Brevard County Public Schools
School Improvement Plan
2013-2014
Name of School:
Area:
Apollo Elementary
North Area
Principal:
Area Superintendent:
Dr. Pamella O’Kell
Dr. Laura Rhinehart
SAC Chairperson:
Obeth Diaz
Superintendent: Dr. Brian Binggeli
Mission Statement:
To educate all students with excellence as the standard, working together in a safe professional learning
community.
Vision Statement:
To inspire all children to learn at their highest potential, preparing them for tomorrow’s global expectations.
Page 1
Brevard County Public Schools
School Improvement Plan
2013-2014
RATIONALE – Continuous Improvement Cycle Process
Data Analysis from multiple data sources: (Needs assessment that supports the need for improvementExamples 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?)
Student Achievement Data--Data based on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT 2.0)
The FCAT is a standards-based test, which means it measures how well students are mastering specific skills
defined for each grade by the state of Florida. In the 2012-2013 school year, the Florida Department of
Education changed the grading criterion, making it more challenging for a school to maintain a School Grade
of “A”. Apollo was the only elementary school in the North Area to make a grade of A. This was mainly
due to our learning gains. Now, included in the calculation are all subgroup scores (i.e. ESOL and students
with disabilities). Previously, those scores were extracted. The table below compares 3-years of achievement
data showing School and State-average scores for the FCAT for level 3 (percent in achievement) and higher.
Grade 3
2011 State 2012
State 2013
State
Reading
83
(73) 72
(56)
72
(57)
Math
83
(78) 72
(58)
56
(58)
Grade 4
2011
Reading
77
(72)
76
(62)
62
(60)
Math
80
(75)
72
(60)
49
(61)
Writing
98
(74)
83
(60)
87
(83)
2012
2013
** 2013 Writing is compared to 3.0 and above as in previous years
Grade 5
2011
2012
2013
Reading
71
(70)
78
(61)
72
(60)
Science
67
(51)
73
(51)
65
(53)
Math
58
(64)
72
(64)
59
(55)
Page 2
Grade 6
2011
2012
2013
Reading
83
(68)
72
(68)
70
(59)
Math
81
(58)
80
(53)
76
(52)
The data displays a three-year period. Apollo’s scores exceed state averages in all subject areas, except 3rd
and 4th grade math, showing a trend of continuous improvement. Please note: 2012 and 2013 FCAT 2.0
scores reflect the drastic change in which Florida scores are calculated, and the increased rigor of the tests
themselves. All schools in Florida were affected proportionately. Nevertheless, Apollo’s scores are above
state averages (shown in parenthesis) in most grade levels. The data also shows state averages dropped
significantly from 2012 to 2013 school years. However, Apollo’s student scores maintained above average,
and did not drop proportionately with the state average in most areas. To further explain, in third-grade
Reading, Apollo maintained its average and was 15 points higher than the state average. In fourth grade
Reading, the state average dropped 2 percentage points, Apollo, again scored higher than the state average.
There was a significant decrease in fifth-grade Math. The State’s score lost 9 points, Apollo lost points as
well. It is also important to point out the state changed the delivery method of the assessment from pencil
and paper to computer-based. In 6th grade, the scores show consistency with being above the state average by
20 points or more over the last three years. The trend for continuous improvement in the lowest 25% is clear
in reading. We are experiencing a consistent increase in the number of students who qualify for free/reduced
lunch by 25% over the last three years. We are currently at 75% free/reduced lunch.
Reading - 71% of Apollo students in Grades 3-6 were proficient on the 2013 FCAT 2.0 Reading assessment.
This is a 5% decrease from the previous year. Although percentages of students at Level 3 or above decreased,
there was also decrease in the percentages of students making learning gains in Reading by 8%. In 2012, 80%
of students make learning gains in Reading and in 2013, 72% of students made a learning gain in Reading.
Over the past 3 years, Reading scores have fluctuated. One major finding from analyzing the data, was 4th
grade scores. The data revealed a 14% decrease in students scoring Level 3 or above, but continued to be higher
than State and District averages. 72% of 3rd- grade students scored on or above grade level. After desegregating
the FAIR data for Kindergarten through 2nd grade, it is evident that the reading success probability is well below
the 50% range. We firmly believe that if our Kindergarten- 2nd grade teachers lay a strong foundation,
implementing Common Core State Standards, student achievement will increase, especially with our 3rd - 6th
grade students. In addition, teachers will be successful in closing the achievement gap in all student subgroups.
