FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM 2009 – …osi.dadeschools.net/sip/09-10/pdf/6091.pdf · 2009-10-07 · VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

School Name: CITRUS GROVE MIDDLE SCHOOL

District Name: Dade

Principal: Emirce Ladaga

SAC Chair: Cynthia Padron

Superintendent: Alberto M. Carvalho

Date of School Board Approval: Pending

Last Modified on: 08-28-2009

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: Believing that all students can learn, our vision is to challenge students with a rigorous curriculum and enriching experiences in order to prepare them to constructively participate in the society of their time.

MISSION: To teach all children to read, write, think, compute, speak well, love the arts, and behave in socially acceptable ways in order to become economically independent contributing members of society.

Brief History and Background of the School

Citrus Grove Middle is located in the area known as "Little Havana" in central Miami-Dade County, Florida, at 2153 N.W. 3 Street. Built in 1975, this 33 year-old school serves a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural student body and community which services students in grades 6-8. School facilities boast a total of 79,711 feet. In 2006, construction was completed on a three-story modular providing an additional 34 classrooms for a total of 83 classrooms. Instruction is offered through a block schedule. School hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 2:40 p.m. and the school colors are yellow and green. We are proudly known as the "Home of the Eagles."

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Continuity within a leadership team of people who have a proven success record of leading a school through steady improvements in student achievement is our greatest strength. Common planning time will enable vertical and horizontal planning among grade levels. This will help to ensure that teachers are aware of students’ performance, instruction is being redirected, best practices are being shared, so that students’ performance on monthly assessments can be monitored for improvement. Common planning time will also be used to plan for the use of Instructional Focus Calendars. Moreover, District pacing guides will provide the structure that ensures that all benchmarks are taught before the FCAT. Additionally, Microsoft settlement dollars has allotted for 100 new computers for laboratory and classroom use and 20 computers allocated to the English Language Learner (ELL) courses. Experts, following the coaching model, will assist teachers in technology use, analyzing data and suggested teaching strategies in core areas in order to increase teacher capacity within the building. Ultimately, all subgroups will make gains on the FCAT and the school will achieve AYP. Additionally, for the first time in Citrus Grove Middle, on the 2009 FCAT Writing, 88% of the students in 8th grade scored level 3.5 or above. Throughout upcomming year, Professional development will be crucial for new and seasoned teachers. Teachers will participate in professional development activities listed in their Goal Setting IPEGS form, in order to select effective instructional strategies that will enhance learning for subgroups not making AYP. By providing teachers with a myriad of professional development activities geared towards strengthening instructional delivery for specific populations, English Language Learners and Students with Disabilities will acquire the necessary skills to master the Sunshine State Standards. The improvement in students’ scores will be evident on monthly and interim assessments and on the FCAT. Modifications to our inclusion program have led to progressive Learning Gains in our SPED population. Ultimately, all subgroups will make gains on the FCAT (2009-2010) and the school will achieve AYP, learning gains will be evident.

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Citrus Grove Middle serves a predominantly Economically Disadvantaged community. Seventeen percent of the student body is comprised of English Language Learners (ELL) levels 1-4, while an additional 4% are level 5 in post program review.

Additionally, Citrus Grove Middle continues to lose high achieving students to neighboring charter and magnet schools due to its loss of programing in electives and magnet school recruitment. Twenty-six percent of the teachers with direct classroom responsibilities have been teaching for three years or fewer. Nine percent of the staff at Citrus Grove Middle are first year teachers; while 25% are within their first five years of teaching experience. Additionally, 29% of the total student population is identified as truant. District budget cuts may also jeapardize the school’s ability to create an alternative to suspension and academic remediation/enrichment tutoring service during early bird, Saturday and afterschool. Citrus Grove Middle is a Title I school and designated for the 2009-2010 school year as a Correct II school that has not met AYP for 6 years. The curriculum, enhanced technology, student-teacher ratio, teaming, inclusion, and ongoing professional development activities are all combined to meet the challenging performance standards outlined by the Sunshine State Standards, and No Child Left Behind.

Student Demographics

Citrus Grove Middle School is home to approximately 1,059 students; 314 in sixth grade, 368 in seventh and 377 eighth grade students which represent all curriculum groups. Standard curriculum students compose approximately 67% of the total student body. Students With Disabilities (SWD) comprise 15% of the population; this does not include the 45 students in the gifted program. Currently, there are 111 students identified as Learning Disabled, 17 Trainable Mentally Handicapped, 3 Emotional Handicapped, 4 Educable Mentally Handicapped, 2 Speech Impaired, 9 Orthopedically Impaired, 11 with other Health Impaired exceptionalities, and 14 students with Autism. There are 157 English Language Learners (ELL); this accounts for 17% of our school population. Within the ELL population, there are 27 level 1 students, 32 level 2 students, 44 level 3 students, and 54 level 4 students. The ethnic/racial composition of the school is 92% Hispanic, 6% African-American, 1% White Non-Hispanic, and less than 1% Asian/other. Ninety-two percent of the total population is economically disadvantaged and is eligible for; which has made the school eligible for recieving Title I funds. The average daily attendance for the 2008-2009 school year was 94.5%. There have been gains in student achievement during the last three years which are mainly attributable to improved staff development and increased course rigor. Data indicates none of our subgroups have made AYP in reading or mathematics but proficiency has been met in writing. Additionally, the AYP percentage criteria met has increased from 64% to 74% during the last three years.

Student Attendance Rates

Since the 2006 school year attendance percentages have increased by 1.36% points from a total 93.19% to a current 94.55% during the 2008-2009 school year. Increases are due to intense intervention techniques provided by the Truancy Court Pilot Program and the efforts put forth by a team of teachers, counselors, and administrators. Despite falling short of the district’s attendance average by 1.77% for the 2006-2007 school year, and by 1.44% in 2007-2008, we have had yearly gains in attendance. Miami-Dade District 2007-2008: 95.45%; 2008-2009: 95.52%, and Region Center III 2007-2008: 95.54%; 2008-2009: 95.60%. Families facing economic hardships have had an effect on the overall percentage of school attendance due to their unfamiliarity with U.S. compulsory school attendance laws.

Student Mobility

The mobility index of Citrus Grove Middle is 32% (2009). Due to economic hardships, immigration and unemployment, student mobility is a concern for students at Citrus Grove Middle. Additionally, Citrus Grove Middle continues to lose high achieving students to neighboring charter and magnet schools due too loss of programing in electives and magnet school recruitment by feeder pattern schools; this consequently impact our schoolwide test results. Declining enrollment has resulted in the loss of FTE for the last three years.

