Florida Department of Education s7

2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

DRAFT School Improvement Plan (SIP) Form SIP-1

Proposed for 2012-2013

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 1 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2012-2013 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

School Information School Name: Leesburg Elementary School District Name: Lake County Principal: Durenda McKinney Superintendent: Dr. Susan Moxley SAC Chair: Judy Holmes Date of School Board Approval:

Student Achievement Data and Reference Materials: The following links will open in a separate browser window. School Grades Trend Data (Use this data to complete Sections 1-4 of the reading and mathematics goals and Sections 1 and 2 of the writing and science goals.) Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT)/Statewide Assessment Trend Data (Use this data to inform the problem-solving process when writing goals.) High School Feedback Report K-12 Comprehensive Research Based Reading Plan

Administrators List your school’s administrators and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an administrator, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of School Grades, FCAT/statewide assessment performance (percentage data for achievement levels, learning gains, Lowest 25%), and ambitious but achievable annual measurable objective (AMO) progress. Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, Degree(s)/ FCAT/statewide assessment Achievement Levels, Position Name Number of Years at Current School Certification(s) learning gains, lowest 25%), and AMO progress, along with the associated school year) Principal Durenda M. Ed. Degree: 7 Leesburg Elementary School: School Grades (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): McKinne Educational Leadership; C, A, B, B, C, C, C y BA Elementary Education % Meeting High Standards in Reading (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): (K-6); Certified School 66%, 63%, 69%, 64%, 61%, 58%,42% Principal % Meeting High Standards in Math (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 57%, 67%, 67%, 64%, 65%, 57%, 43% % Meeting High Standards in Writing (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 58%, 87%, 75%, 88%, 82%, 79%, 75% % Meeting High Standards in Science

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 2 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 37%, 32%, 36%, 41%, 22%, 27% % Making High Learning Gains in Reading (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 58%, 67%, 60%, 56%, 45%, 57%, 66% % Making High Learning Gains in Math (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 78%, 76%, 70%, 67%, 57%,63% % of Lowest 25% Making Learning Gains in Reading (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 58%, 67%, 60%, 56%, 45%, 63%, 70% % of Lowest 25% Making Learning Gains in Math (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 78%, 76%, 70%, 67%, 68%, 68% AYP Criteria Met (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): No, Yes, No, No, No, No, N/A Reading AYP / AMO Subgroups(2006, 2007, 2008,2009, 2010, 2011, AMO 2012): White (Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No, No) Black (Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No, No,) Economically Disadvantaged (Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No, No) Asian- 2012 (Yes) Hispanic – 2012 (No) ELL – 2012 (No) Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No) Math AYP/AMO Subgroups(2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): White (Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, Yes) Black (No, Yes, No, No, No, No, No) Economically Disadvantaged (No, Yes, No, No, No, No, Yes) Asian- 2012 (Yes) Hispanic – 2012 (No) ELL – 2012 (No) Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No)

Assistant Principal Heather M. Ed. Degree: 6 Leesburg Elementary School: School Grades ( 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): Gelb Educational Leadership; A, B, B, C, C, C BA Elementary Education % Meeting High Standards in Reading ( 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): (1-6); Certified School 63%, 69%, 64%, 61%, 58%,42% Principal % Meeting High Standards in Math (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 67%, 67%, 64%, 65%, 57%, 43% % Meeting High Standards in Writing (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 87%, 75%, 88%, 82%, 79%, 75% % Meeting High Standards in Science (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 37%, 32%, 36%, 41%, 22%, 27% % Making High Learning Gains in Reading (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 67%, 60%, 56%, 45%, 57%, 66% % Making High Learning Gains in Math (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 78%, 76%, 70%, 67%, 57%,63% % of Lowest 25% Making Learning Gains in Reading (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 67%, 60%, 56%, 45%, 63%, 70%

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 3 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 % of Lowest 25% Making Learning Gains in Math (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 78%, 76%, 70%, 67%, 68%, 68% AYP Criteria Met ( 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): Yes, No, No, No, No, N/A Reading AYP / AMO Subgroups( 2007, 2008,2009, 2010, 2011, AMO 2012): White (Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No, No) Black ( Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No, No,) Economically Disadvantaged ( Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No, No) Asian- 2012 (Yes) Hispanic – 2012 (No) ELL – 2012 (No) Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No) Math AYP/AMO Subgroups( 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): White (Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, Yes) Black ( Yes, No, No, No, No, No) Economically Disadvantaged ( Yes, No, No, No, No, Yes) Asian- 2012 (Yes) Hispanic – 2012 (No) ELL – 2012 (No) Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 4 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Instructional Coaches List your school’s instructional coaches and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an instructional coach, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of School Grades, FCAT/statewide assessment performance (percentage data for achievement levels, learning gains, Lowest 25%), and ambitious but achievable annual measurable objective (AMO) progress. Instructional coaches described in this section are only those who are fully released or part-time teachers in reading, mathematics, or science and work only at the school site. Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, Subject Degree(s)/ FCAT/Statewide Assessment Achievement Levels, Name Number of Years at Current School Area Certification(s) Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AMO progress along with the associated school year) Literacy Coach Sherry BS: Elementary Education 3 Leesburg Elementary School Jackson M.Ed.: Reading School Grades (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): B, C, C, C % Meeting High Standards in Reading (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 64%, 61%, 58%, 42% % Making High Learning Gains in Reading (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 56%, 45%, 57%, 66% % of Lowest 25% Making Learning Gains in Reading (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): 56%, 45%, 63%, 70% AYP Criteria Met (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): No, No, No, N/A Reading AYP Subgroups (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012): White (Yes, No, No, No) Black (Yes, No, No, No) Economically Disadvantaged (Yes, No, No, No) Asian- 2012 (Yes) Hispanic – 2012 (No) ELL – 2012 (No) Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No) Math Amy Hunton BS: Elementary 1 Leesburg Elementary School: Coach Education School Grades (2011, 2012): C, C M.Ed.: Elementary % Meeting High Standards in Math (2011, 2012): 57%, 43% Education % Making High Learning Gains in Math (2011, 2012): 56%, 63% Certified: % of Lowest 25 % Making Learning Gains Gifted, Elem. Ed., in Math (2011): 68%, 68% Middle Math (1-9) AYP Criteria Met (2011, 2012): (No, N/A) Math AYP Subgroups(2011, 2012): White (No, Yes) Black (No, No) Economically Disadvantaged (No, Yes) Asian- 2012 (Yes) Hispanic – 2012 (No) ELL – 2012 (No) Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No)

Science Coach Craig Willis BS: Business Admin. 1 Leesburg Elementary School: Certified: (K-6) School Grades (2012): C % Meeting High Standards in Science June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 5 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 (2012): 27%

Content Area Tonya Sturgess BS: Psychology Leesburg Elementary School: Coach MS: Psychology School Grades ( 2012): C, C PhD: Educational Students with Disabilities – 2012 (No) Leadership 1 Certified: ESE, Elem. Ed, ESOL

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

Description of Strategy Person Responsible Projected Completion Date

Assistant Principal August 12th, 2012 1. New Teacher Orientation will be held on August 12th. Policies and Procedures will be reviewed will all new teachers to the county. Assistant May 31st, 2013 2. New Teachers will be assigned a mentor who is clinically Principal education trained. Mentor Teacher Instructional May 31st, 2013 3. Weekly meetings will be held with all new teachers and the Coach district Instructional Coach. Assistant May 31st, 2013 4. Monthly meetings will be held between all new teachers and Principal the TQR administrator.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 6 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Non-Highly Effective Instructors Provide the number of instructional staff and paraprofessionals that are teaching out-of-field and/or who are NOT highly effective. *When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]).

