differentiated accountability: element i action...

Differentiated Accountability: Action Plan for MathematicsFlorida Department of Education School: North Shore K-8 Grade Levels: K-8

District: Duval County Instructional Review Date: September 11, 14, 2009

Region: II – George Bennett

Instructional Review

Commendations on DA Indicators Concerns on DA Indicators Revised Action Steps(to address Concerns)

Evidence of Implementation(to document Progress)

Tasks(to implement Action Step)

Timeline(Introduced to Completed: Month/day to Month/Day)

Person Responsible(Title, Name)

Classroom Culture and Environment:

The common board configuration is in place in all classrooms.

Classrooms are inviting and conducive to learning.

Beginnings of word walls are evident in many classrooms.

Most classrooms are print rich.

Exemplary student work with standard, rubric and commentary is on display either in the classroom or on bulletin boards outside.

Expectations , regarding behavior and classroom procedures have been established and are modeled in most classes (CHAMPS).

Students and teachers are polite and mutually respectful of one another.

Classroom Culture and Environment:

The common board configuration is in place for compliance only. The same is true for word walls in most classrooms

Action Step: Utilize the common board configuration to introduce every lesson so that students will understand what they are learning during each lesson and why they are learning it.

Evidence: Use of the board configuration and word walls will be observed as a normal part of the daily instruction in mathematics classes.

Task #1: Set the stage for learning by using the common board configuration to introduce. Refer to it as needed during instruction.

Timeline: September, 2009-May, 2010

Responsible: Teachers

Task #2: Monitor for implementation. Timeline: September, 2009-May, 2010

Responsible: Principal and leadership team, Region II Mathematics Instructional Specialist

North Shore K-8 – 10/5/09 of 26

Action Step: Action Step: Utilize word walls to build vocabulary. Add words to it as they are introduced. Use the vocabulary and expect students to do the same.

Evidence: Use of the word wall will be observed during classroom observations. Words for the word wall will also be noted in lesson plans under essential vocabulary.

Task #1: Establish an interactive word wall. Place words on it as they are introduced and use it to promote the use of critical vocabulary. As words become a natural part of student vocabulary, retire them to an archival word wall where they can be referenced as necessary





Instructional Tools and Materials:

A district mathematics pacing calendar is available and utilized in all classrooms.

All classrooms have ample supplies, materials, and various forms of technology, including computers, overhead projectors, and document cameras.-

Instructional Tools and Materials:

Many teachers do not understand how to use technology effectively (especially the use of the document camera).

Action Step: Provide training on the use of document camera and monitor for implementation.

Evidence: Efficient and effective use of the document camera will be evident during classroom observations.

Task #1: Provide training. Timeline: September, 2009 Responsible: School coaches, Region Ii Mathematics Instructional Specialist

Task #2: Monitor for implementation Timeline: September, 2009-May, 2010


Lesson Planning and Delivery:

Most teachers are following the district pacing guide.

Lesson Planning and Delivery:

Much of the instructional delivery is not modeled. Content is being presented and tasks assigned to students without sufficient understanding of what they are doing or why.

Action Step: Identify and establish a model classroom or classrooms so that all teachers will be able to see, understand and emulate what planning and delivery of mathematics looks like.

Evidence: Model classroom(s) will be established, and a log of visits by other teachers will be kept. The log will also note debriefings after visits.

Task #1: Identify model classroom(s) Timeline: September, 2009 Responsible: Principal and leadership North Shore K-8 – 10/5/09

of 26

team, school mathematics and instructional coaches

Task #2: Establish protocols for teachers to visit and debrief after visits to model classroom(s).

Task #3: Mathematics teachers visit and observe lessons in model classrooms.

Task #4: Monitor classrooms of teachers after their visits to see if they are incorporating or adapting what they have observed in their own lesson planning and delivery.




Responsible: Principal and leadership team, School Mathematics Coach, School Instructional Coach



Higher Order Questioning and Discourse:


Most of the questioning is at the low to moderate level of Webb’s Depth of Knowledge. Few questions require critical or creative thinking.

Action Step: Proved professional development on Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and monitor for implementation.

Evidence: Higher level questioning will be evident during classroom observations and will be reflected in lesson plans.

Task #1: Provide training. Timeline: September, October, 2009 Responsible: School and district mathematics coaches, Region II Mathematics Instructional Specialist

Task #2: Include all levels of questions during instruction.

Task #3: Monitor for implementation.





Student Engagement: Student Engagement:

Although students are engaged, it is primarily passive in many classes. Students are in various groupings, but there are limited opportunities for peer to peer interaction.

Action Step: Provide professional development on strategies to promote active student participation.