Student Suspension Rates

In 2006-2007 there were 183 outdoor suspensions and 233 indoor suspensions. In 2007-2008 there were 287 indoor suspensions; in contrast, during the 2008-2009 school year we have decreased this number by 150 indoor suspensions, for a total of 137. Outdoor suspensions also decreased by 72 suspensions from 356 in 2007-2008 to a current 284. The improvements evidenced in both indoor and outdoor suspensions are due to the use of conflict resolution techniques. Strategies such as: anger management, impulse control, empowerment, positive reinforcements and enhancing self confidence in our students, active parental involvement, scheduled mentoring sessions with our student services staff and referrals to outside agencies and school social workers will contribute to continued decreases in student suspension rates.

Student Retention Rates

Since 2006-2007 retention rates have dropped in all three grade levels. In 2006-2007, a total of 56 students (5%) were retained. In 2007-2008 a total of 22 students (2%) were retained. Currently in 2008-2009, a total of 20 students (2%) will be retained. Since 2006 the number of retained students has decreased from 56 students to 20; a 3% decrease. We have had no midyear promotions during the last three years. Citrus Grove Middle retention rates remain below the District’s retention rate of 6%. This progressive decrease is a direct result of the student services personnel, which targeted students at risk and mentored them to ensure academic success. In addition, sixth and seventh grade students were scheduled in PLATO recovery credit courses in order to makeup failed courses and avoid possible retention.

Class Size

Reduction in class size is a priority at Citrus Grove Middle. During the 2008-2009 school year the average class size for core courses was 20.99 students. In general education classrooms the average class sizes are: 6th grade: 18.9 students, 7th grade: 17.1 and 8th grade 21.44 students. The average class size for Special Education students is 15.10; and the average class size for English Language Learners is 17.55. Great emphasis is placed in creating one-on-one mentorships between

students and teachers and low class sizes are critical in pursuing this goal. Great pride is taken in creating our inclusion classrooms. A delicate balance between class size and personnel combinations is crucial for higher achievement.

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Citrus Grove Middle is part of the Miami Senior High feeder pattern. There are three elementary schools which feed into Citrus Grove Middle: Auburndale, Citrus Grove Elementary, and Kensington Park. FCAT school grades for the 2008-2009 year are as follows: Auburndale is an A, Citrus Grove Elementary is a C, and Kensington is also a C. AYP status for our feeder elementary schools follow: Auburndale is Correct I, Citrus Grove Elementary is Correct II, and Kensington is Correct II. Miami Senior High is our Feeder pattern high school, in 2008-2009 they did not meet AYP and are currently graded a C school. Efforts are made to collaborate on aligning a seamless curriculum from elementary to the secondary level which positively impacts student achievement throughout the feeder pattern. Currently, bi-monthly feeder pattern Principals’ meetings have proven to be an effective avenue to share what is and is not working for us. A constant source of concern is finding the time to get all levels, elementary and secondary, to find financial resources to provide coverage for teachers to meet more often for vertical team planning.

Partnerships and Grants

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

The City of Miami’s “Truancy Court Pilot Program” played a prominent role in the decrease of student suspensions and the increase in student attendance. Use of intense intervention techniques and great parent-school follow up was set forth and in place throughout the length of the school year. Additionally, the City of Miami’s “Elevate Miami” transitional program provides a great incentive for students in the 6th grade class who maintain good attendance and above-average grades. The city provides each sixth grade student with a free computer and one year of Internet access at the end of each school year as an incentive for successfully transitioning into middle school. Additionally, Citrus Grove Middle has joined a partnership with the Miami Heat for a technology initiative to be implemented during the 2009-2010 school year which will afford Citrus the opportunity to upgrade some of our current equipment.

Citrus Grove Middle School collaborates with district programs and services, community agencies and the business community in order to integrate educational services to all students. This collaboration includes: Reading First, Exceptional Student Education, Staff Development Department, ESOL/LEP Programs, Migrant, Neglected/Delinquent, At risk Programs, Homeless Agencies, the Parent Academy, the Parent Information and Resource Center (PERC),the PTS/PSTA, and through compacts with local municipalities as well as Metro Dade County. These collaborative efforts will eliminate gaps in service for the ELL students, Students with Disabilities, migrant children, and homeless 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 Ms. Emirce Ladaga

Bachelors – Secondary English Education (5-9 and 6-12), Master - Educational Leadership (K-12).

4 9

Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2008-2009: Grade: C, Reading Mastery: 38%, Math mastery: 37%, Science Mastery: 18%, Writing Mastery: 88%. AYP: 74%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2007-2008: Grade: C, Reading Mastery: 39%, Math mastery: 38%, Science Mastery: 17%, Writing Mastery: 82%. AYP: 72%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2006-2007: Grade: D, Reading Mastery: 36%, Math mastery: 38%, Science Mastery: 15%, Writing Mastery: 79%. AYP: 64%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did

not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2005-2006: Grade: C, Reading Mastery: 38%, Math mastery: 38%, Writing Mastery: 74%.

Assis Principal Dr. Michael Gould

Educational Specialist/ Doctorate - Educational Leadership, Bachelor - Exceptional Student Education, Bachelors – Elementary Education

3 3

Assistant Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2008-2009: Grade: C, Reading Mastery: 38%, Math mastery: 37%, Science Mastery: 18%, Writing Mastery: 88%. AYP: 74%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Math and Reading.


Assistant Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2006-2007: Grade: D, Reading Mastery: 36%, Math mastery: 38%, Science Mastery: 15%, Writing Mastery: 79%. AYP: 64%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Teacher, Carol City Middle School 2005-2006: Grade: C, Reading Mastery: 31%, Math mastery: 25%, Writing Mastery: 82%. AYP: 74%, Black, Hispanic, and ED did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Teacher, Young Women’s Academy For Academic And Civic Development At Jan Mann Opportunity School 2004-2005: Grade: F, Reading Mastery: 13%, Math mastery: 11%, Writing Mastery: 81%. AYP: 63%, Black and ED did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Assis Principal Ms. Ivette M. Martinez

Master -Educational Leadership, Bachelor - Elementary Education, English for Speakers of Other Languages.

4 4



Assistant Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2006-2007: Grade: D, Reading Mastery: 36%, Math mastery: 38%, Science Mastery: 15%, Writing Mastery: 79%. AYP: 64%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Assistant Principal, Citrus Grove Middle School 2005-2006: Grade: C, Reading Mastery: 38%, Math mastery: 38%, Writing Mastery: 74%. AYP: 67%, Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Math and Reading.

