all levels - accountability, testing and...

Brevard County Public SchoolsSchool Improvement Plan

2014-15

Name of School: Area:

Principal: Area Superintendent:

SAC Chairperson:

Superintendent: Dr. Brian Binggeli

Mission Statement:

To inspire and empower lifelong learning.

Vision Statement:

A model community of excellence and success.

Communication of School Improvement Plan: Briefly explain how the mission, vision and school improvement plan is communicated to all stakeholders.

Cambridge’s mission, vision, and School Improvement Plan are communicated to all stakeholder through our website, school newsletter, faculty and leadership team agendas, our School Advisory Council agendas and minutes, and at school events.

Final Version 8.12.14

Cambridge Elementary Magnet School Central Area

Hilah Mercer Jane Cline

Michelle Zeppieri

Brevard County Public SchoolsSchool Improvement Plan

2014-15

Part 1: Planning for Student Achievement

RATIONALE – Continuous Improvement Cycle Process

Data Analysis from multiple data sources: (Needs assessment that supports the need for improvement-Examples may be, but are NOT limited to survey data, walk-through data, minutes from PLC’s or Dept. Mtgs. Move away from talking about every single data source and determine your rationale. Much like the PGP, what is your focus and why?)

Considerations/Examples: What are the areas of success? Where are concerns? What trends do you see? What kind of data are you looking at within your school? What data do you use for teacher practice? How are teachers planning? Are plans Standards Driven? Are Essential Questions meaningful? What do CWT tell you about instruction? How will you monitor the depth of implementation?

Evidence, derived from the analysis of multiple quantitative and qualitative data sources, provides ample justification to focus our School Improvement Plan (SIP) school wide objective on differentiating standards based instruction to improve reading proficiency rates to meet students’ specific needs. Cambridge Elementary had the third lowest reading proficiency rate in Brevard Public Schools, excluding charter schools, as measured by 2014 FCAT. Only 36% of our third graders scored at proficiency or above in reading while only 48% were at proficiency in grades 3 – 6. Despite weekly grade level team meetings with agendas requiring focus on questions based on student achievement performance data, “walk-to” reading intervention blocks built into each grade level’s daily schedule, and collaboratively planned interventions for non-proficient readers, reading scores remain unacceptably low. Teachers’ plans provide evidence that a balanced literacy program is in place across the school. Walk through observations and lesson plans consistently demonstrate that teachers are utilizing essential questions to frame instruction and learning and that a significant increase in the use of higher order thinking questions has occurred. Ample use of small group standards based instruction, utilized in conjunction with instructional centers that focus on the skills being taught, are documented through observations, feedback, and lesson plans. Students wrote in response to literary and informational text across content areas to justify answers and support points of view. Despite this emphasis on research based instructional practices and use of the Continuous Improvement Cycle, Cambridge’s reading proficiency rates declined slightly by -1% while science proficiency showed significant gains at 66%, exceeding the district average by 2% points. FCAT science requires grade level reading skills to score at proficiency yet an analysis of quantitative data shows our reading proficiency rate far below our science proficiency rate. Students in grades 1 – 6 utilized Pearson’s SuccessMaker computer assisted instruction. Data from SuccessMaker also revealed higher proficiency rates for math skills when compared to reading proficiency. Our math proficiency rates as measured by FCAT remained exactly the same as the previous year at 61%; significantly higher than reading but stagnant. As standards in both content areas focus more on literacy, the need for increased reading proficiency is evident. While Cambridge’s Florida Assessment In Reading (FAIR) data was more positive, demonstrating growth over the year in every grade level, it did not equate to strong proficiency scores on FCAT. Examination of past FAIR and FCAT reading scores reveals that our students have consistently shown more growth on FAIR. The current perception is that FAIR-FS scores at Cambridge will not necessarily equate with Language Arts Florida Standards assessment scores as measured by the Florida State Assessment (FSA).


This continued trend of low reading proficiency scores in comparison to significantly higher math and science scores provides a clear rationale to deliberately focus on an additional research based strategy to improve reading proficiency: the use of differentiated standards based instruction to meet the specific needs of students. Data shows that we are not currently closing the gap between proficiency expectations and student performance in reading. Increasing reading proficiency in the content area of math will also be a focus area. Research by Carol Ann Tomlinson and others provides ample evidence to support that closing achievement gaps demands differentiation of instruction to meet individual needs. In Leading and Managing a Differentiated Classroom (2010) Tomlinson and Marcia Imbeau site the need for teachers to be the leaders for change in utilizing differentiation to increase student achievement. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum emphasizes research supporting the positive impact associated with differentiated instruction in its training and publications. In Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning (2003) Lorna Earle provides research that the teacher’s overriding purpose is to meet the needs of students to increase academic growth. No Cambridge teachers focused their Professional Growth Plan goal on Differentiated Instruction (DI) in 2013-14. Survey data, collected in August 2014 as a pre-assessment of faculty utilization of DI, indicates 75 % of responding teachers currently maintain they utilize DI strategies as part of their instructional practice. However, few rated themselves as differentiating frequently and none differentiated instruction in all major content areas. Teachers indicate the following factors most hinder their ability to differentiate instruction: range and diversity of students in their classroom, professional development, amount of planning time, availability of materials, and knowledge and experience. When teachers in collaborative teams completed the AdvancED Self-Assessment Workbook for Schools the lowest rating assigned, 3.1 out of 4.0, was for Standard 2.3, indicating a perception that while our school leadership is protected, supported, and respected in its autonomy to accomplish goals for improvement in student learning and instruction and to manage day-to-day operation of the school by the governing body. The supportive connection between school and district leadership could improve. District support of Differentiated Instruction is strong. DI staff development opportunities are provided during the school year and over the summer months. DI instruction is offered at the district level and on-site at specific schools utilizing district funds and personnel. In addition to improving reading proficiency rates, child by child, a focus on DI to improve reading proficiency rates will potentially improve the perceived connection between our school and the district which is already rated at a relatively high level. Student survey results emphatically show the vast majority of our students, 93%, want to succeed in school and life, indicating achievement and success is a personal individualized goal that requires differentiated instruction to achieve. Our parent survey results reveal that 86% have attended informational or academic events at our school and 95% found the information provided useful. One of our most successful events is Dinner and Data Night at which students share their own personal achievement data and their goals for improvement. This supports the stance that Cambridge is already engaged in differentiation and that our parents appreciate the practice and gain information from our efforts. Quantitative data measuring reading proficiency and qualitative data measuring teacher experience and use of DI concepts and strategies provide clear evidence of the need to focus on differentiated standards based instruction to improve reading proficiency rates and meet students’ and parents’ expectations for success.

