FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM 2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANosi.dadeschools.net/sip/09-10/pdf/2911.pdf · 2009. 10. 7. · for Tier1 (Core),Tier 2 (Supplemental)

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

School Name: LINDA LENTIN K-8 CENTER

District Name: Dade

Principal: Mrs. Agenoria Powell

SAC Chair: Mrs. Rosena Wright

Superintendent: Mr. Alberto Carvalho

Date of School Board Approval: Pending School Board Approval

Last Modified on: 08-19-2009

Dr.Eric J.Smith, Commissioner

Florida Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Dr.Frances Haithcock, ChancellorK-12 Public Schools

Florida Department of Education325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS

VISION: Linda Lentin K-8 Center strives to collaborate with the community and parents to assist a culturally diverse student population to become proactive and independent learners with integrity. Our students and staff will actively seek to maintain the highest personal standards in obtaining their educational and professional goals in life.

MISSION: The mission of Linda Lentin K-8 Center is to provide a safe learning environment where our students are challenged to engage in moral thinking, subject area journaling, authentic problem-based learning and the successful completion of curriculum standards.

Brief History and Background of the School

Linda Lentin K-8 Center, formerly known as Linda Lentin Elementary, has finally completed its three year transition period. A Title I funded school that opened its doors to students and staff in 1998, our facility has successfully adjusted to accommodate students in sixth, seventh and eighth grade. For three years, we have worked to provide the changes necessary to meet the needs of its growing community and population. Located at 14312 N.E. 2nd Court, the school resides within the North Miami Senior Feeder Pattern. Our campus is complex but has many amenities; such as two science laboratories, two art suites, two music suites, two libraries, two PE courts and two cafeterias. Our facility does not have portables. Linda Lentin K-8 Center is at 104% capacity. We have multiple co-teaching model classrooms due to space constraints.

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Linda Lentin K-8 Center’s unique strength is the school-wide collaborative planning initiative. This initiative is a response to the need to facilitate common planning by grade level, despite a complex master schedule. The collaborative planning initiative affords the administrative leadership team and teachers with the opportunity to analyze student data together to collectively address instructional needs; implementing evidenced-based strategies and progress monitoring. Additionally, the school maintains small learning community sessions for the primary (Pre-K – 2nd), intermediate (3rd – 5th), and secondary (6th – 8th) staff. This process was implemented to promote meaningful interaction between instructional staff members assigned to ten grade levels of curriculum. Linda Lentin K-8 Center has received the Title 1 Project RISE (Rewards and Incentives for School Educators) grant, which has awarded mini-grants to approximately 20 teachers for their innovative classroom practices, professional development opportunities, in-class modeling and collaborative planning. The results of the 2008-2009 FCAT indicate that Linda Lentin K-8 Center showed 19 percent increase in the overall FCAT performance grade. Resulting in the school moving from the grade of a C to a B. AYP was met in mathematics for our AYP Black Sub Group. In mathematics third grade learning gains increased by 9 percent, fourth grade learning gains increased by 11 percent , fifth grade learning gains increased by one percent, sixth grade maintained, and seventh grade learning gains increased significantly by 21 percent. In reading third grade learning gains increased by four percent, fourth grade learning gains increased by 16 percent, fifth grade learning gains increased by 6 percent, sixth grade learning gains increased by two percent, and seventh grade learning gains increased by five percent. Writing in grades four and eight increased by one percent from 91 percent to 92 percent as indicated on the State’s school grade performance grid.

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Linda Lentin K-8 center experienced a drop in student enrollment due to school boundary changes. In compliance with certification and seniority requirements, we have lost some staff members who demonstrated great potential to impact student achievement.There are new non-education major instructors at all grade levels who need time and experience to

improve their instructional delivery and classroom management. According to AYP trend data reports, the ability to achieve AYP has eluded our school as evidenced by the inconsistent AYP achievement in reading one year and then in mathematics the next. This inconsistency varies from one Subgroup to another each year as well. ESOL Level 5 students continue to experience difficulty in fluency, vocabulary and reading comprehension. Many of the students classified as ELL are also identified as members of the Black and Economically Disadvantaged Subgroups.To address the needs of the aforementioned Subgroups and subject areas, we will departmentalize grades three through five and provide support services by ability group for Tier1 (Core),Tier 2 (Supplemental) and Tier 3 (Intensive) students. We will also restructure the curriculum focus in 5th and 8th grade science and also in reading and mathematics in eighth grade. As a result of the 2008-2009 FCAT, Linda Lentin K-8 Center showed a decrease in eighth grade mathematics by seven percent. In reading eighth grade showed a decrease by nine percent. In science the fifth grade decreased by one percent and eighth grade decreased by 15 percent. The school will experience an additional loss in support staff (i.e clerical and maintenance) this year.

Student Demographics

Serving over 1,200 students from Pre-K through eighth grade, we teach a truly diverse student population. Our AYP sub group student population consists of Black (20 percent), English Language Learners (ELL) students (27.9 percent), Economically Disadvantaged students (90.3 percent) and general education students are provided an appropriate and nurturing instructional environment. Although the percentage of students that qualify for Free and Reduced Price Lunch is up from 89 to 90 percent, a slight decrease in Title I school site funds have occurred for two consecutive years. Supplemental Educational Services mandated for eligible schools have resulted in the provision of inconsistent tutorial support for the students in AYP Subgroups for three years. A large number of the town homes and condominiums in the surrounding neighborhood have been converted to temporary apartments due to the downtrend in the real estate market. Counselors have reported that students are encountering some displacement related to their housing and basic needs during the 2008-2009 school year.

Student Attendance Rates

Linda Lentin K-8 Center experienced an overall decrease in student enrollment for the 2008-2009 school year due to attendance boundary changes and the real estate market. Linda Lentin K-8 Center has exceeded the average attendance rates for the District for two consecutive years (2006-2008), Revisions to improve our attendance will be made for the 2009-2010 school year: Linda Lentin K-8 Center 2006-2007: 91.92%; 2007-2008: 93.72%; 2008-2009: 96.13%; Miami Dade County Public Schools 2006-2007: 94.11%; 2007-2008:94.86%; 2008-2009: 95.38%. District’s feeder pattern average for 2008-2009 is 96.19%.

Student Mobility

Linda Lentin K-8 Center’s mobility rate is 27% for the 2008-2009 fiscal school year. Due to large number of rental properties we experience a high volume of transient students. Unused materials left as a result of students moving out of the area unexpectedly impact the school financially. All attempts are made to redirect those resources to current and incoming students. A reduction in the student population directly impacts the number of teachers and support personnel on staff next year.

Student Suspension Rates

2006-2007: In-school 314, Out-of-school 41; 2007-2008: In-school 300, Out-of-school 34; 2008-2009: In-school 251, Out-of-school 44. The suspension rates have increased over the past three years. A loss in administrative staff and an increase in the number of new and inexperienced teachers have impacted overall discipline. A school site plan to monitor and acknowledge improvement in student attitude (moral thinking), attendance (truancy teams, appearance (uniforms) and academic achievement is held during an assembly the fifth week of each quarter. The Code of Student Conduct, the District’s Spot For Success Program, Student Services Character Education and the Police Department D.A.R.E. programs are also implemented to improve student behavior and reduce the suspension rate.

Student Retention Rates

Linda Lentin K-8 Center’s current retention rate is 6.3%. We implement retention prevention plans for students in need of support within the first quarter of the school. Teachers and Counselors conduct parent conferences and the Community Involvement Specialist conducts home visits. The Retention plan also includes the provision of support materials and resources for the identified students throughout the year. The administrator monitors reports for student grades, attendance and behavior each nine weeks. Plato Course Recovery is used to provide our middle school students with the opportunity to retake required core courses in an accelerated setting in lieu of their electives.