Teacher, Lawton Chiles Middle 2004-2005: Grade: B, Reading Mastery: 49%, Math mastery: 51%, Writing Mastery: 82%. AYP: 80%, White, Black, Hispanic, and ED made AYP in Reading. ELL and SWD did not make AYP in Reading. White and Hispanic made AYP in Math. Black, ED, ELL, and

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

SWD did not make AYP in 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 Coach

Penelope Ferguson

Reading M.S. Elementary Ed. Music Education ESOL (endorsement) English 6-12 Elementary Ed. (1-6) Music (K-12)

3 3

2008-2009 (Teacher): Grade C, Reading Mastery: 38%, Learning Gains: 61%, Lowest 25% Gains: 76%. Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Reading.


2006-2007 (Teacher): Grade D, Reading Mastery: 36%, Learning Gains: 52%, Lowest 25% Gains: 62%. Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Reading.

Reading Coach

Oksana Sosa

ESOL K-12 Reading K-12

6 3



2006-2007 (Teacher): Grade D, Reading Mastery: 36%, Learning Gains: 52%, Lowest 25% Gains: 62%. Hispanic, ED, ELL, and SWD did not make AYP in Reading.

* 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)

• New and seasoned teacher mentoring provided through MINT trained Leadership Team professionals.

Principal Assistant Principal Leadership Team

On-going

• Regular meetings of new teachers with the Administrative Team.


On-going

• When recruiting for new teachers soliciting referrals from current employees, college campus job fairs and universities will be used.


On-going

Name Certification Teaching Assignment

Professional Development/Support

to Become Highly Qualified

Beverly Downing 169979

English Reading

Removal from Reading Department teacher assigned to Language Arts for the 2009-2010 school year.

Jorge Euceda 208874 ESOL

Language Arts

Mr. Euceda is registered to take add on certification in English. Assistance with completion of English 6-12 Certification test.

Staff Demographics

Teacher Mentoring Program

Alfredo Hernandez 230719

Exceptional Student Education

ESE-Trainable Mentally Handicapped

Teacher will be assigned to ESE Inclusion position for the 2009-2010 school year.

Jaqueline Silva 279498

Temporary Educators Certificate, Exceptional Student Education

ESE-Varying Exceptionalities

Ms. Silva is currently in the process of taking her final class towards Reading Endorsement. Assistance with completion of Reading Endorsement coursework.

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

70 9 34 29 29 30 86 6 1 19

Mentor NameMentee

AssignedRationale

for PairingPlanned Mentoring

Activities

Cynthia PadronPatricia Arrington

Mrs. Padron is MINT trained and is also a National Board Certified Teacher who has taught Special Education for over 15 years. Currently, she is Special Education Department Chairperson and works closely with her mentee who is also a SPED teacher. Ms. Padron will provide mentoring and modeling.

Common Planning Time Peer Observations Modeling Conferencing

Mario Alvarez Laura Rosen

Mr. Alvarez is MINT trained and the Mathematics Department Chairperson. He will be instrumental in assisting Mr. Ramsey since they are both in the same department. He will provide support with planning and modeling.


Maria De la Rosa Yunex Echezabal

Mrs. De La Rosa is MINT trained and the Science Department Chairperson. She teaches the same subject as her mentee Mr. Alvarez. She will provide support with planning, mentoring and modeling.


ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Note: For Title I schools onlyTitle I, Part A

Services are provided to ensure students requiring additional remediation are assisted through after school programs, Saturday Academy and/or summer recovery courses. The school and District coordinates with Title II and Title III in ensuring staff development needs are met. Support services are provided to all 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, evidenced-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 wide program include an extensive Parental Program, Supplemental Educational Services; and provide support for assessment and implementation monitoring. Other components that are integrated into the school wide program include an extensive Parental Program; 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

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

Services are provided through the district for pull-out English Language Learner (ELL) tutoring via two full-time para-professionals allocated specifically from Title III for ELL tutoring. District provides support such as education materials and personnel to improve the education of immigrant and English Language Learners.

Title X- Homeless

At Citrus Grove Middle, homeless assistance is provided by Project Upstart Homeless Children and Youth in Transition.

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

Citrus Grove Middle offers a non-violence and anti-drug program to students with DFYIT (Drug Free Youth In Town). The program incorporates field trips, community service, drug tests and counseling.

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

Not Applicable

Head Start

Not Applicable

Adult Education

Not Applicable

Career and Technical Education

Not-applicable

Job Training

Not-applicable

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

Parental:

Involve parents in the planning and implementation of Title I program and extend an open invitation to our school’s parent resource center in order to inform parents regarding available programs, their rights under No Child Left Behind and other referral services.

Efforts are being made to increase parent engagement/involvement through the following: (1) EESAC participation; (2) academic and extracurricular programs; (3) Parent Academy workshops to promote a learning environment at home and use of the parent portal; (4) networking with the Community Involvement Specialist; and (5) participation in the school Parent Resource Center.

Conducting 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 and the Title I parental Involvement Monthly Activities Report 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 any students in the school in “homeless situations” as applicable.

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

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

School-based RtI Team

Principal Provides a common vision for the use of data-based decision making, ensures that the school-based team is implementing Rtl, conducts assessment of Rtl skills of school staff, ensures implementation of intervention support and documentation, ensures adequate professional development to support Rtl implementation and communicates with parents regarding school based Rtl plans and activities.

Assistant Principals: Will assist the principal in all duties as related to Rtl. They provide a common vision for the use of data-based decision making, ensure that the school-based team is implementing Rtl, conduct assessment of Rtl skills of school staff, ensure implementation of intervention support and documentation, ensure adequate professional development to support Rtl implementation and communicate with parents regarding school based Rtl plans and activities.

Reading Instructional Coaches Provide guidance on K-12 reading plan; facilitate and support data collection activities; assist in data analysis; provide professional development and technical assistance to teachers regarding data-based instructional planning and creating intervention plans. Develop, lead and evaluate school core content standards/programs: identify and analyze existing literature on scientifically based curriculum/behavior assessment and intervention approaches. Identify systematic patterns of student need while working with personnel to identify appropriate, evidenced based intervention strategies; assists with whole school screening programs that provide early intervening series 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.

Exceptional Student Education Liaison (Teacher): Participates in student data collection, integrates core instructional activities/materials into rigorous instruction and collaborates with general education teachers through such activities in co-teaching.

Student Services Personnel: Provide quality services and expertise on issues ranging from program design to assessment and intervention with individual students. In addition to providing interventions, school student services employees continue to link child-serving and community agencies to the schools and families to support the child’s academic, emotional, behavioral and social success.

Department Chairpersons: Assist the principal and assistant principals as liaisons to school staff as related to Rtl. Participate in data collection, deliver rigorous instruction/intervention, collaborate with other staff to implement interventions and integrates appropriate materials/instruction, and collaborates with general education teachers through such activities as co-teaching, modeling and mentoring.