Writing – Results of 2013 FCAT Writes indicate 87% of Apollo’s 4th- grade students met high standards in
Writing, scoring 3.0 or higher. The data indicates a 4% increase from the previous year in writing. The 2013
FCAT 2.0 Writing had increased the rigor with mechanics and spelling conventions which increased testing
difficulty. Nevertheless, Apollo students met and exceeded the District and State averages. Professional
Learning Communities (PLC) will continue to address our Writing expectations of scoring a 4.0 or higher to
meet high standards. Regularly, administration reviewed Writing samples for all 4th-grade students. This
provided positive feedback to students. As administration observed students in the classroom, students were
excited to share their stories.
Page 3
Math – Results of 2013 FCAT 2.0, indicate 63% of students scored at grade level or higher, which is an 13%
decrease from the previous year. The data also indicates that we are still below our Math score of 3 years ago.
In 2013, we had 65% making learning gains in Math. This was a 23% decrease from the previous year. In
2012, 76% of Apollo students were proficient in Math. The data reflects a decrease of 13% learning gains in
Math. There was a 23% decrease in learning gains for students in the lowest 25% from the previous year. 6th
grade had the largest percentage (76%) of students scoring at level 3 or above. However, 6th grade students also
decreased, indicating a consistent state-wide pattern in this area. As a school, our District Math Assessments
are showing growth and meeting the proficiency level across the grade levels. However, we are seeing a
disconnect between the district assessments and FCAT scores. Teachers are implementing Higher-order
thinking skills to their repertoire of strategies, but need to find ways to ensure sustainable success. Our
Professional Learning Communities will maintain a particular focus on these particular areas of concern.
Science – The 2013 FCAT 2.0 Science scores indicate 65% of the 5th- grade students met high standards in
Science, down from 72% in 2012. In 2011, 67% of Apollo students were meeting high standards in Science.
We will continue to adapt and focus on ensuring students continue to meet high standards at level 3 or higher.
Higher-order questioning is utilized in classrooms as evidenced through students’ Science journals. Teachers
engage students in scientific inquiry, experiments, and discussions. We have implemented the use of Science
notebooks/journals to self-progress monitor. The practice of keeping Science notebooks/journals will continue.
Increasing Level 4 and 5 students in all subjects will be an area of focus. The Reading Leadership Team along
with the Data Teams give input for quantitative and qualitative data to progress monitor students at all grade
levels, K-6 grades.
Percentage Annual Learning Gains
Grades 4 through 6
2011
2012
2013
Reading
Gains
Math
Gains
Reading Gains
Lowest 25%
Math Gains
Lowest 25%
74
80
72
66
88
65
66
79
80
56
73
63
The table above shows percentages of Annual Learning Gains from 2011-2013 FCAT Data. Data indicates a
decrease in Annual Learning Gains in Reading and Math and in the Lowest 25%. A closer analysis reflects a
more significant drop in Math Gains.
Results from the 2012-2013 Parent Survey showed over 89% of parents indicated they are “satisfied” with
classroom instruction of all core subjects at Apollo Elementary.
Analysis of Current Practice: (How do we currently conduct business?)
Page 4
Current practices in Reading, Writing, Math and Science for Apollo Elementary:
The Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Florida Journeys program is the adopted District Reading program. To meet
the students’ needs, the District has recommended 150 minute Reading/Language Arts block of time. The 90minute uninterrupted Reading block is scheduled daily as is the 60 minute Literary Support instruction. The
30-minute iii (Triple I Remediation) is set aside, daily, outside of the 90- minute uninterrupted Reading block.
Differentiated instruction in small groups has been a focus in grades K-6, honing in on comprehension,
fluency, and vocabulary skills. Progress Monitoring Plans are created and implemented for all below-grade
level (BGL) students to address deficient areas. Additionally, 3rd-grade Level-1 students will be recommended
for ASP (Academic Support Program) classes, as well as any Level-1 student in 3-6 grades. The goal of
Academic Support Program (ASP) is to provide instructional support to below level and level 1 students as
“time of need.” These services will occur after school to eligible students to provide support/remediation. The
criteria for students to participate are as follows: Grade 3 students at Level 1 Reading FCAT 2.0 score (3rd
grade students are a priority); Lowest 25% in Reading (3rd Grade); Grades 4-6 lowest 25% in reading and
mathematics; Students in grades 3-6 who display deficiencies in science (Note: Students (grades 3-6)
struggling in science should be encouraged to be invited to participate in Science ASP). Voyager Reading
Program will be used with second and third-grade students working BGL to differentiate instruction for areas
in need of improvement. Diagnostic testing and a PASI/PSI are administered to the lowest 25% of students in
Reading, inclusive of all third-grade students working BGL in Reading, with emphasis on Level-1 students.
