive world” that requires a learner-centered approach that builds
Final Version 8.12.14
thinking and reasoning skills and the ability to solve complex, challenging problems in
relevant ways at school and in their daily lives.
John Hattie’s Visible Learning states that feedback produces a 1.13 effect size. This is
equivalent to a two grade level increase for students. Hattie has made clear that
‘feedback’ includes telling students what they have done well (positive reinforcement),
and what they need to do to improve (corrective work, targets etc), but it also includes
clarifying goals. This means that giving students assessment criteria for example would
be included in ‘feedback’. This may seem odd, but high quality feedback is always given
against explicit criteria, and so these would be included in ‘feedback’ experiments.
As well as feedback on the task, Hattie believes that students can get feedback on the
processes they have used to complete the task, and on their ability to self-regulate their
own learning. All these have the capacity to increase achievement. Feedback on the
‘self’ (such as ‘well done, you are good at this’) is not helpful. The feedback must be
informative rather than evaluative.
B.E.S.T. Module IV & VI talks about formative assessment, data notebooks, and
correlation to student achievement; Marzano, 2001 also shows that powerful ways to
help students make connections between effort and achievement is to ask students to
track their progress.
Throughout the meta analysis by John Hattie in his book, Visible Learning, a pattern
emerged indicating an advantage for computer work when it is used as a supplement
(0.45) instead of as a replacement for the teacher (0.30). The effects are also higher
when the learner, rather than the system, had control. In other words, software that is
mostly learner controlled (0.41) rather than system controlled ( -0.02), showed the
greatest gains for the learner when students were learning in groups.
Software packages that allow students control of pacing showed a 0.49 effect size. When
the software being used allowed the teacher control of pacing the effect size was only
0.34 effect size. Just looking at students, when the student is in control of pacing there is
an effect size of 0.60. When the student isn’t in control of pacing the effect size drops to
0.20. An example of this is with word processors. Especially for weaker writers, the
quality of writing is enhanced when word processors are used. These students who
used computers when learning to write produced work of better quality and lengthier
products than students learning to write on paper (0.40).
If using exploratory programs like simulations, hyper media resources for discovery
learning and general purpose tools, like word for writing, it is important that the teacher
Final Version 8.12.14
embed discussions and opportunities for each child to use different learning strategies.
It is important that the teacher extend the thinking to include students who are able to
articulate, explain and understand a variety of hypotheses and solutions.
In order to help teachers reach the high levels of rigor in the Florida Standards, teachers
will be utilizing strategies that elicit higher levels of engagement.
Final Version 8.12.14
Works Cited:
Archambault, F.X., Jr., Westberg. K,L., Brown, S.W., Hallmark, B.W., Emmons, C.L.,& Zhang, W. (1993). Regular
classroom practices with gifted students: Results of a national survey of classroom teachers (Research
Monograph No. 93102). Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center of the Gifted
and Talented, University of Connecticut.
Bloom, B. S. (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books.
Gardner, H. (1983 & 1993a). Frames of mind: The theories of multiple intelligences (Rev. ed.). New York: Basic
Books.
Gentry, M., Reis, S.M., & Moran, C. (1999). Expanding program opportunities to all students: The story of one
school. Gifted Child Today, 2(4), 36-48.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta Analyses
Relating to Achievement. New York: Routledge.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (1990). Kaufman brief intelligence test (K-bit): Manual. Circle Pines, MN:
American Guidance Service.
Lewis, C., & Tsuchida. I. (1997). Planned educational change in Japan: The shift to student centered elementary
science. Journal of Educational Policy, 29(3), 4 -14.
Otis, A. S., & Lennon, R. T. (1967). Otis-Lennon mental ability test. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Reis, S.M., Gentry, M. (1998). The application of enrichment clusters to teachers’ classroom practices. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted 21(3),
310-334.
Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180-184.
Renzulli, J.S (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In
R.J. Sternberg & J.E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 332-357). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Roe, A. (1952). The making of a scientist. New York: Dodd, Mead.
Shantz, D., & Rideout, G. (2003). Education versus schooling: Seeking new paradigms for a new century.