School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

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

The Rlt Leadership Team will meet bi-weekly to engage in the following activities: - review school-wide data and link to instructional decisions - review progress monitoring data at grade level and classroom level to identify students who are meeting/exceeding or at risk with regards to benchmark standards - collaborate regularly to problem solve - share effective practices - evaluate school improvement implementations - facilitate the process of building consensus - make decisions about implementation

The principal, Educational Excellence School Advisory Council (EESAC), and Rlt Leadership Team discuss, review, make corrections and publish the School Improvement Plan. The team provides targets for academic and social areas that need to be addressed. The team will help set SMART expectations for instruction (rigor and relevance). The RtI will facilitate the development of a systematic approach to teaching (gradual release, essential questions, activating strategies, teaching strategies, extending, refining and summarizing); and align processes and procedures.

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

RtI Implementation

Baseline data: Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN), FCAT Progress Monitoring: PMRN, Interim Testing Midyear: Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading (FAIR), Diagnostic Assessment for Reading (DAR), Reading Plus Data, Interim Assessments End of Year: FAIR, Interim Testing, PMRN, FCAT Frequency of Data Days: Twice a month for data analysis.

Professional development will be provided during teachers’ common planning time and small sessions will occur throughout the year. Two professional development sessions entitled: “Rtl: Problem Solving Model: Building Consensus Implementing and Sustaining Problem Solving/Rlt” and “Challenges to Implementating Data-based Decision-Making and Supporting and Evaluating Interventions” will take place in mid-August and in October. The Rtl Team will also evaluate additional staff professional development needs during the bi-weekly Rtl Leadership Team Meetings.

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data

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

Instructional Calendar Development

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

Plan

Strengths: Lowest 25% students showed gains across all grade levels, by 3% points in reading and by 4% points in mathematics for an average of 76% and 72%, respectively. Eighth grade students increased Writing scores with a 5% point gain from 82% to 87%. Seventh grade reading students outscored all other content areas and grades with 74% of the students meeting high standards. Seventh grade Mathematics students outscored all other content areas and grades with 65% of the students meeting high standards.

Weakness: Results on the Mathematics 2009 FCAT showed a decline of 1% point from 32% in 2007-2008 to 31% in 2008-2009. Across all grade levels the lowest content area is sixth grade Mathematics; evidenced by 81% of the students scoring below state mastery level. In seventh grade, students scored below state mastery level in reading and mathematics at 68% and 69%, respectively. Additionally, 13% of eighth grade students scored below state mastery level in writing and 84% in science. The weakest content cluster for students in grade sixth through eighth is Words and Phrases and Reference and Research, with an average of 50% correct in each category.

The District Instructional Focus Calendars (IFC) are developed in July 2009. Following data analysis and review, secondary benchmarks will be infused into the District IFCs to address students’ needs based on 2009 FCAT results. The calendars are again updated in October as determined by disaggregated data results from the Baseline Test, and again in January as determined by the disaggregated data results from the Interim Assessments. Benchmarks of greatest remedial need are

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?

selected based on assessment results and student needs. Student progress is measured by class-work assignments, assessments and data results. Administrators will ensure that the Instructional Focus Calendars are used daily; observations, lesson plans and teacher-administrator conferences will take place. Assistance in the form of modeling, mentoring and professional development will be provided by the Rlt for teachers who struggle with implementing the IFC’s.

Reading- Vocabulary and Reference and Research will be given priority focus. Writing- Persuasive writing, focus and vivid details will be given priority focus. Mathematics- Basic operations and Number Sense will be given priority focus. Science- Physical Science and Scientific thinking will be given priority focus.

FCAT 2009 scores were disaggregated and learning gain percentages were calculated by teacher. Master schedule decisions were based on a combination of student need and teacher strengths and/or weaknesses. An analysis of learning gains allowed the strongest teachers to be paired with the weakest students.

For all three grade levels students are registered in social studies and elective courses that combine the particular content area with Career Planning. Students in the 7th and 8th grade complete a career path on-line portfolio known as the EPEP, this portfolio can include work from all content areas and is tracked with the students through their middle school years and into high school.

Students, parents and teachers take part in the articulation process in the Spring of 2010. Student services personnel make homeroom and elementary school visits to allow one-on-one meetings with students in order to make an informed decision for their class choices. Students who reach high standards are encouraged to choose two electives of their choice. Students who do not meet state mastery work with the counselor for possible options. Students select their elective courses based on choice and availability. Parents are encouraged to meet with the school counselor and students in order to reach final course selection decisions.

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

Grade level teachers meet weekly to determine areas of students’ strengths and weaknesses as demonstrated by class-work assignments and assessment results. Lesson plans are created for differentiating instruction, which provide lessons for all levels of students, below mastery and above mastery. Additionally, the Rlt is composed of liaisons from all content areas; the bi-weekly meetings discuss vertical and horizontal alignment across the grades and areas as they pertain to lesson planning and instruction. Early release sessions are designed to provide grade level teachers time to meet throughout the year to share effective practices and resources used for implementing the Instructional Focus Calendars.

Grade level teachers will develop lessons that align with the IFC’s and District Pacing Guides. Lessons that provide student results will be shared at weekly department meetings. Model classrooms will be in place to provide open mentoring for new and seasoned teachers. Model classrooms will be selected by the RtI team and will represent each department.

Student mastery on mini-assessments based on focus lessons will determine if the lesson needs to be revised and/or retaught. Data results will be analyzed by the Rlt and will determine effectiveness of focus lessons. Assessments will be disaggregated by teacher and by period to specifically note strong and weak classes.

Assessment

CHECK

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?

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.

Mini-assessments will be in place monthly to determine student comprehension, based on the IFCs. Mini- assessments will be composed of ten or fewer questions that address all benchmarks covered during that period of time. FCAT Focus on-line quizzes will be used for reading and mathematics.

Mastery level for all mini-assessments will be set at 70% to ensure proficiency of each benchmark and to correlate with the district grading scale of a C, average grade. Assessment results will be used and debriefed in a whole group lesson to ensure that weak benchmark clusters are strengthened prior to the following assessment. Item Analysis reports will be disaggregated by content area and by grade and will be used to reteach the questions that students missed most frequently. Teachers will provide intense instruction in the areas that are identified as below mastery. Pull-out tutoring will assist with one-on-one lessons and practice opportunities for identified students in the area of need.

Students at and above mastery level will receive enrichment opportunities by participating in homeroom project activities. Selected homeroom classes have been hand scheduled to include groups of students with similar areas of strengths and weaknesses. The homeroom teacher will provide remediation and/or enrichment in the content area needed.