Class Size

Although a majority of the instructional staff is highly qualified, there are new non-education major instructors at all grade levels who need time and experience to improve their instructional delivery and classroom management. Fifty-eight percent of the instructional staff has bachelors in addition to a masters/specialist degree; two teachers possess National Board Certification. Thirty-two percent of the staff is enrolled in courses for certification and/or seeking advanced degrees. The average class size in general education classrooms is: Kindergarten: 20.83 students; 1st Grade: 21.83 students; 2nd Grade: 21.07 students; 3rd Grade: 21.07, 4th Grade: 21:09, 5th Grade: 33:09, 6th Grade: 21:02; 7th Grade 33:02, 8th Grade: 32:01. The teacher to student ratio in general education classrooms is: 6th Grade: 17.85 students; 7th Grade: 16.66 students; 8th Grade: 17.50 students. The average class size in inclusion classrooms is: 6th Grade: 13 students; 7th Grade: 25.37 students; 8th Grade: 21.87 students. The teacher to student ratio in SWD education classrooms is: Varying Exceptionalities: 6th Grade: 18 students; 7th Grade: 20 students; 8th Grade: 27 students; Emotional Behavior Disorders: 6 students (although multi-graded); Mentally Handicapped: 9 (contains multiple grades). After a review of our three year trend data, Linda Lentin K-8 Center will measure the effectiveness of its interventions through the State’s annual assessment, District Interims and school-wide benchmark assessments. We decided that we would utilize Lesson Study, Reciprocal Reading, McRel and selected CRISS strategies.

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

There are 13 schools in the Linda Lentin K-8 Center Feeder Pattern. Of the 13 schools, two are Correct I status, six are Correct II, one is Prevent I, and one is Prevent II status. Additionally, during the 2008-2009 fiscal school year four schools earned a letter grade of A, five schools earned a letter grade of B, two schools earned a letter grade of C, and two schools earned a letter grade of D. All schools in the Feeder Pattern are Title I.

Linda Lentin K-8 Center eighth grade students feed into North Miami Senior High School for ninth grade. North Miami Senior High School is an Intervene status school. The letter grade earned during the 2008-2009 school year is a D an increase of one letter grade from an F from the 2007-2008 school year. North Miami Senior High School did not make AYP during this school year (2008-2009). The subgroups that did not make AYP are Black, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged, ELL and SWD. Biscayne Gardens Elementary is a Correct II school that maintained a letter grade of C during the 2008-2009 school year. All subgroups met AYP with the exception of the ELL sub populated group. William J. Bryan Elementary is a Correct I school. It increased a letter grade to a B from the 2007-2008 to the 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this year (2008-2009). However, the subgroups that met AYP status are Economically, Black, SWD. Consequently, ELL sub populated groups did not make AYP. Gratigny Elementary is a Correct II school that increased a letter grade from C 2007-2008 to B during the 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). Consequently, Black, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged and ELL subgroups did not make AYP. Natural Bridge Elementary is a Correct II school that increased a letter grade from a B 2007-2008 to a C 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). Consequently, Black, Economically Disadvantaged and ELL subgroups did not make AYP. Oak Grove Elementary maintained a letter grade of B from the 2007-2008 to 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). Consequently, Black, ELL and Economically Disadvantaged subgroups did not make AYP. David Lawrence Jr. K-8 Center is a Prevent I school. They increased a letter grade from a B in 2007-2008 to an A in the 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). However, the subgroups that met AYP status are White, and Hispanic. Consequently, Black, Economically Disadvantaged and ELL subgroups did not make AYP. Hubert O. Sibley Elementary is a Prevent I school, that increased by three letter grades from a D in 2007-2008 to an A in the 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). However, the subgroups that met AYP status are Hispanic and ELL. Consequently, Black, Economically Disadvantaged and ELL subgroups did not make AYP. North Miami Elementary is a Correct I School, that increased by two letter grades from a C (2007-2008) to an A (2008-2009). AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). However, subgroups that met AYP included ELL. Consequently, AYP was not met by Black, and Economically Disadvantaged. Thomas Jefferson Middle School is a Correct II school, that maintained the letter grade of C from the 2007-2008 to the 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). Consequently, Black, Economically Disadvantaged, and SWD subgroups did not make AYP. North Miami Middle is a Correct I school, that maintained the letter grade of D from the 2007-2008 to the 2008-2009 school year. AYP was not met this school year (2008-2009). Consequently, AYP was not met by Black, Economically Disadvantaged, Hispanic and ELL. Arch Creek Elementary School earned a letter grade of an A. AYP was not met this school (2008-2009). However, the subgroups that met AYP are Black and Economically Disadvantaged. Consequently, AYP was not met by ELL.

Linda Lentin K-8 Center offers a Pre-K program. The Early Growth Indicators Benchmark for Pre-K Readiness administered to all preschoolers as an initial diagnostic to determine the specific skills and knowledge of students. High Scope strategies are implemented in the preschool classroom as a continuous observational assessment tool to collect data about the improvement of student developmental skill levels. Houghton Mifflin PRE-K is used to measure progress of foundational reading skills. Low-performing students are targeted early. Certified teachers will work with students using Head Start objectives and developmentally appropriate strategies after the specific weaknesses have been identified by data for each student. An exit interview and The Early Growth Indicators Benchmark for Pre-K will be given to each student before entering Kindergarten to assess readiness and any for remediation. An exit interview and the Oral Language Proficiency Scale (OLPS) is administered to all English Language Learners (ELL) and will be given to each (ELL) student before entering Kindergarten to assess readiness and any need for remediation.

Partnerships and Grants

Linda Lentin K-8 Center is a Title I school. Major Title I Funds are used to supplement and enhance student achievement. During the 2008-2009 school year, the staff and students will receive supplemental services from the Miami Ready School Grant, a Federal and Local funding consortium. The program offers an educational connection with the community in regards to the primary students. The grant also offers a full time nurse and social worker to work with staff and students of Linda Lentin K-8 Center. Services from the grant will be coordinated through the primary classroom teachers, administrators and counseling staff. Project RISE (Rewards and Incentives for School Educators) is a Federal Fund Grant that provides two Nationally Board Certified Teachers and money for professional development. Florida International University provides local funds through the Florida Arts Program (FLAP) and University of Miami supports the program Promoting Science Among English Language Learners (P-SELL). IDEA Funds will be used to enhance special education classes. State FCAT enhancement funds provide funding in after school and Saturday Academy programs. The prevention of violence at the school site and the safety of staff and students is top priority. Linda Lentin K-8 Center works closely with the County Police Department in the coordination of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E) Program. The program offers weekly classes for students in both the elementary and secondary classes. In these classes, students discuss the negative aspects of drugs. Through the Miami Dade County School Board, bilingual parent classes are offered to parents. The Bilingual Parent Outreach Program (BPOP) offers classes to all parents on a variety of topics on a monthly basis. The program supplies Linda Lentin K-8 Center with two teachers, one for Haitian Creole and another for Spanish, to teach classes to all parents.

Linda Lentin K-8 Center collaborates with district programs and services, community agencies and the business community in order to integrate educational services to all students. This collaboration includes: Head Start, Reading First, Early Reading First, Miami-Dade District Pre-K and Early Intervention, Exceptional Student Education, Adult Education, Vocational Career Awareness, Staff Development Department, Miami-Dade County Health Department, community colleges, universities, ESOL/LEP Programs, Migrant, Neglected/Delinquent, At risk Programs, Homeless Agencies, the Parent Academy, the Parent Information and Resource Center (PIRC), the PTS/PTSA, Upward Bound and Pre-collegiate programs at community colleges and universities, Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY), Homestead Housing Authority, and through

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

compacts with local municipalities as well as Metro Dade County. These collaborative efforts will eliminate gaps in service for the ELL students, children with disabilities, migrant children, N & D children, homeless children, and migrant children. An avenue will be provided for sharing information about available services, and for helping to eliminate duplication and fragmentation within the programs. Title I personnel will, on an on-going basis, work with the appropriate staff to increase program effectiveness of the instructional program. Representatives from these agencies will meet as necessary to coordinate various services for families and children to increase student achievement. Additionally, the school receives funding under the School Improvement Grant Fund/School Improvement Grant Initiative in order to increase the achievement of the lowest performing Subgroups through comprehensive, ongoing data analysis, curriculum and instruction alignment, and specific interventions such as Differentiated instruction/intervention, classroom libraries, Project CRISS, and Learning 100.

Note: The following links will open in a separate browser window.