Number of staff and paraprofessional that are teaching Provide the strategies that are being implemented to out-of-field/ and who are not highly effective. support the staff in becoming highly effective

Staff Demographics Please complete the following demographic information about the instructional staff in the school. *When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Total % National % of First- % of Teachers % of Teachers % of Teachers % of Teachers % Highly % Reading % ESOL Number of Board Year with 1-5 Years of with 6-14 Years with 15+ Years with Advanced Effective Endorsed Endorsed Instructional Certified Teachers Experience of Experience of Experience Degrees Teachers Teachers Teachers Staff Teachers 66 2%(1) 26%(17) 30%(20) 42%(28) 42%(28) 100%(66) 11%(7) 8%(5) 98%(65)

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

Mentor Name Mentee Assigned Rationale for Pairing Planned Mentoring Activities

Linda Patterson Courtney Hardaway Clinically Education Trained 1) Weekly Meetings Experienced in Grade Level - Curriculum (Instructional Focus Calendars) Requested Position - Behavior (Positive Behavior System) - Parental Involvement - School Procedures Michael Piano Tana Wilson Experienced in Grade Level 1) Weekly Meetings Requested Position - Curriculum(Instructional Focus Calendars) - Behavior (Positive Behavior System) - Parental Involvement - School Procedures

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 7 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Additional Requirements Coordination and Integration-Title I Schools Only Please describe how federal, state, and local services and programs will be coordinated and integrated in the school. Include other Title programs, Migrant and Homeless, Supplemental Academic Instruction funds, as well as violence prevention programs, nutrition programs, housing programs, Head Start, adult education, career and technical education, and/or job training, as applicable. Title I, Part A Services are provided to ensure students receive any remediation assistance they may require to achieve their best in the academic environment. These services include afterschool tutoring, the state’s SES Tutoring Program, District on-site instructional coaches, as well as, school-based differentiated instructional material. Additionally, a Literacy Coach, Family School Liaison, TLC Coordinator, Writing Coach & Teacher Assistants are provided. In combination, these supports will serve to give every student the opportunity to achieve to their fullest academic potential.

Title I, Part C- Migrant Migrant Liaisons / Parent Liaisons provide services and support to students and parents who require additional resources to ensure the achievement of all students. The district based liaison coordinates with all Title Services. Title I, Part D

Title II The Lake County School District receives supplemental funds for improving basic education programs through the purchase of small equipment to supplement educational programs, based on student need. Title III Services are provided through the Lake County School District for educational materials and ELL support services to improve the education of immigrant and English Language Learners. Title X- Homeless School based guidance counselors monitor students deemed "homeless". District Homeless Social Workers provide resources to assist in providing the identified students with an equitable education. Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI) SAI funds will be coordinated with Title I Funds to provide additional tutoring for Level 1 & 2 students. Violence Prevention Programs Leesburg Elementary School offers the "Too Good for Drugs" curriculum to our students. Additionally, students are taught Character education through the utilization of the Core Essentials curriculum. Nutrition Programs

Housing Programs

Head Start

Adult Education

Career and Technical Education

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 8 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Job Training

Other

School-Based MTSS/RtI Team Identify the school-based MTSS leadership team. Administration: Durenda McKinney, Principal; Heather Gelb, Assistant Principal I; Chad Fraizer, Instructional Dean Provides a clear understanding of the RtI process and its implementation to the staff. Attends all RtI meetings to ensure fidelity of the process. Ensures adequate professional development to support RtI implementation as well as fidelity of all interventions.

Classroom Teachers Provide information about core instruction, participates in student data collection, delivers Tier 1 instruction/intervention, and collaborates with guidance and the instructional coach to implement Tier 2 interventions.

MTSS/RTI Coach: Tonya Sturgess, EdD Identifies and analyzes existing literature on scientifically based curriculum/behavior assessment and intervention approaches. Assists with school screening programs that provide early intervening services for children to be considered "at risk." Assists in the design and implementation for progress monitoring data collection and data analysis; participates in the design and delivery of professional development. Assist in implementation of SOAR program to increase systematic implementation of RtI interventions in grades 3-5.

Curriculum Resource Teacher: Judy Holmes Uses expertise to assist teachers in implementing curriculum needs. Provides information on any curriculum questions or concerns.

Guidance Counselors: Linda Williams; Sharon Williams Facilitate the development of intervention plans. Provides support for intervention fidelity and documentation. Schedules all meetings.

Student Services Personnel: Jackie Ashley, District Social Worker; Bertley Lynch, School Psychologist; Anne Cassidy, ESE Staffing Specialist Provide insight and expertise on data analysis and interpretation.

Family/School Liaison: Serita Morgan Serves as a link between school and home to ensure that each student receives a base of support. Provides an outreach system to families.

Parents: Attend RtI meetings to assist in the decision making process when developing and implementing appropriate interventions to ensure the success of their child.

Describe how the school-based MTSS leadership team functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions). How does it work with other school teams to organize/coordinate MTSS efforts? The MTSS/RtI Leadership Team meets beginning in August to re-visit the status of those students already in the RtI process. A sign up sheet is located in the guidance office for any new students referred to the RtI process. Weekly meetings will be scheduled to begin implementation of interventions. If student improvement has not been demonstrated through the use of the prescribed intervention, the teacher will sign up for a second meeting, to intensify the needed intervention. This process will continue to increase support through the multi tiered system, until the needs of the student are met. If the interventions are found to be successful the student remains in the process, but does not increase in tiers, and is monitored by the teacher.

Describe the role of the school-based MTSS leadership team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan (SIP). Describe how the RtI problem-solving process is used in developing and implementing the SIP? The RtI Problem Solving Team has put into place a systematic process that will ensure that all struggling students are given the proper opportunities to achieve. This process sets the framework for all RtI functions at the school. The team will also work together to implement any needed changes indicated during continuous progress monitoring. These steps will June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 9 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 ensure that the aligned tiered processes and interventions are in place. Fidelity of all interventions will be monitored by the MTSS/RtI Coach. Students who scored within the lower quartile on state standardized tests will be placed in the RtI process to receive the tailored interventions, thus resulting in an increase of their own academic abilities through a thirty minute intervention block during the day. The RtI Leadership Team analyzes data, develops interventions, and provides instructional assistance in the development of the School Improvement Plan.

MTSS Implementation Describe the data source(s) and the data management system(s) used to summarize data at each tier for reading, mathematics, science, writing, and behavior. Once a teacher has signed a student up for RtI in the guidance office, a meeting is held. To this meeting, the teacher must bring any baseline data, academic or behavioral. Behavior data will include the students’ school infraction sheets and referrals. Attendance Records will also be examined. Academic baseline data will derive from FAIR, Harcourt Core Curriculum Assessments, Literacy First Assessments, EduSoft Benchmark Assessments, Orchard reports and Mini Achieve Assessments. After the baseline data has been examined, a the team will develop an aligned intervention based on the established school’s MTSS Decision Tree. The intervention is implemented and observed for no less than six weeks. Should the intervention not be successful, the team will reconvene to develop a more tailored and intensive intervention. These meetings will continue, and interventions integrated until one is found to best fit the academic/behavioral success of the child. If the interventions are found to be successful the student remains in the process, but does not increase in tiers, but is monitored by the teacher. AS400 and FIDO will be used as an attendance and discipline data source.

Describe the plan to train staff on MTSS. Our MTSS/RtI Coach will inservice the staff on the process by mirror the following four steps utilized by the district as a foundation: 1. Problem Identification 2. Problem Analysis 3. Intervention Design 4. Response to Instruction/Intervention These steps along with their school based correlated process will be outlined on a brief two page synopsis for the teachers and staff. Describe the plan to support MTSS. The MTSS/RtI will facilitate all RtI meetings to ensure that the proper protocol is followed and to assist with any misunderstandings or questions. Additionally, the MTSS/RtI coach will meet with the teachers individually if any additional clarification is needed on implementation or documentation of the interventions.

