FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM 2010 – …williamstaros-msedportfolio.weebly.com/uploads/4/1/8/9/... · 2018. 10. 12. · (Use this data to complete Sections 1 -4

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM2010 – 2011 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

School Name: SIX MILE CHARTER ACADEMY

District Name: Lee

Principal: Patricia Duffy

SAC Chair: Priscilla Doyle

Superintendent: Larry Tihen- Interim

Date of School Board Approval:

Last Modified on: 10-13-2010

Dr.Eric J.Smith, Commissioner

Florida Department of Education325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Dr.Frances Haithcock, ChancellorK-12 Public Schools

Florida Department of Education325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

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

School Grades Trend Data(Use this data to complete Sections 1-4 of the reading and mathematics goals and Section 1 of the writing and science goals.)

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data(Use this data to complete Section 5 of the reading and mathematics goals and Section 3 of the writing goals.)

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data(Use this data to inform the problem solving process when writing goals.)

HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS

List your school’s highly qualified administrators and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an administrator, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of school grades, FCAT performance (Percentage data for Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

List your school’s highly qualified instructional coaches and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current

Position NameDegree(s)/

Certification(s)

# of Years at Current School

# of Years as an

Administrator

Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT (High

Standards, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AYP information along with

the associated school year)

Principal Patricia Duffy

BA Canisus College, History; MA, History, State University of New York at Buffalo; MS ED, Educational Administration; Canisius College

3 10

Principal in 09-10 Grade B Reading Mastery: 77% Math Mastery: 69% Science Mastery: 48% Writing Mastery: 83% Met AYP: No

Principal Of Curriculum in 08-09 Grade A Reading Mastery: 77% Math Mastery:69% Science Mastery: 50% Writing Mastery: 82% Met AYP: Yes

07-08 Grade C Reading Mastery: 65% Math Mastery:57% Science Mastery: 31% Writing Mastery: 83% Met AYP: No

school, number of years as an instructional coach, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of school grades, FCAT performance (Percentage data for Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Instructional coaches described in this section are only those who are fully released or part-time teachers in reading, mathematics, or science and work only at the school site.

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Describe the school-based strategies that will be used to recruit and retain high quality, highly qualified teachers to the school.

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

List all instructional staff and paraprofessionals who are teaching out-of-field and/or who are NOT highly qualified.

Staff Demographics

Please complete the following demographic information about the instructional staff in the school who are teaching at least one academic course.

Subject Area NameDegree(s)/ Certification

(s)

# of Years

at Current School

# of Years as an

Instructional Coach

Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT

(Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AYP information along with the associated school year)

No data submitted

Description of StrategyPerson

Responsible

Projected Completion

Date

Not Applicable (If not, please explain why)

1 1. Regular meetings of new teachers with Assistant Principal and/or TLC AP/TLC Ongoing

2 2. Regular walk-throughs and feedback given to teachers Principal/AP Ongoing

Name Certification Teaching Assignment

Professional Development/Support

to Become Highly Qualified

Jennifer FrankEnglish 5-9, Art K-12 Gifted

Courses to be taken through Lee County for endorsement

*When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).

Teacher Mentoring Program

Please describe the school’s teacher mentoring program by including the names of mentors, the name(s) of mentees, rationale for the pairing, and the planned mentoring activities.

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 Teachers

% Reading Endorsed Teachers

% National Board

Certified Teachers

% ESOL Endorsed Teachers

60 10.0%(6) 75.0%(45) 15.0%(9) 5.0%(3) 6.7%(4) 83.3%(50) 6.7%(4) 0.0%(0) 75.0%(45)

Mentor NameMentee

AssignedRationale

for PairingPlanned Mentoring

Activities

Linda MatzkeAmy Vaspasiano

Mrs. Matzke has 9 years of experience with CSUSA having students achieve at high levels. SHe is also our Middle School Team Lead, and our school TLC.

APPLES, monthly meetings

Mrs. Matzke has 9 years of experience

Linda Matzke Dennis Burke

with CSUSA having students achieve at high levels. She is also our Middle School Team Lead, and our school TLC.