Teachers will meet weekly. Grade level on Wednesday mornings and by department on Monday mornings. The meetings will be facilitated by the Team Leader and Department Chair personnel. A teacher will be designated to take minutes from the meeting and the notes will be submitted weekly, along with the meeting agenda to the supervising administrator. Members of the administrative staff will attend meetings on a rotating basis.

The principal and the leadership team will meet with teachers at weekly meetings, IPEG conferences, and one-on-one chats to discuss assessment results and student progress. Lesson plans, data binders, grade verification reports and student files will be utilized to provide evidence of instruction, assessment, and differentiation to address individual student needs. Progress monitoring will be provided by the grade-level counselor and will be utilized to document the process of teaching, assessing, re-teaching and re-assessing. Special attention will be given to special needs populations such as migrant, homeless, neglected and delinquent students. The coaches will assist teachers with providing instruction on the focus lessons either by modeling whole group instruction or assisting the teacher in providing small group instruction. The coaches will also help with the process of recording and charting student scores.

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?

ACT

Resources from the state adopted textbooks which are designed for intensive instruction (Voyager and Language) will be utilized. Computer programs (Compass Learning and Riverdeep) in addition to Internet instructional web sites such as FCAT Explorer will also be utilized for intensive instruction and remediation. Differentiated Instruction and Focus Calendars are followed in the core classes. Moreover, Saturday Academy, Pull Out Tutoring, Before School and After School Tutoring services are offered to all students as supplemental instruction. In addition, students who need remedial assistance in Math and/or Reading, as evidence by their FCAT Reading or Math score, will be placed in Intensive Math and/or Intensive Reading. Academic intervention is evident by various methods used throughout the school year such as Weekly Progress Reports, Student Services, Credit Checks, Plato Recovery Courses, etc.

Resources from state adopted materials which are designed for intensive instruction will be utilized. Instructional software such a: Reading Plus, Compass Learning, and Teen Biz computerized programs, in addition to Internet instructional Web sites such as FCAT explorer will also be utilized. Effective practices and strategies will be shared and discussed during Professional

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 Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification Show Attached Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification

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?

Enrichment

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

Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

Learning Communities (PLC’s) to provide different methods towards remediation and enrichment as applicable to the population.

Professional development sessions for Citrus Grove Middle are determined by a school wide needs assessment surveys and by requests made by the Rlt based on data disaggregation, discussion and observation.

Supplemental Education Services (SES) are based on Title I parameters that include free or reduced lunch applications. As a result of progress monitoring (assessments and assignments) all students scoring below mastery in reading, mathematics, writing, or science will be encouraged to apply for afterschool SES tutoring services. Bottom quartile students will be serviced with pull-out and push-in model tutoring based on achievement data. English Language Learners will be provided with pull-out Title III tutoring services in their home language. All students will be encouraged to participate in Saturday Academy tutoring; where intensive instruction, test preparation and writing enrichment sessions will be held weekly from December through the 2010 FCAT.

Student progress for membership in SES, Saturday Academy and Pull-out tutoring sessions will be progress monitored regularly as custom groups on EDUSOFT. Baseline, mini, and interim assessment results will be disaggregated to track progress or lack there of. All personnel providing services to a student not making mastery will meet to discuss data and to provide possible interventions that need to be set forth. Attendance incentives will be provided to students who attend regularly. Tutoring strategies that are unsuccessful will be discontinued and replaced with alternative interventions.

Students at and above mastery level will receive enrichment opportunities through homeroom sessions by expert teachers. Selected homeroom classes have been individually scheduled to include groups of students with similar areas of strengths and weaknesses. The homeroom teacher will provide hands-on projects, fast paced enrichment and rigorous instruction to support acceleration. Supplemental materials, explicit and deep understanding of instruction will take place for students who typically exceed mastery level within the content area class.

Based on the FCAT 2009 results, progress monitoring of district assessments in specific areas will be provided. Teacher recommendations are used for placement in gifted, advanced, or honor courses. Parent, teacher, counselor recommendations are also taken into consideration and conferences are held to discuss expectations for the student in the higher level course, as well as their continued parental involvement.

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

Frequency of PLC Meetings Schedule (when)

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

Special Education Teachers, all grade and content areas.

Cynthia Padron, SPED Department Chairperson

Weekly Fridays during common planning time

Analyze effective Inclusion practices and model classrooms.

Language Arts, Reading, SPED and ELL teachers.

Penelope Ferguson, Reading Department Chairperson

Monthly Monday mornings Analyze the effectiveness of the Reading FCIM calendars and Literacy Plan progress.

Language Arts, SPED and ELL Teachers

Joseph Luc, Language Arts Teacher

Monthly Wednesday mornings Analyze school initiatives and progress in the area of writing.

Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status Show Attached Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification

Pre-School Transition

Postsecondary Transition

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

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

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 6-8, 38% of students achieved level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading. This represents a decrease of 1% point as compared to 39% in 2008. Words and Phrases was the lowest scoring content cluster for sixth grade with 38% proficiency; Reference and Research was the lowest scoring content cluster for seventh grade with 50% of students at proficiency; and Comparisons was the lowest scoring content cluster for the eighth grade with with 47% proficiency. Additionally, 61% of the total population made learning gains which is a 1% increase as compared to 2008.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, students in grades 6-8 will improve their reading skills as evidenced by 72% scoring at a level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Reading.

Action StepPerson Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step

Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step

Evaluation Tool

1 The school will implement the new FAIR (Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading) to monitor student progress.

Principal, Assistant, Principal, Reading Coach

Review FAIR data reports to ensure teachers are assessing students according to the created schedule

Printout of FAIR (Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading) and Interim Assessments

2 Develop and implement a school-wide timeline (instructional focus calendar) and monitor teacher implementation of instructional focus calendar.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Reading Coach, Language Arts Chairperson

Administrators will be aware of the IFC’s upcoming focus and monitor implementation through classroom walkthroughs.

FAIR (Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading) and Interim Assessments

3 Provide pull-out opportunities for the purpose of differentiated instruction, focusing on specific student deficiencies and/or enrichment, and monitor implementation through interim assessments

Principal, Assistant Principal, Reading Coach

Administrators will review log for student data chats during walkthroughs.

FAIR (Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading) and Interim Assessments



In grades 6-8, 34% of Hispanic students scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading. This represents a decrease of 1% point as compared to 35% in 2008.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, Hispanic students will improve their reading skills as evidenced by 72% scoring at a level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Reading.



Evaluation Tool

1 Implement a diagnostic/ prescriptive intervention tutorial program through a Supplemental Educational


Student progress is assessed using FAIR Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM)

FAIR data will be used to determine progress.

Service provider during after school and Saturday mornings, to address specific reading deficiencies.

every 20 days. Percent of students making adequate progress toward benchmark is calculated.