Literacy Leadership Team (LLT)

School-Based Literacy Leadership Team Identify the school-based Literacy Leadership Team (LLT). Administration, Literacy Coach, Mentor Reading Teachers, and Curriculum Resource Teacher

Describe how the school-based LLT functions (e.g., meeting processes and roles/functions). The LLT meets monthly and focuses on meeting school-wide Literacy needs. In addition, the LLT develops a school-wide literacy plan including appropriate budget support. What will be the major initiatives of the LLT this year? Implementation of G.I.V.E - Garnering Inspiration through Visits by Educators to enable teachers to observe effective instruction and then collaborate about the implementation of the teaching in their own classrooms. Increasing Text Complexity Implementing Common Core in Kindergarten and 1st Grade Focus on Small Group Instruction Monitoring Achievement in Extended Learning Opportunities Stepping Out As Readers Intervention Benchmark Task Cards to unwrap the standards June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 10 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Vertical Articulation based on trends in data

Public School Choice  Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification Upload a copy of the SES Notification to Parents in the designated upload link on the “Upload” page.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 11 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 *Elementary Title I Schools Only: Pre-School Transition Describe plans for assisting preschool children in transition from early childhood programs to local elementary school programs as applicable. All Pre-K students zoned for Leesburg Elementary School attend Rimes full day, ½ VPK or ½ Title I. Leesburg Elementary hosts a visitation day for students from the local HeadStart Program as well as community-wide Kindergarten Roundup to help orient students and parents. Articulation meetings are held for ESE Pre-K students transitioning from Rimes Elementary to Leesburg Elementary.

*Grades 6-12 Only Sec. 1003.413 (2)(b) F.S For schools with grades 6-12, how does the school ensure that every teacher contributes to the reading improvement of every student?

*High Schools Only Note: Required for High School-Sec. 1003.413(2)(g), (2)(j) F.S. How does the school incorporate applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between subjects and relevance to their future?

How does the school incorporate students’ academic and career planning, as well as promote student course selections, so that students’ course of study is personally meaningful?

Postsecondary Transition Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S. Describe strategies for improving student readiness for the public postsecondary level based on annual analysis of the High School Feedback Report.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 12 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS Reading Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Reading Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 13 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. Achievement Level 3 in reading. Time for Professional Development Teachers will be given extended Administration Effectiveness will collaboration time one day a nine be determined Reading Goal #1A: 2012 Current 2013 Expected weeks to fully discuss, understand through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Level of Level of and implement the professional assessments, Students meeting high Performance:* Performance:* development into their lessons. Literacy First standards in reading by 42%(189) 58% data, Harcourt achieving a level 3 or Benchmark higher on the 2012/2013 Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. FCAT will increase by 16 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 14 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 urvey staff on model *Check: Review results Grade Levels: *Act: Implement model 42% (57) of students in 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. third grade demonstrated Small Group Fidelity A template will be developed and Literacy FCIM Model Effectiveness will high standards in reading implemented in each classroom to Coach, be determined We will increase this indicate each student’s time spent inAdministrat* Plan: Develop template through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR percentage by 16 Small Group Instruction. ion & CRT *Do: Email to teachers assessments, percentage points by *Check: Observe during Literacy First focusing in on content CWT data, Harcourt areas of deficit and *Act: Adjust template as Benchmark enhancing areas of needed Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. achievement. The content 1A.3. 1A.3. Teachers will “unwrap” each 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. area of lowest proficiency Lack of Rigor in Curriculum standard and determine proficiency Literacy FCIM Model Effectiveness will was Reading Application at rubrics in weekly data meetings to Coach & be determined 56%, while the content ensure rigor and expectations in the Administrat* Plan: Prepare “unwrap” through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR area of highest proficiency curriculum. ion presentation assessments, was Vocabulary at 71%. *Do: Present to teachers Literacy First *Check: Observe during data, Harcourt 42% (62) of students in CWT Benchmark fourth grade demonstrated *Act: Adjust presentation Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. high standards in reading. when needed

We will increase this percentage by 16 percentage points by focusing in on content areas of deficit and enhancing areas of achievement. The content area of lowest proficiency was Literary Analysis at 54%, while the content area of highest proficiency was Reading Application at 71%.

36% (60) of students in fifth grade demonstrated high standards in reading.

We will increase this percentage by 22 percentage points by focusing in on content areas of deficit and enhancing areas of achievement. The content area of lowest proficiency was Informational Text at 57%, while the content June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 15 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 area of highest proficiency was Vocabulary at 66%.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in reading. Reading Goal #1B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected N/A Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A

1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 16 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 17 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. Achievement Levels 4 in reading. Higher achieving Implementation of SOAR Administration, Effectiveness will students often CRT, RtI / MTSS be determined Reading Goal #2A: 2012 Current 2013 Expected allocated less time for Coach through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Students meeting high Level of Level of enrichment assessments, standards in reading by Performance:* Performance:* instruction/activities. Literacy First achieving a level 4 or 17% (76) 20% data, Harcourt higher on the 2012/2013 Benchmark FCAT will increase by 3 Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 18 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 develop schedule

26% (35) of students in third grade demonstrated a 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. standard of level 4 or Lack of cognitive Provide Professional Development: AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will higher in reading. We will complexity within Text Complexity ion, be determined increase this number to instruction to keep higher achieving Higher Order Questioning CRT, * Plan: Schedule through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR 30%. students engaged Lesson Study Instructionaprofessional development assessments, l *Do: Attend professional Literacy First 14% of students in fourth Coaches, development data, Harcourt grade demonstrated a Teacher *Check: Monitor progress Benchmark standard of level 4 or Joint *Act: Adjust where needed Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. higher in reading. We will Teachers increase this number to 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 20%.

11% of students in fifth grade demonstrated a standard of level 4 or higher in reading. We will increase this number to 20%.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. scoring at or above Level 7 in reading. Reading Goal #2B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of N/A Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 19 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 20 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students making 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. learning gains in reading. Student Engagement Teachers who attended Administration & Kagan Lead Effectiveness will the Kagan Workshop Teachers be determined Reading Goal #3A: 2012 Current 2013 Expected over the 2012 summer through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Level of Level of will provide strategies assessments, Students making learning Performance:* Performance:* to their grade level to Literacy First gains in reading by on the 66%(297) 77% increase student engagement data, Harcourt 2012/2013 FCAT will Benchmark increase by 10 percentage Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 21 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 ded Kagan *Do: Schedule an inservice *Check: Observe the use of strategies during CWTs *Act: Provide additional training when needed 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. Lack of student Students will establish, AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will motivation and/or with teacher support, ion, be determined student ownership of reachable goals for Classroom * Plan: Establish grade level through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR learning. making gains in reading Teachers, expectations within the data assessments, while self reflecting and Instructionanotebooks Literacy First monitoring their l Coaches *Do: Implement within eachdata, Harcourt progress with data notebooks and classroom Benchmark teacher/student *Check: Observe the use of Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. conferencing. data notebooks during CWTs. *Act: Provide additional training when needed. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3.