Evidence: Full participation by students including asking and answering questions, attempting new approaches, making mistakes, asking for assistance, and collaborating with peers will be evident during observations. Strategies will be reflected in lesson plans.

Task #1: Provide training. Timeline: September, October, 2009 Responsible: School and district

mathematics coaches, Region II North Shore K-8 – 10/5/09

of 26

Mathematics Instructional SpecialistTask #2: Implement strategies that promote student engagement.






Differentiated Instruction: Differentiated Instruction:

Although data is available, it is not evident that it is being used to differentiate instruction.

Action Step: Provide professional development on data analysis and its use for differentiating instruction to refocus, re-teach, and enrich. Monitor for implementation.

Evidence: Based upon analysis of assessment data during PLCs and common planning, lesson plans will reflect differentiation of instruction. Differentiation will be evident during classroom observations.

Task #1: Provide training. Timeline: September, October, 2009 Responsible: School and district mathematics coaches, Region Ii Mathematics Instructional Specialist

Task #2: Administer mini-assessments or formatives to measure student comprehension of content. Analyze data from assessments to refocus, re-teach, and enrich.






Cross Content Reading and Writing:

Some mathematics teachers are incorporating writing through journal entries, exit tickets, and short/extended responses on assessments.

Cross Content Reading and Writing:

Most writing in mathematics classes is trivial and does not assess the benchmark/objective of what students should be learning.

Action Step: Provide daily writing opportunities through the use of journals/ notebooks and exit tickets. Include short/extended responses on all assessments.

Evidence: Opportunities for writing will be reflected in lesson plans and observed during instruction. All assessments will include short/extended responses.

Task #1: Provide training on how to construct meaningful questions (including short and extended responses) that will promote writing on a daily basis.

Timeline: September, October, 2009 Responsible: School and district mathematics coaches, Region II Mathematics Instructional Specialist

Task #2: Implement journaling and Timeline: September, 2009-May, Responsible: TeachersNorth Shore K-8 – 10/5/09

of 26

other opportunities for writing during instruction. Include short/extended responses to measure understanding on all assessments.


2010



Florida Continuous Improvement Model (FCIM):

Florida Continuous Improvement Model (FCIM):

Use of the FCIM strategies is not yet evident or utilized.

Action Step: Provide professional development on FCIM and monitor for implementation.

Evidence: Lesson plans will reflect FCIM process including teaching, assessment, refocusing/re-teaching, and enrichment based upon the assessment.

Task #1: Provide training. Timeline: September, October, 2009 Responsible: School and district mathematics coaches, Region II Mathematics Instructional Specialist


Responsible: Principal and leadership team, school and district mathematics coaches, Region II Mathematics Instructional Specialist

Action Step: Engage in Lesson Study Evidence: Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) reflect Lesson Study process and classroom monitoring reveals implementation of refined lessons.

Task #1: Provide training in Lesson Study protocol

Timeline: January, 2010-April, 2010 Responsible: School coaches, Region II FLDOE staff

Task #2: Implement Lesson Study

Task #3: Monitor for implementation

Timeline: January, 2010-April, 2010

Timeline: January, 2010-April, 2010




`Differentiated Accountability: Action Plan for Reading / English Language ArtsFlorida Department of Education School: North Shore K-8 Grade Levels: K-8

District: Duval Instructional Review Date: September 11, 14, 2009

Region: 2 Rita Franklin


Commendations on DA Indicators

Concerns on DA Indicators Revised Action Steps(to address Concerns)





Classroom EnvironmentStudents are respectful and friendly

Classrooms are inviting to students, clear of clutter and arranged appropriately for grouping and student collaboration.

Word walls are in the initial stage of development and were used appropriately in the K-3 classrooms.

Clear behavior expectations and rituals/routines are established and posted.

Instruction is bell-to-bell.

Some classrooms are literacy rich and classroom libraries are adequate and contain a variety of texts.

Classroom EnvironmentBoard configurations were incomplete in some classrooms and were unclear or too detailed in others. References to the board configuration were not observed in most classrooms.

Benchmarks and learning objectives were not written in student friendly language in some classrooms.

In some classrooms, the NCEE Performance Standards are posted and used rather than the Sunshine State Standards.

Word walls and the posted agendas in some classrooms are not aligned to instruction or lesson plans.

Action Step:Use common board configurations which include an agenda (date, benchmark, objective, bell ringer, homework and an assessment. Use word walls that are interactive, current and aligned to instruction. Ensure that all teachers post and use the Sunshine State Standards.

Evidence:All classrooms will have common board configurations using the elements in the correct manner.

Word Walls are interactive, current and aligned to instruction.

The Sunshine State Standards are posted and used in all classrooms.