In grades 6-8, 14% of English Language Learners scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading. This represents a decrease of 2% as compared to 16% in 2008.

Given instruction based on Sunshine State Standards English Language Learner students will improve their reading skills as evidenced by 72% scoring a level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Reading.



Evaluation Tool

1 Schedule English Language Learners immersed in regular core classes for weekly use of the Bilingual Content Curriculum laboratory with two full time para-professional to address language deficiencies, class work and homework help


Student progress is assessed using FAIR Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM) every 20 days. Percent of students making adequate progress toward benchmark is calculated.




In grades 6-8, 21% of Students with Disabilities scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading; this was a 6% point decrease when compared to 27% in 2008.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, Students with Disabilities will improve their reading skills as evidenced by 72% achieving a level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Reading.



Evaluation Tool

1 Follow core subject area Instructional Focus Maps in all Special Education classes; provide pull-out and intervention opportunities for all students enrolled in the inclusion program.


Student progress is assessed using FAIR Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM) every 20 days.


Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed Content/Topic Facilitator Target Date

Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring

Person Responsible

for Monitoring

In grades 6-8, 38% of students achieved level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading. This represents a decrease of 1% point as compared to 39% in 2008. Words and Phrases was the lowest scoring content cluster for sixth grade with 38% proficiency; Reference and Research was the lowest scoring content cluster for seventh grade with 50% of students at proficiency; and Comparisons was the lowest scoring content cluster fot the eighth grade with 47% proficiency. Additionally, 61% of the total population made learning gains which is a 1% gain as compared to 2008.

Effective implementation of the Instructional Focus Calendar and Pacing Guide.

Reading Coach and Language Arts Department Chairperson

August 2009

Lesson Plans Classroom Visits Student Ongoing Progress Monitoring

Administrators, Reading Coach

In grades 6-8, 34% of Hispanic students scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading. This represents a decrease of 1% point as compared to 35% in 2008.

Explicit Teaching Reading Coach August- September 2009



In grades 6-8, 14% of English Language Learners scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading; this represents a decrease 2% as

Effective writing practices for English Language Learners.

Reading Coach August- September 2009

Lesson Plans Classroom Visits Student Ongoing


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

Teacher

compared to 16% in 2008. Progress Monitoring

In grades 6-8, 21% of Students with Disabilities scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Reading. This represents a decrease of 6% when compared to 27 % in 2008.

Effective practices for the diverse learner.

SPED Department Chairperson

August- September 2009



Implementation of Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM), school wide professional development, and frequent

modeling of effective reading strategies for teachers will ensure responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every

Teacher. Reading coaches and mentor level teachers will be utilized to help and support teachers to

strengthen their teaching skills in reading, build school site capacity, and provide for the follow-up activities

that extend the application of new knowledge to impact student achievement. The reading coach and

administrators will be used for all functions necessary for implementing and maintaining the school’s reading

program. These would include modeling effective strategies for content area teachers, designing and

developing professional development, differentiated instruction, monitoring progress, and analyzing student

data among others. The Rtl teachers will be utilized within their classrooms to network and model exemplary

reading teaching strategies and techniques for staff as needed.

Budget:

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

Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

Research-Based Program(s)/material(s) for Voyager District Funds $25,000.00

Research-Based Program(s)/material(s) for Language! District Funds $3,600.00

Total: $28,600.00

Technology


Smart Boards District Funds $8,352.00

Total: $8,352.00

Professional Development


No Data No Data $0.00

Total: $0.00

Other


Before/After school tutoring and Saturday Academy Title I $10,000.00

Total: $10,000.00

Final Total: $46,952.00

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 6-8, 37% of students scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics. This represents a decrease of 1% point as compared to 39% 2008. The 6th grade lowest scoring content cluster was Number Sense and Measurement, with 33% each. The 7th grade lowest content cluster Geometry with 38% proficiency and the 8th grade lowest scoring areas were Measurement, Geometry, Data Analysis, and Algebraic Thinking, with a 33% score each.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, students in grades 6-8 will improve their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.



Evaluation Tool

1 Implement a diagnostic/prescriptive intervention tutorial program after school via Supplemental Educational Service provider (SES), and on Saturdays (beginning in January 2010) to address specific Mathematics deficiencies of all students desiring additional assistance.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Mathematics Department Chairperson

Student data will be reviewed via OPM with periodic checkpoints to ensure effective grouping and target the need of students based on assessment results.

Baseline, mini-assessments and Interim Assessments results.

2 Use manipulatives to enhance and facilitate understanding of lowest content clusters.


Department Chairperson will assist teacher in the creation of rigorous lesson planning and teaching strategies.


3 Incorporate computer programs such as FCAT Explorer and Compass Learning to strengthen weakest content clusters.


High achieving students will be scheduled into a homeroom enrichment program where Mathematics coach and teacher will use a fast paced, rigor based approach to enrichment

Baseline, mini-assessments and Interim Assessments results



In grades 6-8, 34% of Hispanic students scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics. This score is the same as the 2008 FCAT Mathematics score.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, Hispanic students will increase their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring at level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.



Evaluation Tool

1 Schedule all Bilingual Content Curriculum BCC mathematics classes for weekly use of the Mathematics computer laboratory with a full time Para-professional and teacher, providing on-going hours to address mathematics deficiencies.


Focused walkthroughs by administrators will be used to ensure all math teachers are following the IFC’s and action steps.

Effectiveness will be determined by baseline, mini-assessments and Interim Assessments results.

2 Identify and closely monitor the progress of the lowest 25%; revise instruction and intervention groups by the Mathematics coach as indicated by student progress.



Learning gains achieved between assessments.



In grades 6-8, 33% Economically Disadvantaged students scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics; this score is the same as the 2008 FCAT Mathematics score.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, Economically Disadvantaged students will increase their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring at level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.



Evaluation Tool

1 Increase the use of core mathematics operations, essential questions, and activities to reinforce mathematics concepts.


Focused walkthroughs by administrators will be used to ensure all math teachers are following the IFC’s and action step


2Identify and closely monitor the progress of the lowest 25%; revise instruction and intervention groups.






In grades 6-8, 16% of English Language Learners scored a level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics. This represents a decrease of 1% point compared to 17% who achieved level 3 or above on the 2008 FCAT Mathematics.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, English Language Learner students will increase their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring at level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.



Evaluation Tool

1 Schedule all Bilingual Content Curriculum (BCC) mathematics classes for weekly use of the Mathematics computer laboratory with a full time para-professional and teacher, providing on-going sessions to address mathematics deficiencies.


Focused waltkthroughs by administrators will be used to ensure all math teachers are following the IFC’s and action step.