3B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. of students making learning gains in reading. Reading Goal #3B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected N/A Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A

3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 22 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 23 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 4A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students in 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. lowest 25% making learning gains in reading. Attendance Child Study Teams will Administration, Classroom Effectiveness will be set up with the Teacher, Social Worker, be determined Reading Goal #4A: 2012 Current 2013 Expected parent to determine Guidance Counselor & RtI through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Level of Level of strategies needed in Coach. assessments, The % of the Lowest 25% Performance:* Performance:* getting children to Literacy First of the student population 70%(78) 80% school and on time. data, Harcourt making learning gains in Benchmark reading on the 2012/2013 Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments as well as AS400 FCAT will increase by 10 attendance reports. percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 24 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Do: Meetings will be conducted *Check: Progress will be monitored *Act: If progress does not increase, district protocols will be followed. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. Parent Support / Educate Parents on the AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will Involvement importance of reading ion, be determined at home and being CRT, * Plan: Schedule “Nights through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR involved in their child’s InstructionaOut” assessments, education through l on the master calendar Literacy First grade level “Nights Coach, *Do: Conduct “Nights Out” data, Harcourt Out,” Parents/Teacher Family *Check: Monitor parent Benchmark conference nights, and Liaison & involvement Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. through parent Classroom *Act: Adjust “Nights Out” involvement with our Teachers. needs (food, babysitting, family liaison. etc.), where needed. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. Fidelity of Extended Learning Provide structured and accountable AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will Opportunities Extended Learning Opportunities to ion, be determined ensure optimum student CRT & * Plan: Identify student levelthrough student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR achievement growth. Classroom of need & send out tutoring assessments, Teachers. invitations Literacy First *Do: Conduct AM & PM data, Harcourt tutoring opportunities Benchmark *Check: Monitor progress Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. *Act: Adjust tutoring curriculum when needed. 4A.4 4A.4 4A.4 4A.4 Number of At Risk Students Identify and closely Administration, Effectiveness will monitor the progress CRT, Instructional be determined of the third grade Coaches & through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR At Risk (Lowest Quartile) students. Classroom assessments, Revise instruction and Teachers. Literacy First intervention groups as data, Harcourt indicated by student Benchmark progress to include Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. additional instruction from Title 1 Reading Teacher

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 25 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 26 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 27 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 28 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

4A.5 4A.5 4A.5 4A.5 Additional support Implement the MTSS/RtI Guidance Counselors, CRT, Effectiveness will needed for student process for students MTSS/RtI Coach, be determined achievement unable to achieve with Administration & through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Tier I classroom Classroom Teachers assessments, interventions Literacy First data, Harcourt Benchmark Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 29 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 30 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 31 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

4B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in reading.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 32 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Reading Goal #4B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of N/A Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 33 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2015-2016 2016-2017 Objectives (AMOs), identify reading and mathematics performance target for the following years

5A. In six years Baseline data White: 54% White: 62% White: 66% White: 69% White: 73% White: 77% school will reduce 2010-2011 Black: 30% Black: 41% Black: 47% Black: 53% Black: 59% Black: 65% Hispanic: 28% Hispanic: 43% Hispanic: 48% Hispanic: 54% Hispanic:60% Hispanic: 66% White: 54% their achievement Asian: 85% Asian: 58% Asian: 63% Asian: 67% Asian: 71% Asian: 75% Black: 29% gap by 50%. ELL: 28% ELL: 38% ELL: 45% ELL: 51% ELL: 57% ELL: 63% Hispanic: 31% Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Students with Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Asian: 50% 6% 27% Disabilities: 34% 41% 49% 56% English Language Learners: 26% Economically Economically Economically Economically Economically Disadvantaged:Economically Students with Disabilities: 12 % Disadvantaged: 36% Disadvantaged: 46% Disadvantaged: 51% Disadvantaged: 57% 62% Disadvantaged: 68% Economically Disadvantaged: 35% Reading Goal #5A:

In six years school will reduce their achievement gap by 50% in the area of reading.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 34 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, 5B.1. 5B.1. 5B.1. 5B.1. Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not White: Students not Develop a Professional Lead PLC Teacher & Effectiveness will identifying with present Learning Community Administration be determined making satisfactory progress in reading. teaching strategies to correlate cultural through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Reading Goal #5B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected studies and assessments, Level of Level of Black: Students not instruction among Literacy First Performance:* Performance:* identifying with present subgroups. data, Harcourt White: 46% White: 38% teaching strategies Benchmark Black: 70% Black: 59% Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. The White population will Hispanic: 72% Hispanic: 57% Hispanic: Students not increase their current level Asian: Asian: identifying with present on the 2012/2013FCAT by American American teaching strategies 8 percentage points. Indian: Indian: Asian: American Indian:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 35 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 The Black population will S increase their current level ur on the 2012/2013FCAT by v 11 percentage points e The Hispanic population y will increase their current te level on the a 2012/2013FCAT by 15 c percentage points. h er s o n th o se in te re st e d in b ei n g a p ar t of th e C ul tu ra l St u di es P L C * D o: P L June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 36 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 C s w ill re se ar c h a n d d et er m in e w a y s to ef fe ct iv el y in cr e as e st u d e nt a c hi e v e m e nt w it hi June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 37 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 n th e s u b gr o u p s * C h e c k: M o ni to r P ro gr es s * A ct : A dj u st c ur ri c ul u m or te a c hi n g m et June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 38 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 h o d s w h e n n e e d e d 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. Lack of experience in setting Implement with fidelity the Teachers & FCIM Model Effectiveness will personal achievement goals use of student data Administration be determined notebooks. Implement with * Plan: Determine grade through student achievement as demonstrated on the fidelity the use of standard level expectations for data FAIR based scales and rubrics. notebooks and scale assessments, proficiency Literacy First *Do: Implement the use of data, Harcourt data notebooks and scales/ Benchmark rubrics in the classroom. Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. *Check: Monitor Progress / CWT *Act: Adjust curriculum or teaching methods when needed. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 39 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5C. English Language Learners (ELL) not 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. making satisfactory progress in reading. Difficulty in activating and Thinking Maps Implementation Administration, Literacy Coach, Chapter Tests, Literacy First, Mini Achieves & FCAT connecting reading skills CRT & Teachers. Reading Goal #5C: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* The English Language 28% 38% Learner subgroup will increase their current level on the 2012/2013 FCAT by 10 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 40 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Provide Thinking Maps Inservice *Do: Implement the use of thinking maps within the classroom *Check: CWT / Monitor Progress *Act: Adjust professional development support when needed. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. Unable to answer questions Use of Question Stems AdministratFCIM Chapter Tests, Literacy First, Mini Achieves & FCAT Use of Benchmark Task Cards ion, *Plan: Provide Question Literacy Stem and Benchmark Task Coach, Card Inservice CRT & *Do: Implement the use of Teachers. Questions Stems & Benchmark Task Cards in the classroom. *Check: CWT / Monitor Progress *Act: Adjust professional development support when needed. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. Unable to do assignments on grade Leveled Learning Centers & Choice AdministratFCIM Chapter Tests, Literacy First, Mini Achieves & FCAT level Boards ion, *Plan: Development Literacy Template to assist teachers Coach, with their leveled learning CRT & centers. Literacy Coach will Teachers. provide an inservice for Choice Boards *Do: Implement the use of leveled learning centers and choice boards. *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Provide additional support from Literacy Coach when needed. Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 41 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. making satisfactory progress in reading. Lack of student motivation and/or Teachers will work with students to student ownership of learning. develop attainable individual Reading Goal #5D: 2012 Current 2013 Expected learning goals via resource, Level of Level of individual or support facilitation. Performance:* Performance:* Additionally they will monitor their 6% 27% progress with data notebooks and The Students with student conferences. Disabilities subgroup will increase their current level on the 2012/2013 FCAT

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 42 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 by 21 percentage points. Administration, ESE School FAIR, Literacy First, IEP Specialist & ESE Teachers Goals, District Benchmark Testing. lan: The ESE Specialist will review IEPs with all ESE teachers. *Do: Teachers will ensure that all accommodations are implemented in the classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: IEP meetings will be held if adjustments are needed 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. Additional support needed to Implement SOAR interventions AdministratFCIM FAIR, Literacy First, IEP Goals, District Benchmark reinforce/reteach prior skills not yet outside of the reading block ion, CRT, *Plan: Students in 3-5 will Testing. mastered ESE be identified according to Teachers & previous FCAT scores & Regular Benchmark Achievement Education Data for tailored curriculum Teachers. needs including ESE accommodations and RtI interventions *Do: Begin 30 minute SOAR intervention time for additional student support *Check: Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust SOAR curriculum as needed 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 43 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 44 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 5E. Economically Disadvantaged students not 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. making satisfactory progress in reading. Parent Involvement Inclusion of parent in RtI meetings Administration, CRT, Classroom Effectiveness will to promote involvement in Teachers, MTSS/RtI Coach be determined Reading Goal #5E: 2012 Current 2013 Expected student's academic success through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Level of Level of assessments, The Economically Performance:* Performance:* The use of mental health resources Literacy First Disadvantaged subgroup 36% 46% to provide counseling services data, Harcourt will increase their current Benchmark level on the 2012/2013 Provide additional instruction Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. FCAT by 10 percentage extended day opportunities points. through Title One supplemental educational services.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 45 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 ions to all RtI meetings, plan to refer Life Stream counseling services to families in need and compile a list of students in need of additional extended day opportunities *Do: Implement the parent involvement plans *Check: Monitor the plans through parent participation *Act: Adjust the plans when needed

5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. Poverty The use of Family Family FCIM Model Effectiveness will School Liaison to assist School be determined families in obtaining Liaison, * Plan: Designate those through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR appropriate resources via the Administratstudents in resource need on assessments, resource room ion, campus Literacy First Cafeteria *Do: FSL will make contact data, Harcourt Free Breakfast Campus Wide Staff with those identified families Benchmark *Check: FSL will account Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. for parents who are provided resources on campus *Act: Adjustments will be made when needed 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. Lack of Rigor, Relevance, Provide Intentional Vocabulary AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will Relationships & Rules Instruction ion, Family be determined Provide Community Member School * Plan: A plan of action will through student achievement as demonstrated on the FAIR Mentors Liaison, be developed to address the assessments, Utilize the Core Essentials TLC lack of language, role Literacy First Curriculum Coordinatormodels, and positive data, Harcourt , Classroombehaviors within the home ofBenchmark Teachers students. Testing and Achieve Mini Assessments. *Do: Provide Intentional Vocabulary Instruction Provide Community Member Mentors Utilize the Core Essentials Curriculum *Check: Progress Monitor achievement *Act: Adjust where needed

Reading Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activities Please note that each strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 46 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g., early release) PD Content/Topic Grade Level/ Person or Position Responsible and/or (e.g., PLC, subject, grade level, and Schedules (e.g., frequency of Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring and/or PLC Focus Subject for Monitoring PLC Leader or school-wide) meetings) FCIM Model

Second Semester * Plan: Provide Inservice Lesson Study K-5 Judy Holmes 4th & 5th Grade Teachers Administration TBD *Do: Implement in Classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed. FCIM Model

* Plan: Provide Inservice Common Core K-5 Judy Holmes 2nd Grade Teachers Second Semester Administration *Do: Implement in Classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed. FCIM Model

* Plan: Provide Inservice Close Reads K-5 Durenda McKinney School Wide August 16th Administration *Do: Implement in Classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed. FCIM Model

* Plan: Provide Inservice Thinking Maps K-5 Durenda McKinney School Wide October 19th Administration *Do: Implement in Classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 47 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Reading Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Renaissance Learning Reading Incentive Title I $3,500.00

Subtotal: 3500 Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount My Data First Progress Monitoring Tool Discretionary $3,500.00 Brain Pop Online Teaching Tool Discretionary $2,000.00 A-Z Reading On-line Teaching Tool Title I $2,800.00 Subtotal: 6500 Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Close Reads DOE Presenter N/A 0 Thinking Maps District Personnel N/A 0 Subtotal: 0 Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Kagan Instructional Strategies Cooperative Learning Strategies SIG A Gran $12,000 Subtotal: 12000 Total: 22,000 End of Reading Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 48 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Comprehensive English Language Learning Assessment (CELLA) Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). CELLA Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Language Acquisition

Students speak in English and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Process Used to Determine Evaluation Tool understand spoken English at Responsible for Monitoring Effectiveness of Strategy grade level in a manner similar to non-ELL students. 1. Students scoring 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. proficient in Difficult Vocabulary in Speaking Teachers will use “Rosetta Stone” CRT, Teacherm, RtI Coach & FCIM Model Effectiveness will to build develop speaking and Administration be determined listening/speaking. listening skills. * Plan: RtI Coach, CRT & through student achievement as CELLA Goal #1: 2012 Current Percent of Administration will attend an demonstrated on the FAIR Students Proficient in online webinar on Rosetta assessments, ELL Students will improve their Listening/Speaking: Stone’s implementation. Literacy First proficiency in listening & KG: 40%(4) Proficiency *Do: Identified students will data, Harcourt st speaking on the CELLA by 10 1 : 77%(10) Proficiency begin the program after Benchmark 2nd: 88% (7)Proficiency placement Testing and Achieve Mini percentage points. rd 3 : 0(0) *Check : Monitor Progress Assessments & 4th: 13%(1) Proficiency th *Act: Adjust curriculum when Cella Achievement. 5 : 43% (3)Proficiency needed 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. Difficult Vocabulary in Listening Use of “Thinking Maps” CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Effectiveness will *Plan: Provide Thinking Maps be determined Inservice through student achievement as *Do: Implement the use of demonstrated on the FAIR thinking maps within the assessments, classroom Literacy First *Check: CWT / Monitor data, Harcourt Progress Benchmark *Act: Adjust professional Testing and Achieve Mini development support when Assessments & needed. Cella Achievement. Students read grade-level text in Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Process Used to Determine Evaluation Tool English in a manner similar to Responsible for Monitoring Effectiveness of Strategy non-ELL students. 2. Students scoring 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. proficient in reading. Understanding Complex Questions Level questions to adjust the CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Model Effectiveness will language of the question be determined CELLA Goal #2: 2012 Current Percent of * Plan: Review Webb’s Depth through student achievement as Students Proficient in of Knowledge question stems demonstrated on the FAIR ELL Students will improve their Reading: with teachers assessments, proficiency in reading on the KG: 0%(0) Proficiency *Do: Begin implementation of Literacy First CELLA by 10 percentage 1st: 0%(0) Proficiency questioning at the lower end of data, Harcourt nd points. 2 : 50% (4)Proficiency the spectrum Benchmark 3rd: 0%(0) *Check: Monitor Progress Testing and Achieve Mini 4th: 0%(0) Proficiency *Act: Adjust questioning when Assessments & 5th: 57% (4)Proficiency needed Cella Achievement. June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 49 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. Understanding Skills & Concepts Use of Tiered Assignments CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Model Effectiveness will be determined * Plan: Review the DRI through student achievement as handbook with teachers demonstrated on the FAIR *Do: Implement differentiated assessments, assignments within the Literacy First classroom data, Harcourt *Check: Progress monitor Benchmark *Act: Adjust curriculum when Testing and Achieve Mini needed Assessments & Cella Achievement. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. Student Engagement Leveled Learning Centers CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Model Effectiveness will be determined * Plan: Review the DRI through student achievement as handbook with teachers demonstrated on the FAIR *Do: Implement differentiated assessments, assignments within the Literacy First classroom data, Harcourt *Check: Progress monitor Benchmark *Act: Adjust curriculum when Testing and Achieve Mini needed Assessments & Cella Achievement.