Analysis of Current Practice: (How do we currently conduct business?) Move any Action Steps that have become standard practice to this section.

The success Cambridge experienced with increasing our over-all school grade points, despite increasing assessment rigor, leads us to the conclusion we must keep the action steps initiated in our 2012-13 and 2013-14 SIPs. While we will adapt the focus of our on-site staff development to match our new objectives and actions steps, we will continue the following practices because they produced positive results:


Every teacher will continue to create and post essential questions to frame teaching and learning tasks designed to promote critical thinking.

Students will engage in writing to summarize, clarify, justify, explain, list, give examples, etc. distributed across lessons in all content areas.

Teachers will continue to implement higher order thinking questions in all content areas. Using progress monitoring/goal setting tools, including data notebooks and charts, teachers will provide

meaningful feedback and guidance in setting attainable to students. Utilize activity wheel teachers as our Special Help In Everyday Learning Development Team (S.H.I.E.L.D.) to

support each grade level (2 – 6) one day per week and continue providing small group instruction and allowing classroom teachers the opportunity to observe/collaborate with other teachers and strengthen their professional practice.

Hold Dinner and Data Nights to allow students the opportunity to share their academic progress monitoring and the improvement goals they have established for themselves with their families.

Utilize Positive Behavior Support (PBS) Tier 1 strategies to encourage all students to be active learners and take responsibility for their learning. Provide Tier 2 intervention and Tier 3 referral as indicated by student need.

Provide a Walk to Intervention model at each grade level to insure that time is allocated for struggling students outside the mandated 90 minute reading block.

Provide math instruction in a small group setting based on student’s needs while utilizing math centers to reinforce skill acquisition.

Monitor the amount of literary and informational text used for instruction to verify 50/50% balanced literacy across curriculum areas.

Monitor student progress in reading and math utilizing Pearson’s Successmaker computer assisted instruction in grades 1 – 6.

Reflection on practices that may impeded student achievement include: Students’ reading fluency and understanding of vocabulary impedes their reading comprehension Students have an understanding of vocabulary when presented orally and can demonstrate application during

instruction although a disconnect takes place when it is in written form or requires future recall Increased assessment rigor requiring demonstration of both academic vocabulary and content vocabulary High percentage of Title I families are unfamiliar with new practices and how to support language acquisition and

vocabulary development

Best Practice: (What does research tell us we should be doing as it relates to data analysis above?)What does the research say about your findings? Evidenced based? What practices can you put into place to work on what the data says is impeding student achievement?

Based on what you are seeing; what teachers are doing well; what you need to change and improve…RESEARCH SAYS YOU SHOULD…

Differentiated instruction helps teachers meet the learning needs of every child. Today's classrooms are filled with diverse learners who differ not only culturally and linguistically but also in their cognitive abilities, background knowledge, and learning preferences. Faced with such diversity, many schools are implementing differentiated instruction in an effort to effectively address all students' learning needs and close achievement gaps.

Researchers at the National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum define differentiated instruction as a process to approach teaching and learning for students of differing abilities in the same class. The intent is to maximize each student's growth and individual success by meeting each student where he or she is . . . rather than expecting


students to modify themselves for the curriculum (Hall, 2002).

Although experts and practitioners acknowledge that the research on differentiated instruction as a specific practice is limited (Allan & Tomlinson, 2000; Anderson, 2007; Hall, 2002), solid research does validate a number of practices that provide the foundation of differentiation. These practices include using effective classroom management procedures; promoting student engagement and motivation; assessing student readiness; responding to learning styles; grouping students for instruction; and teaching to the student's zone of proximal development (the distance between what a learner can demonstrate without assistance and what the learner can do with assistance) (Allan & Tomlinson, 2000; Ellis & Worthington, 1994; Vygotsky, 1978). Moreover, a growing body of research shows positive results for full implementation of differentiated instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (Rock, Gregg, Ellis, & Gable, 2008). According to Tomlinson and Strickland (2005), teachers usually differentiate instruction by adjusting one or more of the following: the content (what students learn as they approach mastery of the required standards); the process (how students learn); or the product (how students demonstrate their mastery of the knowledge or skills). However, there is no one-size-fits-all model for differentiated instruction; it looks different depending on the prior knowledge, interests, and abilities students bring to a learning situation.

According to Differentiating Instruction in the Regular Classroom, 2002, by Diane Heacox, Ed.D, differentiating instruction means changing the pace, level, or kind of instruction you provide in response to individual learners’ needs, styles, or interests. Differentiated instruction specifically responds to students’ progress on the learning continuum—what they already know and what they need to learn. It responds to their best ways of learning and allows them to demonstrate what they’ve learned in ways that capitalize on their strengths and interests.

Differentiated instruction is:

□ Rigorous- You provide challenging instruction to motivate students to push themselves. You recognize individual differences and set goals for learning based on a student’s particular capabilities. You don’t set the bar so low that students are not compelled to put forth their best efforts nor so high that students fail and feel defeated.

□ Relevant- It focuses on essential learning, not on “side trips” or irrelevant content. Differentiating does not mean more of the same to fill time (for example, more problems instead of more challenging problems); Differentiating focuses on essential learning. Not all assignments require differentiation; however, the teaching of important concepts (Big Ideas - Standards) must be differentiated to achieve deep connectional learning for all students.