2 Identify and closely monitor the progress of the lowest 25%; revise instruction and intervention groups by the Mathematics coach as indicated by student progress.






In grades 6-8, 25% of Students with Disabilities scored level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics. This represents a decrease of 3% point decrease compared to 28% who achieved level 3 or above in 2008.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, Students with Disabilities will increase their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring at level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.



Evaluation Tool

1 Plan supplemental instruction/ intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction


Focused walkthroughs by administrators will be used to ensure all math teachers are following the IFCs and action step




In grades 6-8, 31% of the Lowest 25% achieved level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics. This

Given instruction based on Sunshine State Standards the Lowest 25% will improve their mathematics skills as

represents a decrease of 1% point as compared to 32% who achieved proficiency in 2008.

evidenced by 74% scoring a level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.



Evaluation Tool

1 Determine core instructional needs by reviewing assessment data for all students within Lowest 25%. Plan differentiated instruction and use evidence-based instruction/ interventions within the mathematics blocks.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Mathematics Department Chairperson.

Departments will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark

Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered bi-weekly.




Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Students in grades 6-8 will improve their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.

Aligning classroom instruction with IFCs to use student achievements data to drive the instructional process with the help of Edusoft.

Mathematics Department Chairperson, Expert Mathematics and Science Teachers, Curriculum Support Specialists.


Lesson Plans Classroom Visits Progress Monitoring


Students with Disabilities will increase their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring at level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.

Using of Exam View test generator for in-class teacher assessment progress monitoring.

Mathematics Department Chairperson, Expert Mathematics and Science Teachers, Curriculum Support Specialists.




Lowest 25% will improve their mathematics skills as evidenced by 74% scoring a level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics.

Training on the Florida Continous Improvement Model.

Administrators August- September 2009


Principal, Assistant Principal

Budget:




Total: $0.00

Technology



Total: $8,352.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $10,000.00


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?



In 8th grade, 16% of students achieved level 3 or above on the 2009 FCAT Science. This is a 2% point increase as compared to 14% who achieved level 3 or above in 2008. The weakest content cluster was Earth and Space, with 36% proficient.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, students in grade eight will improve their science skills as evidenced by 50% scoring level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Science.



Evaluation Tool

1 Conduct District developed "Essential Labs" using inquiry-based thinking skills for all science classes in all grade levels within a weekly scheduled laboratory session guided by a full-time para-professional and their grade-level science teacher.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Science Department Chairperson

The lab schedule will be implemented with fidelity and monitored by administrators

Focused waltkthroughs by administrators will be conducted to ensure all math teachers are following the Instructional Focus Calendars (IFC) and that lab logs are being utilized.

2 Implement a diagnostic/ prescriptive intervention tutorial program after school and on Saturdays via a supplemental educational service provider, to address reading deficiencies of all students through specific content area strategies.


Student data will be reviewed via OPM with periodic checkpoints to ensure effective results and target the need of students based on assessment results.

Learning gains achieved between Baseline and Interim assessments as well as Gizmo assessments

3 Increase the use of computer-based programs to enhance project based activities such as: Gizmos, Riverdeep and FCAT Explorer


Student data will be reviewed via OPM with periodic checkpoints to ensure effective results and target the need of students based on assessment results.

Learning gains achieved between Baseline and Interim assessments.



Strategy for Follow-

up/ Monitoring

Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, students in grade 8 will improve their science skills as evidenced by 50% scoring level 3 or above on the 2010 FCAT Science.

Aligning classroom instruction with IFC’s to use student achievements data to drive the instructional process with the help of Edusoft.

Administrators, Science Department Chairperson, Curriculum Support Specialists




Budget:



Gizmos District Funds $2,100.00

Total: $2,100.00

Technology



Total: $8,352.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $10,000.00


End of Science Goal

Writing 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?



On the 2009 FCAT Writing, 88% of the students in 8th grade scored level 3.5 or above. This score fell 2% points short of the 2008 FCAT 90% goal.

Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, on the 2010 FCAT Writing Test, 68% of the 8th grade students will score a 4.0 or above.



Evaluation Tool

1 Implement research-based writing strategies through programs such as Teen Biz.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Reading Coach, Language Arts Department Chairperson

Administrators will monitor revision and editing process by reviewing student drafts.

Evidence found in student folders

2 Administer school-developed diagnostic writing pre and post-tests to all students in preparation for the FCAT Writing using both expository and persuasive prompts.



Progress between the pre-test prompt And mid-year Prompt.

3 Incorporate the writing process throughout the core classes using journals



Samples from journal entries




Person Responsible

for Monitoring

On the 2010 FCAT Writing, 68% of the 8th grade students will achieve a 4.0 or above.

Implementing research-based writing strategies in Language Arts classes.

-Language Arts Department Chairperson

September 2009

Monitor student writing portfolios, notebooks, journals.

Administrators, Language Arts Chairperson

Budget:



Journals for students Journals for students $1,000.00

Total: $1,000.00

Technology


Teen Biz for English Language Learners District $2,000.00

Total: $2,000.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $0.00


End of Science Goal

Parent Involvement Goal

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

Were parent involvement activities and strategies targeted to areas of academic need?

Based on information from surveys, evaluations, agendas, or sign-ins:

Was the percent of parent participation in school activities maintained or increased from the prior year?

Generally, what strategies or activities can be employed to increase parent involvement?



Based on 2008-2009 School Climate Survey results, 19% of parents feel the school does not involve them in matters directly affecting their child’s academic progress. This is a 2% decrease from 21% in 2007-2008.

By June 2010, the school will increase 5% the percentage of parents who feel they are involved in matters pertaining to their child’s education.



Evaluation Tool

1 Offer meetings and workshops after school

Principal Review Telephone Logs Parent Attendance sign-in sheets

2 Use of Connect Ed Messaging System

Principal, Community Involvement specialist

Telephone message delivery logs

Response to calls made

3 Maintain parental telephone logs and activity reports

Community Involvement Specialist

Tally Parental Involvement Monthly school activity reports

Title I Parental Involvement Monthly Activities report.



Increase communication between school and home. From a current 20% of the students' parents contacted to 25% parent contact each quarter in 2008-2009.

Increase teacher communication with parents to 25% of the students’ parents each quarter.



Evaluation Tool

1 Conduct a needs assessment through EESAC.

EESAC Chairperson Collect feedback surveys from parents and teachers

Surveys

2 Provide Professional Development on home-school communication.

Assistant Principal Collect Professional Development participation logs.

Professional Development Evaluation.




Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Increase teacher communication with parents to 25% of students each quarter.

Effective two-way communication

Student Services Personnel

November 2009

Monitoring of parent contact log.