Task #1:Provide training on the expectations and support and monitor classroom implementation of appropriate board configurations and word walls.

Provide training on understanding and unpacking the Sunshine State Standards. Use in all classrooms.

Timeline:September - October 2009

September – October 2009

Responsible:District and School CoachesTurnaround Executive DirectorRegion 2 CoordinatorRegion 2 Instructional Specialists

District and School CoachesTurnaround Executive DirectorRegion 2 CoordinatorRegion 2 Instructional SpecialistsClassroom Teachers


Task #2: Write benchmarks in student friendly language.

Task #3Communicate clear expectations and monitor the implementation of the appropriate board configurations, word walls, and the Sunshine State Standards.

Timeline:September 2009

Timeline:September 2009 – May 2010

Responsible:Classroom Teachers

Responsible:Principal and Leadership Team

Instructional Tools and MaterialsAdequate content materials and supplies are readily available for student use.

Teachers are using the district’s learning schedules and administering the district’s writing prompt.

Instructional Tools and Materials:Teachers need some clarification on appropriately using the learning schedules and how to score writing products. A variety of rubrics are being used and teachers are struggling with which one to use and how to use it.Writing assessments have not been scored in most classes and the data is not available to guide instruction.

Action Step(s):Use the FCAT Writing Rubric in grades all grades. Use the DOE anchor papers for writing to increase teacher and student understanding of the scoring process and writing expectations.

Evidence:Teachers use the DOE Writing to score student writing.

Teachers use anchor papers to increase their understanding and that of the students.

Task #1:Provide training for teachers on the DOE Writing Rubric. Teachers will use the DOE rubric to score student writing in all grades.

Task #2:Use the rubrics to score student writing.

Task #3Train students on how to use the DOE Rubric to score their writing in all grades.

Task #3Provide training on Short and Extended Responses and the use of anchor papers to increase understanding of the scoring process and writing expectations.

Timeline:October 2009

October 2009 – December 2009

October – November 2009

October 2009 – November 2009

Responsible:School and district coachesTurnaround Executive DirectorRegion 2 CoordinatorRegion 2 Instructional Specialist

Classroom Teachers

District and School Coaches

District and School CoachesTurnaround Executive DirectorRegion 2 CoordinatorRegion 2 Instructional Specialist


Task #2:Communicate expectations and monitor the writing process in all classrooms.



Lesson Planning and Delivery

Lesson plans are accessible in all classrooms and an attempt to be on target with the learning schedule is evident in some of the classes.

A common Lesson Plan format is used by most teachers in grades K-3.

A few teachers provided explicit instruction (setting the stage for learning, an explanation of what to do, modeling of the process, opportunities for practice, and assessments).

In some classes, students understood the purpose of the lesson.

Teachers used the Read 180 rotation cycle and the R-Book to plan instruction.

Lesson Planning and Delivery

Essential Questions/learning objectives, though posted, were not referred to during the lesson or as a comprehension check in the majority of classrooms.

There is no evidence that teachers are unpacking the standards and feel comfortable doing so.

All teachers are not providing explicit instruction.

There is a need to develop and administer common assessments to gather data and use to inform instruction (re-teaching, differentiation).

Some teachers are using exit slips inappropriately. They are not used to assess the understanding of the

Action Step(s):Provide training on lesson planning/development; explicit teaching, essential questions and the use of exit slips.

Develop and use a common lesson plan format.

Use multiple data sources to drive class instruction and differentiate instruction for student success.

Plan and develop instructional focus and common lessons.

Collaborate with grade level teachers to prepare common lessons and assessments, analyze data and share strategies.

Develop common assessments and use data to inform teaching.

Schedule a 90 minute reading block.

Evidence:All teachers understand and use a common lesson plan format.

Lesson plans and instructional delivery reflect all components of explicit teaching.

Differentiated instruction evident in all classes to improve student performance and success.

Teachers use multiple sources of data to inform instruction.

Teachers unpack the standards and post appropriately on board configurations.

Instructional focus lessons are used appropriately.

Teachers plan and collaborate together.

Common assessments are used and data drives instruction.

Lesson plans reflect differentiation, re-teaching and adjustments in instruction.

The 90 minute reading block is evident in classrooms.

A variety of engagement strategies are used.


Read 180 teachers checked student understanding through exit slips.

Teachers were using structured engagement routines (Think-Pair-Share, Oral Cloze, etc.) in Read 180.

Teachers were scaffolding instruction using sentence starters during Read 180 instruction.

content taught to re-teach or adjust instruction.

Some lesson plans are generic and extended over several days without teacher reflections or changes.

Teachers on the same grade level are not planning and collaborating together.

Reading/Writing Focus lessons are not used at this time.