Linda MatzkeKandice Giesler

Mrs. Matzke has 9 years of experience with CSUSA having students achieve at high levels. She is also our Middle School Team Lead, and our school TLC.


Linda MatzkeHannah Strader



Linda MatzkeLeah Zaremba



Linda Matzke Todd Calfee



Linda MatzkeShannon Lakeman



Linda MatzkeCarissa Valerio



Mrs. Matzke has 9 years of experience

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Note: For Title I schools only

Please describe how federal, state, and local services and programs will be coordinated and integrated in the school. Include other Title programs, Migrant and Homeless, Supplemental Academic Instruction funds, as well as violence prevention programs, nutrition programs, housing programs, Head Start, adult education, career and technical education, and/or job training, as applicable.

Linda MatzkeBridget Higgins

with CSUSA having students achieve at high levels. She is also our Middle School Team Lead, and our school TLC.


Linda Matzke Norma Olea



Linda MatzkeDonald Pittaway



Linda Matzke Vicky Madden



Linda MatzkeJennifer Frank



Title I, Part A

Title I, Part C- Migrant

Title I, Part D

Title II

Title I coordinates with other programs funded under NCLB through the SIP (School Improvement Plan) process. Within this plan, schools complete a Professional Development Plan in collaboration with Title II. The PDP is concentrated in reading, math, science and writing to meet the needs of the targeted subgroups not making AYP. The PDP includes teachers, paraprofessionals, and administrators. As part of the School Advisory Council, parents are included in this planning process. Each school completes a needs assessment before writing goals for the year. School improvement plans are written to ensure compliance with all state and national regulations. This collaboration ensures that all programs funded under NCLB use funds to support schools, not supplant district obligations.

Title III

Title I, Part A coordinates with Title III to expand academic enrichment opportunities for ELLs. These services include after school tutorials, professional development, supplemental scientifically research based resources and materials.

Title X- Homeless

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

Violence Prevention Programs

Nutrition Programs

Food and Nutrition Services offers healthy meals to all students. This includes ensuring that families are offered free and reduced lunch applications throughout the year.

Housing Programs

Head Start

Adult Education

Career and Technical Education

Job Training

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions). How does it work with other school teams to organize/coordinate RtI efforts?

School-based RtI Team

The RtI Leadership Team for Six Mile Charter Academy consists of the following members: Abbie DelGratta, RTI Chair, Patricia G. Duffy, Principal

The RtI Leadership team at Six Mile Charter Academy meets on a monthly and as needed basis to analyze school and/or student progress data in order to monitor the progress of students receiving interventions and to identify students in need of

Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership Team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan. Describe how the RtI Problem-solving process is used in developing and implementing the SIP?