Monitoring of parent contact log.

Budget:



Community Involvement Specialist for Parent Outreach Title I $9,000.00

Total: $9,000.00

Technology


Connect Ed Messaging Services District $1,000.00

Total: $1,000.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $0.00


End of Parent Involvement Goal

Other GoalsNo Other Goals were submitted for this school

FINAL BUDGET

Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance

No Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance

School Advisory Council


Goal Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

Reading Research-Based Program(s)/material(s) for Voyager District Funds $25,000.00

Reading Research-Based Program(s)/material(s) for Language! District Funds $3,600.00

Writing Journals for students Journals for students $1,000.00

Science Gizmos District Funds $2,100.00

Parental Involvement Community Involvement Specialist for Parent Outreach Title I $9,000.00

Total: $40,700.00

Technology


Reading Smart Boards District Funds $8,352.00

Mathematics Smart Boards District Funds $8,352.00

Writing Teen Biz for English Language Learners District $2,000.00

Science Smart Boards District Funds $8,352.00

Parental Involvement Connect Ed Messaging Services District $1,000.00

Total: $28,056.00



No Data No Data No Data $0.00

Total: $0.00

Other


Reading Before/After school tutoring and Saturday Academy Title I $10,000.00

Mathematics Before/After school tutoring and Saturday Academy Title I $10,000.00

Science Before/After school tutoring and Saturday Academy Title I $10,000.00

Total: $30,000.00


Intervenenmlkj Correct IInmlkji Prevent IInmlkj Correct Inmlkj Prevent Inmlkj NAnmlkj

School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

The majority of the SAC members are not employed by the school district. The SAC is composed of the principal and an appropriately balanced number of teachers, education support employees, students (for middle and high school only), parents, and other business and community citizens who are representative of the ethnic, racial, and economic community served by the school.

Yes. Agree with the above statement.

Projected use of SAC Funds Amount

Library books and media 3000

Instructional technology 4000

Student incentives 2999

Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year

SAC Members

Collaborate with the school community to carry out provisions of the school improvement plan. Support the school and community with funding for the purchase of educationally relevant materials. Address educational concerns of the school and community.

Members

1) Emirce Ladaga , Principal

2) Cynthia Padron, SAC Chair

3) Hector Bouret, Student

4) Kevin Chow, Student

5) Roslyn Granville, Teacher

6) Carlos Sala, Teacher

7) Johnny Junes, Teacher

8) Louis Martinez, Business Member

9) Sesin Bechara, Parent

10) Carlos Porras, Parent

11) Maria Porras, Parent

12) Sobeyda Bouret, Parent

13) Hector Bouret, Parent

14) Frank Valle, School Support Personnel

15) Luis Arrazcaeta, School Support Personnel

16) Robert Fischer, Union Steward

AYP DATA

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Dade CITRUS GROVE MIDDLE SCHOOL 6091

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Click here to see Number of students in each groupRead: 1035Math: 1035

2008-2009 School Grade1:

C Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

NO

This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2).

This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model.

GroupReadingTested 95% of the students?

MathTested 95% of the students?

65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading?

68% scoring at or above grade level in Math?

Improved performance in Writing by 1%?

Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%?

Percent of Students below grade level in Reading

SafeHarborReading

Percent of Students below grade level in Math

SafeHarborMath

% of students on track to be proficient in reading

Growth model reading

% of students on track to be proficient in math

Growth model math

2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2008 2009 Y/N 2007 2008 Y/N 2008 2009 Y/N 2008 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N

TOTAL4 100 Y 99 Y 34 N 34 N 85 88 Y NA 65 66 N 66 66 N 37 N 38 N

WHITE NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

BLACK 100 Y 100 Y NA NA NA NA NA NA

HISPANIC 100 Y 99 Y 34 N 34 N 85 88 Y NA 65 66 N 66 66 N 38 N 38 N

ASIAN NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

AMERICAN INDIAN NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 100 Y 99 Y 33 N 33 N 83 88 Y NA 66 67 N 67 67 N 36 N 37 N

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 100 Y 100 Y 14 N 16 N 60 77 Y NA 84 86 N 83 84 N 29 N 29 N

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 99 Y 99 Y 21 N 25 N 60 67 Y NA 73 79 N 72 75 N 20 N 23 N





C Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

NO










SafeHarborReading


SafeHarborMath




Growth model math


TOTAL4 100 Y 100 Y 35 N 34 N 87 85 N NA 70 65 NA 68 66 NA 36 NA 49 NA


BLACK 100 Y 100 Y NA NA NA NA NA NA

HISPANIC 99 Y 99 Y 35 N 34 N 87 85 N NA 70 65 NA 68 66 NA 37 NA 49 NA



ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 99 Y 99 Y 34 N 33 N 87 83 N NA 70 66 NA 67 67 NA 35 NA 47 NA

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 100 Y 99 Y 16 N 17 N 72 60 N NA 91 84 NA 85 83 NA 28 NA 47 NA

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 99 Y 99 Y 27 N 28 N 50 60 Y NA 88 73 NA 92 72 NA 23 NA 27 NA





D Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

NO










SafeHarborReading


SafeHarborMath




Growth model math


TOTAL4 98 Y 98 Y 30 N 32 N 88 87 N NA 67 70 NA 66 68 NA 35 NA 51 NA


BLACK 97 Y 98 Y NA NA 80 79 N NA NA NA

HISPANIC 98 Y 98 Y 30 N 32 N 88 87 N NA 66 70 NA 67 68 NA 36 NA 51 NA



ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 98 Y 98 Y 30 N 33 N 87 87 N NA 67 70 NA 66 67 NA 34 NA 51 NA

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 98 Y 98 Y 9 N 15 N 73 72 N NA 87 91 NA 82 85 NA 38 NA 47 NA

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 91 N 89 N 12 N 8 N 66 50 N NA 77 88 NA 80 92 NA 23 NA 23 NA

Dade School DistrictCITRUS GROVE MIDDLE SCHOOL2008-2009

Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned

% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)

38% 37% 88% 18% 181

Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.

% of Students Making Learning Gains

61% 59% 120

3 ways to make gains:● Improve FCAT Levels● Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5● Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2

Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?

76% (YES) 69% (YES) 145

Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.

Points Earned 446 Percent Tested = 99% Percent of eligible students tested

School Grade C Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned


39% 38% 82% 17% 176



60% 62% 122



73% (YES) 68% (YES) 141



School Grade C Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned


36% 38% 79% 15% 168



52% 59% 111



62% (YES) 60% (YES) 122



School Grade D Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

Documents

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM 2009 – …osi.dadeschools.net/sip/09-10/pdf/6091.pdf · 2009-10-07 · VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS