school improvement plan schoolwide title i - auburn.wednet.edu · school improvement plan...

SIP Template

1 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Implementation September 2016-June 2019

Washington Elementary

School Improvement Plan

Schoolwide Title I

SIP Template

2 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

September 2016-June 2019

Auburn School District Strategic Plan

Aspiration:

The Auburn School District aspires to be a world-class education system preparing all students to

be globally competitive for career, for college, and for life in the twenty-first century.

District Goal 1: Student Achievement

All staff in the Auburn School District provide support, leadership, and guidance to ensure each

student meets or exceeds state and district standards, graduates on time, and is prepared for

career and college.

District Goal 2: Community Engagements

All staff in the Auburn School District are accountable for engaging its diverse community as

partners to support and sustain a world-class education system.

District Goal 3: Policies and Resource Management

Auburn School District policies and resources are aligned to the strategic plan.

School:

Washington Elementary

Date of SIP Team District Goal Review:

SIP Team Members:

SIP Template

3 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

School Improvement Team Signatures 2013-2014

Date Submitted: Date of School Board

Approval:

Name Title/Position Signature

Pauline Thomas Principal

Lynnette Stewart Parent

Emanuel Chavez-

Ocegueda

Student

Community

Member

Bonnie Harvey Staff

Jessica Lewis Staff

Jolie Stevens Staff

Danielle Boyles Staff

Kim Seng Staff

Kelli Monagin Staff

Katie Anderson Staff

Donna Mayer Staff

Tori Smith Staff

Tracy Brown Staff

Each team must include staff, students, families, parents, and community

members.

SIP Template

4 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Signatures for Approval

Department of Student Learning

Heidi Harris Assistant Superintendent

Student Learning

Julie DeBolt Executive Director High

School/Post Secondary

Programs

Vicki Bates Assistant Superintendent

Technology

Department of School Programs

Ryan Foster Associate Superintendent

Principal Leadership and

School Programs

Rhonda Larson Assistant Superintendent

Family Engagement and

Student Services

Superintendent

Alan Spicciati

Superintendent

School Board

Anne Baunach School Board

Carol Seng School Board

Laurie Bishop School Board

Ray Vefik School Board

Ryan Van Quill School Board

SIP Template

5 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Executive Summary – SWT 1

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Auburn School District Mission

In a safe environment, all students will achieve high standards of learning in order to become

ethically responsible decision makers and lifelong learners.

Auburn School District Vision

The vision of Auburn School District is to develop in students the skills and attitudes that will

maximize their potential for lifelong learning and ethically responsible decision making.

School Mission

The Mission of Washington is to provide a safe environment where all students achieve high

standards of learning and develop responsible behavior.

School Vision

The vision of Washington Elementary is to provide a supportive and challenging environment

where all students have the opportunity to reach their full potential through high academic

standards, independent thinking and responsible behavior.

Background Information

WAC 180-16-220

Requirements for School Improvement Plan Each school shall be approved annually by the school board of directors under an approval process determined

by the district board of directors and “At a minimum the annual approval shall require each school to have a

school improvement plan that is data driven, promotes a positive impact on student learning, and includes a

continuous improvement process that shall mean the ongoing process used by a school to monitor, adjust, and

update its school improvement plan.” School Improvement plans must include a brief summary of use of data to

establish improvement; acknowledging the use of data which may include DIBELS, MAP, WELPA, Credit

Attainment, Enrollment in Honors/AP Courses, CEE Perceptual Data, SAT/ACT, Discipline, and MSP or HSPE.

Stakeholder Input

In the fall of 2015 the SIP team met to review the following data: DIBELS, MAP, WLPTII and

MSP. Over a three week period data was reviewed by all staff at weekly meetings. In addition,

staff, parents and students completed the CEE Perceptual survey and Positive Behavior Support

survey and reviewed data on school climate in January of 2015. Trends were noted and areas of

SIP Template

6 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

growth were celebrated and areas of concern were discussed. Comments and areas of concern

were collated and reviewed by the teams and ranked by greatest concern. Next, a review of

current research and best instructional practices in the areas of reading and math were reviewed

by sub committees of classroom teachers and specialist. In addition, a school summary Report

of the CEE and PBIS surveys was by the climate team. Lastly, Smart Goals, which align with

research findings in reading, math and school climate, were set and shared with staff. As plans

are made for instruction and curriculum needs, Grade Level Professional Learning Communities,

along with Specialist and support staff will meet to review academic data and plan for

differentiated instruction and curriculum. Throughout the process the Department of Student

Learning provided support through half day staff development workshops, work release time,

and consultant visitation.

Highly Qualified Staff – SWT 3

All Washington staff members have met the requirement for highly qualified.

High Quality, Highly Qualified Teachers – SWT 5 All Washington staff members have met the requirement for highly qualified.

Demographic data

Washington Elementary School is located in downtown Auburn, Washington and reflects this

diverse community. During our fall data review workshop the full staff looked at the most recent

demographic data as reported in the 2014-2015 OSPI Report Card and made the following

observations;

Washington’s student body is made up of males and females with 79.4% of Washington’s

nearly four hundred and forty students qualify for free or reduced lunch. This is an increase from

61.3% in 2009.