□ Flexible and varies- Where appropriate, students make choices about how they will learn and how they will show what they’ve learned. They may be given opportunities to select topics they wish to explore in greater depth. They may also choose whether they will work independently, with a partner, or in a cooperative group. Differentiation requires teachers to employ many different instructional strategies.

□ Complex- Teachers challenge students’ thinking and actively engage them in content that conveys depth and breadth. Deep conceptual understanding of the content drives teaching and learning.

Goal 1 of Brevard Public Schools’ current Strategic Plan focuses on student achievement and maximizing student potential in core area achievement, closing achievement gaps between student sub-groups, providing non-core learning opportunities, and promoting student acquisition of 21st Century skills. Differentiated instruction serves as a vehicle for accomplishing those objectives.

In Leading and Managing a Differentiated Classroom, 2010, by: Carol Ann Tomlinson and Marcia B. Imbeau, Tomlinson and Imbeau argue that the inherent interdependence of leading and managing a differentiated classroom is at the very heart of 21st-century education. This essential guide to differentiation also includes a helpful teacher’s toolkit of activities and teaching strategies that will assist any teacher expand his or her capacity to make room for


and work tirelessly on behalf of every student.

Across the literature, experts (Anderson, 2007; Rock, Gregg, Ellis, & Gable, 2008; Tomlinson, 2000) suggest these guiding principles to support differentiated classroom practices:

-Focus on the essential ideas and skills of the content area, eliminating ancillary tasks and activities. -Respond to individual student differences (such as learning style, prior knowledge, interests, and level of

engagement). -Group students flexibly by shared interest, topic, or ability. -Integrate ongoing and meaningful assessments with instruction. -Continually assess; reflect; and adjust content, process, and product to meet student needs.

Within the school we will support increasing Differentiated Instruction (DI) to improve the school’s reading proficiency rate through focused implementation of strategies that support both the School Improvement Plan and Goal 1 of the District Strategic Plan. By utilizing B.E.S.T. Modules, obtaining new knowledge from professional learning, coaching from the administration and Title I team, and collaborative activities allow opportunities for specific feedback to increase lesson rigor and utilization of monitoring tools to track students’ learning gains across the grade levels. Such tools might include: formative and summative assessments, DI lesson plans, and data notebooks. Teachers will participate in collaborative planning, collaborative analysis of student work, and weekly data team meetings to discuss and monitor student growth.

CONTENT AREA:

Reading Math Writing Science Parental Involvement

Drop-out Prevention Programs

Language Arts

Social Studies

Arts/PE Other:

School Based Objective: (Action statement: What will we do to improve programmatic and/or instructional effectiveness?)

To maximize the capacity of each learner to master the Language Arts Florida Standards (LAFS) and Math Florida Standards (MAFS) at a deep conceptual level, Cambridge teachers will engage in standards based instruction through differentiation by content, process, and/or product.

Strategies: (Small number of action oriented staff performance objectives)

Barrier Action Steps

Person Responsible

Timetable Budget In-ProcessMeasure

1. Completing the book study within the timeframe of PD Early Release Wednesday’s

Read and conduct a guided book study: In Leading and Managing a Differentiated

Cambridge Administration Faculty Collaborative Learning Teams

Read and collaboratively study the book: September – February

$1,200.00 for books

Early release Wednesday’s Professional Development evaluation tool used after each book study


Classroom by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Marcia B. Imbeau

session

2. Seating capacity for professional development.

Conduct twelve two hour DI sessions: Staff Development for Educators (SDE) Differentiated Instruction: Theory Into Practice™

Rick Dillon (SDE Trained DI Instructor)Teachers Participants

September - December

$12,000.00 for materials and training rate salaries

ProGOE attendance records, exit slips, classroom observations,final evaluation project

3. Lack of content knowledge first semester

Implement a key learning from one of the five non-negotiable pillars of DI

Classroom TeachersPeer CoachesAdministrators

One key learning per semester

Classroom observations, Professional Growth Plans, team meetings notes

4. Lack of a pre-assessment tool for all major concepts

Use pre-assessment data to determine student readiness for major concepts

Classroom TeachersTitle I TeamAdministratorsPeer Coaches

October - May Pre-assessment instruments from adopted programs or teacher developed, teacher data team meetings

5. Need for a post-assessment tool for all major concepts

Measure depth of conceptual knowledge through the use of post- assessment instruments


October – May Post-assessment instruments from adopted programs or teacher made, teacher data team meetings

6. Need to identify/develop formative assessment tools for all major concepts

Utilize embedded formative assessment data to guide instruction and influence learning leading to concept mastery


September- May Formative assessment tools, classroom observations, teacher data team meetings,

7. Need for adequate time for planning and gathering /creating diverse materials

Plan and implement instruction/materials based on student readiness (approaching, on-level, and beyond)

Classroom TeachersTitle I TeamAdministration

December - May Master schedule,lesson plans, team meeting notes, observations with conversations

8. Need to find or Use ongoing Classroom January - May Formative data Final Version 8.12.14

develop assessment tools

progress monitoring data to ensure students move dynamically between instructional groups based on readiness

Teachers Title I Team

tools/strategies, data team meeting notesStudent groupings

9. Adequate time and appropriate tools for creating learner profiles needed

Formulate a learner profile to identify how each student learns best

Classroom Teachers Title I Team

September – January Individual learner profiles, recheck learner interest second semester

10. Funding for personnel to focus on DI practices and progress in primary grades

Designate one Title I Teacher whose role is to mentor teachers and instruct students in grades K - 3

Primary Grades Title I TeacherTitle I TeamClassroom teachersAdministration

August - May Designated teacher’s daily scheduleObservationsData Team notes

11. Adequate time to provide appropriate feedback to all teachers

Provide beginning, middle, and end of year observation feedback to teachers regarding differentiation practices

AdministrationPeer CoachesMentor teachersTitle 1 teachers

September - May ProGoe informal and formal observation data and comments;peer coaches, mentors, and Title 1 teachers schedules; any comments teachers choose to share with administration.