more support. The team uses the five-step problem solving process as outlined in the district’s Response to Intervention Manual. The roles of each member are as follows: Classroom Teacher • Keep ongoing progress monitoring notes in a RTI folder (DIBELS, curriculum assessments, SAT 10 or FCAT scores, work samples, anecdotals) to be filed in cumulative folder at the end of each school year or if transferring/withdrawing • Attend RTI Team meetings to collaborate on & monitor students who are struggling • Implement interventions designed by RTI Team for students in Tier 2 & 3 • Deliver instructional interventions with fidelity Reading or Math Coach/Specialist • Attend RTI Team meetings • Train teachers in interventions, progress monitoring, differentiated instruction • Implement Tier 2 & 3 interventions • Keep progress monitoring notes & anecdotals of interventions implemented • Administer screenings • Collect school-wide data for team to use in determining at-risk students Speech-Language Pathologist • Attend RTI Team meetings for some Tier 2 & Tier 3 students • Completes Communication Skills screening for students unsuccessful with Tier 2 interventions • Assist with Tier 2 & 3 interventions through collaboration, training, and/or direct student contact • Incorporate RTI data when guiding a possible Speech/Language referral & when making eligibility decisions Principal/Assistant Principal • Facilitate implementation of RTI in your building • Provide or coordinate valuable and continuous professional development • Assign paraprofessionals to support RTI implementation when possible • Attend RTI Team meetings to be active in the RTI change process • Conduct classroom Walk-Throughs to monitor fidelity RTI Chair • Often RTI Team facilitators • Schedule and attend RTI Team meetings • Maintain log of all students involved in the RTI process • Send parent invites • Complete necessary RTI forms • Conduct social-developmental history interviews when requested School Psychologist • Attend RTI Team meetings on some students in Tier 2 & on all students in Tier 3 • Monitor data collection process for fidelity • Review & interpret progress monitoring data • Collaborate with RTI Team on effective instruction & specific interventions • Incorporate RTI data when guiding a possible ESE referral & when making eligibility decisions ESE Teacher/Staffing Specialist • Consult with RTI Team regarding Tier 3 interventions • Incorporate RTI data when making eligibility decisions Specialist (Behavior, OT, PT, ASD) • Consult with RTI Team • Provide staff trainings Social Worker • Attend RTI Team meetings when requested • Conduct social-developmental history interviews and share with RTI Team ESOL/ELL Representative • Attend all RTI Team meetings for identified ELL students, advising and completing LEP paperwork • Conduct language screenings and assessments Provide ELL interventions at all tiers

The RtI Leadership Team assists with the analysis of school, classroom, and student level data in order to identify areas for school improvement. Additionally, the team assists with the evaluation of the student response to current interventions, curricula, and school systems.

Describe the data source(s) and the data management system(s) used to summarize data at each tier for reading, mathematics, science, writing, and behavior.

RtI Implementation

Six Mile Charter Academy utilizes the CSUSA adopted data management system, SIS system. This allows the school

Literacy Leadership Team (LLT)

NCLB Public School Choice

Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status No Attached a copy of the Notification of SINI Status to Parents Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification No Attached a copy of the CWT Notification to Parents Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status No Attached a copy of the SES Notification to Parents

*Elementary Title I Schools Only: Pre-School Transition

Describe plans for assisting preschool children in transition from early childhood programs to local elementary school programs as applicable.

*Grades 6-12 Only

Sec. 1003.413(b) F.S.

For schools with Grades 6-12, describe the plan to ensure that teaching reading strategies is the responsibility of every teacher.

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

comprehensive access to all school and district databases, thereby assisting with the detailed analysis of district, school, classroom, and student level data. These analyses assist with the tracking of student progress, management of diagnostic, summative, and formative assessment data, and the response of students to implemented interventions.

The Lee County School District has developed a comprehensive training and support plan for schools. District teams have been established to support schools in the implementation of the RtI process for all students. The teams provide training, coaching, modeling, data analysis, and guidance to assist schools with the implementation of supplemental and intensive strategies designed to improve the educational outcomes for students with academic and behavioral needs.

The teams are comprised of teachers with knowledge in effective instructional practices, data analysis, behavior management techniques, and ESOL strategies. All team members are provided on-going staff development training regarding the RtI process and research based practices to support the academic and behavioral needs of students.

Identify the school-based Literacy Leadership Team (LLT).

Describe how the school-based LLT functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions).

What will be the major initiatives of the LLT this year?

School-Based Literacy Leadership Team

Rachel Dunlap-K, Laura Eding-1, Lisa Horn-2, Will Staros-3, Kelly Chechilo-4, Richard Peters-5, Kelly Bright-MS, Linda Matzke-MS, Joelle Frantz- Specialists, Patricia Duffy- Administration

LLT meets weekly to review data and target instruction based on areas of need. LLT also disseminates information to their team members and conducts weekly walk-throughs to ensure research-based teaching strategies are being implemented within the classrooms. FAIR data, as well as, data from CSUSA benchmark assessments are used to identify areas of weakness. Grade level teams then create Instructional Focus Calendars to ensure these areas are targeted during instructional time.