Students write in English at Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Process Used to Determine Evaluation Tool grade level in a manner similar to Responsible for Monitoring Effectiveness of Strategy non-ELL students. 3. Students scoring 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. proficient in writing. Confidence in own ability to express ideas in written English Utilize “Being a Writer” Strategies. CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Model Effectiveness will be determined CELLA Goal #3: 2012 Current Percent of * Plan: Provide professional through student achievement as Students Proficient in development on “Being a demonstrated on the FAIR ELL Students will improve their Writing : Writer” assessments, proficiency in writing on the KG: 0%(0) Proficiency Literacy First st CELLA by 10 percentage 1 : 23%(3) Proficiency nd points. 2 : 38% (3%)Proficiency 3rd: 0%(0) 4th: 0%(0) Proficiency 5th: 100% (7)Proficiency 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. Grammar difficulties Place ELL Students with partners CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Model Effectiveness will be determined * Plan: Develop a model which through student achievement as partners up ELL students with demonstrated on the FAIR proficient English students assessments, *Do: Implement model in the Literacy First classroom data, Harcourt *Check : Progress Monitor Benchmark *Act: Adjust placements where Testing and Achieve Mini June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 50 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 needed Assessments & Cella Achievement.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. Unable to edit & proofread One on One conferencing with CRT, Teacher & Administration FCIM Model Effectiveness will Writing Coach Teacher be determined * Plan: Develop a through student achievement as “conferencing” time with the demonstrated on the FAIR Writing Coach for each student. assessments, *Do: Implement the Literacy First conferencing schedule data, Harcourt *Check: Progress monitor Benchmark *Act: Adjust conferencing as Testing and Achieve Mini needed Assessments & Cella Achievement.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 51 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 CELLA Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of CELLA Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 52 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Elementary School Mathematics Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Elementary Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 53 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. Achievement Level 3 in mathematics. Time for Professional DevelopmentTeachers will be given extended Administration Effectiveness will collaboration time one day a nine be determined Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected weeks to fully discuss, understand through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, FCAT #1A: Level of Level of and implement the professional Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Performance:* Performance:* development into their lessons. Achieve Mini Assessments. Students meeting high 43%(194) 57% standards in math by achieving a level 3 or higher on the 2012/2013 FCAT will increase by 14 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 54 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 vey staff on model 50% (68) of students in *Check: Review results third grade demonstrated *Act: Implement model high standards in math We 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. will increase this Fidelity of Achieve assessment Math Coach will ensure the proper AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will percentage by 7 percentage administration distribution of all Achieve Mini ion & Math be determined points by focusing in on Assessments to ensure fidelity. Coach * Plan: The Math Coach through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, content areas of deficit and will provide inservice on the FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & enhancing areas of proper utilization of the Achieve Mini Assessments achievement. The content Achieves in the classroom area of lowest proficiency *Do: Implement the use of was Number Operations, Achieves in the classroom as Problems & Statistics at an assessment 61%, while the content *Check: Review results in area of highest proficiency grade level meetings was Geometry & *Act: Adjust Measurement at 76%. curriculum/instruction as needed 40% (59) of students in 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. fourth grade demonstrated Utilization of Best Practices when Provide on-going coaching and Math FCIM Model Effectiveness will high standards in math. teaching mathematically complex mentoring Coach & be determined We will increase this concepts. Administrat* Plan: The Math Coach through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, percentage by 17 ion will provide teaching FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & percentage points by strategies during the grade Achieve Mini Assessments focusing in on content level meetings areas of deficit and *Do: Teachers will enhancing areas of implement the strategies achievement. The content within the classrooms area of lowest proficiency *Check: Progress monitor was Geometry & *Act: Adjust strategies as Measurement at 58%, needed while the content area of highest proficiency was Base Ten & Fractions at 60%.

35% (58) of students in fifth grade demonstrated high standards in math. We will increase this percentage by 22 percentage points by focusing in on content areas of deficit and enhancing areas of achievement. The content area of lowest proficiency was Base Ten & Fractions at 46%, while the content area of highest proficiency was Expressions, June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 55 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Equations & Statistics at 51%.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 56 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above 2A.1. 2A.1. Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in mathematics. Higher achieving STEM Bowl Enrichment students often Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected allocated less time for Increase focus on higher cognitive #2A: Level of Level of enrichment complex tasks Performance:* Performance:* instruction/activities Students meeting high 18%(83) 20% standards in math by achieving a level 4 or higher on the 2012/2013 FCAT will increase by 2 percentage points.

26% (35) of students in third grade demonstrated a standard of level 4 or higher in math. We will increase this number to 30%.

15% of students in fourth grade demonstrated a standard of level 4 or higher in math. We will increase this number to June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 57 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 20%. 2A.1. 2A.1 Math Coach, AdministrationEffectiveness will 15% of students in fifth & Teachers be determined grade demonstrated a through student achievement standard of level 4 or as demonstrated on LBAs, higher in math. We will FCAT Test Maker, Chapter increase this number to Tests & 20%. Achieve Mini Assessments

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 58 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

3A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students making 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. learning gains in mathematics. Student Engagement Teachers who attended Administration & the Kagan Workshop Kagan Lead Effectiveness will Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected over the 2012 summer Teachers be determined #3A: Level of Level of will provide implementation through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, FCAT Performance:* Performance:* strategies Test Maker, Chapter Tests & 56%(252) 63% to their grade level to Achieve Mini Assessments Students making learning increase engagement. gains in math by on the 2012/2013 FCAT will increase by 7 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 59 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 er a team of Kagan “attendees” and develop a schedule of presentation times during faculty meetings *Do: Implement Kagan strategies with the classroom *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust teaching strategies when needed. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. Time Constraints for Remediation Teachers will implement Math Classroom FCIM Model Effectiveness will Centers to allow small group Teacher, be determined remediation for those students who Math * Plan: The Math Coach through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, need additional assistance. Coach, will assist teachers in the FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Administratdevelopment of math centers Achieve Mini Assessments ion *Do: Implement math centers in the classroom *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust center activity when needed 3B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. of students making learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #3B: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* N/A. N/A N/A

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 60 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 61 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 4A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students in 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. lowest 25% making learning gains in Attendance Child Study Teams will Administration, Classroom be set up with the Teacher, Social Worker, Effectiveness will mathematics. parent to determine Guidance Counselor be determined Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected strategies needed in through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, FCAT #4A: Level of Level of getting children to Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Performance:* Performance:* school and on time. Achieve Mini Assessments 68% (76) 70% The % of the Lowest 25% of the student population making learning gains in math on the 2012/2013 FCAT will increase by 2 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 62 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 with attendance meetings

4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. Time Constraints to cover all The Instructional Focus Calendar AdministratFCIM Model Effectiveness will content will streamline curriculum ion, Math be determined resources to ensure that all Coach & * Plan: Assemble a summer through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, benchmarks are taught with fidelity Classroom writing team to develop a FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Teacher school based instructional Achieve Mini Assessments focus calenda *Do: Implement calendar for curriculum pacing in the classrooms *Check: Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust calendar/instruction as needed 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. Technology (Assessments on line) Students will begin taking their FCIM Model Effectiveness will Mini Achieve assessments online to Administrat be determined assist in acclimating them to the ion & Tech * Plan: A plan and schedule through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, new method of testing. Cons will be developed to begin 5thFCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & grade assessments on line Achieve Mini Assessments Computer Lab will be refreshed to during the second nine ensure that all computers are up and weeks running effectively. *Do: 5th grade Students will begin taking the Achieve Assessments online *Check: Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust computer test taking skills as needed. 4A.4. 4A.4. 4A.4. 4A.4. 4A.4. Additional support Implement the RtI Guidance FCIM Model Effectiveness will needed for student process for students Counselors, be determined achievement unable to achieve with Math * Plan: The RtI process will through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, Tier I classroom interventions Coach, be streamlined to incorporate FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Administratonly those interventions Achieve Mini Assessments ion & which have proven effective Classroom *Do: RtI meetings will be Teachers conducted utilizing the process set forth in the plan *Check: The RtI coach will assist in all charting of intervention successes *Act: RtI interventions will be adjusted as needed 4B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 63 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #4B: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A N/A

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 64 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2015-2016 2016-2017

Based on ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable Objectives (AMOs), identify reading and mathematics performance target for the following years

