school improvement plan · 2012 english language arts proficiency gap narrowing 6 year goal 2011...

Brockton Public SchoolsBrockton, Massachusetts

Downey Elementary School

School Improvement Plan

2012-2014

Principal: Diane C. Gosselin

AssocPrincipal:

AsstPrincipal: John Kelly

Mission Statement:The mission of the Downey School is to provide a supportive environment where students can maximize their potential in English, Reading and Math while also emphasizing the importance of free thinking, responsibility, diversity and respect for all. Our staff is committed to the creation of a stimulating climate which motivates

students to become self-initiating and discriminating in decision making and learning.

Vision Statement:

Students at Downey School will be proficient in ELA, Mathematics and Science/Technology at the end of Grade 5 using multiple assessments, including but not limited to the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System.

School Leadership Team Members:

MCAS

Proficient or Higher

School State

Advanced

School State

Proficient

School State

Needs ImprovementSchool State

Warning/Failing

School State

Students Included

ELA Math Sci

2011 0110SY:

Science and Tech/EngGrade 05 22 50 0 14 22 36 49 36 29 15 79

MathematicsGrade 05 43 59 9 25 34 34 28 26 29 15 79

English Language ArtsGrade 05 44 67 3 17 41 50 38 24 19 9 80




ReadingGrade 03 22 61 2 11 20 50 42 30 36 9 97

MathematicsAll Grades 32 58 5 24 27 34 35 27 33 15 279

English Language ArtsAll Grades 26 69 1 17 25 52 43 23 31 8 280

Proficient or Higher

School State

Advanced

School State

Proficient

School State

Needs ImprovementSchool State

Warning/Failing

School State

Students Included

ELA Math Sci

2012 0110SY:

Science and Tech/EngGrade 05 17 52 1 22 16 30 32 34 51 14 90






ReadingGrade 03 24 61 2 15 22 46 44 30 31 9 99

Science and Tech/EngAll Grades 17 54 1 17 16 37 32 32 51 13 90

MathematicsAll Grades 26 59 5 27 21 32 36 26 38 15 276

English Language ArtsAll Grades 28 69 2 19 26 50 40 22 32 9 276

of 12

Accountability

All Students CPPI: 46Accountability Level: Level 3 High Needs CPPI: 53

83.5 67 69.8 66.2 No Change

2012 English Language Arts Proficiency Gap Narrowing

6 Year Goal

2011 CPI (Baseline

2012 Target

2012 CPI

Rating

All Students:

High Needs: 82.8 65.6 68.5 65.3 No Change

83.8 67.5 70.2 64.9 Declined

2012 Mathematics Proficiency Gap Narrowing:

6 Year Goal

2011 CPI (Baseline

2012 Target

2012 CPI

Rating

All Students:


80.7 61.4 64.6 58.1 Declined

2012 Science Proficiency Gap Narrowing:

6 Year Goal

2011 CPI (Baseline

2012 Target

2012 CPI

Rating

All Students:


1.4 1.8 25 22.5 22.8

2012 English Language Arts Extra Credit:

Advanced Baseline %

2012 % Advanced

PPI Points Awarded

All Students:

High Needs: 0.8 1.8 25 23.6 24.2

0

0

Warning/Failing Baseline %

2012 % Warning/Failing

PPI Points Awarded

4.7 5.4 25 24.4 27.5

2012 Mathematics Extra Credit:

Advanced Baseline %

2012 % Advanced

PPI Points Awarded

All Students:

High Needs: 3.6 4.7 25 24.9 27.7

0

0



PPI Points Awarded

2012 Science Extra Credit:

of 12

0 1.1 25 25.3 37.8

Advanced Baseline %

2012 % Advanced

PPI Points Awarded

All Students:

High Needs: 0 1.2 25 30.3 39.3

0

0



PPI Points Awarded

2012 English Language Arts Growth:

51 38 54 No Above Target

6 Year Goal

2011 SGP

2012 SGP

Met Safe Harbor?

Rating

All Students:

High Needs: 51 37.5 56 No Above Target

2012 Mathematics Growth:

51 45.5 51 No On Target

6 Year Goal

2011 SGP

2012 SGP

Met Safe Harbor?

Rating

All Students:

High Needs: 51 43 51 No On Target

of 12

School Demographics

Enrollment by Gender

Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity

Selected Populations

Average Class Size

Male

Female

Asian

AIAN

African American

Hispanic

NHOPI

White

Two or More

First Language Not English

Limited English Proficient

Special Education

Low Income

Retentions

General Ed Modifie

Up to 20% Separate

21-60% Separate

All Grades

2011

57%

43%

1%

1%

49%

18%

0%

26%

5%

39%

19%

85%

1%

0%

52%

5%

17.7

2012

56%

44%

1%

1%

49%

19%

0%

25%

5%

37%

18%

25%

92%

2%

23%

0%

46%

3%

2013

55%

45%

2%

2%

47%

18%

0%

26%

6%

35%

14%

23%

83%

0%

0%

50%

1%

of 12

Literacy Goal

Degree of Attainment for 2012-2014:

0%

Goal Statement for 2012-2014:

High Needs Goal: 71.3

DATA ANALYSIS: READING/LITERACY

STAR AssessmentsSF Unit BenchmarksTestWiz reports

AREAS OF STRENGTH: READING/LITERACY

1. Vocabulary is an area of strength as evidenced by SF unit Benchmarks

Briefly describe areas of strength identified through ongoing data analysis.

List the formative assessments used to determine strengths and weaknesses in your data analysis.