There is a need to focus on engaging beginnings and the use of transitions in student writing. Posted student work reflected this concern.

Task #1:Schedule and implement training on lesson planning/development, explicit teaching, essential questions and the use of exit slips.

Task #2:Develop and use appropriate lesson plans; provide explicit teaching and use essential questions and exit slips appropriately.

Task #3:Monitor lesson plans and instructional delivery to ensure instruction is appropriate and contains all components of explicit teaching.

Timeline:September 2009 – October 2009

October 2009 – May 2010


Responsible:District and School CoachesTurnaround Schools Executive DirectorRegion 2 CoordinatorRegion 2 Instructional Specialists

Classroom Teachers

Principal and Leadership Team


The Reading Block is less than 90 minutes long in some classes.

Some teachers are not aligning instruction and lesson plans with the district’s learning schedules (grades 4-7).

Common lesson plan formats were not used at all grade levels.

Some classrooms had an excessive amount of time devoted to independent reading.

.

Task #4:Provide training on unpacking the Sunshine State Standards to ensure teacher and student understanding.

Task #5:Post Sunshine State Standards and use to guide instruction.

Task #6:Monitor the implementation of the Sunshine State Standards in all classrooms.

Task #7:Review teacher schedules to ensure a 90 minute reading block.

Task #8:Use scheduled planning time for teachers to plan instruction, analyze data, share strategies, and develop instructional focus and common lessons.

Task #9:Use multiple data sources to re-teach, differentiate, and focus instruction.

Task #10:Limit the amount of time scheduled for independent reading and have teachers implement varied strategies for engagement, such as, centers that provide opportunities for practice and differentiated instruction.

Task #11:Create model classrooms for teachers to observe effective instruction.


October 2009


September 2009

October 2009


September 2009

September 2009

Responsible:District and School CoachesTurnaround Schools Executive DirectorRegion 2 CoordinatorRegion 2 Instructional Specialists

Classroom Teachers



Principal and Leadership TeamClassroom Teachers

Classroom Teachers

Classroom Teachers



Student Engagement:Most students are engaged but as passive learners.

Journals/Portfolios are being developed and used in some classrooms.

Student Engagement:Most instruction was teacher-directed and with few opportunities for student collaboration and group work.

Limited reading strategies and protocols are used to engage students.

Provide opportunities for teachers to meet and debrief observations.

Action Step(s):Provide training on student engagement and the use of effective instructional strategies.

Evidence:Teachers use effective strategies and students are engaged.

Lesson plans reflect appropriate use of instructional strategies to engage students.

Task #1:Schedule and implement training on effective student engagement and the use of effective instructional strategies.


Responsible:District and School CoachesTurnaround Schools Executive DirectorRegion 2 Instructional Specialists

Task #2:Use effective and instructional engagement strategies.

Monitor the implementation of strategies in all classrooms.

Timeline:October 2009 – May 2010

September 2009 - May 2010



Rigorous Tasks and Assessments. There is a need to provide more rigor in instruction.

There is no evidence that data housed in data notebooks is being used to drive instruction.

Action Step:Provide training on rigor in instruction.

Review data notebooks to ensure multiple sources of data are included and data is used for grouping and to drive instruction.

EvidenceLesson plans and instructional delivery reflect a progression of rigor in instruction.

Data notebooks should reflect multiple sources of data, grouping of students, and how data is used to inform instruction.

Task #1:Schedule and provide training on rigor in instruction.


Responsible:District and School CoachesTurnaround Schools Executive DirectorRegion 2 Instructional Specialists


Task #2: Monitor the implementation of instructional delivery for rigor.




Higher Order Questioning and Discourse:Questioning was primarily at the DOK low or moderate level. There were missed opportunities to scaffold student responses, limited probing and prompting, limited wait time, and missed teachable moments.

Action Step:Provide training on Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and other questioning strategies.

Evidence:Student engagement through effective questioning.

Lesson plans reflect appropriate questioning strategies.Task #1:Schedule and provide training on Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and/or other questioning strategies.


Responsible:Assistant PrincipalDistrict, School Coaches and/or Region 2 Content Specialists

Task #2: Monitor the use of effective questioning strategies.


Responsible:

Principal and Leadership TeamFlorida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Teachers need to have this training. The elements of FCIM were missing in classes.

Action Step:Schedule FCIM training.

Evidence: The elements of FCIM become a part of each class and drive instruction.

Task #1:Provide FCIM training.