Differentiated instruction in a flexible small group setting and iii, Tier 2, will be in place for the lowest 25% of
students in Reading. Progress monitoring will take place for the lowest 25% of students, inclusive of all 3rd grade students and Level-1 students in Reading.
The Writing programs currently used for Writing in K-6 grades, consists of the Piece By Piece pacing guide,
Developing Artistic Writing Conventions and Writing Skills in place. Writing may develop an opinion or
argument, inform or explain a topic, or narrate a story or event. This will be done by responding text to real
world. Apollo Elementary has provided professional development in Writing instruction for the past several
years. Last year, a school-wide Writing cadre was established. The Writing POC (Point of Contact), and a
member of each grade level from K-6 grades, compose the Writing cadre. The Writing POC will relay
communication from District meetings to the Writing cadre with updated information. A 30- minute time
frame is scheduled each day allowing for student Writing instruction, outside of the 90-minute Reading block.
District Writing assessments are analyzed in each grade level, adjusting instruction as necessary. The Writing
cadre collaborates on ways in which to improve Writing instruction in areas indicated from the District
Writing assessment.
Currently, Scott Foresman EnVision (K-5 grades) and the Macmillan/McGraw-Hill Glencoe (6th- grade) Math
programs are implemented for Mathematics instruction for at least 60 minutes, daily. Formative Assessments
and progress-monitoring data drive Math instruction. 3rd- grade classes will be conducting timed skill tests to
improve student achievement in Math and focusing on multi-step word problems. Teachers and Title I
instructors incorporate differentiated instruction for students working BGL in Math, inclusive of the lowest
25% of students and all subgroups. Teachers will incorporate B.E.S.T. instructional strategies to retain and
increase 2014 FCAT 2.0 scores of Level 4 & 5 students. Teachers work with BGL (below grade level)
students using the following scientifically researched-based programs: FCAT Explorer, FCAT Focus, FCAT
TestMaker, Lexia Core 5, Math Solutions, Fountas and Pinnell Intervention Program, and Brain Pop. The 5th
and 6th - grade teachers will be using SuccessMaker with fidelity to help drive small-group instruction in
reading and math skills. Progress monitoring and/or formative assessments takes place through the use of
FAIR, SRI (Scholastic Reading Inventory), running records, district benchmark, DBQ’s (Document Based
Questioning) and inventory testing to determine student academic progress in Reading and Math. The FCAT
2.0 strands which need additional emphasis are: Reading Applications, Informational Text, and Literary
Analysis.
The Science curriculum, National Geographic, is currently in place for grades K-5. The 6th-grade curriculum
is Discovery Education. Science instruction is aligned with the Next Generation of Florida Sunshine State
Page 5
Standards (NGSSS). Science skills are developed by actively involving students in investigations, teaching
content area as well as the essential process skills with real-world connections. Strands needing emphasis are
Physical Science and Life Science. Increased attendance in Science ASP (Academic Support Program) classes
is desired, as attendance has been low.
The data reflects increased student achievement with the current instructional strategies we are utilizing in the
classroom, along with the proper implementation of our core programs. Currently, instructional strategies
include an emphasis on differentiated instruction, Graphic Organizers and Higher-order thinking skills. Action
plans were developed and implemented through the 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan. Teachers’ PGP’s
(Professional Growth Plans) coincided with the SIP objectives. However, research indicates that we need to
focus on differentiation in small groups so that student achievement can increase in all subject areas. A survey
of our needs and knowledge of Differentiation was taken and analyzed to form an action plan. From the
analysis of the survey, a PLC is being developed and materials purchased to assist with implementation of
differentiation within the school. Apollo Elementary’s Professional Learning Community provides for strong
grade-level teams, meeting regularly to share data progress monitoring, strategies, and ideas to help increase
student achievement. Teachers share the responsibility of disaggregating the data, collaborating to identify
strengths and weaknesses to positively impact student learning. Teachers are provided a common planning
time, meeting at least weekly with administrators and other supportive services. Additional time is given to
teachers for peer observations, inputting data, and team meetings. Teachers visit each other’s classrooms,
helping one another to hone in on specific instructional strategies, or for sharpening their own lesson design.