The ethnicity at Washington reflects the downtown community of Auburn: 34% white, 28%

Hispanic, 2% Asian, 9% Pacific Islander, 9% Black, 18% Multi Racial. 25.4% of the students are

served by the Transitional Bilingual program with our largest groups speaking Spanish and

Marshallese. Special Education and 504 students make up 12.6%which includes two Structured

Learning Center Classrooms and one Resource Room.

SIP Template

7 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Discipline The number of discipline reports increased which was a reflection of the implementation of systematic

reporting and documentation systems.

Based on the end of the year Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire most students reported liking school and

having 2-3 friends. There appears to be a decrease in the percentage of students reporting being bullied

this year but the number of students reporting being bullied for one year or more remained consistent.

The most frequently reported bullying types were verbal taunting and rumors. These bullying incidents

most frequently took place on the playground and in the gym. A smaller numbers of incidents were

reported in the bathroom and at the bus stop. Students reporting feeling afraid of being bullied by other

students often or fairly often decreased by 5%.

Attendance Analysis

Attendance continues to be an area of focus with the percentage of student absences on the

increase. Attendance letters go home monthly to families who have reached the 10% threshold.

Students receive recognition at Student of the Month assemblies for monthly and year to date

perfect attendance.

Three Year Attendance Trend (Absences)

2013 2014 2015

All School 15.7% 14.5% 16.8%

Data Analysis- DIBELS

Formally, three times each year the staff comes together to review the DIBELS benchmark assessment results. The results are shared with the entire instructional team and decisions are made to support the students that are not at benchmark. Results are shared in multiple formats; whole grade level, by class, by rank and by performance level. Staff work collectively to determine interventions. Walk to Read groups, small group instruction via special programs and tutoring is applied to support the reader. Volunteers are utilized to assist with progress monitoring.

Fall 2015

Number of students performing at each level in each grade level

Grade Level Intensive Strategic Benchmark Advanced

Kindergarten 35 11 51 11

1st grade 31 11 41 10

SIP Template

8 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

2nd grade 31 15 51 13

3rd grade 29 11 30 12

4th grade 16 9 41 17

5th grade 12 12 35 25

Data Analysis- MAPS Mathematics

THIRD GRADE: SPRING 2015 data results show the Mean RIT score for Mathematics to be

194.1. This reflects a 5.9 decrease from the previous year. When compared to the End of Year

Status Norms, the Mean RIT from 2015 is below the national average by 9.3.

34% of Grade 3 students are at or above District Grade Level Mean RIT.

FOURTH GRADE: SPRING 2015 data results show the Mean RIT Score for Mathematics to be


Status Norms, the Mean RIT from 2015 is below the national average by 10.

47% of Grade 4 students are at or above the District Grade Level Mean RIT.

FIFTH GRADE: SPRING 2015 data results show the Mean RIT Score for Mathematics to be




Three Year MAPS Trend-Mean RIT Scores: Mathematics

2013 2014 2015 End of Year Status Norms

3rd 198.1 200.0 194.1 203.4

4th 205.9 204.8 203.5 213.5

5th 214.8 212.5 209.8 221.5

Data Analysis- MAPS Reading

THIRD GRADE: SPRING 2015 data results show the Mean RIT score for Reading to be 191.7.

This reflects a 4.3 decrease from the previous year. When compared to the End of Year Status

Norms, the Mean RIT from 2015 is below the national average by 6.9.

43% of Grade 3 students are at or above District Grade Level Mean RIT.

FOURTH GRADE: SPRING 2015 data results show the Mean RIT Score for Reading to be

199.3. This reflects a 1 increase from the previous year. When compared to the End of Year



FIFTH GRADE: SPRING 2015 data results show the Mean RIT Score for Reading to be 199.6.

This reflects a 5.3 decrease from the previous year. When compared to the End of Year Status

Norms, the Mean RIT from 2015 is below the national average by 12.2.


Three Year Trend-Mean RIT Scores: Reading

SIP Template

9 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

2013 2014 2015 End of Year Status Norms

3rd 192.4 196.0 191.7 198.6

4th 198.6 198.3 199.3 205.9

5th 201.7 204.9 199.6 211.8

Data Analysis- WELPA

Washington Elementary has met AMAO-1 with 71.5% making progress on the 2014-15

WELPA. Washington Elementary has met AMAO-2 with 9.1% attainment of English

Proficiency on the 2014-15 WELPA.

Data Analysis- CEE Perceptual Survey

CEE Nine Characteristics of High Performing Schools Perceptual Survey results from fall 2014

showed parent perception to be higher than staff perception in all areas; parent perception is

significantly higher than staff perception in the following categories: Collaboration &

Communication, Effective Leadership, Supportive Learning Environment, Curriculum,

Instruction & Assessment. Parent and student perception is significantly higher than staff in the

following areas: High Standards & Expectations, Parent & Community Involvement. Staff

perception was lower than parent perception in all areas. Student perception was equal to or

lower than parent perception in all areas.