Responsible:PrincipalDistrict, School Coaches and/or Region 2 Instructional Specialists

Task #2: Timeline: Responsible:


Differentiated Accountability: Action Plan for ScienceFlorida Department of Education School: North Shore K-8 Grade Levels: K-7

District: Duval Instructional Review Date: September 11 & 14, 2009

Region: 2 Terry Harvey and Rita Franklin







Classroom Environment:Students were respectful, friendly, and on task. Most classrooms were inviting to students, clear of clutter and desks were arranged for group work and student collaboration. Behavior expectations, rituals/routines and CHAMPS rules were posted throughout the school and established in most classrooms. Transitions were smoothed, classroom schedules were followed, and the students helped each other and followed instructions. Most classrooms had an ample amount of non-fiction reading materials and instruction was bell to bell. One 5th

Classroom EnvironmentBoard configurations were inconsistent, unclear and lacked appropriate content. Most teachers did not reference the board/agenda to guide the students through the lesson.

Interactive word walls were in the beginning stages or missing and were not referenced during instruction to increase student vocabulary acquisition and use.

Action Step: Use a common board configuration that includes a date, benchmark, objective, agenda, bell ringer and homework.Ensure that all teachers understand all components of the board configuration. Develop and display current, interactive word walls.

Evidence:All classrooms will have common board configurations using the correct elements and referenced during instruction.

Current interactive word walls are aligned to instruction in all classrooms.


grade teacher modeled the effective use of the agenda and the word wall.

Task #1:Schedule and provide training on the expectations for board configurations, writing benchmarks and interactive word walls.

Task #2: Implement common board configurations in all classrooms and interactive word walls in classrooms.

Task #3Communicate clear expectations and monitor the implementation of the appropriate board configurations and word walls.

Timeline:October 2009 – November 2009



Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive Director

Classroom Teachers

Principal Leadership Team

Instructional Tools and Materials:Adequate content materials are readily available for student use. Projection equipment is present in all classrooms. Curriculum maps were present with most Lesson Plan books.

Instructional Tools and MaterialsSpecific science content materials to use in labs or for display were not easy to find in most Intermediate and Middle Grade classrooms. These resource materials are needed to reflect various learning styles.Projection equipment with document cameras is available in all classrooms but not being used on a consistent basis to support instruction.Some classes do not have enough sets of inquiry lab equipment.

Action Step:Organize and label science materials.

Use projection equipment with document cameras to support instruction.

Inventory, plan ahead and request equipment.

Evidence:A variety of resource materials are used regularly in the classrooms to support learning styles.Projection equipment and document cameras are used regularly in classrooms to support instruction.Labs are conducted regularly with adequate supplies for all students.

Task #1:Schedule and provide training on various resources available to use in the classrooms and how to effectively use the projection equipment to support instruction.

Timeline:October 2009 – November 2009

Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive Director


Task #2: Use the available resources and technology regularly to support instruction and inquiry activities. Task#3: Inventory and label science resources in the classroom and locate supplies to prepare inquiry activities. Task#4:Monitor lesson plans and classrooms for effective use of science resources and inquiry activities.





Classroom Teachers



Lesson Planning and DeliveryLesson plans were accessible in all classrooms. Most content topics were closely aligned to the pacing guides. Essential questions were posted in most classrooms.

Lesson Planning and DeliveryAll teachers were not providing explicit instruction, setting the stage for learning; an explanation of what to do, modeling of the process, and providing opportunities for practice. Assessment data was not present allowing for differentiation, re-teaching and adjustments in instruction. Lesson plans in some classrooms were not aligned to the current learning schedules and most did not include detailed instructional elements and were missing hands on activities/inquiry labs. Essential question/learning objectives were not clear or written in student friendly language and were not referenced during instruction. Teachers were not using effective comprehension checks or closing strategies during the delivery of a lesson to assess the understanding of the content, re-teach, and adjust the lesson. Vocabulary was not integrated into instruction and not used to build the knowledge and skills of students. There was not evidence that teachers

Action Step:Provide training on lesson planning/development, use of the learning schedule and unpacking standards, 5Es Instructional delivery model, essential question, use of vocabulary, closing strategies, analyzing data, and differentiated instruction. Establish model classrooms at all grades and allow opportunity for observation and feedback during PLCs.

Evidence:Lesson plans reflect all components of explicit teaching and structured based on the 5Es Instructional Delivery Model.

All lessons are delivered appropriately and effectively based on the Sunshine Standards.

Lesson plans of grade level teachers reflect lesson products that are similar and include a variety of assessments.

Essential questions/learning objective is posted in all classrooms and referenced during instruction. Closing strategies and comprehension checks are used appropriately during instruction.

Teachers use multiple sources of data to inform instruction.

Model classroom teachers are observed and debriefings follow observations.


are unpacking the standards for complete understanding to drive instruction. All teachers are not using the 5Es Instructional Delivery Model.Science content instructional time was not scheduled consistently across grade levels.