EVALUATION – Outcome Measures and Reflection- begin with the end in mind .

Qualitative and Quantitative Professional Practice Outcomes: (Measures the level of implementation of professional practices throughout the school)

All Cambridge teachers are expected to complete a baseline analysis of their use of differentiated instruction pillars and strategies through the completion of a DI questionnaire/survey adapted from the work of Alixa Rodriquez (2012). They will assess what DI strategies they utilize, how often they use them, in what content areas they use them, and the factors that hinder and help them in utilizing DI. All teachers will participate in a Professional learning opportunity through the collaborative study of Leading and Managing A Differentiated Classroom by Carol Ann Tomlinson and Marcia Imbeau. Up to twenty-six (26) teachers will participate in Staff Development for Educators (SDE) Differentiated Instruction: Theory Into Practice™ workshop facilitated at Cambridge by Rick Dillon, certified trainer. All teachers will document the implementation of at least 2 new DI strategies, one per semester minimum. Lesson plans reflecting evidence of learner choice, weekly team meeting notes focusing on assessment data, MTSS Data Team meeting records, classroom observations, DI strategy artifacts, learner profiles, professional development attendance records, and student and


teacher reflection exit slips will be used to monitor progress at implementing DI. All teachers will include differentiated instruction in their Professional Growth Plans as a connection to our School Improvement Plan to improve professional practice school wide by May 2015.

Qualitative and Quantitative Student Achievement Expectations: (Measures student achievement)

The shift from using FCAT scores, focused on the Next Generation State Standards, to FSA scores, focused on LAFS and MAPS, as the measure of proficiency and growth for students will require adjustments to the comparison of data used to measure student achievement in 2014-15. Instead of setting goals for increased student achievement based on FCAT scores which will no longer be available, Cambridge will use percentile rankings calculated over the last 3 years to establish an increase in reading and math proficiency and growth. Cambridge students are expected to increase their reading proficiency percentile rank from its current 29th percentile rank to the 34th percentile or higher as a result of receiving differentiated instruction. Reading gains will increase from the 55th percentile to the 60th percentile or better. Cambridge students are also anticipated to increase their percentile rank in math proficiency by 5th percentile points as a result of improved literacy, increasing from the 56th percentile rank to the 61st percentile rank. Math growth will remain stable or increase from the 72nd percentile. The FSA, will be used to measure reading and math proficiency and growth in grades 3 – 6 as a summative assessment. Primary grades, kindergarten through 2nd grade, will use listening comprehension or reading comprehension questions from Florida Assessment In Reading for Florida Standards (FAIR-FS) to show evidence of a minimum increase of 10% improvement as measured by the initial and final FAIR-FS administration. Formative assessments to monitor progress and influence differentiation in all grade levels will include, but are not limited to: Leveled Literacy Intervention (LLI) Program assessments, DORF, BELAA, FAIR-FS, SuccessMaker Reading computer based instruction and assessment, and running records. District assessments, adopted math program assessments, Success Maker, and teacher designed formative assessments will be used to monitor math achievement and growth. Stem statements, exit slips, and surveys following the use of differentiated strategies will be submitted by students and reviewed for feedback and reflection by teachers. Teacher observations and checklists will also be considered for reflection on DI instructional practice. All students whose pre-assessment data indicates a need for Tier 2 MTSS intervention will use LLI materials by Fountes and Pinnell to differentiate by readiness level. DIBLES Next Oral Reading Fluency (DORF) comprehension questions will continued to be administered each quarter, five times within a school year, to all 3rd graders and to students in grades 4 – 6 who have Good Cause Exemptions, were retained, or who scored level 1 on FCAT reading. Using DORF and LLI intervention assessment data, classroom teachers will assess the required students and determine the instructional needs of the students. Title I, S.H.I.E.L.D., and administrators will assess the remaining students. This will provide a progress monitoring tool that can be compared across quarters and across grade levels. Teachers and support assessors will reflect on data and make instructional decisions based on results at the individual student level. Collaborative reflection and planning based on formative assessment results by grade level teams will guide intervention and enrichment practices.

Part 2: Support Systems for Student Achievement (Federal, State, District Mandates)

For the following areas, please write a brief narrative that includes the data for the year 2014-2015 and a description of changes you intend to incorporate to improve the data for the year 2014-2015. Instructions and


support are provided in each section to assist with what data you may include. The instructions are intended to be a guide and may be deleted from each cell to allow for appropriate typing space.

MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS (MTSS)/RtI This section meets the requirements of Sections 1114(b)(1)(B)(i)-(iv) and 1115(c)(1)(A)-(C), P.L. 107-110, NCLB, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 6314(b) and Senate Bill 850.a) Describe the process through which school leadership identifies and aligns all available resources (e.g., personnel,

instructional, curricular) in order to meet the needs of all students and maximize desired student outcomes. Include the methodology for coordinating and supplementing federal, state and local funds, services and programs.

b) Describe your school’s data-based problem-solving processes for the implementation and monitoring of your MTSS and SIP structures to address effectiveness of core instruction, teacher support systems, and small group and individual student needs.

c) Provide the person(s) responsible, frequency of meetings, and any problem-solving activities used to determine how to apply resources for the highest impact

d) Describe the systems in place that the leadership team uses to monitor the fidelity of the school’s MTSS.e) Describe the plan to support understanding of MTSS and build capacity in data-based problem solving for staff and parents.

(See Accountability and Testing website/SIPTOOLS/MTSS for a checklist that may help you with this section.)

MTSS Leadership Team:Administration: Hilah Mercer (Principal) and Kori Hurst (Assistant Principal); Dr. Sarah Brothers (Guidance Counselor) Title I Staff: Mary Anne Pittman (Literacy Coach), Sandra Marines (Title I ELA Intermediate), Rick Dillon (Title I ELA/Math Primary), Karen Tabor (Title I Math Intermediate); Coordinating Teacher: Erik Jacobson (Positive Behavior Support Coach)

To organize and coordinate MTSS efforts:Each grade level has a designated MTSS contact teacher who assists the team in completing the MTSS forms and processes. Each teacher and team has available a Student Data Meeting Checklist that tracks each specific student going through the MTSS problem solving process beginning with Tier 2. Successive MTSS meetings are recorded on each data checklist, tracking successful interventions, or need for Tier 3 and possible IPST involvement.