Almost Always True and Often True Combined Totals

Nine Characteristics of High

Performing Schools

Staff Parent Student

Collaboration & Communication 65 80 74

Clear & Shared Focus 78 82 68

High Standards & Expectations 59 87 87

Effective Leadership 70 85 74

Supportive Learning Environment 73 82 77

Parent & Community Involvement 49 77 61

Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment 64 79 NA

Monitoring Teaching & Learning 57 75 71

Focused Professional Development 54 NA NA

SBA ELA

THIRD GRADE: 55% of Third graders met AYP. This reflects a 26% decrease in the number of

third graders making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of third graders making AYP

is above that of the state and below that of the district.

SIP Template

10 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

FOURTH GRADE: 54.1% of Fourth graders met AYP. This reflects a 12.5% decrease in the

number of third graders making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of fourth graders

making AYP is below that of the state and district.

FIFTH GRADE: 40% of Fourth graders met AYP. This reflects a 25.6% decrease in the number

of fifth graders making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of fifth graders making

AYP is below that of the state and district.

Three Year MSP/SBA Trend: Reading

2013-MSP 2014-MSP 2015-SBA

3rd 71.1% 81% 55%

4th 66.6% 66.6% 54.1%

5th 64.7% 65.6% 40%

SBA/EOC Math

THIRD GRADE: 55.7% of Third graders met AYP in math. This reflects a 14.3% decrease in

the number of third graders making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of third graders

making AYP is above that of the state, but below that of the district.

FOURTH GRADE: 65.2% of Fourth graders met AYP in math. This reflects a 4% increase in

the number of fourth graders making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of fourth

graders making AYP is above both the state and the district.

FIFTH GRADE: 29% of Fifth graders met AYP in math. This reflects a 34.2% decrease in the

number of fifth graders making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of fifth graders

making AYP is below that of the state and district.

Three Year MSP/SBA Trend: Math

2013-MSP 2014-MSP 2015-SBA

3rd 65.2% 70% 55.7%

4th 65.1% 61.2% 65.2%

5th 60.8% 63.2% 29%

MSP Science/EOC Biology

FIFTH GRADE: 29% of fifth graders met AYP in Science. This reflects an 8.3% decrease in the

number of students making AYP over the previous year. The percentage of fifth graders making

AYP is below that of the state and district.

Three Year MSP Trend: Science

SIP Template

11 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

2013 2014 2015

5th 36.7% 37.3% 29%

Data Analysis- Credit Attainment, Honors/AP Enrollment

Students designated as Highly Capable are placed in general education courses at Hazelwood in

all grades in a PACE format. Students are provided opportunities to accelerate their learning via

Walk to Read and Walk to Math programs within the school. Additionally, the individual

classroom teacher provides support along with the school counselor meeting with the designated

highly capable students on a regular basis. Highly Capable students in grades 4 and 5 have the

opportunity to attend Terminal Park Elementary School.

Parent Involvement – SWT 6

All students enrolled at Washington are notified in writing regarding the School-Wide Walk-to-

Read Program. All parents receive grade level specific instructional plans for reading. In addition,

parents will receive an explanation of specific Title I programs, its selection process, and basic

procedures. All parents will receive Washington elementary Title I Parent Policy, the Parent Right to

Know and information on Title I funding is made available in both Spanish and English. This

information is posted on the school web site and available in the office Parent Information kiosk.

The goals of parent involvement will be to share materials and suggestions that will help

their children improve and succeed in the basic education classroom. The following ongoing

activities (but not limited to) may take place: open house, conferences, home reading program,

newsletters, good work awards, curriculum exploration nights, telephone contacts, additional

materials as requested by concerned parents, take-home books with parent information, parent

observation of groups in session, workshops, and other activities that encourage parental

involvement in the educational experience of their child.

A fall and spring survey will give parents input as to what type of communication and

involvement they would value in the Title I program. The results of this survey will be complied by

the Title I coordinator and taken into consideration during program planning. The Title I program’s

open door policy welcomes parent input and program suggestions at any time. Translators are

contracted for school wide events to support the predominate languages. Notices will be sent in

home languages as available. A Compact, on which parents, students, and teachers indicate

activities they will engage in is used in an effort to work together to foster reading growth. A signed

copy of these compacts will be kept on file for selected students.

SIP Template

12 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Student Transitions – SWT 7

The Auburn School district has recognized the Head Start program as a community outreach

program. Former Head Start students are identified in consideration for Kindergarten Title I

support. ECE teachers work with Kindergarten teachers to develop ways to support ECE students

that are entering Kindergarten. Local preschools and daycares, which feed into Washington

Elementary, will be notified of parent education opportunities. In the spring, Kindergarten Round-

up is held to give upcoming Kindergarten parents important school information. Upcoming

Kindergarten students are invited to attend also to become familiar with the school setting and

riding the bus. If funds permit, parents are invited to have their child participate in a screening for

possible participation in a Summer School Jump Start program for qualifying students. Summer

school is available for selected students, K-3, for three weeks in August.