Task #1:Schedule and provide training on lesson planning/development and delivery, unpacking the Sunshine State Standards, analyzing data, integration of vocabulary into content, essential questions, strategies to determine student understanding and closing strategies for lesson reflection. Ensure science instructional time is scheduled appropriately.

Timeline:October 2009 – December 2009

Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive DirectorRegion 2 Science Specialists

Task #2: Implement/transfer training into classroom practice.Task #3: Monitor the implementation of the training in all classrooms.Task #4:Review master schedule to ensure students are scheduled appropriately in science.Task #5:Establish model classrooms at all grade levels.

Task #6:Visit model classrooms and discuss feedback in the PLCs.Task #7;Monitor PLCs and the implementation of all training components.









Principal Leadership TeamDistrict Academic ServicesClassroom Teachers

Principal Leadership TeamDistrict Academic ServicesClassroom Teachers




Higher Order Questioning and Discourse / Rigorous Tasks and Assessments:

Higher Order Questioning and Discourse / Rigorous Tasks and Assessments:

In Intermediate and Middle Grade classes, questioning was primarily at the DOK low level. There were missed opportunities to scaffold student responses, limited probing /prompting, and insufficient wait time.There is a need for tasks to follow an appropriate progression of rigor.

Action Step:Provide training on Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and/or other questioning strategies and rigor in instruction.

Evidence:Student engagement through effective questioning.

Lesson plans and instructional delivery reflect appropriate questioning strategies and a progression of rigor from recall to reasoning.

Task #1:Schedule and provide training on Webb’s Depth of Knowledge and/or other questioning strategies and rigor in instruction.

Task #2Implement Webb’s DOK and/or other questioning strategies and rigorous instruction.Task #3: Monitor the use of effective questioning strategies and the implementation of rigorous instruction.

Timeline:September 2009 - October 2009

September 2009 – May 2010


Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive DirectorRegion 2 Science Specialists

Classroom Teachers


Student Engagement:Students were engaged, though passively at times.Students appeared eager and anxious to participate. Students were sitting in groups in most classes.

Student Engagement:Most instruction was teacher directed with few opportunities for student interaction and participation.Limited instructional strategies were used in Intermediate and Middle Grades to engage students. Students were sitting in groups of six in most cases and teachers infrequently checked for student understanding.

Action Step:Provide training on student engagement and the use of effective instructional strategies.

Evidence:Teachers use effective instructional strategies and students are engaged.

Lesson plans reflect appropriate use of instructional strategies to engage students.


Most Intermediate and Middle Grades teachers did not require student notebooks or evidence of students explaining science through written and/or pictorial examples.Inquiry based activities were not observed or noted in most classrooms. Too few lab set-ups were available for every student to interact in the designed activity. In most Intermediate and Middle Grades there was very little checking for understanding.

Task #1:Schedule and provide training in instructional strategies to present science content and how to effectively use inquiry activities.

Task #2Implement effective engagement /inquiry strategies.Task #3: Monitor the implementation of strategies in all classrooms.




Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive DirectorRegion 2 Science SpecialistsClassroom Teachers


Cross Content Reading and Writing Instruction:

Cross Content Reading and Writing Instruction:There was little evidence of interactive reading and writing during instruction of science in the classrooms.

Action Step:Provide training on how to implement reading and writing strategies during science instruction.

Evidence:Appropriate use of reading and writing strategies in all science classrooms.

Lesson plans reflect appropriate reading and wiring strategies. Task #1:Schedule and provide training on use of effective reading and writing strategies during science instruction.

Task #2: Transfer training into classroom practice.

Task #3:Monitor the implementation of strategies in all classrooms.

Timeline:October 2009 – December 2009



Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive DirectorRegion 2 Science SpecialistsClassroom Teachers



Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model:

The FCIM was in the beginning stages of implementation.

Florida Continuous Improvement Model:

There appears to be confusion regarding the implementation of components of the Florida Continuous Improvement ModelIt was not evident that the instructional focus calendar for fifth grade science includes all of the annually assessed benchmarks. It is the expectation that the focus lessons will be developed based on the benchmarks.

Action Step:Provide FCIM training and implement all components. Ensure fifth grade students are receiving appropriate instruction based on the annual assessed benchmarks.

Evidence:The elements of FCIM are a part of each class and drive instruction.

All teachers use the instructional focus calendar and focus lessons.

Fifth grade students receive instruction that include all annual assessed benchmarks.

Task #1:Schedule and provide FCIM training.

Task #2:Implement all components of FCIM. Review elements of the instructional focus calendar and develop focus lessons to align with the calendar.