Cambridge employs the Continuous Improvement Model for problem solving for academic and/or behavioral improvement. We have a delineated plan of increasingly supportive MTSS interventions for students progressing through the MTSS process. The 8 step process includes the completion of an IPST packet, making contact with the parent, completing a Progress Monitoring Plan (PMP) for the student, and a problem solving meeting to determining which Tier 2 interventions will meet the needs of the students. After individualized interventions are determined, the teacher will monitor the students’ academic progress for three to six weeks, including an observation by the guidance counselor. The Tier 2 data will then be reviewed, if the student is showing academic progress, Tier2 interventions will continue. If the student does not make progress a problem solving meeting will be set to determine which Tier 3 interventions (based on the same skills from Tier 2) will meet the needs of the student. The Tier 3 data will be reviewed after four to six weeks. The data will determine if the student is making academic progress or if the student needs to continue through to IPST process to determine if services need to be provided through an ESE program.

All grade levels have a clear specified intervention time for reading and math assigned on the master schedule which adheres to the district required time frames. Grade level data teams meet bi-weekly during planning and at least two members of the MTSS Leadership team are present for planning and assistance purposes. Teams use a problem solving model (Continuous Improvement Model) that determines root causes of academic and behavioral concerns. Based on level of concern for student, or point in the process, teachers bring specific performance data. Teachers discusses 1-2 students of concern per meeting - beginning with struggling retained students and those in the lowest 25%. Research based programs and resources intended to improve students’ academics or behaviors are organized into three tiers. Interventions are selected as indicated by student needs. Also, the guidance counselor works with teachers during


these meeting to complete the Student Data Meeting checklist to ensure that all forms, observations, and documents are being completed and reflect individualized intervention information.

In addition to interventions during the school day Cambridge offers an After School Program (ASP) to students in grades 3-6 who are working below grade level or in the bottom quartile in reading or math. Students meet twice a week for eight weeks.

All grade level and special team teachers will receive training in small groups by our MTSS facilitator and school psychologist with an emphasis on acceptable data sources, focus on specific skills, and intervention strategies for Tier 2 and 3 will be presented and reviewed with teacher teams and administrators. Grade level communicators will provide the MTSS process information to new teachers.

Collaboration is accomplished by using MTSS problem solving model and data sheets in grade level meetings. Teachers fill out Academic/Behavioral concern with extenuating circumstances and documentation of parent contact. Teachers complete MTSS Forms 1, 2 and 3A before presenting students of concern during grade level biweekly Tier 2 and 3 MTSS meetings. During Tier 2 and 3 MTSS meetings background information/baseline data is presented. Clear, objective, measurable goals for student progress are set. Goals, gaps, and the correct scientifically research based intervention strategy(s) are determined. Tier 2 and Tier 3 students are placed on a calendar for every 4-6 weeks after the initial conference (updated data). MTSS forms 1-5 must be completed prior to referral to IPST. Response to intervention data will be documented on data point sheets and presented to our school psychologist for graphing.

Movement between tiers with adjustments to the intensity of interventions, will be based on monitored data point progress. Instructional consultation will precede movement from Tier 2 to Tier 3 to determine fidelity to the process and data based documented need for more intensive intervention.

MTSS Problem-solving process, based on the Continuous Improvement Model, is used in developing and implementing the SIP: The School Advisory Council, led by the school administration; the MTSS Leadership Team; and our Vertical Content Area Leadership Teams (ELA, Math, Science, and behavior) will review and advise the School Improvement Plan (SIP) developers. Moving all students to competency in core academic areas and closing the achievement gap between subgroups will be a primary focus of the SIP.

The Literacy Coach and Title I Teachers will be responsible for advising, monitoring and modeling additional strategies and reviewing materials for appropriate grade level interventions. These teacher leaders will also provide modeling of instruction for intervention groups. Our Peer Coaches and Title I Teachers will also assist with staff training and providing feedback.

The Primary ELA/Math Title I Teacher for K-3 will provide support, model strategies, and review materials for reading and math instruction for all primary grade levels. This coach will also provide modeling and support during intervention groups.

The 4-6 Math Title I Teacher will model instructional strategies for teaching the Math Florida Standards to classroom teachers in intermediate grade levels. The teacher leader will also provide faculty wide and grade level training in MTSS data collection and management. Our Math Title I teacher and Peer Coaches will assist in training teachers and in providing feedback.

The intermediate (ELA) Title I teacher will be responsible for monitoring, advising, and modeling Language Arts Florida Standards instruction and assessments in grades 4-6. She will ensure the grade level specific school-wide writing plan is implemented. She will model and assist with writing instruction in the classrooms with an increased emphasis on writing in response to reading. The teacher will provide support for intervention groups.


The Science Leadership Team will responsible for advising, monitoring and modeling strategies and reviewing materials for science instruction for all grade levels. Resources will be provided to classroom teachers in implementing the NGSSS Science Curriculum. Our Science Lab will be utilized by our Title I science teacher as part of the activity wheel for grades 2-6.

The Guidance Counselor and S.H.I.E.L.D. teachers will perform classroom observations on students of concern. Our Guidance Counselor will serve as the coordinator of the bi-weekly MTSS Grade Level/Data Team meetings.

Title I teachers and Peer Coaches will monitor students in the MTSS process with a specific focus on assigned primary or intermediate grades.

Positive Behavior Support (PBS) will continue to be implemented school-wide. PBS Tier 2 interventions will also be implemented. Coordinating Teacher, Erik Jacobson (PBS Coach) will serve as Tier 2 implementer for grades 2-6. Our Guidance Counselor will be the Tier 2 coach for grades K-1. A “Check In/Check Out” intervention with parent and student involvement will be utilized when data indicates the intervention works for the student. A Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) will be developed for students who display a need for more intensive individualized behavioral intervention. 2013-14 data supports the need for Social Skills instruction for all Kindergarten Students (Tier 1).