Education, 124, 204-211.
Slosson, R. L. (1963). Slosson intelligence test and Slosson oral reading test. New York: Slosson Educational.
Sternberg, R. J., & Powell, J. S. (1985). Handbook of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University.
Terman, L. M. (1925). The mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children: Genetic studies of genius.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Toffler, A. (1980). Third wave. New York: Morrow.
Westberg, K.L., Archambault, F.X., Jr., Dobyns, S., & Salvin, T. (1993). An observational study of instructional and
curricular practices used with gifted and talented students in regular classrooms (Research Monoograph No. 93104).
Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
Winner, E. (2000). Giftedness: Current theory and research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5),
153-156.
Final Version 8.12.14
CONTENT AREA:
Reading
Language
Arts
Math
Social
Studies
Writing
Science
Arts/PE
Other:
Parental
Involvement
Drop-out Prevention Programs
School Based Objective: (Action statement: What will we do to improve programmatic and/or instructional effectiveness?)
Continuing with the goal from last year, Holland Elementary School will use engagement
strategies to increase rigor across all content area over the next two years.
Strategies: (Small number of action oriented staff performance objectives)
Barrier
Action Steps
Person
Responsible
Timetable
Budget
In-Process
Measure
Best use of
Time
arrange meeting times Once a
month for planning
Principal &
Assistant Principal
August 2014
0
Schedule
Time for
Lesson Study
Arrange for Substitutes for
Lesson Study Participants in
order to complete teaching
and reflection steps
Assistant Principal
Once each
semester
1000.00
Line of Duty
forms
Teaching of lesson with group
members observing and
collecting data
Lesson Study
Members
Reflection
Time for
Clusters
Best use of
time as
Instruction
Leaders
Lack of Parent
Knowledge
Communicati
on
Data Collection
Forms
Lesson Study
Members
Reflection Forms
Organize and schedule time
for student clusters
Principal
Inform and Recruit Parents
Principal
Implement Clusters
Administration,
Faculty &
Volunteers
Principal &
Assistant Principal
Once each
semester
0
Schedule
Principal
Sept. 18, 2014
500.00
Attendance sheet
All Faculty
Once each
semester
0
Products from
Clusters & Lesson
Study
Take part in both Lesson
Study and Clusters
Arrange parent informational
meeting on Clusters
Teachers will share
experiences and lessons
learned in their respective
Cluster or Lesson Study group
Sept. 2014
0
Schedule
Chart
Parent
Participation
Cluster product
Agenda
Final Version 8.12.14
Communicati
on
Knowledge
Slow
Equipment
What to
include in
student
portfolio
Best use of
Time
Transfer of
Knowledge
Focus informal teacher
observations on the use of
small group, differentiated
instruction and provide
feedback to teachers
Arrange for Technology
Integrators to train staff on
effective educational apps and
programs
Principal
Once each
semester
0
Feedback Forms to
Teachers
August 11, 2014
0
Agendas
Monthly training
with a Technology
Integrator
September 2014
1000.00
Documented use of
the IPads across
grade levels
Purchase Order
Purchase and install an
upgrade for the computers in
order to speed up and
increase their capability
Collaborate with teachers to
create and determine
components of the data
folders that may vary by
grade level
Provide opportunity for
teachers to exchange a
traditional parent teacher
conference night with a
student led conference
format
Use walk-through data to
measure level of engagement
of both teachers and students
Principal & School
Technology
Specialist
Lead teachers
September 2014
0
Ready to use
student portfolios
Principal
November 2014
0
Assistant Principal
January 2015
Feedback froms
regarding
perception of
student led
conferences
Principal &
Assistant Principal
4 times in the
2014-2015 school
year
0
Walk-through data
Assistant Principal
Assistant Principal
EVALUATION – Outcome Measures and Reflection-begin with the end in mind.
Qualitative and Quantitative Professional Practice Outcomes: (Measures the level of implementation of
professional practices throughout the school)
Where do you want your teachers to be? What tools will you use to measure the implementation of your strategies? How will
you measure the change in adult behavior? What tool will be used to measure progress throughout the year? Use real
percentages and numbers.