Task#3:Monitor the use of FCIM components in all classrooms




Responsible:PrincipalSchool CoachDistrict Academic ServicesDistrict Cluster Executive Director Region 2 Science Specialists

Classroom Teachers Principal Leadership Team



Differentiated Accountability: Action Plan for RtI and ESEFlorida Department of Education School: North Shore K-8 School Grade Levels: pre-k – 8

District: Duval County Public Schools Instructional Review Date: 09/11/09 & 09/14/09

Region: 2 – Michael McAuley







ESE Lead teacher and ESE faculty work closely with the inclusion teachers. Lesson planning is done jointly through electronic means so that accommodations and instructional strategies are written directly into the daily lesson plans that are utilized in the regular classroom setting.

Recently appointed RTI Facilitator is not familiar with the Problem-Solving Model and general RTI constructs.

There may also be questions regarding specific functions this role may require in support of school-level RTI practice.

Action Step:Prepare the RTI Facilitator so that he can provide technical support/assistance for the RTI process to faculty, staff, leadership, and community.

Evidence:A review of the RTI Facilitators instructional log will reveal dates, time, and topic of completed training modules/activities.

Task #1:Provide intensive training to RTI Facilitator on the Problem-solving process, components, and framework

Timeline:Ongoing throughout academic year

Responsible:District RTI TeamRegion 2 RTI Specialist

Task #2: Assist RTI Facilitator in connecting PS/RTI processes to important variables such as FCIM, Lesson Plans, Lesson Study, and Differentiated Instruction.


Responsible:District RTI TeamRegion 2 RTI Specialist

School Improvement Plan includes a well written and clearly outlined plan for including RTI principles in data-based decision making and instruction.

School leadership and faculty are not familiar with the specific components of Problem-Solving/RTI.

Action Step:Complete a Self-Assessment of Problem Solving Implementation (SAPSI) to gain evidence and needs for RTI consensus, infrastructure, and implementation.

Evidence:A completed SAPSI that reflects the school’s current understanding and implementation of PS/RTI.


Task #1:School-based leadership will meet as a group to complete the SAPSI.

Timeline:September - October 2009

Responsible:School-based RTI contactRegion 2 RTI SpecialistPrincipal

Action Step:Conduct a series of workshops with school leadership and faculty on the various components of PS/RTI.

Evidence:Professional Development calendar will reflect PS/RTI Training to school faculty and leadership to include discreet training units such as problem-solving model, standard treatment protocol, data-based decision making, and progress-monitoring.

Task #1:Schedule and develop training modules for unit workshops at the school level.


Responsible:School-based RTI contactDistrict RTI TeamRegion 2 RTI Specialist

Task #2: Deliver RTI workshops to faculty and school leadership on a regular schedule.


Responsible:School-based RTI contactDistrict RTI TeamRegion 2 RTI Specialist

School principal expresses a good understanding of basic RTI principals, including need for frequent review of student performance data.

School leadership has established a calendar for weekly meetings for faculty and leadership to review student performance and behavior data with the intent to better focus instruction.

School does not maintain an up-to-date inventory of strategies and interventions for at-risk learners.

Action Step:Maintain an inventory of all school-level and district-level resources (strategies and interventions) available to faculty for working with at-risk students.

Evidence:Posting of inventory list in teachers lounge and/or distributed directly to faculty.

Task #1:Conduct a survey of all school leadership, faculty and coaches to list intervention programs/tools to include title, skill for remediation, implementation time-line and progress monitoring tool.

Timeline:September – October 2009

Responsible:School-based RTI contactAcademic CoachesPrincipal Leadership Team

Task #2: Post the resource inventory in such a manner so that coaches, SLC’s and PLC’s have ready access for review.


Responsible:Principal Leadership Team

Behavior Support classroom teachers did not have an aid in the classroom to assist with behavior management.

Action Step:Establish support personnel schedules so that there is always the required level of support in the Behavior Support classrooms.

Evidence:Presence of more than one adult in the Behavior Support classrooms at all required times.


Task #1:Coordinate para-professional and behavior specialist schedules so that coverage is maintained in the Behavior Support classroom.


Responsible:School PrincipalESE Lead Teacher

Observed student classroom behavior in the Behavior Support classroom did not promote positive learning opportunities for all students.

Action Step:Establish a systematic behavior management program in the Behavior Support classrooms.

Evidence:Utilization and display of a behavior management program.

Task #1:School leadership and ESE Lead Teacher should review current steps of Positive Behavior Support in Behavior Support classrooms


Responsible:School PrincipalESE Lead Teacher

Task #2:School leadership and ESE Lead Teacher should consult with district support staff to establish a workable behavior management program that operates in the Behavior Support classrooms.