The data source(s) and the data management system(s) used to summarize data:

Data Sources District Required Assessments (DRAs) based on the district adopted content area curriculum programs for reading, language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies. (Tier 1,2,3)Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading (FAIR-FS) (Tier 1,2,3)DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (DORF)Brevard English Language Arts Assessment (BELAA) – Pearson SuccessMaker Computer Assisted Instruction (Tier 1,2,3)Phonological Awareness Screener for Intervention (PASI) (Tier 2,3)Phonics Screener for Intervention (PSI) (Tier 2,3)Rewards-Multisyllabic Word Study (Tier 2,3)Level Literacy Intervention Program (Fountas & Pinnell)

Data Management Systems Performance MattersA3 – teacher and district dataAS400Desktop Student Data SystemProgress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN)

Our plan to train staff on MTSS August 2014 - May 2015 teachers, MTSS Leadership Team, to include administration and Individual Problem Solving Team (IPST), will continue to meet bi-weekly to focus on compliance with Tier 1, 2, and 3 MTSS as well as our MTSS Support Building Facilitator, Guidance Counselor Dr. Brothers. Grade level designee teachers will serve as MTSS facilitators for the teachers on their team. We will utilize our new MTSS District Facilitator to ensure fidelity to the process.

PARENT AND FAMILY INVOLVEMENT: (Parent Survey Data must be referenced) Title I Schools may use the Parent


https://www.fldoe.org/flbpso/pi/pipp.asp

Involvement Plan to meet the requirements of Sections 1114(b)(1)(F) and 1115(c)(1)(G), P.L. 107-110, NCLB, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 6314(b). Consider the level of family and community involvement at your school (this may include, but is not limited to, number of parent engagement opportunities offered in the school year; average number of parents in attendance at parent engagement opportunities; percent of parents who participated in parent engagement opportunities; percent of students in lowest performing quartile or subgroups not meeting AMOs whose parent(s) participated in one or more parent engagement opportunities).

12% of Cambridge parents participated in the 2014 parent survey. Areas of Strength:

Communication: o Personal Phone Calls from Staffo Newsletters and Teacher notes including agenda

School /Academic Meetingso Information is useful

Safe School Environment o 66.7% rated this area as Excellento All gates and doors are locked after 8AMo Campus is secure with the only entry point being through the front officeo All visitors must sign in through the new KeepNTrack system before they are allowed access to student

areaso Walking students throughout neighborhoodo Keeping parents informed

ESE Serviceso 504s, IEP, and EP

21st Century Skills Academics

o Reading, Math and Science

Areas of Concerns/Needs: Communication:

o Automated Call System-continuing to request up dated phone numbers – addressing – the new BlackBoard Connect 5 system is being utilized and making on-going corrections as reported

o Edline and Cambridge’s school website- addressing- informing the parents of the information provided through Edline during Title I Nights and monthly newsletters

School /Academic Meetingso Meetings not at convenient time – addressing - increasing use of 5:30 and 6:00 as start times and

continuing to schedule events on Tuesdays and Thursdayso Did not receive information about meetings/events – addressing - increased use of BlackBoard Connect

5, agenda notes, newsletters, and posting information on school marque Parent Topics

o Homework Help – addressing –Title I Homework Night in February 2015 – provide parents with resources available for them to help students with homework in content areas

o School Safety/Anti-bullying – addressing – Title I Night in November 2014 on Anti-bulling; presentation given by Janean Knight from Student Services

ESE Serviceso Adult Services – addressing – continue to offer English acquisition classes for ELL parents and providing

opportunities through Cambridge’s Business Partnerso Gifted Services – addressing – All gifted students will be serviced at Cambridge rather than bused to a

neighboring school for services.


https://www.fldoe.org/flbpso/pi/pipp.asp

In addition to Cambridge’s Title I Nights, parents, students, and teachers will take part in data nights. Students review their data, set goals, track their progress, and then discuss and explain individual data with their parents. At our annual Open House/Title I Night, August 2014, Literacy for Adults in Brevard (LAB) will give away books to families and provide information about their reading program for adults. English Language classes are provided at Cambridge through a partnership with Adult Ed and Title I in order to provide additional support to our non-English speaking parents. Parent involvement at Cambridge will increase student achievement through the increased use of Edline. Teachers in grades 3-6 will post updates and grades weekly in core academic areas to allow parents to review and follow-up with their students. This will in turn increase student achievement. Cambridge’s Parent Involvement Plan is located at https://app1.fldoe.org/bsa/parentInvolvementPlan/

STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS (Required):Address Elements of Student Survey Results found in the District Strategic Plan and describe how you will improve student perceptions of these indicators.

Strategic Plan Indicators: Promotes 21st Century Skills 1.4.2, 1.4.3, 1.4.4, 1.4.5 Safe Learning Environment 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.2.5

Elementary Student Survey: 21st Century Skills – Refer results pages 3 – 4 Online Safety – Refer results pages 4 - 6 School Safety – Refer results pages 6 - 7

Secondary Student Survey: 21st Century Skills – Refer results pages 4 - 6 Online Safety – Refer results pages 6 - 7 School Safety – Refer results pages 7 - 8