5A. Baseline data 2010-2011 White: 58% White: 58% White: 62% White: 66% White: 70% White: 75% Black: 27% Black: 38% Black: 45% Black: 51% Black: 57% Black: 63% White: 67% Hispanic: 32% Hispanic: 46% Hispanic: 51% Hispanic: 57% Hispanic: 62% Hispanic: 68% Black: 26%% Asian: 77% Asian: 73% Asian: 75% Asian: 78% Asian: 81% Asian: 84% Hispanic: 35% ELL: 34% ELL: 51% ELL: 56% ELL: 61% ELL: 66% ELL: 71% Asian: 67% Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: Students with Disabilities: ELL: 41% 16% 37% 43% 49% 56% 62% Students with Disabilities: 24% Economically Economically Economically Disadvantaged: Economically Economically Economically Economically Disadvantaged: Disadvantaged: 39% Disadvantaged: 44% 50% Disadvantaged: 55% Disadvantaged: 61% Disadvantaged: 67% 33%

Mathematics Goal #5A:

In six years school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 65 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, 5B.1. 5A.1. 5A.1 5B.1. Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not White: Students not Provide ongoing Classroom Effectiveness will engaged professional teachers, Math be determined making satisfactory progress in mathematics. in current teaching development on Go Coach, District through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected strategies Math curriculum to personnel & Tests & #5B: Level of Level of optimize student Administration Achieve Mini Assessments Performance:* Performance:* Black: Students not engagement in the The Hispanic population White: White: engaged curriculum will increase their current Black: 73% Black: 62% in current teaching level on the Hispanic: 68% Hispanic: 54% strategies 2012/2013FCAT by 14 Asian: Asian: percentage points. American American Hispanic: Students not Indian: Indian: engaged in current teaching strategies

Asian: American Indian:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 66 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 The Black population will Math Coach will provide a increase their current level streamlined pacing guide to on the 2012/2013FCAT by assist the teachers will Go 11 percentage points. Math implementation *Do: Teachers will implement the given pacing guide and strategies in the classroom *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust curriculum pacing / instruction when needed 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 67 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 68 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 5C. English Language Learners (ELL) not 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Learning on Grade Level Tiered assignments to differentiate Administration, Math Coach, Chapter Tests, Achieves Mini Assessments & FCAT CRT & Teachers Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #5C: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* The English Language 34% 51% Learners subgroup will increase their current level on the 2012/2013 FCAT by 17 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 69 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 rs

5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. Not able to understand questions Leveled Questioning AdministratFCIM Chapter Tests, Achieves Mini Assessments & FCAT ion, Math *Plan: Review Webb’s Coach, Depth of Knowledge CRT & question stems with teachers Teachers *Do: Begin implementation of questioning at the lower end of the spectrum and build up *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust questioning when needed 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. Difficult Vocabulary Use of Rosetta Stone to differentiateAdministratFCIM Chapter Tests, Achieves Mini Assessments & FCAT ion, Math *Plan: RtI Coach, CRT & Coach, Administration will attend an CRT & online webinar on Rosetta Teachers Stone’s classroom implementation *Do: Identified students will begin the program after placement *Check: Monitor progress *Act: Adjust curriculum when needed Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 70 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1 making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Lack of student motivation and/or Teachers will work with students to Administration, ESE School IEP Goals, District Benchmark Testing, Achieves Mini student ownership of learning. develop attainable individual Specialist & ESE Teachers Assessments & FCAT Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected learning goals. Support will be #5D: Level of Level of provided through individual, Performance:* Performance:* resource and support facilitation. 16% 37% Progress will be monitored with data notebooks and student The Students with conference. Disabilities subgroup will increase their current level on the 2012/2013 FCAT by 21 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 71 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Specialist will review IEPs with all ESE teachers. *Do: Teachers will ensure that all accommodations are implemented in the classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: IEP meetings will be held if adjustments are needed 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2.

5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 72 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 73 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 5E. Economically Disadvantaged students not 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Parent Involvement Inclusion of parent in RtI meetings Administration, CRT, Classroom Effectiveness will to promote involvement in Teachers be determined Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected student's academic success through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, FCAT #5E: Level of Level of Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Performance:* Performance:* The use of mental health resources Achieve Mini Assessments to provide counseling services The Economically 39% 44%. Disadvantaged subgroup Provide additional instruction will increase their current extended day opportunities level on the 2012/2013 through Title One supplemental FCAT by 5 percentage educational services. points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 74 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 ions to all RtI meetings, plan to refer Life Stream counseling services to families in need and compile a list of students in need of additional extended day opportunities 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. Poverty The use of Family Family FCIM Model: Effectiveness will School Liaison to assist School *Plan: Designate those be determined families in obtaining Liaison, students in resource need on through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, appropriate resources via the Administratcampus FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & resource room ion, *Do: FSL will make contact Achieve Mini Assessments Cafeteria with those identified families Free Breakfast Campus Wide Staff *Check: FSL will account for parents who are provided resources on campus *Act: Adjustments will be made when needed

5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. Lack of Rigor, Relevance, Provide Intentional Vocabulary AdministratFCIM Model: Effectiveness will Relationships & Rules Instruction ion, Family *Plan: A plan of action will be determined Provide Community Member School be developed to address the through student achievement as demonstrated on LBAs, Mentors Liaison, lack of language, role FCAT Test Maker, Chapter Tests & Utilize the Core Essentials TLC models, and positive Achieve Mini Assessments Curriculum Coordinatorbehaviors within the home of , Classroomstudents. Teachers *Do: Provide Intentional Vocabulary Instruction Provide Community Member Mentors Utilize the Core Essentials Curriculum *Check: Progress Monitor achievement *Act: Adjust where needed End of Elementary School Mathematics Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 75 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Middle School Mathematics Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Middle School Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 76 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. Achievement Level 3 in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #1A: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #1B: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2. 1B.2.

1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3. 1B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 77 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 78 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #2A: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2.

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. scoring at or above Level 7 in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #2B: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2. 2B.2.

2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3. 2B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 79 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 80 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students making 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. 3A.1. learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #3A: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box.

3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2. 3A.2.

3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3. 3A.3.

3B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. of students making learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #3B: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box.

3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 81 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 82 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 4A. FCAT 2.0: Percentage of students in 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. 4A.1. lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #4A: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2. 4A.2.

4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3. 4A.3.

4B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. 4B.1. of students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #4B: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2. 4B.2.

4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3. 4B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 83 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2015-2016 2016-2017 Objectives (AMOs), identify reading and mathematics performance target for the following years

5A. In six years, Baseline data 2010-2011 school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%. Mathematics Goal #5A:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 84 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, 5B.1. 5B.1. 5B.1. 5B.1. Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not White: Black: making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Hispanic: Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected Asian: #5B: Level of Level of American Indian: Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. White: White: Black: Black: Hispanic: Hispanic: Asian: Asian: American American Indian: Indian: 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2. 5B.2.

5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3. 5B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 85 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 86 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 5C. English Language Learners (ELL) not 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. 5C.1. making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #5C: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2. 5C.2.

5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3. 5C.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 87 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

5D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. 5D.1. making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #5D: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2. 5D.2.

5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3. 5D.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 88 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 89 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 5E. Economically Disadvantaged students not 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. 5E.1. making satisfactory progress in mathematics. Mathematics Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #5E: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected goal in this box. level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2. 5E.2.

5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3. 5E.3.

End of Middle School Mathematics Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 90 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Florida Alternate Assessment High School Mathematics Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). High School Mathematics Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 91 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in mathematics. Mathematics Goal #1: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 92 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. scoring at or above Level 7 in mathematics. Mathematics Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 93 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 94 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of 3.1. 3.1. 3.1. 3.1. students making learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal #3: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box.

3.2. 3.2. 3.2. 3.2. 3.2.

3.3. 3.3. 3.3. 3.3. 3.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 95 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

4. Florida Alternate Assessment: Percentage of 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. 4.1. students in lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics. Mathematics Goal #4: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 4.2. 4.2. 4.2. 4.2. 4.2.