AREAS OF WEAKNESS --> IMPROVEMENT OBJECTIVES --> INITIATIVES --> PROGRESS MONITORING -->

Briefly describe areas of weakness identified through ongoing data analysis.

Identify priority objectives that will target each identified area of weakness.

List the initiatives that will be implemented to address each

improvement objective.

Describe how each initiative will be monitored. By whom?

How often?

Comprehension scores across all grades as measured by SF unit Benchmarks

Increase comprehension scores across all grades to 80%.

1. Plan books/Observations: ILT2. SF Unit Benchmarks: ILT3. STAR Assessment: Teachers/ILT

1. Implementation of Leveled Literacy in Grades 1-4.2. Continued use of directed notes in Grades 3-5.3. PD in Common Core.

DISTRICT READING GOAL: ALL STUDENTS WILL DEMONSTRATE PROFICIENCY IN COMPREHENDING AND ACQUIRING INFORMATION FROM LITERATURE AND INFORMATIONAL TEXTS (NON-FICTION).

DISTRICT WRITING GOAL: ALL STUDENTS WILL DEMONSTRATE PROFICIENCY IN COMPOSING GRADE APPROPRIATE WRITING PRODUCTS IN A RANGE OF MODES (NARRATIVE, EXPOSITORY, PERSUASIVE AND RESEARCH).

READING/LITERACY

of 12



Identify priority objectives that will target each identified area of

weakness.



Describe how each initiative will be monitored. By whom? How often?

Open response Grades 3-5 Increase open response average across Grades 3-5 to 2.5

1. Monthly review of sample writing folders by ILT.2. Data meetings3. Staff meetings

1. Continued use of directed notes in Grades 3-5.2. Continued PD in Common Core

Students have limited exposure to all writing modes (expository, persuasive, research)

To implement the BPS writing overview across all grade levels

Monthly review of sample writing folders by ILT.2. Data meetings3. Staff meetings

1. PD in BPS writing overview2. Implementation of BPS writing template

WRITING

DATA ANALYSIS: WRITING

BPS Writing RequirementsOngoing review of writing foldersBPS Common Assessments

AREAS OF STRENGTH: WRITING

Fourth grade MCAS long prompt average score is higher than the district and just below the state in both topic development and conventionsAs measured by the Scott Foresman Benchmark vocabulary is a strength in Grades 2-5



of 12

Numeracy Goal


0%



DATA ANALYSIS:

Fastt Math Usage ReportsSTAR Assessment dataCommon Assessment resultsAIMS web

AREAS OF STRENGTH:

Geometry is an area of strength across all grades as evidenced by Unit Benchmark test.









Computational fluency in Grades 2-5 Increase fluency and accuracy in all operations (depending on grade level) by 40%.

1. AIMS Web: quarterly/ teachers/ILT2. TENS testing: quarterly/teachers/ILT

1. Fastt Math 3 times weekly2. Mad Minutes/Computation drills 10 minutes daily3. PD in Common Core

Problem solving/Open response Increase average open response score on state tests to 1.25 in Grade 3 and 2.5 in Grades 4 and 5.

1.. Unit Benchmark test: Teachers/ILT2. STAR Assessment reports: Teachers/ILT3. Data meetings: Teachers/ILT

1. Super Six problem solving strategy2. Daily intervention groups with an emphasis on problem solving.

DISTRICT MATH GOAL: ALL STUDENTS WILL DEMONSTRATE PROFICIENCY IN GRADE-APPROPRIATE COMPUTATION, OPERATIONS AND PROBLEM SOLVING.

of 12

Science and Technology Goal


0%



DATA ANALYSIS:

Discovery Education Usage Reports

AREAS OF STRENGTH:

MCAS score in the area of Physical Science was above the state average









Performance in Life Science, Earth/Space Science, Technology/Engineering on MCAS

Monitor implementation of required 90 minutes weekly of Science instruction

1. Plan book/Observations: ILT2. Discovery Ed Usage Report: Teachers/ILT

1. Students in Grades 4 and 5 will receive 1. 90 minutes of Science instruction using Discovery Ed Tech book.2. PD in Discovery Ed Tech Book provided for staff

of 12

SCHOOL CLIMATE/SCHOOL CULTURE GOAL OR NON-ACADEMIC SUPPORT GOAL


To provide faculty and staff with detailed data regarding disruptions to teaching/learning in an effort to create a plan to reduce disruptions and increase time on task.

Describe actions that will be taken in an effort to meet your goal:

1. Implementation of PBIS and SWIS data management system, including individual and class incentives.2. School Wellness Team- bimonthly meetings-report at staff meetings3. Continued implementation of Second Step at all grade levels.

This is an opportunity for schools to articulate some of the other initiatives or areas of focus that have a positive impact on staff and/or students

in their schools. Examples include (but are not limited to):

- School Wellness Teams and the Healthy Schools Project - relate to outcomes on

- {PBIS (Positive Behavior Intervention and Support) - related to SWIS data

- Second Step/Steps to Respect

- Helping Traumatized Children Learn

- Collaborative Problem Solving

- Skills for Life

of 12

Projected Professional Development and Data Meetings

September: Sept 20 In-service: K-2 WIDDA training, Grades 3-5 MCAS item analysis

October: Oct 18 In-service: Mathematical PracticesGrade level data meetings

November: Grade level data meetings

December: December 6 In-service: TBD

January: Jan. 31 In-service: TBDGrade level data meetings

February: Grade level data meetings

March: March 12 In-service: TBD

April: Grade level data meetings

May: Grade level data meetings

June: June 6 In-service: TBDJune 12: In-service TBD

of 12

school improvement plan · 2012 english language arts proficiency gap narrowing 6 year goal 2011...

Documents