Students moving on to Cascade middle school are invited to a parent night in the spring.

They will tour the building and discuss procedures for the upcoming year. Counselors come to

Washington Elementary in the spring to meet 5th graders, get acquainted with them, and discuss

what they can look forward to at their new school.

Assessment Decisions – SWT 8

Washington Elementary is a Schoolwide Title Building. Students identified for extra help in reading score below standard at his/her grade level using the DIBELS fluency assessment and the Diagnostic Decoding Survey (DDS) for grades 1-5. Student state assessments like the Maps and SBA tests, along with Teacher Rating Scales are also used to identify and place students into small reading groups. Kindergarten students are placed according to their DIBELS and Trimester Skills assessment (readiness skills assessment), in addition to the Teacher Rating Scale.

Data meetings are conducted with each grade level, three times a year after each benchmark assessment. Assessment data and student placement are discussed and goals are confirmed. Professional Learning Communities (PLC’s) are ongoing to revisit student progress and/ or concerns throughout the year. All students are progress monitored every month and changes in grouping may be made. Reading groups are fluid and instruction is determined by assessment data. Gaps confirmed by using the DDS assessment are targeted with timely, effective instruction.

Effective, Timely Assistance – SWT 9

Students at Washington Elementary are tested within the first week of school using the DIBELS assessment for fluency and the Diagnostic Decoding Survey for phonics knowledge. This data, along with student state assessments like the Maps and SBA tests, and the Teacher Rating Scales are also used to identify and place students into small reading groups. Kindergarten students are placed according to their DIBELS and Trimester Skills assessment (readiness skills assessment), in

SIP Template

13 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

addition to the Teacher Rating Scale. Student data is sorted and walk-to-read groups are established according to need. Data is shared with the staff, reviewed, and discussed promptly. Walk to read groups begin as soon as possible for effective and timely assistance. These groups are fluid and on-going progress monitoring occurs. As students grow and progress they may change groups so we may continue to challenge them. If a student is struggling, we place them in a group to strategically target the skills that they need.

SIP Template

14 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Prioritized Challenges

1. The percentage of Washington 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders passing the reading MSP

between 2013 and 2014 was on an upward trend while the 2015 ELA SBA

percentages dropped.

2. The percentage of Washington 3rd and 5th graders passing the Math MSP between

2013 and 2014 was on an upward trend while the 2015 Math SBA percentages

dropped.

3. Based on the data between 2012 and 2015 Bully survey, the number of students who

reported being bullied at least 2 times per month did not decrease. In 2012 30%, 2015

29%.

4. Our free and reduced population increased from 75.5% in 2012 to 81% in 2015.

5. Our Absentees have increased from 15.7% to 16.8% in 2015.

SIP Template

15 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SMART Goal 1:

The percent of students at each grade level meeting standard will increase by at least 6% each year from spring 2015 to spring 2019 as measured by the State assessment in ELA for Grades 3, 4, and 5. Scores will increase from 55% to 73% in 3rd grade, 54.1% to 72.1% in 4th grade, and 40% to 58% in 5th grade.

SMART Goal 2:

The percent of students at each grade level meeting standard will increase by at least 6% each year from spring 2015 to spring 2019 as measured by the State assessment in MATH for Grades 3, 4, and 5. Scores will increase from 55.7% to 73.7% in 3rd grade, 65.2% to 83.2% in 4th grade, and 29% to 47% in 5th grade.

SMART Goal 3:

Reduce percentages of Absences by at least 2% each year from spring 2015 to spring 2019 as measured by Skyward attendance records decreasing absences from 16.8% in 2015 to 10.8% in 2019.

SIP Template

16 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Needs Assessment Data Documents

o DIBELS

o MAP

o WELPA

o CEE

o Discipline

o Demographics

o AYP

o SBA/MSP/EOC

SIP Template

17 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

DIBELS DASHBOARD

SIP Template

18 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Histogram - DIBELS Next

District: Auburn School District #408

School: Washington Elementary School

Grade: Kindergarten

Year: 2014-2015

Period: Beginning

Measure: First Sound Fluency

Need for Support: Former Goals

SIP Template

19 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade: First Grade

Year: 2014-2015

Period: End

Measure: Nonsense Word Fluency - Correct Letter Sounds


SIP Template

20 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade: Second Grade

Year: 2014-2015

Period: End

Measure: DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency - Words Correct


SIP Template

21 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade: Third Grade

Year: 2014-2015

Period: End

Measure: DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency - Words Correct


SIP Template

22 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Histogram - DIBELS 6th Edition



Grade: Fourth Grade

Year: 2014-2015

Period: End

Measure: Oral Reading Fluency - Words Correct

SIP Template

23 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Histogram - DIBELS 6th Edition



Grade: Fifth Grade

Year: 2014-2015

Period: End

Measure: Oral Reading Fluency - Words Correct

SIP Template

24 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

MAP DATA

DASHBOARD

SIP Template

25 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

26 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

WELPA

DASHBOARD

SIP Template

27 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Washington Elementary School

Principal PAULINE THOMAS 253.391.4988

20 E ST NE AUBURN 98002-5501 Auburn School District

Grade Span: K-5

This displays student performance information for the Washington English Language

Proficiency Assessment (WELPA) for 2012 and later years. For the previous years, the results show the Washington Language Proficiency Test (WLPT-II). You can view either details or trend for an individual school, school district or the entire state.