School Grades Trend Data

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data

HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS

Position Name Degree(s)/ Certification(s)

# of Years at Current School

# of Years as an

AdministratorPrior Performance Record *

Principal Mrs. Agenoria Paschal-Powell

BS- Business Management, Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University; Master of Science- Education, University of Miami; Educational Leadership Certification- Nova Southeastern University

5 13

Principal of Linda Lentin K-8 Center in 2008-2009: Grade: B, Reading Mastery: 57%, Math mastery: 56%, Science Mastery: 27% and Writing: 92%. AYP: 82% was met. However, 18% Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Math.Only Black made AYP in Math. Economically Disadvantaged, Black and ELL did not make AYP in Reading. 2007-2008: Grade: C, Reading Mastery 58%, Math Mastery 57%, Science Mastery 35%. Writing Mastery 91%. AYP: 82% Black, ELL, and Economically Disadvantaged did not meet AYP in Mathematics. Black and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in Reading. Only ELL made AYP in Reading. 2006-2007: Grade C - Reading Mastery: 59%, Math Mastery 55%. Writing Mastery 87%. Science Mastery 18%. AYP: 95%, Black and Economically Disadvantaged made AYP in reading and math. ELL did not make AYP in Reading or Math. 2005-2006: Grade B, Reading Mastery 64%, Math Mastery 54%. Writing Mastery 85%. AYP: 90%, Black, ELL and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in reading. Black, ELL, and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in Math. 2004-2005: Grade: B, Provisional AYP Reading Mastery 61%, Math mastery 57%, AYP: 93%, Black and Economically Disadvantaged made AYP in reading and math. ELL made AYP in Reading. Only ELL did not make AYP in Math.

Assis Principal Mrs. Ericka Reed

BS – English Master of Science, English Education with a Minor in Specific Learning Disabilities, Nova Southeastern University; Ed. S. –Educational Leadership Reading and Learning Disabilities, University of Miami; Certificate Program

3 6

Assistant Principal of Linda Lentin K-8 Center in: 2008-2009: Grade: B, Reading Mastery: 57%, Math mastery: 56%, Science Mastery: 27% and Writing: 92%. AYP: 82% was met. However, 18% Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Math. Black, Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Reading. 2007-2008: Grade: C, Reading Mastery 58%, Math Mastery 57%, Science Mastery 35%. Writing Mastery 91%. AYP: 82% Black, ELL, and Economically Disadvantaged did not meet AYP in math. Black and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in reading. Only SWD made AYP in reading. 2006-2007: Grade C - Reading Mastery: 59%, Math Mastery 55%. Writing Mastery 87%. Science Mastery 18%.

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

Educational Leadership from Nova Southeastern University; Certification English Education, Specific Learning Disabilities, Educational Leadership, State of Florida

AYP: 95%, Black and Economically Disadvantaged made AYP in reading and math. ELL did not make AYP in reading or math. 2005-2006 Assistant Principal of Jan Mann Opportunity School Grade :P Reading Mastery; not applicable, Math Mastery; 9%, APY; 83, Black and Economically Disadvantage did not make APY in reading or math. 2004-2005: Assistant Principal at Jann Mann Grade: F Reading Mastery 13%, Math mastery 11%. AYP: 63%, Black and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in Reading and Math.

Assis Principal Dr. Alyssa Rosenblatt

AA-Pre-Bachelor of Arts, Miami Dade College; Bachelor of Science-Special Education, Florida International University; Master of Science-Diagnostic Teaching, Florida International University; PhD-Educational Leadership with A Specialization In Special Education in Union Institute and University; Certification-Specific Learning Disabilities, Educational Leadership, State of Florida

1 5

2008-2009: Grade: B, Reading Mastery: 57%, Math mastery: 56%, Science Mastery: 27% and Writing: 92%. AYP: 82% was met. However, 18% Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Math. Black, Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Reading. 2007-2008: Assistant Principal at North Miami Middle Grade: C Reading Mastery 41%, Math Mastery 39%, Science Mastery 14%. AYP: 74%, Black, Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Reading or Math. 2006-2007: Grade D - Reading Mastery: 33%, Math Mastery 37%. Science Mastery 18%. AYP: 82%, Black, ELL, SWD did not make AYP in Reading or Math. 2005-2006: Assistant Principal at North Miami Middle Grade C, Reading Mastery 37%, Math Mastery 37%. AYP: 77%, Economically Disadvantaged, Hispanic, and ELL, did not make AYP in reading. Only SWD and Black made AYP in Reading. 2004-2005: Assistant Principal at North Miami Middle Grade: C, Reading Mastery 29%, Math mastery 34%. AYP: 57%, Black, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged, ELL and SWD did not make AYP in Reading and Math.

* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)

Subject Area Name Degree(s)/ Certification(s)

# of Years at Current School

# of Years as a Coach

Prior Performance Record *

Reading Mrs. Rosalind Pickens

Professional Educator’s Certificate; Elementary Education 1-6, ESOL K-12

9 3

Reading Coach of Linda Lentin K-8 Center in 2008-2009: Grade: B, Reading Mastery: 57%, Math mastery: 56%, Science Mastery: 27% and Writing: 92%. AYP: 82% was met. However, 18% Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Math. Black, Economically Disadvantaged, and ELL did not make AYP in Reading. Lowest 25% making gains 65%. Learning Gains 63%. 2007-2008: Grade: C, Reading Mastery 58%, Math Mastery 57%, Science Mastery 35%. Writing Mastery 91%. AYP: 82% Black, ELL, and Economically Disadvantaged did not meet AYP in math. Black and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in Reading. Only SWD made AYP in Reading. Lowest 25% making gains 57%. Learning Gains 61%

2006-2007: Grade C - Reading Mastery: 59%, Math Mastery 55%. Writing Mastery 87%. Science Mastery 18%. AYP: 95%, Black and Economically Disadvantaged made AYP in Reading and Math. ELL did not make AYP in Reading or Math. Lowest 25% making gains 60%. Learning Gains 57%

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

2005-2006: Grade B, Reading Mastery 64%, Math Mastery 54%. Writing Mastery 85%. AYP: 90%, Black, ELL and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in Reading. Black, ELL, and Economically Disadvantaged did not make AYP in Math. Lowest 25% making gains 63%. Learning Gains 64%.

* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)

Description of StrategyPerson

Responsible

Projected Completion

Date

Not Applicable (If not, please explain why)

MINT Mentoring Certified MINT Instructors On-going

Small Learning Communities Administration On-going

Professional Growth Teams

Clinical Education Trained and Professional Service Contract teachers

On-going

Wrote and Received Title I Project Rewards and Incentives for School Educators (RISE) Grant

Two National Board Certified Teachers Ms. Dicandia and Mrs. P. Perez

On-going

Name Certification Teaching Assignment

Professional Development/Support

to Become Highly Qualified

Jean Valbrun

Professional Educator’s: Bookkeeping, Economics, Educational Leadership, Elementary Education, English for Speakers of Other Languages, Foreign Language

ESOL

Mr. Valbrun currently holds certification in the area he is teaching. Certificate pending course completion.

Carol Boston

Professional Educator’s: Elementary Education

2nd Grade

Ms. Boston currently holds certification in the area she is teaching and has completed course work for ESOL endorsement. However, endorsement has not been added to certification. Must complete HOUSSE survey.

Karen Smith


6th Grade

Ms. Smith currently holds certification in the area she is teaching. Certificate pending course completion.

Linda Williams


1st Grade

Ms. Williams currently holds certification in the area she is teaching. Certificate pending course completion.

Anike Sakariyawo

Professional Educator’s: Exceptional Student Education

Middle Grade Science

Ms. Sakariyawo has been given an out-of-field waiver and has taken and passed the general knowledge exam. She is registered to take the subject area certification exam.

Shironda L. Williams


Language Arts/Reading

Ms. Williams has been given an out-of-field waiver. She has completed the courses for Reading certification and is preparing to take the Reading certification

Staff Demographics

Teacher Mentoring Program

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Note: For Title I schools only

exam.

Antoinette D. Washington Temporary Educator’s

5th Grade

Ms. Washington is preparing to take the subject area certification exam.

Barbara Frost

Professional Educator’s: Exceptional Student Education/ESOL

7th Grade

Ms. Frost has been given an out-of- field waiver. She is preparing to take the subject area certification exam.