Cambridge‘s student survey was completed by 100% of its 4th-6th graders. The findings from the 2013-2014 Brevard Public Schools Student Survey revealed a need for increased opportunities for students to utilize technology in order to develop 21st century skills. Of the students responding, 47.97% indicated they were given opportunities to use technology for projects in reading. Additionally, 54.5% or more of the students agreed they were learning the 21st Century skills at school often. In order for students to successfully master the Florida Standards and continue to develop 21st Century skills, especially the skills focusing on communication, teamwork, and research we will provide students relevant opportunities to use technology across content areas and classes. Students will also need to increase their keyboarding skills in an effort to experience and build proficiency with word processing, research, and computer testing requirements. One finding was that 92.59% of Cambridge’s students want to achieve success and 83.07% are comfortable with who they are and with the decisions they make. Of the students surveyed, 90.70% revealed that they have a computer at home with internet access and 98.94% indicated they learned about online safety at school. 74.60% stated they had never been cyber-bullied and 84.13% indicated if they had been cyber-bullied they would tell an adult while 57.67% would change their screen name, email, or phone number. 88.36% of the students feel safe at school. Of the remaining students 3.70% do not feel safe walking or riding their bikes to and from school and 3.17% stated they felt unsafe in the hallways, these amounts were reduced by 50% from last years’ Student Survey.


https://app1.fldoe.org/bsa/parentInvolvementPlan/

Early Warning Systems (SB 850)1. Describe the school’s early warning system and provide a list of the early warning indicators used in the system. This list must include the following:

ELEMENTARY Attendance below 90 percent, regardless of whether absence is excused or a result of out-of-school

suspension One or more suspensions, whether in school or out of school Course failure in English Language Arts or mathematics Level 1 score on the statewide, standardized assessments in English Language Arts or mathematics Students who are not proficient in reading by third gradeSECONDARY

Attendance below 90 percent, regardless of whether absence is excused or a result of out-of-school suspension

One or more suspensions, whether in school or out of school Course failure in English Language Arts or mathematics Level 1 score on the statewide, standardized assessments in English Language Arts or mathematics

2. Provide the following data related to the school’s early warning system: The number of students by grade level that exhibit each early warning indicator listed above The number of students identified by the system as exhibiting two or more early warning

indicators

Cambridge StudentsGrade Level K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total

Attendance <90

2 2 1 2 1 3 11

1 or more ISS or OSS

37 11 6 19 17 21 33 144

Level 1 in Reading or Math

29 20 16 16 81

Course Failure in ELA or Math

Students exhibiting 2 or more indicators

7 2 3 4 16

3. Describe all intervention strategies employed by the school to improve the academic performance of students identified by the early warning system (i.e., those exhibiting two or more early warning indicators).

ATTENDANCECambridge’s attendance rate for 2013-2014 school year was 96%. Due to the continued increase in our attendance rate, we will utilize BlackBoard Connect 5 (automated home calling system) to inform guardians of


daily student absences and tardies. Our staff will distribute letters to parents of students with excessive absences based on the requirements of the Brevard Public Schools Attendance Policy. Prior to referring students to our Central Area Resource Teacher for Attendance issues as required by Brevard Public Schools policy the Individual Problem Solving Team (IPST) will conduct a meeting to address attendance issues.

SUSPENSION:In an effort to lower the amount of referrals during the 2014-2015 school year, Cambridge will utilize Positive Behavior Support System, (PBSS) strategies such as school-wide expectations, classroom expectations and procedures, social skill lessons, incentives, rewards and consequences. Additionally, school policy dictates that once a student receives three referrals an individual behavior plan is created by the teacher with assistance from the Positive Behavior Support (PBS) coach, parent/guardians, and school counselor. This behavior plan is created with the goal of eliminating unwanted behavior.

Cambridge differentiates Tier 2 through Positive Behavior Support: Response to Intervention (RtI) for Behavior by use of the PBS Coach to form behavior interventions based on areas of concern for Tier 2 students and track discipline data accordingly. Data is tracked by the school, grade level teacher, and students. Areas where behaviors of concern are committed is tracked as well as the specific type of misconduct. All discipline referrals are coded in AS400 and RtI Data System.

ACADEMICS:When students are identified as below grade level or struggling, grade level discussions are then facilitated in order to identify targeted students, as well as ineffective and effective strategies. The students identified as not proficient in a particular instructional area are given standards based instruction in a small group setting (Tier 2) in order to increase student achievement. Their progress is tracked and discussed during grade level meetings. Students still identified as not proficient will be moved to a more intense interventions group (Tier 3) and referred to the Individual Problem Solving Team (IPST) if Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention is not sufficiently successful. In addition to providing Tier 1, 2, and 3 interventions during the school day, Cambridge also provides these students with an opportunity to attend ASP after school. ASP provides additional academic support to students in the lowest 25% for reading and math.

CTE/STEM:

1. All Levels

a) # of STEM-related experiences provided for students (e.g. field trips; science fairs, Odyssey of the Mind) – 10 experiences: Lagoon Quest field trip, Cambridge Science Fair, Central Area Science Fair, Title I Math Night, Title I Science Fair Information Night, Kennedy Space Center field trip, Keep Brevard Beautiful Recycling Program for 4th and 5th grade students, Captain Winston Scott: NASA astronaut presentation, City of Cocoa Wonder of Water Conservation Program, Odyssey of the Mind

b) Participation in STEM-related experiences provided for students –Cambridge Science Lab will continue on the activity Wheel for grades 2 – 6, Harris Super Science Saturdays, Continued use of Cocoa High School Feeder Chain STEM Grant Netbook computers for 5 th and laptop computers for 6th grade, Lagoon Quest field trip, Cambridge Science Fair, Central Area Science Fair, Title I Math Night, Title I Science Fair Information Night, Kennedy Space Center field trip, Caption Winston Scott, NASA astronaut presentation, City of Cocoa Wonder of Water Conservation Program, 5th


grade Zoo School, Odyssey of the Mind

With having science on the activity wheel, grades 2 – 6 are able to participate in integrated science activities through hands on experiences. Additionally, students are engaged in STEM activities in their classrooms and hands on field trips. The students will strengthen their understanding of the natural world and increase their knowledge of technology through the use of the NGSSS standards for Science.