Select a category of

students:

Composite Level - Grade K

Number Percent

Transitional (English Proficient) 2 8.3%

Level 4 (Transitional) 2 8.3%

Not Transitional (Limited English) 22 91.6%

Level 3 (Advanced English) 4 16.6%

Level 2 (Intermediate English) 17 70.8%

Level 1 (Beginning English) 1 4.1%

No Score* 0 0.0%

Total 24 100.0%

Previously Transitioned

Composite Level - Grade 1st

Transitional (English Proficient)

Level 4 (Transitional)

Not Transitional (Limited English)

Level 3 (Advanced English)

Level 2 (Intermediate English)

Level 1 (Beginning English)

No Score*

Total


Composite Level - Grade 2nd

Number Percent

Transitional (English Proficient) <5%


Not Transitional (Limited English) > 95%




No Score*

Total 22


Suppression Reason (Info) < 5% Suppression

Composite Level - Grade 3rd







No Score*

Total


Suppression Reason (Info)

Composite Level - Grade 4th

Number Percent







No Score* 0 0.0%

Total 13 100.0%


Composite Level - Grade 5th







No Score*

Total


Composite Level - Grade All

http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/Suppression_Overview_3v3.docx


SIP Template

28 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Number Percent







No Score* 1 0.8%

Total 120 100.0%


Washington Language Proficiency Test

This displays student performance information for the Washington English Language Proficiency Assessment (WELPA) for 2012 and later years. For the previous years, the results show the Washington Language Proficiency Test (WLPT-II). You can view either details or trend for an individual school, school district or the entire state.


students:

Kindergarten

Transitioning

Year School District State

2008-09 6.1%

2009-10 8.3%

2010-11 5.2% 6.3%

2011-12 6.3%

2012-13 5.9% 7.3%

2013-14 6.2%

2014-15 8.3% 8.3%

http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/WLPTCurrent.aspx?domain=WELPA&schoolId=1394&OrgType=4&reportLevel=School&year=2008-09&yrs=2014-15&gradeLevelId=1&waslCategory=1&chartType=1







SIP Template

29 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

1st Grade

Transitioning

Year School

District

State

2008-09

17.6%

18.3% 16.7

%

2009-10

5.8% 22.1% 18.5

%

2010-11

18.5% 18.0

%

2011-12

6.6% 16.4% 12.4

%

2012-13

26.6%

14.4% 11.8

%

2013-14

13.7% 10.9

%

2014-15

11.4%

16.7% 13.1

%

2nd Grade Transitioning


2008-09

12.5% 35.7% 30.2%

2009-10

16.6% 36.5% 21.1%

2010-11

33.3% 37.6% 29.9%

2011-12

11.7% 19.6% 13.0%

2012-13

33.3% 18.6% 13.7%

2013-14

18.7% 14.5% 13.1%

2014-15

19.2% 15.2%





























SIP Template

30 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

3rd Grade

Transitioning


2008-09

23.2% 19.5%

2009-10

11.6% 10.2%

2010-11

27.2% 20.2% 24.7%

2011-12

13.2% 10.4%

2012-13

7.1% 11.7% 10.6%

2013-14

14.2% 15.5% 13.8%

2014-15

11.0% 13.5%

4th Grade

Transitioning


2008-09

30.5% 23.2%

2009-10

6.2% 6.9%

2010-11

18.1% 23.1% 22.1%

2011-12

10.0% 11.5% 10.2%

2012-13

8.9% 9.6%

2013-14

18.7% 11.8% 11.7%

2014-15

15.3% 13.5% 16.5%





























SIP Template

31 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

5th Grade

Transitioning

Year School

District

State

2008-09

18.1%

28.9% 21.8

%

2009-10

2010-11

19.3% 19.7

%

2011-12

21.6% 15.0

%

2012-13

20.1% 18.4

%

2013-14

8.3% 13.6% 17.9

%

2014-15

27.2%

31.3% 26.0

%















SIP Template

32 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives Summary

This page presents a summary of your AMAO results. (What does Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives mean?)