Rosena Wright

Professional Educator’s: Elementary Education, ESOL Endorsement

6th Grade

Ms. Wright currently holds a certification in the area she is teaching. This teacher is highly qualified. Schedule change from reading to language arts achieved compliance.

Marisa Moceri

Professional Educator’s: Elementary Education, MG English

2nd Grade/Gifted

Ms. Moceri is currently completing classes toward gifted certification and is preparing to take the subject are certification exam.

Alicia PrangeElementary Education K-6 Kindergarten

Ms. Prange currently holds certification in the area she is teaching. Certificate pending course completion.

Shaketha C. Ritchie

Elementary Education Reading Certification

Reading

Ms. Ritchie currently holds certification in the area she is teaching. Must complete HOUSSE survey.

Total Number of

Instructional Staff

% of First-Year Teachers

% of Teachers with 1-5 Years of

Experience

% of Teachers with 6-14 Years of

Experience

% of Teachers with 15+ Years of

Experience

% of Teachers

with Advanced Degrees

% Highly Qualified

% Reading Endorsed Teachers

% National Board

Certified Teachers

% ESOL Endorsed

84 5 46 15 18 28 53 5 2 28

Mentor NameMentee

AssignedRationale

for PairingPlanned Mentoring

Activities

Rosalind Pickens (Reading Coach)

William Witcher (ESE Teacher)

Mr. Witcher is a first year teacher. The students that Mrs. Pickens tutor have shown improvement in reading achievement as reflected by FCAT learning gains and by scoring at high performance levels.

Observations: Mentee observes mentor and other veteran teachers. Create professional growth environment for new teacher. Identify beginning teacher’s needs and modify support in response to the assessed needs. Engage in active listening activity for productive assistance. This mentor is a full release reading coach and therefore has time to observe and provide feedback and coaching for the mentee. This is executed on a bi-weekly basis.

Title I, Part A

Services are provided to ensure students requiring additional remediation are assisted through after-school programs or summer school. The district coordinates with Title II and Title III in ensuring staff development needs are provided. Support services are provided to secondary students. Curriculum Coaches Develop, lead, and evaluate school core content standards/ programs; identify and analyze existing literature on scientifically based curriculum/behavior assessment and intervention approaches. They identify systematic patterns of student need while working with district personnel to identify appropriate, evidence-based intervention strategies; assists with whole school screening programs that provide early intervening services for children to be considered “at risk;” assist in the design and implementation for progress monitoring, data collection, and data analysis;

participate in the design and delivery of professional development; and provide support for assessment and implementation monitoring. Other components that are integrated into the school wide program include an extensive Parental Program; Title CHESS (as appropriate); Supplemental Educational Services; and special support services to special needs populations such as homeless, migrant, and neglected and delinquent students.

Title I, Part C- Migrant

The school provides services and support to migrant students and parents. The District Migrant liaison coordinates with Title I and other programs and conducts a comprehensive needs assessment of migrant students to ensure that the unique needs of migrant students are met.

Title I, Part D

District receives funds to support the Educational Alternative Outreach program. Services are coordinated with district Drop-out Prevention programs.

Title II

The District uses supplemental funds for improving basic education as follows: • training to certify qualified mentors for the New Teacher (MINT) Program • training for add-on endorsement programs, such as Reading, Gifted, ESOL • training and substitute release time for Professional Development Liaisons (PDL) at each school focusing on Professional Learning Community (PLC) development and facilitation, as well as Lesson Study Group implementation and protocols

Title III

Title III funds are used to supplement and enhance the programs for English Language Learners (ELL) by providing funds to provide tutorial programs (K-12), parent outreach activities (K-12) Reading and supplementary instructional materials. Hardware and software for the development of language and literary skills in Reading has been purchased for our school.

Title X- Homeless

The Homeless Assistance Program seeks to ensure a successful educational experience for homeless children by collaborating with parents, schools and the community.

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

This school will receive funding from Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI) as part of its Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP) allocation.

Violence Prevention Programs

The school offers a yearly gang resistance education program to students that incorporate counseling, recognitions and support materials.

Nutrition Programs

1) The school adheres to and implements the nutrition requirements stated in the District Wellness Policy. 2) Nutrition education, as per state statute, is taught through physical education. 3) The School Food Service Program, school breakfast, school lunch, and after care snacks, follows the Healthy Food and Beverage Guidelines as adopted in the District's Wellness Policy.

Housing Programs

N/A

Head Start

Head Start programs are co-located in several Title I schools and/or communities. Joint activities, including professional development and transition processes are shared. Through affiliating agreements, the Summer VPK program is provided at Head Start sites.

Adult Education

N/A

Career and Technical Education

N/A

Job Training

N/A

Other

Parental Involve parents in the planning and implementation of the Title I Program and extend an open invitation to our school’s

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

parent resource center in order to inform parents regarding available programs, their right under No Child Left Behind and other referral services. Increase parental engagement/involvement through developing (with on-going parental input) our Title I School-Parent Compact (for each student); and other documents/activities necessary in order to comply with dissemination and reporting requirements.

Conduct informal parent surveys to determine specific needs of our parents, and schedule workshops, Parent Academy Courses, etc., with flexible times to accommodate our parents’ schedule as part of our goal to empower parents and build their capacity for involvement.

Complete Title I Administration Parental Involvement Monthly School Reports (FM-6914 Rev. 06-08) and the Title I Parental Involvement Monthly Activities Report (FM-6914 03-07), and submit to Title I Administration by the 5th of each month as documentation of compliance with NCLB Section 1118.

Confidential “as-needed services” will be provided to students in the school in “homeless situations” as applicable.

Additional academic and support services will be provided to students and families of the Migrant populations applicable.

School Improvement Grant Fund/School Improvement Grant Initiative

The school receives funding under the School Improvement Grant Fund/School Improvement Grant Initiative in order to increase the achievement of the lowest performing subgroups through comprehensive, ongoing data analysis, curriculum and instruction alignment, and specific interventions such as extended day remedial tutorial instruction, Differentiated Instruction/Intervention, classroom libraries, Project CRISS, and Learning 100. Additionally, Title I School Improvement Grant/Fund support funding and assistance to schools in Differentiated Accountability based on need.

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

School-based RtI Team

Principal: Trains faculty on the use and purpose on response to intervention (RtI). The principal will schedule the RtI discussions by grade level through scheduled bi-monthly collaborative planning meetings, Child Study Team meetings RtI sessions will also be held after each FAIR and District Interim assessment period where student academic regression is indicated.

Assistant Principals: Maintain documentation of student identification, assessments, progress monitoring, and tier placement. The Assistant Principals will refer students to SST who do not make consistent gains after utilizing course supplemental and intensive interventions and contact the parents to obtain to consent for evaluation under IDEA. The multidisciplinary team and the parent will meet to review all data and determine whether the student is eligible to receive Special Education Services.

Curriculum Coaches: Provide the school site specific assessments in Reading, Mathematics and Science in Edusoft format. The coaches will maintain the identified students FCAT, District Interims and FAIR assessments and bring this data to all RtI grade level discussions.

Grade Chairs: Serve as the formal RtI Leadership Team members; providing current behavior and academic data to the discussions held regarding the selected students on their respective grade levels.

ESSAC: Receives monthly updates regarding the progress of our RT1, RT2 and RT3 students. Incentives, mentoring, and focus group discussions will be provided to the members. The ESSAC is responsible for working with the principal to monitor student achievement and progress throughout the year.

Behavior Management Teacher (BMT): Serves as the SPED Liaison, integrates core instructional materials into Tier 3 instruction and collaborates with the general education teachers.

Professional Development School Liaison: Manages all data generated in Edusoft and schedules the online access so that all staff members can register for the school site Professional Development sessions.

School Psychologist: Participates in the selection of data reviewed and asks appropriate questions which guide the interventions used at a frequency which will enable the support provided to be applicable and useful if the students must be referred for evaluation under IDEA.

School Speech Therapist: Assists in the selection of screening measures and identifies students who may be eligible for language and speech therapy.

Counselors: Provides expertise related to the child’s developmental needs, extended counseling, and community resources available to support the student and family as needed.

Community Involvement Specialist: Receives a list of RT2 (supplemental) and RT3 (intensive) students. The CIS makes hope visits, provides notices and literature to parents.