The LLT will hold professional development trainings on research-based teaching strategies to increase reading proficiency. Monthly Instructional Focus Calendars will target areas of weakness by grade level. LLT will monitor effective teaching practices so that students make learning gains in reading.

*High Schools Only

Note: Required for High School - Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S., Sec. 1003.413(g)(j) F.S.

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?

Postsecondary Transition

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

Describe strategies for improving student readiness for the public postsecondary level based on annual analysis of the SchoolFeedback Report

Monthly staff development training with all staff members on guided reading, higher order questioning, and read alouds. Weekly staff development on Marzano Teaching Strategies.

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

Reading Goals

* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).

Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:

1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in

reading

Reading Goal #1:

80% of students will meet high standards in reading.

2010 Current Level of Performance:* 2011 Expected Level of Performance:*

77% 80%

Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

Anticipated Barrier Strategy

Person or Position

Responsible for Monitoring

Process Used to Determine

Effectiveness of Strategy

Evaluation Tool

1

Hispanic subgroup and economically disadvantaged subgroup will make gains.

ESOL teachers will work with ELLs. Progress monitoring of subgroup populations.

ESOL department, teachers

benchmark assessments, FAIR data

CSUSA benchmarks, FAIR


2. Students achieving above proficiency (FCAT

Levels 4 and 5) in reading

Reading Goal #2:

Students will incease above proficiency percentage by 4%


36% 40%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

differentiated instruction

protection of instructional time, PD training

teachers, administration

progress monitoring on student by student level

benchmark assessments, FAIR, administrative walk-throughs


3. Percentage of students making Learning Gains in

reading 70% of students will make learning gains and increase

Reading Goal #3:achievement levels to meet AYP goals.


65% 70%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1targeted interventions for deficit areas

research-based strategies PD training

administration, lead teachers

progress monitoring on student-by-student basis

benchmark assessments, FAIR


4. Percentage of students in Lowest 25% making

learning gains in reading

Reading Goal #4:

65% of lowest 25% will make learning gains in reading.


58% 65%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

targeted interventions based on needs assessments

tier 2 and tier 3 interventions, ESE teachers focus on annual goals

RtI team, ESE department

progressing monitoring on student-by-student basis


Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the applicable subgroup(s):

5A. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly

Progress (AYP) in reading

Reading Goal #5A:

Hispanic subgroup will increase level of performance to 72% proficiency.

Reading Goal #5A: Ethnicity(White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)


64% 72%



Person or Position

Responsible for


Effectiveness of Evaluation Tool

Monitoring Strategy

1

language ESOL teachers will provide support to ELLs, classroom teachers will teach using ESOL strategies

ESOL department, lead teachers

progress monitoring on student-by student basis


Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:

5B. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly


Reading Goal #5B:

Reading Goal #5B: English Language Learners (ELL)




Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring

Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy

Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted


5C. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly


Reading Goal #5C:

Reading Goal #5C: Students with Disabilities (SWD)






Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted


5D. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly


Reading Goal #5D:

Percentage of ED students not meeting grade level will be reduced by 10%.

Writing Goal #5D: Economically Disadvantaged


59% 69%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1differentiated instruction

protection of instructional time, PD training on DI strategies

adminstration, lead teachers

administrative walk-throughs

benchmark assessment, FAIR

Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community

(PLC) or PD Activity

Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.

PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject

PD Facilitator and/or PLC

Leader

PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,

subject, grade level, or school-

wide)

Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. ,

Early Release) and Schedules (e.g.,

frequency of meetings)

Strategy for Follow-

up/Monitoring

Person or Position


Differentiated Instruction all/reading teachers all teachers weekly, ongoing administrative

walk-throughs administration

Reading Budget:

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

Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

textbooks, consumables CSUSA $8,000.00

Subtotal: $8,000.00

Technology


No Data No Data No Data $0.00

Subtotal: $0.00

Professional Development


small group PLCs IRA Conference Title II $2,600.00

Subtotal: $2,600.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00

Grand Total: $10,600.00

End of Reading Goals

Mathematics Goals




mathematics

Mathematics Goal #1:

Students achieving proficiency in mathematics will increase 5%.