Select a year:

Yes Met AMAO NR Number of students less than minimum required

No Did not meet AMAO NA No students in this category

AMAO-1 Making Progress

AMAO-2 Attainment of English Proficiency AMAO-3

District/School

Met All 3

AMAOs

Students matched

Making

progress

Met AMAO1

target

(68.1%)

Unscored

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Total

students

% Transi- tioning

Met AMAO2

Target (8.0%

)

Met Readin

g Proficiency/ Participation

Met Math

Proficiency/ Participation

Met AMAO3

State Total

No 84,4

21 77.9

% Yes 1,918

4,118

29,724

58,804

19,020

113,584

16.7%

Yes No No No

Auburn Consortium

No 1,76

3 76.0

% Yes 75 79 650

1,256

377 2,43

7 15.4%

Yes No No No

Auburn School District

No 1,73

7 75.7

% Yes 75 79 645

1,229

372 2,40

0 15.5%

Yes No No No

Washington

Elementary School

No 88 71.5

% Yes 1 4 55 49 11 120

9.1

% Yes No No No

Notes: No* indicates district failed to meet all three AMAOs due to consortium total Yes* indicates district met all three AMAOs due to consortium total Results may be suppressed (Info).


SIP Template

33 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

CEE

SPIDER CHART

SIP Template

34 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

35 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

36 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

37 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

38 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

DISCIPLINE

DASHBOARD

SIP Template

39 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

40 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

41 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

42 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

DEMOGRAPHICS

SIP Template

43 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade Span: K-5

2014-15 Results (Administration Info)

Grade Level SBA ELA SBA Math

3rd Grade 55.0% 55.7%

4th Grade 54.1% 65.2%

5th Grade 40.0% 29.0%

Grade Level MSP Science

5th Grade 29.0%

Student Demographics

Enrollment

October 2014 Student Count 461

May 2015 Student Count 452

Gender (October 2014)

Male 214 46.4%

Female 247 53.6%

Race/Ethnicity (October 2014)

Hispanic / Latino of any race(s) 128 27.8%

Asian 11 2.4%

Black / African American 41 8.9%

Native Hawaiian / Other Pacific Islander 40 8.7%

White 159 34.5%

Two or More Races 82 17.8%

Special Programs

Free or Reduced-Price Meals (May 2015) 359 79.4%

Special Education (May 2015) 57 12.6%

Transitional Bilingual (May 2015) 115 25.4%

Migrant (May 2015) 0 0.0%

Section 504 (May 2015) 2 0.4%

Foster Care (May 2015) N<10

http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/TemplateDetail.aspx?domain=SBAC&schoolId=1394&reportLevel=School&year=2014-15&gradeLevelId=3&groupLevel=District&waslCategory=1&chartType=1



http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/TemplateDetail.aspx?domain=MSPHSPE&schoolId=1394&reportLevel=School&year=2014-15&gradeLevelId=5&groupLevel=District&waslCategory=1&chartType=1

SIP Template

44 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Other Information (more info)

Unexcused Absence Rate (2014-15) 217 0.4%

Teacher Information (2014-15) (more info)

Classroom Teachers 32

Average Years of Teacher Experience 11.2

Teachers with at least a Master's Degree 68.8%

Total number of teachers who teach core academic classes 24

% of teachers teaching with an emergency certificate 0.0%

% of teachers teaching with a conditional certificate 0.0%

Total number of core academic classes 24

ESEA Highly Qualified Teacher Information

% of classes taught by teachers meeting ESEA highly qualified (HQ) definition

91.7%

% of classes taught by teachers who do not meet ESEA HQ definition

8.3%

% of classes in high poverty schools taught by teachers who meet ESEA HQ definition

N/A

% of classes in high poverty schools taught by teachers who do not meet ESEA HQ definition

N/A

% of classes in low poverty schools taught by teachers who meet ESEA HQ definition

N/A

% of classes in low poverty schools taught by teachers who do not meet ESEA HQ definition

N/A

SIP Template

45 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

AYP

SIP Template

46 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Adequate Yearly Progress Summary

This page presents a summary of your AYP results. (What does Adequate Yearly Progress and ESEA mean?) To see the data used to compute each proficiency cell and Safe Harbor results, switch "Summary" to "Participation/Other Indicator Detail" and click "go".

Yes Group met AYP. N<Required Group has fewer than required.

No Group did not meet AYP. N/A There are no students in this group.

Made AYP Overall: NO In Improvement: Step 2

Number of Yes:

11 | Number of No:

10 | % of Yes/Total:

52.4% | Number of N<Required:

22 | Number of NA:

2




Grade Span: K-5

http://www.k12.wa.us/ESEA/default.aspx

SIP Template

48 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SBA/MSP

SIP Template

49 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade Span: K-5

Note: As of 2015 Smarter Balanced replaces MSP/HSPE Math, Reading and Writing

Statewide Assessment Trend

This displays student performance information for Measurements of Student Progress (MSP) for grades 3 through 8, and the High School Proficiency Exam (HSPE) starting with the school year 2009-10. For the previous years, the results show the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL). You can view either details or trends for the

individual school, school district or the entire state.


students:

SIP Template

50 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

51 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

52 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade Span: K-5






students:

SIP Template

53 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

54 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

55 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3




Grade Span: K-5






students:

SIP Template

56 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

57 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SIP Template

58 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SMART Goal 1

Subject Area: Reading-ELA

School Name: Washington Elementary

Target Population- based on

demographic, discipline and attendance

data analysis:

All

Our Reality-based on assessment

data analysis:

Three Year MSP/SBA Trend: Reading

2013-MSP 2014-MSP 2015-SBA

3rd 71.1% 81% 55%

4th 66.6% 66.6% 54.1%

5th 64.7% 65.6% 40%

Our SMART Goal-based on

target population and your reality:

The percent of students at each grade level meeting standard will increase by at least 6% each year

from spring 2015 to spring 2019 as measured by the State assessment in ELA for Grades 3, 4, and 5.