School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g. meeting processes and roles/functions).

Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership Team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan

Dade Partner: Receives monthly updates regarding the progress of our RT2 and RT3 students. Incentives, mentoring, and focus group discussions will be provided by available Dade Partners during the year.

The RtI Leadership Team will meet twice a month by grade level. Each meeting will include a review of the students’ progress or lack of progress. The grade chairperson will provide input from the homeroom teacher. Reviews will take place to address the students’ academic progress and if applicable, behavioral progress. The team will utilize a Problem Solving process to address the following questions: 1. What’s the problem(s) with this student? 2. Why is it occurring? 3. What intervention (at what level core, supplemental or intensive) are we going to use and by whom? 4. At the next data meeting, is this intervention working?

The RTI Leadership Team provides insight and current student monitoring data on a monthly basis to the EESAC and its membership. Based on data collected by the leadership team, informed decisions will be made in the development and maintenance of the strategies noted in the School Improvement Plan.

RT1 updates will a standard EESAC agenda item. The school’s academic and behavioral goals will be adjusted through data gathering and data analysis during the bi-monthly meetings. Administration and Curriculum coaches will use the bi-monthly discussions to monitor the fidelity of the delivery of instructions and interventions used. The Principal will purchase technology and evidence based resources for Rt2 and Rt3 students.

Baseline, mid-year and end of the year systems related to the managed data for academics will include grades, school sites specific assessment (labeled via the electronic grade-book), FAIR assessments, district interims and the annual assessment (SAT/FCAT). The Linda Lentin faculty will be trained in RtI on August 21, 2009 prior to the opening of the 2009-2010 school year.

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

RtI Implementation

The managed data related to behavior will include teacher antidote records, parent contact logs, counseling referrals, student case management systems, attendance, and referrals to the school support teams. Baseline, mid-year and end of the year systems related to the managed data for academics will include grades, school sites specific assessment (labeled via the electronic grade-book), FAIR assessments, district interims and the annual assessment (SAT/FCAT).

On-going professional development will be provided during grade level collaborative planning and Professional Learning Community meetings. Two PD sessions entitled “Response to Intervention – Challenges to Implementation” will take place in August and October. The leadership team will provide input on staff Professional Development needs specific to AYP sub-groups and targeted benchmarks.

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data

What strengths and weaknesses were identified in the 2009 data by grade level, subject area, and clusters/strands?

Plan

Strengths: Across all grade levels in reading, students are performing at district and state averages in Reference and Research, and in mathematics Number Sense and Operations. Ninety-two percent of the students in grade 4 and grade 8 combined met standards in Writing. In science, for grade 5, Physical and Chemical Science was their strength, while in grade 8, the strength was in Scientific Thinking. Third grade has maintained the most growth and improved test scores for two consecutive years. Fourth grade made the greatest gains in reading (14%) and seventh grade made the greatest gains in mathematics (21%). The adoption of the third grade teachers collaborative planning strategies (joint planning, targeted and scheduled small group instruction, Benchmarking and shared testing) implemented by the teachers in grades four and seven this year indicate a possible to replicate these strategies with fidelity in grades five, six and eight. Weaknesses: Across all grade levels in reading, the lowest cluster area is Comparison and Contrast. Mathematics in grades five and six continue to lag behind in terms of overall performance. Closer adherence to the math pacing guide and support to improve classroom management must be in place. While grade 3 scored well (79%), grade levels 5, 6 and 8 scored lower. In writing, both grades 4 and 8 struggled with Organization. Fourth grade writers must improve in the area of grammar,

Instructional Calendar Development

What is the process for developing, implementing, and monitoring an Instructional Focus Calendar for reading, writing, mathematics, and science?

Which instructional Benchmarks will be given priority focus, based on need, for each content area (reading, writing, mathematics, and science)?

What is the process to ensure instruction is based on individual students’ needs, as opposed to the master schedule?

How does the school incorporate applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between subjects and relevance to their future?

How does the school incorporate students’ academic and career planning, as well as promote student course selections, so that students’ course of study is personally meaningful?

maintaining writing focus and monitor the time allocated to address a prompt. Eighth grade writers must include greater details and facts to support persuasive positions in a prompt. Additionally, in Science grades 5 and 8 scored lowest in Earth and Space Science.

The Instructional Focus Calendars will be created in July 2009. The IFCs will be updated in October 2009, as determined by the disaggregated data results from the September Pre-Test, and again in January 2010, as determined by the disaggregated data results from the December Progress test. Based on the 2008-2009, FCAT results, emphasis will be placed on clusters and strands that revealed school wide weaknesses and on specific grade levels in reading, writing, mathematics, and science. Teachers and Coaches will be responsible for determining the instructional focus of whole group lessons, and small group/differentiated instruction. Benchmarks were selected as indicated by students’ strengths and weaknesses, which were measured by progress on class work assignments, weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly assessments, and data results. The duration of instruction and emphasis on each Benchmark cluster/strand was determined by the amount of time allotted in the IFCs to ensure the students are exposed to all Benchmarks prior to FCAT testing. Within the amount of time allotted in the IFCs, teachers will provide instruction on each Benchmark clusters/strands based on the District Pacing Guides, allowing students an opportunity to practice, assessing the students’ knowledge via progress monitoring, and re-teaching the Benchmarks as indicated by student’s progress, either in a whole group or small group setting. Administration will implement a continuous cycle of making classroom visitations, evaluating lesson plans, monitoring teachers’ data binders, and conducting meetings with teachers to ensure that the IFCs are being utilized and implemented effectively. Subject area coaches and or grade level chairpersons will also be assigned to teachers who are demonstrating signs of struggling with IFCs implementation and provide teachers’ additional opportunities to attend small learning community sessions, have a mentor assigned to them, and participate in the process of observing other teachers who are successful. We have professional learning communities organized into three working groups; PK-2, 3-5, and 6-8. The teachers will receive support from other colleagues in the Professional Learning Communities, held during biweekly collaborative planning meetings.

Reading: Compare and Contrast was the least proficient cluster and will be given priority focus. Writing: Organization was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus. Mathematics: Measurement was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus. Science: Earth and Space Science was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus.

Once District Interims and FCAT scores are released, the administration monitored and determined student performance and learning gains by teachers and adjusted the master schedule to prevent low performing teachers from teaching the same subject area classes again. In addition, EESAC, UTD and the staff work together to write and adopt waivers to adjust the master schedule each year. The school engages in Secondary School Reform. We adopted a modified block schedule and departmentalized grades 3 and 4 to address the needs of our individual, grade level learners, and AYP subgroups to ensure that the strongest teachers are paired up with the weakest students. We have also organized our professional learning communities into three working groups; PK-2, 3-5, and 6-8.

The school offers students electives courses in art, music, physical education, and services in health connect and tobacco prevention. We offer career studies in 7th grade through Career Exploration infusion in Social Studies and Electronic Personalized Education Plan (EPEP) for our 8th grade students. A daily focus of the school is for teachers to ask themselves, “Are we teaching this with Rigor?” and, “How Relevant is the content based on our students’ everyday lives?” We include current events and diverse materials in our daily lesson plans and annually conduct a Career Day Fair, so that our students are exposed and educated about various occupations and careers, the necessary education, and possible monetary returns.

Annually, after FCAT testing, students and parents participate in a course selection fair that exposes them to next year’s curriculum to inform them of the courses available. After the course selection fair, students meet one-on-one with the Trust Counselor to create their schedule for the upcoming year. Parents are also invited to these meetings and final course selection is sent home for parent’s signature.

Direct the Instructional Focus

How are lesson plans and instructional delivery aligned across grade levels and subject areas?

How are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

DO

Over the summer, administration and teachers meet to create the initial IFCs based on the previous year’s FCAT results that indicated areas of strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, IFCs will be updated and generated based on pre-tests, weekly, bi-weekly and monthly benchmark tests, District Interim assessment tests, and pacing guides. Lesson plans will be created for differentiated instruction, which provides lessons for all levels of students, below mastery, at mastery, and above mastery. Teachers will meet monthly in their small learning communities based on the working groups, and weekly in the grade level meetings throughout the year to share best practices, research-based strategies, evidenced-based strategies, and resources when implementing IFCs.