69% 74%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

Lack of teaching to deficit areas

Creation of Insructional Focus Calendars based on deficit areas identified by CSUSA benchmark assessments, intensive math class for students projected to get a 1 or 2

classroom teachers, administration

review of benchmark data, progress monitoring on student-by-student basis

benchmark assessments



Levels 4 and 5) in mathematics


Students achieving above proficiency in mathematics will increase 5%


32% 37%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

lack of challenging math instruction

High School level algebra course for high achieving 8th grade students, higher order questioning within classroom

classroom teacher, administration

administrative walk-throughs, Progress monitoring on a student-by-student basis

benchmark assessments, administrative walk-through forms


3. Percentage of students making Learning Gains in

mathematics


Students making gains in mathematics will increase by 8%


62% 70%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

lack of focus on deficit areas

Instructional Focus Calendars based on areas of weakness, Progress monitoring plans with each student

classroom teacher, administration

Progress monitoring on a student-by-student basis



4. Percentage of students in Lowest 25% making

learning gains in mathematics


Students in the lowest 25% will increase their learning gains in mathematics by 19%


56% 75%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

lack of focus on areas of weakness

tier 2 and tier 3 interventions, ESE teachers focus on annual goals

classroom teachers, RtI chair, ESE teacehrs

ESE teachers will focus on annual goals, progress monitoring on student-by-student basis

benchmark assessments, easycbm graphs for RtI students

Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the applicable subgroup(s):

5A. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly

Progress (AYP) in mathematics

Mathematics Goal #5A:

White students will increase proficiency in mathematics by 8%; Hispanic students will increase proficiency in mathematics by 19%

Mathematics Goal #5A: Ethnicity(White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)


White: 66%, Hispanic: 55% White: 74%, Hispanic: 74%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

lack on focus on areas of weakness, lack of ESOL teaching strategies

Progress Monitoring Plans for each student in these subgroups, ESOL teaching strategies

classroom teachers, ESOL specialists

administrative walk-throughs, progress monitoring on student-by-student basis

administrative walk-through forms, benchmark assessments


5B. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly


Mathematics Goal #5B:

Mathematics Goal #5B: English Language Learners (ELL)






Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted


5C. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly


Mathematics Goal #5C:

Mathematics Goal #5C: Students with Disabilities (SWD)






Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted


5D. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly


Mathematics Goal #5D:

Students who are economically disadvantaged will increase proficiency in mathematics by 21%



53% 74%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1lack of focus on areas of weakness

progress monitoring plans

classroom teacher progress monitoring on student-by-student basis





PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject


Leader



wide)





up/Monitoring

Person or Position


Envision Math Training all CSUSA Math

Coaches

K-5: all classroom teachers, 6-8: all math teachers

August 2010 administrative walk-throughs administration

Mathematics Budget:



Envision and Math Connects New textbooks CSUSA $95,000.00

Subtotal: $95,000.00

Technology



Subtotal: $0.00



Singapore Math Title II $3,096.00

Subtotal: $3,096.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00


End of Mathematics Goals

Science Goals




science

Science Goal #1:

Students achieving proficiency in science will increase 18%


42% 60%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

lack of hand-on activities and labs

ongoing hand-on application science experiments through use of new grade level science kits

classroom teachers

team leads walk-through forms



Levels 4 and 5) in science

Science Goal #2:

Students achieving above proficiency in science will increase by 11%


14% 25%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1lack of hand-on application experiments

use of new grade level science kits for experiments

team leads walk-throughs walk-through form




PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or PLC Leader



wide)





up/Monitoring

Person or Position


Generating and Testing Hypotheses

all Curriculum Cadre team all ongoing

CSUSA QUEST tool, administrative walk-throughs

administration

Science Budget:



McGraw-Hill textbooks CSUSA $3,500.00

Subtotal: $3,500.00

Technology


Overheads CSUSA $750.00

Subtotal: $750.00




Subtotal: $0.00

Other


Grade Level Science Experiment Kits CSUSA $6,372.00

Subtotal: $6,372.00


End of Science Goals

Writing Goals



1. Students achieving Adequate Yearly Progress

(FCAT Level 3.0 and higher) in writing

Writing Goal #1:

Students achieving high standards in writing will increase 5%


83% 88%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

lack of focus on writing strategies and/or evaluation areas

teaching 4-square planning method for writing, teaching rubric for student self-evaluation and improvement

classroom teachers, language arts teachers

monthly writing prompts, walk-throughs

CSUSA writing prompt and FCAT grading rubric


2. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly

Progress (AYP) in writing

Writing Goal #2A:

Writing Goal #2A: Ethnicity(White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)






Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted




Writing Goal #2B:

Writing Goal #2B: English Language Learners (ELL)






Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted




Writing Goal #2C:

Writing Goal #2C: Students with Disabilities (SWD)






Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted




Writing Goal #2D:







Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted




PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject

PD Facilitator

and/or PLC Leader



wide)





up/Monitoring

Person or Position


4-Square Writing Method

all Linda Matzke all August 2010

walk-throughs, student planning papers for writing prompts

team leads

FCAT Writes Grading Rubric

3-8 language arts Linda Matzke

3-5 classroom teachers, 6-8 language arts teachers

September 2010 walk-throughs team leads

Writing Budget:



SuperKids, ImagineIt!, GlencoeEmbedded writing/language arts curriculum with reading curriculum

CSUSA $9,500.00

Subtotal: $9,500.00

Technology



Subtotal: $0.00




Subtotal: $0.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00


End of Writing Goals

Attendance Goal(s)


Based on the analysis of attendance data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:

1. Attendance

Attendance Goal #1:Our current attendance rate is 98.51%

2010 Current Attendance Rate:* 2011 Expected Attendance Rate:*

98.51% Our goal is to maintain over 95% attendance rate.

2010 Current Number of Students with Excessive Absences (10 or more)

2011 Expected Number of Students with Excessive Absences (10 or more)

0 15

2010 Current Number of Students with Excessive Tardies (10 or more)

2011 Expected Number of Students with Excessive Tardies (10 or more)

0 28



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

Parent compliance Education campaign and notification when students have missed or been tardy 10 or more school days

administration Monitoring and comparison of attendance rates

SIS




PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject


Leader



wide)

Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules

(e.g., frequency of meetings)


up/Monitoring

Person or Position


Correlation between attendance and student achievement

all administration all teachers December 2010 SIS administration

Attendance Budget:




Subtotal: $0.00

Technology



Subtotal: $0.00




Subtotal: $0.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00

Grand Total: $0.00

End of Attendance Goal(s)

Suspension Goal(s)


Based on the analysis of suspension data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:

1. Suspension

Suspension Goal #1:We will decrease suspensions through Positive Behavior Support and educating students by 20%.

2010 Total Number of In –School Suspensions 2011 Expected Number of In- School Suspensions

200 170

2010 Total Number of Students Suspended In School 2011 Expected Number of Students Suspended In School

70 50

2010 Number of Out-of-School Suspensions 2011 Expected Number of Out-of-School Suspensions

55 40

2010 Total Number of Students Suspended Out of School

2011 Expected Number of Students Suspended Out of School

30 20



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

Change in Code of Conduct

Teach students about new code of conduct, develop behavioral interventions for RtI students

Susan Ingalls monthly data chat SIS




PD Target Dates

and Schedules

PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject


Leader

Participants (e.g. ,

PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide)

(e.g. , Early Release) and

Schedules (e.g.,



up/Monitoring

Person or Position


No Data Submitted

Suspension Budget:




Subtotal: $0.00

Technology



Subtotal: $0.00




Subtotal: $0.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00

Grand Total: $0.00

End of Suspension Goal(s)

Dropout Prevention Goal(s)Note: Required for High School - F.S., Sec. 1003.53


Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:

1. Dropout Prevention

Dropout Prevention Goal #1:

*Please refer to the percentage of students who

dropped out during the 2009-2010 school year.