Scores will increase from 55% to 73% in 3rd grade, 54.1% to 72.1% in 4th grade, and 40% to 58% in 5th

grade.

Action Plan

Action Step

Systematically and explicitly teach phonemic awareness and phonics in all grades K-5 during daily 45

minute Walk to Read. SWT-2

SIP Template

59 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Evidence of Implementation Evidence of Impact Timeline Resources Responsibility

Teacher’s 1-5 use one of

the Really Great Reading

Programs based on

student data to address

phonemic awareness and

phonics.

Teachers K-5 use

instructional templates to

review skills and fill gaps

identified by DDS or

progress monitoring.

Kindergarten teachers use

ERI, Heggerty, and Read

Well.

Common phonics

terminology and strategies

used in WTR is applied

and reinforced across all

content throughout the

day.

Engagement strategies are

routinely used. Such as:

think, pair, share; partner

work; I do, we do, you do,

etc.

Dibels Benchmark Assessment K-

5.

-Classroom teachers and/or Title

Team progress monitor

benchmark students monthly.

-Title team will progress monitor

strategic and intensive students

twice a month.

-Data is reviewed at monthly PLCs

by grade level

Diagnostic Decoding Survey grade

1 assessed January and May,

grades 2-5 assessed September,

January, and May.

Data Carousel with all teachers K-

5 to analyze Dibels and DDS data

Fall, Winter, and Spring

Leadership team will meet monthly

to review implementation and

impact.

Analyzing the Dibels School

Effectiveness report 3 times a year

Building hours

Principal hours

Staff Meetings

Building Leadership

Team Meetings (SIP)

PLCs

Waiver Days

Boost manual

Dibels/DDS

Assessments

SBA Weekly Passages

Professional

development

- (Blast/Boost) for

effective phonics

instruction with

phonics concepts

and terminology.

- Comprehension

strategies and

scope and

sequence

Principal,

Leadership Team,

All staff K-5,

Special

Education, ELL,

Reading

Specialist, IS

Action Step Explicitly teach and reinforce comprehension strategies. SWT-2.


SIP Template

60 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Grade level teams will

intentionally and

systematically use the

scaffolding tools and

teaching strategies to

enhance comprehension

instruction, ie anchor

charts, close reading,

visuals, graphic

organizers, etc.

Student performance on SBA

Weekly passages grades 2-5

ELA embedded assessments

MAP Data analyzed fall, winter,

spring at grades 3-5

K performance on oral

comprehension; ie: sequencing,

predict, retell

Leadership team will meet to

review schoolwide data

Building hours

Principal hours

Staff Meetings

PLCs

Building Leadership

Team Meetings

Waiver Days

Professional

development

- Comprehension

strategies and

scope and

sequence

- Close reading

Chart Sense

Principal,

Leadership Team,

All staff K-5,

Special

Education, ELL,

Reading

Specialist, IS

SIP Template

61 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SMART Goal 2

Subject Area: Math




data analysis:

ALL


data analysis:

Three Year MSP/SBA Trend: Math

2013-MSP 2014-MSP 2015-SBA

3rd 65.2% 70% 55.7%

4th 65.1% 61.2% 65.2%

5th 60.8% 63.2% 29%



The percent of students at each grade level meeting standard will increase by at least 6% each year

from spring 2015 to spring 2019 as measured by the State assessment in MATH for Grades 3, 4, and 5.

Scores will increase from 55.7% to 73.7% in 3rd grade, 65.2% to 83.2% in 4th grade, and 29% to 47% in

5th grade.

Action Plan

Action Step Increase student math fact fluency in all grades. SWT-2


Math facts will be explicitly

taught by classroom teachers 1-5.

Daily math fact fluency practice.

Students will set personal fluency

goals.

Monthly fact fluency

assessments

Building hours

Principal hours

Staff Meetings

PLCs

Waiver Days

Kim Sutton

Engage NY

Principal,

Leadership Team,

All staff K-5,

Special Education,

ELL, Reading

Specialist, IS

SIP Template

62 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Action Step Effectively use Engage NY materials across grades K-5. SWT-2


Common language and common

vocabulary will be used during

mathematics instruction.

Teachers will use models to

scaffold math concepts in order

to teach the CCSS standards

Teach students how to use

mathematical models to

understand how numbers work.