Focus lessons are developed by grade levels based on strengths and weaknesses from annually assessed FCAT, District Interim assessments, weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly tests and are developed by instructional coaches. The lessons used on the focus calendars are aligned with District Pacing Guides, and clusters/strands benchmark tests. The fifteen minute focus lesson will be taught at the beginning of each class period. Reading, Writing, Math and Science teachers will teach the focus lessons correlated to their subject area. Social Studies teachers and Coaches may also teach focus lessons.

The focus calendar lessons will be monitored by teacher protocols and revised based on student mastery on District Interim assessments, weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly tests. Administration and teachers will ensure the effectiveness of focus calendar lessons by analyzing student data for strengths and weaknesses from focus lessons as they are reassessed intermittently throughout the year. Proficiency of skills and Benchmarks taught should be reflective of skills and Benchmarks taught in whole group instruction.

Assessment

Describe the types of ongoing formative assessments to be used during the school year to measure student progress in core, supplemental, and intensive instruction/intervention.

How are assessments used to identify students reaching mastery and those not reaching mastery?

Maintenance

How is ongoing assessment and maintenance of Benchmark mastery for each grade level and content area built into the Instructional Focus Calendar?

CHECK

Weekly, bi-weekly, and monthly assessments based on the District Pacing Guide will be administered to determine student comprehension, based on IFCs. Five to 10 questions will be utilized to assess each Benchmark cluster and will be re-assessed on a monthly basis.

Student mastery of 80% will be used to ensure student proficiency of each Benchmark cluster. The assessment results will be used to determine future Instructional Focus Calendars of whole group lessons. An item analysis of the assessment will be maintained in each teacher’s data binder and utilized to re-teach the questions that students missed most frequently. Teachers will differentiate instruction utilizing assessed results to provide intensive instruction to those students earning less that 50%. Additional instruction and practice opportunities will be made available for those students earning between 50-70%, and enrichment/advanced instruction to students earning 80-100% mastery.

Teachers will differentiate their instruction for students at or above mastery level to receive the opportunity to work on projects integrated with the benchmarks of the subject areas. Through the use of application, hands-on activities, CRISS, and McRel Strategies, the students will be able to apply their classroom projects to their everyday life. Additionally, to maintain their performance skills of mastery, the students will work on supplemental lessons. Trends of students by AYP subgroups and students who are in the lowest twenty-five percent in reading, mathematics, and science are identified and addressed. All teachers are engaged in Curriculum Mapping and the school’s instructional calendar will be aligned to address student’s academic performance. Professional Development is provided to those teachers who need assistance in helping the students to gain mastery in the particular benchmarks.

Describe the process and schedule for teams to review progress monitoring data (summative and mini assessments) to identify the required instructional modifications that are needed to increase student achievement.

Monitoring

Describe the Principal’s and Leadership Team’s roles as instructional leaders and how they will be continuously involved in the teaching and learning process.

The analysis of instructional progress and test results are scheduled weekly, bi-weekly and monthly by all stakeholders. The teachers will meet weekly in their grade level meeting to review assessment data. Content area teachers will need to meet bi-weekly to discuss and review assessment data. The meetings will be facilitated by the grade level chairperson. The grade level chairperson will present an agenda to the team members and the minutes and signatures of teachers/coaches will be submitted to administration on a weekly/bi-weekly basis. Members of the administrative staff and leadership team will be monitoring the meetings by studying and checking progress via classroom walkthroughs, weekly grade level meetings, report reviews, small learning communities and faculty meeting discussions. The curriculum team engages in the progress monitoring of all tutorial services by analyzing data to determine benchmark strengths and weaknesses and provide remedial and enrichment tutorials.

The Principal and the Leadership Team will meet with teachers to discuss assessment results and student progress. The Principal and the Leadership Team will monitor the individual teacher protocols located in each teacher’s data binder on a bi-monthly basis. Through the use of the teacher’s data protocol, students’ strengths and weaknesses will be identified. Special attention will be given the special needs populations such as homeless, neglected, and delinquent students. Utilizing IFCs, teachers will be able to modify their lessons through the use of differentiated instruction to meet the needs of the students. The coach will work with the teachers to form small learning groups for students who lack mastery in specific areas/benchmarks. In small learning groups, teachers will re-teach and re-assess for student mastery. Coaches will provide teachers with specific grade level IFCs. Moreover, the coach will model whole group instruction and/or assist the teachers in providing small group instructions. Additionally, the role of the coach will be to provide pull-out/push-in interventions, administers the school wide mandated FAIR, and FORF assessments.

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions

Identify the core, supplemental, and intensive instruction and interventions.

How are supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions and tutorials structured to re-teach non-mastered target areas?

How does the school identify staff’s professional development needs to improve their instructional strategies?

Which students will be targeted for supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions?

How will the effectiveness of the interventions be measured throughout the year?

ACT

The core supplemental and intensive instructions and interventions utilized at Linda Lentin K-8 Center are FCAT Explorer, Achieve3000, Gizmos, Reading Plus, Bilingual Tutorial, Accelerated Readers, Voyager Journeys, Voyager Passport, Language!, SOLO, Ticket to Read, SES Programs, and Saturday Academy.

Linda Lentin K-8 Center offers a variety of supplemental opportunities for students who have not mastered target areas. Supplemental opportunities are also extended to students who are on grade level to maintain their proficiency skills. These programs include, but are not limited to, FCAT Explorer, Achieve 3000, Gizmos, Reading Plus, Bilingual Tutorial, Accelerated Readers, Voyager Journeys, Voyager Passport, Language!, before/after school programs, SOLO, Ticket to Read, SES Programs and Saturday Academy. Students are also given the opportunity to participate in extended day programs which offer research-based strategies, referenced by the Florida Center for Reading Research. All the lessons and interventions are re-taught so that non-mastery students are exposed to the same benchmarks and/or standards continuously.

To assist teachers in becoming more diverse in their instructional delivery style, a variety of professional development opportunities are being offered. Our staff is provided with opportunities to attend both school-site and district-sponsored professional development workshops. Teachers can select from various trainings such as Multiple Intelligences, Differentiated Instruction, creative writing, Cooperative Learning, Classroom Management, data protocols, McRel Strategies and CRISS Strategies. Professional Development offerings are determined by surveys, teacher requests, administrative requests, and teacher/administrative conferences, data analysis and administrators’ observations.

Students scoring Level 1 and 2 on the FCAT in reading and Level 1 in mathematics will participate in all tutorial programs. Intensive instructions/interventions will be provided to students scoring below mastery. Students below mastery will be provided tutorial services three times a week, forty-five minutes per session, including but not limited to, using technological programs. Students will also receive services through the SES provider(s).

Professional Learning Communities

NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only

Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status Show Attached Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status (Uploaded on 8/17/2009 2:27:25 PM) Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification Show Attached Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification (Uploaded on 8/17/2009 2:27:46 PM) Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status Show Attached Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification (Uploaded on 8/17/2009 2:28:07 PM)

Pre-School Transition

Enrichment

Describe alternative instructional delivery methods to support acceleration and enrichment activities.

Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

All school site tutorial programs will assess the students with pretests and post program tests to determine baseline data and the students’ progress throughout the year. The curriculum team engages in the progress monitoring of all tutorial services by analyzing data to determine benchmark strengths and provide tutorial services as needed. The effectiveness of the interventions can be measured in two ways. First, the teacher and administration can observe the interventions from monitoring the data through the technological intervention programs and teacher data binders. Secondly, teachers will review the current strategies, observe students behavior, and attendance. Once all aspects have been observed, differentiated instructions should be implemented to assist the non-mastery students achieve mastery. Strategies that are unsuccessful will be replaced with supplemental interventions/new strategies to help the students reach mastery.

Students who are at or exceed mastery levels are placed in TEAM and Gifted courses. The alternative instructional delivery methods to support acceleration and enrichment activities include Guided Reading, CRISS and McRel strategies, One-on-One, teacher directed activity, computer assisted activities, and teacher generated instructional assignments. The supplemental delivery methods that support acceleration and enrichment activities resources are Research-based materials, field trips, virtual tours, web quests, classroom presentations, lab demonstrations, infusing technology to make real world connections, stimulating prior-knowledge, higher order thinking, and content focus assignments. Students who are a part of the enrichment program will be receiving tutorial services. Also, the students will receive supplementary enrichment materials from the core basal.

Students are identified for enrichment strategies as a result of FCAT scores, class work, and projects which are consistent with mastery skills demonstrated. Also, teacher recommendation, parent conferences, and student evaluations are performed to place the students in appropriate classes. Parental support will be provided at all times. Conferences for student placement may consist of an administrator, guidance counselor, the classroom teacher, and the parent/guardian(s) of the student.

PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.) PLC Leader

Frequency of PLC Meetings Schedule (when)

Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis)

Pre-K, 1st, 2nd Grade, ESE, ELL, and Gifted

Mrs. Adrian, Mr. Acebo

Monthly Tuesdays (7:30am – 8:15am)

FAIR Assessments, Professional Development using the Core Curriculum

3rd, 4th and 5th Grade, ESE, ESOL, and Gifted

Mrs. Bailey, Mrs. LaFrance, Ms. Moton

Monthly Wednesdays (7:30am – 8:15am)

Lesson Study Examining student work, RtI meetings, Focused Benchmark instruction based on grade level and school-wide test results

6th, 7th and 8th Grade, ESE, ESOL, and Gifted

Mrs. Wright, Ms. Mayard, Mrs. Frost

Monthly Thursdays (7:30am – 8:15am)

Lesson Studies examining student work, on-going assessments, participation in RtI meetings, aligned benchmark instruction based on grade level and school-wide test results

Each content area team – Reading & Writing

Mrs. Pickens Ms. Moulinos

Monthly Tuesdays (7:30am – 8:15am)

Aligned benchmark instruction based on grade level

Each content area team – Mathematics & Science

Mrs. Lubin Ms. Dicandia

Monthly Wednesdays (7:30am – 8:15am)

Aligned benchmark instruction based on grade level

Title I Administration assists the school by providing supplemental funds beyond the State of Florida funded Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program (VPK). Funds are used to provide extended support through a full time highly qualified teacher and paraprofessional. This will assist with providing young children with a variety of meaningful learning experiences, in

Postsecondary Transition

Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.

environments that give them opportunities to create knowledge through initiatives shared with supportive adults. In selected school communities, the Title I Program further provides assistance for preschool transition through the Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) Program. HIPPY provides in-home training for parents to become more involved in the educational process of their three- and four-year old children.

Linda Lentin K- 8 Center offers a Pre-K program. The Early Growth Indicators Benchmark for Pre-K Readiness is administered to all preschoolers as an initial diagnostic to determine the specific skills and knowledge of students. High Scope strategies are implemented in the preschool classroom as a continuous observational assessment tool to collect data about the improvement of student developmental skill levels. Houghton Mifflin Pre-K is used to measure progress of foundational reading skills. Low-performing students are targeted early. Certified teachers will work with students using Head Start objectives and developmentally appropriate strategies after the specific weaknesses have been identified by data for each student. An exit interview and The Early Growth Indicators Benchmark for Pre-K will be given to each student before entering Kindergarten to assess readiness and any for remediation. An exit interview and the Oral Language Proficiency Scale (OLPS) is administered to all English Language Learners (ELL) and will be given to each (ELL) student before entering Kindergarten to assess readiness and any need for remediation.

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

Reading Goal

Needs Assessment: Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?

What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?

Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?

Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?

Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement

Objective Linked to Area of Improvement

In grades 3-8, 60% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading Test. This represents an increase of 2 percentage points when compared to 58% who achieved mastery in 2008. A 5% increase in Reading Learning Gains is indicated from 59% to 64%. A 6% increase is indicated by the Lowest 25% making Learning Gains in Reading from 63% to 69%. Only 8th grade showed a decrease in reading proficiency (57% to 48%) and in all reading Content Clusters: Words/Phrases (71% to 63%) Main Idea/Purpose (68% to 58%) Comparisons (67%-60%) Reference/Research (54% to 50%). Decreases in proficiency by Content Cluster were indicated in third grade (64% to 63%) and fifth grade (61% to 57%) for Main Idea/Authors Purpose. A decrease in proficiency by Content Cluster is indicated in sixth grade (55% to 50%) for Words/Phrases.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, students in grades three through eight will improve reading skills as evidenced by 72 percent of the student performing at proficiency level or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.

Action StepPerson Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step

Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step

Evaluation Tool

1 Utilize the Florida Continuous Improvement Model to disaggregate the student test results by AYP Subgroups, Content Clusters and Tier groups (Core, Supplemental, and Intensive Levels). Plan differentiated instruction during whole group and tutorial push-in, and pull-out sessions.

Administration Reading Coach and Classroom Teachers

Review teacher data binders for the data protocol and grouping charts to ensure students are grouped appropriately and receiving appropriate instructional support.

District Interim Assessment Report results

2 Student data chats will be conducted by the teachers after the administration of the Baseline Assessment BBA to discuss results and goals.

Administration Reading Coach Classroom Teachers

Administrators will review teacher documentation of student data chats, student journals and work folders during Administrative Classroom Walkthroughs

Student Bi-weekly benchmark progress reports

3 Subject Area teachers will collaborate with the Reading and Language Arts teachers during planning and explicitly teach CRISS and McRel reading strategies.

Administration Reading Coach Classroom Teachers

Administration will monitor lesson plans addressing Content Clusters for the weekly inclusion and teaching of reading strategies during subject area instruction

District Interim Assessment Report results



Based upon the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 56 percent of Students in the Black Subgroup scored at or above Level

Increase the percent of students in the Black subgroup scoring at or above a level 3 from 56% to 72%.

3. The greatest area of deficiency by Content Cluster (56 percent) for the Black Subgroup was Main Idea and Words and Phrases.



Evaluation Tool

1 Retrain teachers in the use of Soar to Success

Classroom Teachers Reading Coach and Reading Tutors

Pull the tutorial logs monthly for students scheduled to receive Soar to Success Support to verify attendance and progress

Soar to Success Progress reports



Based upon the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 56 percent of Students in the Economically Disadvantaged Subgroup scored at or above Level 3. The greatest area of deficiency by Content Cluster (56 percent) for the Economically Disadvantaged Subgroup was Main Idea and Words and Phrases.

Increase the percent of students in the Economically Disadvantage subgroup scoring at or above a level 3 from 56% to 72%.



Evaluation Tool

1 Initiate the pull-out, push-in tutorial services for each subgroup by the reading interventionist.

Administration,Interventionists and grade group.

Monitor and analyze student assessment for proficiency weekly reports with Assistant Principal.

Student benchmark assessment reports



Based upon the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 50 percent of Students in the English Language Learner ELL Subgroup scored at or above Level 3. The greatest area of deficiency by Content Cluster (50 percent) for the ELL Subgroup was Words and Phrases.

Increase the percent of students in the ELL subgroup scoring at or above a Level 3 from 50 percent to 72 percent



Evaluation Tool

1 Classroom teachers use Achieve 3000 for ELL students with fidelity. Teachers provide extensive scheduled practice on word meaning, phrases, expressions and returning to the text to verify answers.

Administration, Coach and Grade Level Teachers

Monitor on-going student progress through benchmark assessments Collection of documentation : small learning community meetings, teachers data binders, and lesson plans by assistant principals.

Monthly Achieve 3000 Computer-Based assessment results. Cella and Insight Assessment results.Data Chat Forms

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed Content/Topic Facilitator Target Date

Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring

Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, students in grades three through eight will improve reading skills as evidenced by 72 percent of the students performing at proficiency level or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.

Response to Intervention-Introduction.

Reciprocal Teaching, CRISS and McRel Strategies- Review

Modeling effective Word Study and Main Idea Instruction for classroom teachers

Lesson Study Protocol –Introduction

Principal

National Board Certified Teachers, Selected Classroom Teachers,

Principal, Selected Teachers Coaches

Reading Coach Administration

Friday, August 21, 2009

Saturday, August 29, 2009

Saturday, August 29, 2009

September 2009

Start date: Week of August 31 – Sept. 4th

Lesson plans Classroom visits Log of data chats with reading coach during collaborative planning sessions throughout the year.