2010 Current Dropout Rate:* 2011 Expected Dropout Rate:*

2010 Current Graduation Rate:* 2011 Expected Graduation Rate:*





Evaluation Tool

No Data Submitted




PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject


Leader

PD Participants

(e.g. , PLC,subject,

grade level, or school-wide)

Target Dates and Schedules

(e.g. , Early Release) and

Schedules (e.g.,



up/Monitoring

Person or Position


No Data Submitted

Dropout Prevention Budget:




Subtotal: $0.00

Technology



Subtotal: $0.00




Subtotal: $0.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00

Grand Total: $0.00

End of Dropout Prevention Goal(s)

Parent Involvement Goal(s)


Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:

1. Parent Involvement

Parent Involvement Goal #1:

*Please refer to the percentage of parents who

participated in school activities, duplicated or

unduplicated.

100% of CSUSA parents will be involved with school activities.

2010 Current Level of Parent Involvement:* 2011 Expected Level of Parent Involvement:*

100% 100%



Person or Position




Evaluation Tool

1

Time and/or money CSUSA parents will commit 20 volunteer hours for their first student, and 10 hours per student thereafter. Parents who are unable to volunteer time may instead purchase classroom items in lieu of volunteer hours.

classroom teachers, administration

monitoring of parent hours

SIS




PD Content /Topic

and/or PLC Focus

Grade Level/Subject


Leader



wide)





up/Monitoring

Person or Position


Parent-Teacher Co-Op

all Leading Edge Team

parents and teachers monthly meeting

Review of school-wide events

Co-Op committee: Leading Edge Team, Priscilla Doyle, and Lyn Bradford

Parent Involvement Budget:




Subtotal: $0.00

Technology



Subtotal: $0.00




Subtotal: $0.00

Other



Subtotal: $0.00

Grand Total: $0.00

End of Parent Involvement Goal(s)

Additional Goal(s)No Additional Goal was submitted for this school

FINAL BUDGET

Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance

Show Attached School’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/27/2010 10:13:40 AM)

School Advisory Council


Goal Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

Reading textbooks, consumables CSUSA $8,000.00

Mathematics Envision and Math Connects New textbooks CSUSA $95,000.00

Science McGraw-Hill textbooks CSUSA $3,500.00

Writing SuperKids, ImagineIt!, Glencoe

Embedded writing/language arts curriculum with reading curriculum

CSUSA $9,500.00

Subtotal: $116,000.00

Technology


Science Overheads CSUSA $750.00

Subtotal: $750.00



Reading small group PLCs IRA Conference Title II $2,600.00

Mathematics Singapore Math Title II $3,096.00

Subtotal: $5,696.00

Other


Science Grade Level Science Experiment Kits CSUSA $6,372.00

Subtotal: $6,372.00


Intervenenmlkj Correct IInmlkj Prevent IInmlkj Correct Inmlkj Prevent Inmlkji 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

No data submitted

Describe the activities of the School Advisory Council for the upcoming year

Review and approval of SIP, review of school-wide goals, needs assessment for budgeting

AYP DATA

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

No Data FoundNo Data FoundNo Data Found

Lee School DistrictSIX MILE CHARTER ACADEMY2008-2009

Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned

% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)

77% 69% 82% 50% 278

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

73% 70% 143

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?

73% (YES) 71% (YES) 144

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 565 Percent Tested = 99% Percent of eligible students tested

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


Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned


65% 56% 83% 31% 235



57% 64% 121



53% (YES) 69% (YES) 122



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


Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned


64% 51% 46% 38% 199



67% 45% 112



81% (YES) 33% (NO) 114



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

Documents

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM 2010 – …williamstaros-msedportfolio.weebly.com/uploads/4/1/8/9/... · 2018. 10. 12. · (Use this data to complete Sections 1 -4