Responsible:School PrincipalESE Lead TeacherDistrict ESE support staff


Differentiated Accountability: Action Plan for School and District LeadershipFlorida Department of Education School: North Shore K-8 Grade Levels: PK-7

District: Duval County Instructional Review Date: September 11 and 14

Region: Region 2 Leila Mousa







School leadership has established a system for shared instructional leadership. The roles and responsibilities of the Instructional Coaches and Grade Level Lead Teachers have been formalized. The School Leadership Team is scheduled to meet weekly to discuss and review current school data.

School leadership team does not have a procedure for documenting specific instructional activities or support provided to faculty. In addition, specific coaches’ or grade level lead teacher logs are not completed delineating coaching activities and support provided to teachers

Action Step:Establish and use a system to log daily instructional and support activities.

Evidence:Logs with specific dates, activities, faculty names and follow-up steps

Task #1:School Leadership will develop log forms and train coaches and administrators in the use of such logs

Timeline:September, 2009



Grade level and content area faculty meet twice during common planning to begin the process of analyzing student data, problem solving and developing common lessons.

Faculty does not have a clear understanding of specific problem solving and root causal analysis.

Action Step:Train the faculty and administration on the Problem Solving Model.

Evidence:The faculty will analyze data and identify problems and possible interventions that are specific to the problem

Task #1:The Region 2 Instructional Specialists and RtI Specialist will meet with faculty and coaches during common planning to begin the process of using data to identify specific problems and interventions.

Timeline:October, 2009

Responsible:All Region 2 Instructional Specialists and RtI SpecialistDistrict CoachesSchool Coaches




The District and School Leadership have allocated adequate resources such as coaches and instructional materials to support the instructional program through the use of FCIM

The School Leadership Team and the faculty do not have a clear understanding of the function and application of the Florida Continuous Improvement Model. The school has several academic coaches funded by the district but all lack a coherent understanding of FCIM.

Action Step:Provide FCIM training to administration , coaches and faculty with specific emphasis on data analysis and focus lesson plan development

Evidence:Relevant and specific focus calendar and lesson plansData that assesses student academic outcomes

Task #1:Within grade level and/or content area common planning, faculty members will be trained on the FCIM.


Responsible:Region 2 Instructional SpecialistsSchool CoachesDistrict Coaches

Task #2: Train all instructional coaches in effective coaching strategies


Responsible:District Academic ServicesDistrict CoachesRegion 2 Instrucional Specialists and Reading Coordinator

The beginnings of a monitoring system are in place. The School Improvement Plan and the FCIM Distributive Leadership Plan designates specific individuals who will monitor the content area action steps.

A comprehensive monitoring system is not fully in place. Administrators and faculty do not have a clear understanding of monitoring, assessing, analyzing and refocusing either processes or instructional activities.

Action Step:Train all stakeholders, including students, in the monitoring process.

Evidence:All stakeholders will use data from the monitoring system to support the instructional programs and student achievement.

Task #1:All stakeholders will reach a consensus on the common monitoring constructs that will support student achievement. In other words, what does one look for to document explicit instruction?


Responsible:District Leadership TeamRegion 2 Executive DirectorPrincipalFacultyStudentsRegion 2 Instructional Specialists


A Teacher Mentoring System is not in place for teachers who are new to the content area and/or beginning

Action Step:Establish a Teacher Mentoring System

Evidence:Teachers paired with experienced content mentors with a scheduled time for meeting regularly


teachers Task #1:Identify the teachers and pair them with a mentor


Responsible:PrincipalProfessional Development CadreDistrict Cluster Executive Director


Confusion exists regarding the understanding and implementation of the following elements: writing rubric, lesson plan format, board configuration and exit assessments.

Action Step: Develop a common understanding of the FLDOE writing rubric, lesson plan format, board configuration and exit assessments

Evidence:Common writing rubric and lesson plan format used in all classroomsUnderstanding and use of the board configuration with benchmarks, objective and exit assessment

Task #1:All stakeholders will reach a consensus on the understanding of the writing rubric, lesson plan format and the purpose of the board configuration.


Responsible:PrincipalSchool coachesDistrict coachesRegion 2 Instructional Specialists


Teachers have been provided data notebooks that include current FCAT data and will contain both mini and formative assessments that will refocus instruction.

The Response to Intervention (RtI) process is in the very beginning stages of understanding at the faculty, coaches and administrative levels

Action Step:Train the faculty, coaches and administrators on the basic components of RtI.

Evidence:Initial understanding of RtI constructs with specific emphasis on the appropriate tier support systems.

Task #1:The faculty and administration will be trained on the global understanding and implementation of RtI.


Responsible:Region 2 RtI Specialist



differentiated accountability: element i action...

Documents