Productive feedback is given to teachers through informal meetings and observations. This was a big step for
teachers to take, however, realizing the benefit, this practice permeated throughout the school. During
meetings, student progress indicators are discussed, along with visual explanations (charts, etc.). We look for
areas of needed improvement, brainstorming ways in which to help one another. Teachers were surveyed for
input for School Improvement Plan. They were asked, “What should the educational plan emphasize this
year?” The teachers responded the need for differentiation in small group in all content areas. Higher-Order
Questioning will continue to be emphasized with the small groups. Teachers understand the scaffolding
techniques in HOQ that foster the conditions for increased critical thinking needs to be utilized within small
group instruction. They also understand that the critical thinking is embedded throughout the Common Core
Standards. The ability to discern and comprehend increases the critical thinking ability. However, we need to
insure that all teachers have opportunities to collaborate and are provided consistent professional development;
this fosters supportive conditions for a more cohesive PLC. Thus, we believe that the continuation of HigherOrder Questioning within the differentiated small groups will enable us to further close the achievement gap
across in all subgroups.
Best Practice: (What does research tell us we should be doing as it relates to data analysis above?)
Currently, Apollo teachers integrate HOQ into lesson delivery. As evidenced through administrative Classroom
Walkthroughs, and by surveying teachers, progress is being made. However, differentiation in small group in all
content areas is not consistently utilized throughout the school. According to Carol Ann Tomlinson in her book
Fulfilling the Promise of Differentiated Classroom, “it is an approach to teaching that advocates active planning
for student differences in classrooms. The philosophy of differentiation proposes that what we bring to school as
learners, matters in how we learn. Differentiated instruction is response instruction.” In 2012, the Reading
FCAT 2.0 score was 76% and in 2013, the Reading FCAT 2.0 score of 71% with a 5% drop school wide in
Page 6
comprehension standards. In Math, Apollo scored 76% and 63%, which in a 13% decrease in FCAT 2.0 scores.
Although, there was an overall decrease of learning gains in both Reading and Math for the 2013 FCAT 2.0
score. Most concerning is the 23% decrease in Math learning gains. There needs to be more emphasis
differentiation in small groups across all subject areas to meet the needs of ALL learners. Each year, Apollo
Elementary continues to build a wide repertoire of professional development in order to enhance instruction. By
implementing additional Differentiating strategies, teachers will be able to reinforce their teaching techniques
and continue to strengthen their skills, enhancing classroom strategies that promote rigor and relevance
throughout the curriculum.
Questioning, thinking, and understanding are the three processes that interact in a dynamic fashion to advance
student learning, performance, and achievement. (Walsh & Sattes, 2005) Staff Development for Educators, Inc.
states “Differentiated Instruction makes it possible to maximize learning for ALL students. It is a professional
and responsive mindset where the teacher is proactively planning for the needs of diverse learners. This
proactive mindset is the key to successfully implementing differentiated instruction. The teacher must make a
conscience and deliberiate effort to know each learnier as an individual in order to create multiple pathways
through which every student can experience success.” “Differentiated instruction’s bottom line is to teach in
whatever way students learn best.” (Wormeli, 2005) Training in differentiation techniques will be offered
through PLC’s and teacher-led training. Differentiation in small group will be implemented with fidelity, and
reflected in teachers’ PGP’s (Professional Growth Plans), aligning with this year’s School Improvement Plan.
This year we are planning to provide teachers more in-service on Differentiation to keep the momentum going.
We want to support teachers’ efforts to meet the needs of all students for their ultimate success. Administration
will be consistent in monitoring fidelity of small group differentiation.
Page 7
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?)
Professional Learning Communities will integrate Differentiation through small groups into core subjects.
Strategies: (Small number of action oriented staff performance objectives)
Barrier
Person
Responsible
Timetable
Budget
Pre-Survey
teachers for needs
assessment
Administration
August 2013
N/A
May not
have
enough
funds
Provide teachers
Professional
Development on
Differentiation.
Administration
Literacy Coach
Rick Dillon
August 2013 –
May 2014
Title 1
Scheduling
conflicts
Differentiation
staff development
Administration
Literacy Coach
August 2013 –
May 2014
Title 1
Attendance
Develop PLC
Book Club:
Administration
and Literacy
Coach
August 2013 –
May 2014
Title 1/ PTO
Assistant
Principal
September 2013
– May 2014
1. Professional
Development



Action Steps
Math Concepts by
Kathy Richardson
In-Process
Measure
Agenda
Sign-In Sheet
Handouts
Differentiation
Books
Lesson Plans
Classroom
Walkthroughs
Purchase Order
Forms and
Receipts
In-Service
Documentation
Differentiated
Math Classroom a
Guide for
Teachers Grades
K-8 by Miki
Murray
2. Teacher and
Student
Materials/
Funding
Order appropriate
materials for
teacher and
student use
Page 8
Title 1/
PTO/SAC
Purchase Order
Forms
3. Academic
Vocabulary
4. Time
(Teachers’
perception of
change causes
Overload.)
Create Common
Academic
Language
Through Word
Walls for teacher
and student use
Teachers
September
2013–May
2014
Give Vocabulary
Handouts to
teachers/Common
Core presented on
Morning
Announcements
Administrations September
and News Crew 2013–May
2014
Send Vocabulary
lists home to
parents
TBA
Tech. and
Media Specialist 2013/2014
Teachers
Develop Model
Classrooms For
Differentiation in
Small Group
Teachers
September
2013 –May
2014
Monitor processes
to support
Differentiation
Administration
On a regular
basis
Post survey
teachers on
fidelity of
implementation
N/A
Agenda
Schedule
Minutes
Sign-In Sheet
Collaboration &
Mutual
Accountability
Teams
Copies of lists
Hand-outs
Sign-in sheets
Lesson Plans
Classroom
Walkthroughs
N/A
Agenda
Schedule
Sign-In Sheet
Collaboration &
Mutual
Accountability
Teams
Classroom
Walkthroughs
Observation sheets
Informal meetings
with teachers
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)
Systematical use of checklists, anecdotal records, formative assessments, observation instruments, and test
results will indicate successful implementation of professional practices throughout the school. Along with new
Differentiation skills, teachers will continue implementation of Differentiation across the academic curriculum.
Page 9
Lesson plans will be consistently monitored and will reflect Differentiation aligned with CCSS and NGSSS (K6th Gr.). Professional development will be provided by District and staff. Teachers will complete a selfassessment checklist for quality planning for differentiation. Model classrooms will be established for peer
mentoring observations for Differentiation in Small Group. Teachers will reflect in their 2013-2014 PGP’s
(Professional Growth Plans), Differentiation strategies which reflect research and best practices. In May 2014,
100% of teachers will have implemented scientifically-researched based instructional practices for
differentiation in small group. Apollo’s goal will be to improve all assessments, with an emphasis on FCAT
2.0 learning gains, in Reading by 4 points to 76% ALG, and in Math by 7 points to 72% ALG. Writing by 3
points to 70% 3.5 +, and in Science by 3 points to a 70%, 3.0+.
Qualitative and Quantitative Student Achievement Expectations: (Measures student
achievement)
Students will set goals for individual achievement for all academic curriculums through the use of student
notebooks and journals. FCAT scores will show learning gains, A3 Vision, Edline, interims, and progress
reports will document student achievement for all academic curriculums (CCSS Kdg-2nd Gr. & NGSSS Gr. 36). Through the increased use of Differentiation in small group strategies, there will be an increase in student
achievement. Teachers will utilize “exit slips” and surveys to monitor student and parent views of the
implementation of differentiation strategies.
For the following areas, please write a brief narrative that includes the data for the year 2012-13 and a
description of changes you intend to incorporate to improve the data for the year 2013-14. 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).
The school Guidance Counselor, Lynn Santana, is training the staff this year on the MTSS/RtI process by meeting
with each grade level team during team meetings. Mrs. Santana is also meeting with teachers individually on
Mondays to discuss specific individual student cases. Once students are receiving a higher level of intervention
and the interventions do not seem to be working, Mrs. Santana schedules a meeting with the school psychologist
and staffing specialist to discuss the next step in the MTSS process. Administration has also brought over
members of the District MTSS team, Janet Stephenson, to train teachers on the A3 Vision system.
PARENT 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).
In the 2012-2013 Parent Survey, over 89% of parents indicated they are “satisfied” with classroom instruction of all
core subjects at Apollo Elementary. The 2012-2013 Parent Survey also indicates 90% of parents attending meetings
and academic events the school, thought the meetings or events were useful. During the 2012-2013 school year,
over 25,000 volunteer hours were logged for Apollo Elementary. The parent dedication is a great contributing factor
for the school’s overall success. Apollo is currently planning to implement “Common Core’ner” (a section in our
Page 10
school newspaper) and Parent Nights to help explain Common Core to parents. This will ensure the understanding
and assistance from our families.
Early Warning Systems (Formerly Attendance, Suspension, and Graduation Rate)
1.
Elementary School Indicators
The following data shall be considered by elementary schools.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Students who miss 10 percent or more of available instructional time
Students retained, pursuant to s. 1008.25(4)(c), F.S.
Students who are not proficient in reading by third grade
Students who receive two or more behavior referrals
Students who receive one or more behavior referrals that lead to suspension, as defined in s.1003.01(5), F.S.
ATTENDANCE: (Include current and expected attendance rates, excessive absences and tardies)(a)
The 2011-2012 attendance rate was at 96% and at 97% for 2012-2013. We anticipate attendance for the
2012-2013 school year to remain at or above 95%. Teachers will call parents when students are absent or
tardy 3 days or more. A parent meeting will be scheduled with the guidance counselor to discuss the
chronic absences and/or tardies.
BEHAVIOR REFERRALS: (d and e)
There were 694 incidents in the 2012/2013 school year. This is a decrease of 78 referrals from the previous year.
These are including bus referrals. Of the 694 incidents, only 68 resulted in suspensions. 54 were male students.
14 were female.
RETAINEES AND LOW PROFICIENCY STUDENTS: (b and c)
Students who are identified as the lowest 25% are receiving remedial support on a daily basis, and including ASP
offered twice a week. The number of students varies depending on data from support teams and teachers. As
students find success from the extra assistance, they are able to move in and out of support, as needed. It is the
school’s belief that providing this support will have an additional benefit of lower behavioral incidents.
CTE/STEM:
All students in grades 3 - 6 are required to participate in school and district science fair. Grades K – 2 participate
in the science fair through class projects. Robotics is a voluntary after-school activity for grades 3-6. Odyssey of
the Mind is also voluntary for students in grades 3 – 6. Other events are: STEM Nights; October 8 - Science
Fair (San Harper), *Geo-caching, *Hands-On Science (observe and infer), January 14 - "Starry Night", March 11
- Environmental
STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS (Required):
253 students responded to the District Student Survey. 81% of students responding believe school work will
help them in later life. 89% of students responded that they had learned about internet safety at school. 87%
of students say they feel safe at school. Of the students responding, 73% of students say they have patience,
understanding, and appreciation for others’ differences. A concerning answer was that only 68% of students
Page 11
responding say they want to achieve success.
(TITLE 1 SCHOOLS ONLY)
Highly Effective Teachers
Describe the school based strategies that will be used to recruit and retain high quality,
highly effective teachers to the school.
Descriptions of Strategy
Person Responsible
1. Provide professional development to encourage
positive school relationships.
District Resource
Teachers and
Administration
Teachers and
Administration
Teachers and
Administration
2. Provide induction and mentoring programs for
new teachers.
3. Develop strong professional relationships
through collaboration and decision making to
continue a team-oriented culture.
Projected Completion
Date
May 2014
May 2014
May 2014
Non-Highly Effective Instructors
Provide the number of instructional staff and paraprofessionals that are teaching out-offield and/or who are not highly effective. *When using percentages, include the number
of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).
Number of staff and paraprofessionals that
are teaching out-of-field/and who are not
highly effective
Mark Meyers – Gifted Endorsement
Marilyn Bertot – ESOL
Shruti Raman – ESOL
Martha Murphy - ESOL
Provide the strategies that are being
implemented to support the staff in becoming
highly effective
Training is ongoing for the 8 teachers toward
completion of an ESOL and Gifted Endorsement at
this time. Notification in writing to parents of these
students for this information has been provided.
The above listed teachers (8 teachers) are teaching out
of field.
Page 12