College and Career Readiness This section is required for secondary schools, per Sections 1003.413(2)(g),(h), and (j) and 1008.37(4), F.S. COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS ( TO BE COMPLETED BY SECONDARY SCHOOLS) This section meets the requirements of Sections 1114(b)(1)(B)(iii)(I)(aa)-(cc), P.L. 107-110, NCLB, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 6314(b). 1. Describe the strategies the school uses to support college and career awareness. 2. Describe how the school integrates vocational and technical education programs. 3. Describe strategies for improving student readiness for the public postsecondary level based on annual analysis of the High School Feedback Report, which is maintained by the Department of Education, pursuant to Rule 6A-10.038, F.A.C. Incorporated by reference in Rule 6A-1.099811, F.A.C. (August 2013)

Strategies that assist preschool children in the transition from preschool to kindergarten:

Cambridge Elementary Magnet School provides transition from preschool to kindergarten through:

Current Cambridge Head Start Students are able to participate in the following activities: Title I Family Nights PBS Data monitoring Kindergarten Round-Up

Community based VPK providers: Kindergarten Round-Up Kindergarten registration week/classroom visits Host family walk-throughs Provide fliers and newsletters

(TITLE I SCHOOLS ONLY)

Highly Qualified Teachers Final Version 8.12.14

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

Descriptions of Strategy Person Responsible Projected Completion Date

1. Cambridge Elementary Magnet School welcomes pre-service teachers from both Eastern Florida State College and the University of Central Florida.

Administration Trained supervising teachers

May 2015

2. Our teachers allow the education majors to observe them in the classroom and welcome them as tutors in the America Reads, Brevard Reads, and Eastern Florida State College Buddies Program

Administration, Teachers, SACC Coordinator

May 2015

3. Each new teacher hired at Cambridge receives a CET mentor teacher and is assisted by our Mentor Council Representative, National Board Certified Teachers, our Reading Coach, our Title I Coordinator, Peer Coaches, as well as writing, science, and math contact members.

Administration, Title I Teachers, Teacher Mentors, Peer Coaches

May 2015

4. B.E.S.T. practices and Instructional Performance Appraisal System Observation criteria will be used to create a system for continuous improvement of instruction and supervision based on a common vision of effective teaching.

Administration May 2015

5. Our goal is to have 80% of the teaching staff hold a master’s degree or higher or National Board Certification by 2020.

Administration, Teachers May 2020 (Strategic Plan Goal)

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors Provide the number of instructional staff and paraprofessionals that are teaching out-of-field and/or who are not highly effective. *When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Number of staff and paraprofessionals that are teaching out-of-field/and who are not

highly effective

Provide the strategies that are being implemented to support the staff in becoming

highly effective13% (7) are currently out of field for ESOL

Robin Cook Amanda Cruz Rick Dillon Erik Jacobson Abbey Mogford Jaycie Tipton Monique Vargas

All teachers are currently completing professional development ESOL course work being offered through the

District by years end


ALIGNMENT OF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANAND

TITLE I SCHOOLWIDE PLAN

Required Elements of a Title I Schoolwide Plan (SWP) /School Improvement Plan (SIP)

(Section 1114 – Components of a Schoolwide Program)

Check the area(s) where each element is addressed in the SIP.

Additional information and references from Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA):

1. Include data from comprehensive needs assessment of the school

X Rationale

Include academic achievement of students in relation to the state academic content and achievement standards. Be sure to include migrant, if applicable.

2. Provide opportunities for all children to meet state standards

X Analysis of Current

X Practice

X Strategies

X MTSS

3. Utilize scientifically based strategies to strengthen the core academic program X Analysis of Current

X Practice

X Best Practice

X Strategies

Strategies, materials and programs that are research based are a required element of any objective.

4. Include additional strategies that increase the amount and quality of learning time X Strategies

X MTSS

X CTE/STEM

All schools are required to indicate what additional learning opportunities are made available during school, before and/or after school, and during summer, when applicable, and help provide enriched and accelerated curriculum.

5. Include strategies for meeting the educational needs of historically

These may include counseling, pupil services,


underserved subgroups, low-achieving, and at-risk students

X Strategies

X MTSS

X Early Warning System

and mentoring services.

6. State the means of determining whether student needs in the above requirement (#5) are being met

X Strategies

X MTSS

X Early Warning System

Address how the school will determine the educational needs of historically underserved subgroups, low-achieving, and at-risk students are being met

7. Incorporate instruction by highly qualified teachers

X Highly Qualified Teachers

All instructors working in a Title I school are required to be Highly Qualified (Section 1119). If you have personnel that do not meet the requirements, list strategies to support staff to become highly qualified.

8. Include strategies that support high quality and ongoing professional development for teachers, principals, and paraprofessionals

X Best Practice

X Strategies

X MTSS

Each school receiving Title I funds shall devote sufficient resources to effectively carry out this requirement.

9. Include strategies to attract high quality, highly qualified teachers

X Highly Qualified

Teachers

Schools must indicate how they mentor, attract and retain high-quality and highly qualified teachers.

10. Include strategies to increase parent involvement

X Parental

Involvement

Each Title I school is required to complete a Parent Involvement Plan (PIP) and that plan may be used to meet the requirements of this section in the SIP.

11. Include strategies that assist preschool children in the transition from preschool to kindergarten

X Transition from

Preschool

Elementary schools must identify how they will assist students in early childhood programs, such as Head Start and VPK, with the transition into elementary school.

12. Include teachers in using student achievement data to plan the overall instructional program X Analysis of Current

Described in Section 1111 (b) (3) in order to provide information on, and to improve, the achievement of individual students and the


Practice

X Strategies

X MTSS

overall instructional program.

13. Provide additional assistance for low-achieving students that shall include measures to ensure that students’ difficulties are identified in a timely manner

X MTSS

Every school is required to incorporate strategies on how they will address the needs of low performing students that experience difficulty mastering the proficient and advanced levels of academic achievement standards (Section 1111 (b)).

14. Specify coordination with other federal, state, and local programs

X Analysis of Current

Practice

X Best Practice

X MTSS

Schools should include any alignment to other state, federal and local programs that support the educational programs of the school such as violence prevention, nutrition programs, Early Childhood, and Head Start.

Cambridge Elementary Magnet School _________________________ 9/08/2014

School Name Principal’s Signature Date


all levels - accountability, testing and...

Documents