Training during scheduled grade level and faculty meetings. Collaborative Planning scheduled twice a month.

Classroom Teachers Reading Coach Administration

Assistant Principals Reading Coach Classroom

For Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every

Teacher

F.A.I.R. Teachers

Increase the percent of students in the Black Subgroup scoring at or above a Level 3 from 56 percent to 72 percent.

Voyager Passport Grade Chairperson

Start date: Month of Sept.

Grade Levels meet to share and review Voyager Computer Reports and Student Books at Collaborative Planning meetings

Assistant Principals

Increase the percent of students in the Economically DisadvantagedSubgroup scoring at or above a Level 3 from 56 percent to 72 percent.

The Effective use of Student Journaling to improve achievement

National Board Certified Teacher(s)

Start date: Sept. 8th, 2009

Grade Levels meet to share and review Subject Area Student Journals at Collaborative Planning meetings

Assistant Principals

Increase the percent of students in the ELL Subgroup scoring at or above a Level 3 from 50 percent to 72 percent.

Achieve 3000 ESOL Chairperson

Start Date September 14, 2009

Grade Levels meet to share and review Achieve 3000 Computer Reports and Benchmark data at Collaborative Planning meetings

Principal District Bilingual Dept.

On a bi-weekly basis, the Reading Coach/Administrator will review an activity from the model schools “Gold Seal”

and or “Lessons Learned” book to build the knowledge base of all teachers. Instructional Focus Calendars will

also be used in social studies that will be aligned with the reading instructional focus. Linda Lentin will

participate in a school-wide initiative to promote literacy through the use of novels with explicit attention given

to vocabulary.

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)

Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

Classroom Libraries Title 1 $5,000.00

Total: $5,000.00

Technology


Voyager Passport Compass Learning ESOL- Achieve 3000 Accelerated Reader Title I $2,100.00

Total: $2,100.00

Professional Development


Temporary Coverage for Professional Development, Collaborative Planning, Teacher Mini-Grants, McREL training

Title I- Project RISE Grant $7,000.00

Total: $7,000.00

Other


No Data No Data $0.00

Total: $0.00

Final Total: $14,100.00

End of Reading Goal

Mathematics Goal

Needs Assessment: Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?

What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?

Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?

Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?

Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?



In grades 3-8, 61 percent of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test. This represents an increase of three percent compared to 57 percent who achieved mastery in 2008. A seven percent increase is indicated in Mathematics Learning Gains from 60 percent to 67 percent. A one percent increase is indicated in the Lowest 25 percent Learning Gains in Mathematics from 65 percent to 66 percent. Only 8th grade showed a decrease in proficiency and in the Content Clusters for Data Analysis (50% to 42%) Measurement (50% to 42%) and Number Sense (75% to 58%). Decreases in Proficiency by Content Cluster were indicated in sixth grade (67% to 56%) and seventh grade (50% to 38%) for Geometry. A decrease in proficiency by Content Cluster is indicated in fifth grade (50% to 42%) for Data Analysis.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, students in grades three through eight will improve mathematics skills as evidenced by 74 percent of the student performing 3 or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.



Evaluation Tool

1 The school will utilize the Florida Continuous Improvement Model to identify the students in the core, supplemental and intensive by tiers and monitor their progress through interventions and enrichment.

Administration, Coach and Teachers

Review teacher data protocol and grouping charts to ensure students are grouped appropriately and receiving targeted instruction.

Student folders/portfolios.

2 School wide collaborative planning will be implemented to determine core instructional needs based on assessment data, by grade level for students. Design differentiated instructions utilizing Gizmos, Compass Learning and VMath to enhance mathematicsinstruction.

Administration, Coach and Mathematics Teachers

Collaborative planning sessions will be recorded and documented through agenda and minutes to ensure that data is discussed and differentiated instructions are identified.

Common assessment of identified area of instruction administered on a Bi-weekly basis.

3 School wide mathematics journals will be utilized to ensure that students are actively engaged in the lessons. Focused lessons to improve student achievement in higher order thinking, problem solving and hands-on activities will be implemented to reinforce mathematics concepts.

Coach and Teachers

Monitor Student Journals

Student Journals.



Based on the 2009 FCAT results, the ELL student population did not meet AYP as required by NCLB requirements. The greatest area of deficiency by Content Cluster (52 percent) for the ELL Subgroup was Measurement and Algebraic Thinking.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, ELL students in grades three through eight will improve mathematics skills as evidenced by 74 percent of the student performing 3 or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.



Evaluation Tool

1 Increase the use of Manipulative and hands-on activities (2 xs weekly) to reinforce mathematics concepts.

Principal, Classroom Teachers

Math coach will assist teachers in the creation of centers and stations, administration will monitor during classroom visits.

District Interim Assessments

2 Identify all students in the ELL Subgroup on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics Assessment and initiate the pull-out, push-in tutorial

Administrator, Teacher and Interventionist

Monitor student progress on bi-weekly assessments.

Bi-weekly benchmark assessments reports

services for each subgroup by the math interventionist. Utilize real-world problem solving.

3 Implement technology and supplemental programs with fidelity, Compass Learning, Gizmo, and FCAT Explorer.

Teachers Monthly data reports of technology programs.

Increased achievement between assessments generated from reports.



Based on the 2009 FCAT results the Economically Disadvantaged student population did not meet AYP as required by the NCLB. The greatest area of deficiency by Content Cluster (55 percent) for the Economically Disadvantaged Subgroup was Measurement and Algebraic Thinking

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, Economically Disadvantaged students in grades three through eight will improve mathematics skills as evidenced by 74 percent of the student performing 3 or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.



Evaluation Tool

1 Analyze Economically Disadvantaged student data to implement mathematics tutorials to strengthen math skills utilizing diagnostic assessments to determine the needs for targeted benchmark instruction. Revise and increase the frequency of instruction and intervention groups as needed resulting from students’ progress.

Administration, Coach, and Teacher.

Review the results of the common assessment data monthly to determine the progress toward benchmark (80 percent on benchmark assessments).

Benchmark assessments.

2 Schedule small learning community (Primary, Intermediate and Secondary) model/share best practices, and discuss curriculum revisions for student achievement.

Administration Maintain a record of attendance and agenda for each small learning community meeting, monitor teachers’ data binders, and lesson plans.

Administrative Walk-through Checklist.

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed Content/Topic Facilitator Target Date

Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring

Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, ELL students in grades three through eight will improve mathematics skills as evidenced by 74 percent of the student performing Level 3 or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.

Effective use of Gizmos and Compass and Learning to enhance problem-based learning in mathematics.

National Board Certified Teacher Math Coach

8/29/09

Students will leave journals on the desk for administrative walk through.

Administration Math Coach

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, students in grades three through eight will improve mathematics skills as evidenced by 74 percent of the students performing Level 3 or higher on the 2010 FCAT assessment.

Use Next Generation Standards in Mathematics curriculum objective to identify the appropriate hands-on manipulatives. Increase the number of hands- on Mathematics instruction (minimum 2x a week).

National Board Certified Teacher and gradechair

8/29/09

Modeling of lessons and classroom visits Mathematics Hands-on Logs

Administration Math Coach

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)


Math Kits Title I $4,000.00

Total: $4,000.00

Technology


Compass Learning District $2,000.00

GIZMOS District $2,000.00

Total: $4,000.00

Professional Development


Temporary Coverage for Professional Development, Collaborative Planning, Teacher Mini-Grants

Title I-Project RISE Grant District $10,000.00

Total: $10,000.00

Other


No Data No Data $0.00

Total: $0.00

Final Total: $18,000.00

End of Mathematics Goal

Science Goal

Needs Assessment: Based on School Grade Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?

What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?



Based on the 2009 FCAT Science Data, 27 percent of the students in grade five scored a level 3 and above as compared to 28 percent in 2008. This represents a decrease of one percent. The lowest Content Cluster for fifth grade is Scientific Thinking

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards 51 percent of the students will score at level three or above on the 2010 FCAT Science Assessment



Evaluation Tool

1 Pla

Documents

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM 2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANosi.dadeschools.net/sip/09-10/pdf/2911.pdf · 2009. 10. 7. · for Tier1 (Core),Tier 2 (Supplemental)