MAPs Assessment grades 3-5

SBA Assessment grades 3-5

Benchmark Assessment

grades K-2

Classroom based formative

assessments

District Problem Solvers

Building hours

Principal hours

Staff Meetings

PLCs

Waiver Days

CCSS

Principal,

Leadership Team,

All staff K-5,

Special Education,

ELL, Reading

Specialist, IS

Alignment to District Improvement Plan Objectives:

SIP Template

63 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

SMART Goal 3

Subject Area: School Climate




data analysis:

All


data analysis:

Three Year Absence Trend

2013 2014 2015

All 15.7% 14.5% 16.8%



Reduce percentages of Absences by at least 2% each year from spring 2015 to spring 2019 as

measured by Skyward attendance records decreasing absences from 16.8% in 2015 to 10.8% in 2019.

Action Plan

Action Step Implement School Wide effective behavior systems.


Clearly defined rules and

expectations taught, posted, and

reviewed often

Positive reinforcement of pro-

social behaviors including

attendance

School Wide implementation of

PBIS systems

Think Time

Students can articulate

school rules and

expectations (collect data

from randomly selected

students 3 x a year)

Reduction in the number of

students that receive office

referrals for Think Time (4

or more per week)

Fewer students needing Tier

2 intervention

PLC

Building

Hours

CEL5D

PBIS

Bully Survey

Universal

Screener

Principal

SIP Team

Intervention

Team PLC

Behavior

Specialist

All K-5 Staff

Support

Staff: ELL,

Title, Sp. Ed.

Counselor,

Behavior

Specialist

SIP Template

64 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Reduction in the number of

students being bullied

(yearly bullying survey)

Fewer Absences

Fewer Tardies

-Reviewed 3 times a year by

SIP Team

-Reviewed 2 times a year by

whole staff

Action Step Implement school wide Social Emotional Learning curriculum.


Staff will reinforce Social

Emotional Learning skills:

Vocabulary and visuals

Targeted small group SEL

instruction

Weekly SEL lessons K-5

- Reduction in the number of

students that receive office

referrals for Think Time (4

or more per week)

- Fewer students needing Tier

2 intervention (Universal

Screener)

Fall 2016 PLC

Building

Hours

CEL5D

Universal

Screener

Professional

Development:

-Zones of Regulation

-Steps to Respect

-Social Thinking

-Kelso’s Choices

Principal

SIP Team

Intervention

Team PLC

Behavior

Specialist

All K-5

Staff

including

Specialists

SIP Template

65 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Alignment to District Improvement Plan Objectives:

Planning Implementation Calendar, SAMPLE:

Planning and Implementation Calendar (SWT-4) Implementation and Professional Development Calendar

SWT #4 LAP #6

2016 - 17

Month Building 28+ 6 (Principal hours) Staff Meetings BLT Meetings ELA PLCs Math PLS’s District/Waiver Days

August Data Review & SIP / PD

for Implementation

8/29 8/31PM

9/1

(Prepare launch of SIP)

9/30

9/31 AM

September DIBELS and MAP analysis

9/28

Helping Children Succeed Book (Paul

Tough)

What Works and Why

Sept/Oct

9/21 SIP focused

agenda 9/14 ELA Implementation

9/26 TBS

October TBD

Family (Parent) Engagement 10/12 10/26

SIP focused

agenda

10/19 Math Implementation

10/3 10/10—K, 1 10/17—2,3 10/24—4,5 10/31—K,1

TBD 10/14 Waiver

Day

November 11/2 PD: Goal #3

Universal Screener/Tier11 Interventions

Performance Assessment Work

11/9

11/30 Goal #3 11/7—2,3 11/28—4,5

TBD

December 12/7 SIP focused

agenda 12/14 ELA 12/5—K, 1

12/12—2,3 TBD

SIP Template

66 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

January 1/18 SIP focused

agenda 1/11 Goal 3 1/25 Math

1/9—reading

team 1/23—4,5 1/30—K, 1

TBD

February DIBELS AND MAP analysis

2/8

Universal Screener Data Review

2/14

2/8 SIP focused

agenda 2/15 ELA

2/6—2,3 2/13—4,5 2/27—8:40 K,1

TBD

March Performance Assessment Work

3/1

TBD Family (Parent Engagement)

3/8 SIP focused

agenda 3/15 Goal 3 3/29 ELA

3/13—2,3 3/20—4,5 3/17—K,1

TBD 3-6 Waiver Day

April

4/19 SIP focused agenda

4/5 Math 4/26 ELA

4/3—2,3

4/1—reading

team 4/24—4,5

TBD

May (DIBELS and MAP analysis) 5/17

5/10 SIP focused

agenda 5/3 Goal 3 5/17 Math

5/1—K, 1 5/15—2,3 5/22—4,5

TBD 5/8 Waiver Day

June 6/15 Staff reflection on Y1 of

Implementation and plan for Y2 6/7 Prepare to Facilitate

Reflection on Y1 of

Implementation and plan for Y2

SIP Template

67 | P a g e 1 1 / 1 9 / 2 0 1 3

Budget - SWT# 10 Insert budget page here