The objective of lesson study is to produce quality instructional strategies that positively
impact student learning. The focus will be on “look fors of engagement: including a quality
instructional practice that is based on a well-developed lesson plan. According to
Thompson (2012) monitoring is best used when schools focus on a few specific
instructional practices. The underlying question is, did the students learn?
The objective of clusters is to produce more high-end learning through monitoring student
understanding of more advanced level information (content), methodical skills (process),
and human or material resources. A pre and post survey will be utilized in order to
evaluate parent and student attitude about enrichment opportunities at Holland. 60% of
the teachers involved in clusters will indicate that the enrichment strategies used in
Clusters transferred to what they currently do in their classrooms. There will be facilitator
Final Version 8.12.14
reporting forms used as progress monitoring. Students that participate in Clusters will
also evaluate the Cluster experience.
Data from Classroom walk-throughs will indicate that student engagement increases by
20% due to transfer of knowledge from these staff development opportunities.
Thompson, M. (2012). Creating a High-Performance Learning Culture. Speaker at Brevard Workshop., June 6, 7.
Qualitative and Quantitative Student Achievement Expectations: (Measures student achievement)
Where do you want your students to be? What will student achievement look like at the end of the school year 2014-15? What
tool will be used to measure progress throughout the year?
By the end of the 2014-2015 school year, Holland would like to see student performance
as follows as evidenced by the 2015 FSA scores.
ELA Proficiency:
All Students 80%
Black/African American 74%
Hispanic 90%
White 87%
Students with Disabilities 60%
Economically Disadvantaged 80%
Lowest 25% making learning gains = 70%
Learning gains = 79%
Math Proficiency:
All Students 80%
Black/African American 74%
Hispanic 86%
White 93%
Students with Disabilities 62%
Economically Disadvantaged 81%
Lowest 25% making learning gains = 70%
Learning gains = 85%
Writing Level Proficiency = 80%
Science Level 3-5 = 82%
Throughout the 2014-2015 School year, we will be monitoring progress of all K-6 students
during our Grade Level/Data Meetings. We will look at student FAIR scores, SRI scores,
and District Assessment scores. Teachers will use Performance Matters to graph student
Final Version 8.12.14
progress compared to others in the school and district. Adjustments in instruction will be
made based on student progress and need.
On the 2014-2015 Student Survey, our goal is that 95% of our students respond that they
feel that they have been involved in meaningful projects that involved critical thinking
skills and that 86% of our students feel that they have participated in the teaching and
learning process.
Part 2: Support Systems for Student Achievement (Federal, State, District
Mandates)
For the following areas, please write a brief narrative that includes the data for the year 2014-2015 and a
description of changes you intend to incorporate to improve the data for the year 2014-2015. Instructions and
support are provided in each section to assist with what data you may include. The instructions are intended to
be a guide and may be deleted from each cell to allow for appropriate typing space.
MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS (MTSS)/RtI This section meets the requirements of Sections
1114(b)(1)(B)(i)-(iv) and 1115(c)(1)(A)-(C), P.L. 107-110, NCLB, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 6314(b) and Senate Bill 850.
a) Describe the process through which school leadership identifies and aligns all available resources (e.g., personnel,
instructional, curricular) in order to meet the needs of all students and maximize desired student outcomes. Include
the methodology for coordinating and supplementing federal, state and local funds, services and programs.
b) Describe your school’s data-based problem-solving processes for the implementation and monitoring of your MTSS
and SIP structures to address effectiveness of core instruction, teacher support systems, and small group and
individual student needs.
c) Provide the person(s) responsible, frequency of meetings, and any problem-solving activities used to determine how
to apply resources for the highest impact
d) Describe the systems in place that the leadership team uses to monitor the fidelity of the school’s MTSS.
e) Describe the plan to support understanding of MTSS and build capacity in data-based problem solving for staff and
parents.
(See Accountability and Testing website/SIPTOOLS/MTSS for a checklist that may help you with this section.)
Scott Culbreth, Guidance Counselor
Lynn Roley, Teacher
Chris King, School Psychologist
Angela Fullmore, Staffing Specialist
Judy Vizzini, Teacher
Debra Willman, Reading Coach
Tiffiny Fleeger, Assistant Principal
Grade levels met weekly with administration to analyze and discuss student data. During
IPST Meetings, discussion about individual students ensured a problem solving approach
was used with measurable outcomes. We will continue to use this format this year.
Final Version 8.12.14
The RtI Team's primary purpose is to monitor student growth and achievement in
academics. A new “Walk to Success” in grades K-4 will be utilized this year in order to
assure that RtI is implemented with fidelity.
There are designed strategies evident throughout this paper to be implemented by
Holland Teachers. In order for this to happen, the RtI Team first had to review and analyze
school data to target strategies that are used.
The Florida FAIR Assessment is given to students at Holland and is then used to help
monitor ongoing progress. Reading Decision Trees are then reviewed with teachers in
order to help determine initial placement of a student in the Tier system and to monitor
the fluid movement of a student as progress is realized. Data collection helps a teacher
monitor progress for each student and to analyze movement needed in the Tiered System
as learning gains are either increased or decreased dependent on the different strategies
that are used.
This year we have a new Guidance Counselor who will need to be trained, as well as, a new
staffing specialist and a new school psychologist. The School Psychologist will meet with
the faculty and go over the new documents that were developed by the county at a Faculty
meeting in the fall of 2014.
For 2014-2015 we are helping teachers incorporate gifted and enrichment strategies
through Lesson Study and Cluster groups. Both Lesson Study and Clustering will help
teachers differentiate both process and product for students. It is the belief at Holland
that a gifted education is good for all students.
PARENT AND FAMILY INVOLVEMENT: (Parent Survey Data must be referenced)
Title I Schools may use the
Parent Involvement Plan to meet the requirements of Sections 1114(b)(1)(F) and 1115(c)(1)(G), P.L. 107-110, NCLB, codified at 20 U.S.C. §
6314(b).
Consider the level of family and community involvement at your school (this may include, but is not limited to, number of parent
engagement opportunities offered in the school year; average number of parents in attendance at parent engagement opportunities; percent
of parents who participated in parent engagement opportunities; percent of students in lowest performing quartile or subgroups not
meeting AMOs whose parent(s) participated in one or more parent engagement opportunities).
Parent survey results indicated that they would like to see more parent meetings on helping
their child gain study skills and an increase in activities that build higher level thinking skills
such as our Future Problem Solvers, Chess Club, Student Council, etc.
Last school year 78 parents participated in the online parent survey. Our volunteer hours
increased from approximately 4600 hours to 4925 hours. We also had a small group of
parents who volunteered regularly. Several of our older volunteers would typically spend
entire days here at Holland. We held a volunteer orientation where approximately 40
parents attended. Holland also has an organized PTO that was formed in the 2013-2014
school year. We held our Celebrate America celebration, Book Fairs, Science Fair Night,
Final Version 8.12.14
Grade Level Musical Programs, Living Biography Programs, Strings and Orchestra
Programs, and an Invention Convention program where parents were encouraged to
attend. We will be adding a Reading and Math Night this year. We will continue to partner
with Satellite High School as they continue to send high school students over to support
teachers in their classrooms and fulfill their course requirements. We will also be utilizing
Parent Volunteers as we move forward with Enrichment Clusters.
STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS (Required):
Address Elements of Student Survey Results found in the District Strategic Plan and describe how you will improve
student perceptions of these indicators.
Strategic Plan Indicators:
 Promotes 21st Century Skills 1.4.2, 1.4.3, 1.4.4, 1.4.5
 Safe Learning Environment 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.2.5
Elementary Student Survey:
 21st Century Skills – Refer results pages 3 – 4
 Online Safety – Refer results pages 4 - 6
 School Safety – Refer results pages 6 - 7
Holland Student Survey results show that in the area of 21st Century Skills students
responded at or exceeded the percentage level of the district. The 2 areas that we were
within a few tenths of a percentage point below were in how to research and organizational
skills. The area that we were significantly below the district average was in how the
students responded to the question about using technology in math class to create
meaningful projects. Holland is 7.67% below the district on this. In order to increase the
area of students using technology to create meaningful projects in math, Holland has
invested in an IPad lab and committed to training teachers monthly in order to empower
teacher to utilize technology more often in their classrooms. The IPad lab will be scheduled
to remain in each grade level weekly to provide time for student usage and project
completion.
In the area of safety, both at school and on-line, our percentages were above that of the
district and were highest for the question that asked the students if they felt safe at school.
93.29% of Holland students said they feel safe at school.
Final Version 8.12.14
Early Warning Systems (SB 850)
1. Describe the school’s early warning system and provide a list of the early warning indicators used in the
system.
This list must include the following:
ELEMENTARY
 Attendance below 90 percent, regardless of whether absence is excused or a result of out-of-school
suspension
 One or more suspensions, whether in school or out of school
 Course failure in English Language Arts or mathematics
 Level 1 score on the statewide, standardized assessments in English Language Arts or mathematics
 Students who are not proficient in reading by third grade
2. Provide the following data related to the school’s early warning system:
 The number of students by grade level that exhibit each early warning indicator listed above
 The number of students identified by the system as exhibiting two or more early warning
indicators
Fill in BLANKS with Number of Students
Total
Grade Level
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Attendance
19
35
19
30
30
16
20
<90
1 or more ISS
1
1
or OSS
Level 1 in
8
6
7
1
Reading or
Math
Course Failure
1
in ELA or
Math
1
Students
exhibiting 2 or
more
indicators
3. Describe all intervention strategies employed by the school to improve the academic performance of students
identified by the early warning system (i.e., those exhibiting two or more early warning indicators).
The office staff calls students’ families when absences occur. We will recognize students
with perfect attendance quarterly by giving them a certificate with their progress report
that has been donated by a local business sponsor. We will continue to include a school
health initiative that incorporates healthy habits across all grade levels. Teachers have
included washing hands in their daily procedures prior to lunch and sanitizing hands after
using computers as a proactive measure against the spread of germs. Holland’s overall
attendance for the 2013-2014 school year was at 94.55%
Holland should see a strengthening of reading and math skills in Kindergarten through
fourth grade as the school wide Walk to Success RtI model is implemented. Sixth grade
Final Version 8.12.14
students are given the opportunity to make up the grade of an F if they attend the Middle
School Course Recovery program. We did have 2 students that successfully completed that
program over the summer. Holland also offers to all, but not limited to, level 1 students
after school and before school help in math and reading.
School wide programs are implemented to reduce the occurrence of bullying. In media
class they receive instruction twice a year on cyberbullying. Holland also utilizes a police
officer that implements a general bullying program to our 6th grade students once a week.
This year, he will also include the 5th grade students in this program.
CTE/STEM:
1.
All Levels
a)
b)
# of STEM-related experiences provided for students (e.g. robotics competitions; field trips; science fairs)
Participation in STEM-related experiences provided for students
There are many STEM related experiences offered to students at Holland Elementary
School. In spring of 2014 a primary robotics team met after school on a regular basis.
All students in grades 3-6 are required to complete a science fair project and children
in grades K-2 are highly encouraged to complete a project, as well. The fifth and sixth
grade students are involved with many STEM related experiences such as:
 Truss Design Challenge/Space Week
 Bottle Rockets
 Marble race (2x2 race with 6 different surfaces)
 Catapults/craft sticks or straws (similar to Pumpkin Chunking but with
marshmallows)
 6th Gifted homeroom is required to create an complete inquiry lab that follows the
scientific method from design with a problem that is testable, research, materials,
procedure, data collecting, graphing, analyzing data, summarizing and
sharing/communicating with a product or presentation of their choice)
 Egg Drop Challenge
 Solar Oven Cook Off
Fourth grade students go on the Lagoon Quest field trip and sixth graders attend Kennedy
Space Center annually. A math tournament team participates at the district level. Fourth
grade also completes an “Invention Convention” project each year.
Spessard Holland Elementary
School Name
Final Version 8.12.14
_________________________
Principal’s Signature
__________
Date