4.3. 4.3. 4.3. 4.3. 4.3.

End of Florida Alternate Assessment High School Mathematics Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 96 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Algebra 1 End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (this section needs to be completed by all schools that have students taking the Algebra I EOC) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Algebra 1 EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 97 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Algebra 1. Algebra 1 Goal #1: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 98 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Levels 4 and 5 in Algebra 1. Algebra Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 99 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2015- 2016-2017 Objectives (AMOs), identify reading and mathematics 2016 performance target for the following years

3A. In six years, Baseline data 2010-2011 school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%. Algebra 1 Goal #3A:

Enter narrative for the goal in this box.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 100 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

3B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not White: Black: making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1. Hispanic: Algebra 1 Goal #3B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Asian: Level of Level of American Indian: Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. White: White: Black: Black: Hispanic: Hispanic: Asian: Asian: American American Indian: Indian: 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 101 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 102 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3C. English Language Learners (ELL) not 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1. Algebra 1 Goal #3C: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2.

3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 103 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

3D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1. Algebra 1 Goal #3D: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2.

3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 104 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 105 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3E. Economically Disadvantaged students not 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. making satisfactory progress in Algebra 1. Algebra 1 Goal #3E: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2.

3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3.

End of Algebra 1 EOC Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 106 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Geometry End-of-Course Goals (this section needs to be completed by all schools that have students taking the Geometry EOC) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Geometry EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 107 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Geometry. Geometry Goal #1: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 108 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Levels 4 and 5 in Geometry. Geometry Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 109 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on ambitious but achievable Annual Measurable 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2016-2017 Objectives (AMOs), identify reading and mathematics performance target for the following years

3A. In six years, Baseline data 2011-2012 school will reduce their achievement gap by 50%. Geometry Goal #3A:

Enter narrative for the goal in this box.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 110 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

3B. Student subgroups by ethnicity (White, 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. 3B.1. Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian) not White: Black: making satisfactory progress in Geometry. Hispanic: Geometry Goal #3B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Asian: Level of Level of American Indian: Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. White: White: Black: Black: Hispanic: Hispanic: Asian: Asian: American American Indian: Indian: 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2. 3B.2.

3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3. 3B.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 111 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 112 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3C. English Language Learners (ELL) not 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. 3C.1. making satisfactory progress in Geometry. Geometry Goal #3C: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2. 3C.2.

3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3. 3C.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 113 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

3D. Students with Disabilities (SWD) not 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. 3D.1. making satisfactory progress in Geometry. Geometry Goal #3D: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2. 3D.2.

3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3. 3D.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 114 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following subgroup:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 115 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 3E. Economically Disadvantaged students not 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. 3E.1. making satisfactory progress in Geometry. Geometry Goal #3E: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2. 3E.2.

3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3. 3E.3.

End of Geometry EOC Goals

Mathematics Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activities Please note that each strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g., early release) PD Content/Topic Grade Level/ Person or Position Responsible and/or (e.g., PLC, subject, grade level, and Schedules (e.g., frequency of Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring and/or PLC Focus Subject for Monitoring PLC Leader or school-wide) meetings) FCIM Model

*Plan: Literacy Coach will provide on-going support of unwrapping the standards Unwrapping the Standards K-5 Content Coaches School Wide Weekly throughout the year Administration *Do: Teachers will tailor their curriculum to the level of rigor and understanding required of the standard *Check : CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed FCIM Model

Second Semester * Plan: Provide Inservice to 4th & 5th Grade Teachers Lesson Study K-5 Judy Holmes 4th & 5th Grade Teachers Administration TBD *Do: Implement in the 4th & 5th Grade Classrooms *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed. FCIM Model

* Plan: Provide Inservice upper grades Common Core K-5 Judy Holmes 2nd Grade Teachers Second Semester Administration *Do: Begin blending implementation in Classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed. Thinking Maps K-5 Durenda McKinney School Wide October 19th FCIM Model Administration

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 116 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 * Plan: Provide Inservice *Do: Implement in Classroom *Check: CWT / Progress Monitor *Act: Adjust when needed.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 117 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Mathematics Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Brain Pop Online Teaching Tool Disretionary $3500.00

Subtotal:$3,500.00 Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Kagan Instructional Strategies Teacher Resource Materials Title I $2500.00 Subtotal:$2,500.00 Total:$6,000.00 End of Mathematics Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 118 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Elementary and Middle School Science Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Elementary and Middle Science Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 119 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. Achievement Level 3 in science. Students are not Integrate mini scientific method Science Coach & Administration Effectiveness will grasping a deeper based labs into each lesson, along be determined through student achievement as demonstrated on Science Goal #1A: 2012 Current 2013 Expected understanding of with lab write ups to allow students Chapter Tests, LBAs and Achieve Mini Assessments. Level of Level of scientific content and to write about their learning. Students meeting high Performance:* Performance:* processes, due to a standards in math by 27%(45) 37% lack of lab time in the achieving a level 3 or classroom. higher on the 2012/2013 FCAT will increase by 10 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 120 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 demonstrate labs for each 5th grade science standard *Do: Teachers will implement the lab in the classrooms *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust lab support as needed 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2.

1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3.

1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in science. Science Goal #1B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of N/A Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 121 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Based on the analysis of student achievement data and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 122 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 2A. FCAT 2.0: Students scoring at or above 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. 2A.1. Achievement Levels 4 and 5 in science. Higher achieving Students demonstrating a high Administration, Classroom Effectiveness will students often proficiency in science will be Teachers, Math Coach be determined through student achievement as demonstrated on Science Goal #2A: 2012 Current 2013Expected allocated less time for invited to serve on the STEM Chapter Tests, LBAs and Achieve Mini Assessments. Level of Level of enrichment enrichment team. Students meeting high Performance:* Performance:* instruction/activities. standards in science by 2% (4) 10% After school Time Travelers will be achieving a level 4 or a science based enrichment for level higher on the 2012/2013 four and five students. FCAT will increase by 8 percentage points.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 123 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 of high achieving science students according to the Benchmark Data. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2. 2A.2.

2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3. 2A.3.

2B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. 2B.1. scoring at or above Level 7 in science. Science Goal #2B: 2012 Current 2013Expected Level of Level of N/A Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A

End of Elementary and Middle School Science Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 124 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Florida Alternate Assessment High School Science Goals * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). High School Science Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 125 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. scoring at Levels 4, 5, and 6 in science. Science Goal #1: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in Responsible for Monitoring need of improvement for the following group:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 126 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. scoring at or above Level 7 in science. Science Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

End of Florida Alternate Assessment High School Science Goals Biology 1 End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (this section needs to be completed by all schools that have students taking the Biology I EOC) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Biology 1 EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Biology 1.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 128 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Biology 1 Goal #1: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 129 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Levels 4 and 5 in Biology 1. Biology 1 Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

End of Biology 1 EOC Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 130 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Science Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Grade Person or Position Responsible for and/or PLC Focus and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or Release) and Schedules (e.g., Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Level/Subject Monitoring PLC Leader school-wide) frequency of meetings) Hands On Labs FCIM *Plan: Science coach will develop lab lesson plans for every 5th grade science standard Science * Do: Science coach will provide a 5th Grade 5th Grade Teachers Weekly Administration Coach demonstration of every lab during weekly grade level meetings *Check: Monitor progress *Act: Lab adjustments will be made when needed

Science Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Hands –On Lab Activities Materials & Supplies Title I $2,000.00 Subtotal:$2,000.00 Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 131 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Subtotal: Total:$2,000.00 End of Science Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 132 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Writing Goals

* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Writing Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 133 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1A. FCAT: Students scoring at Achievement 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. 1A.1. Level 3.0 and higher in writing. Required grammar Students will use the Writing Teacher & Effectiveness will component to the writing process daily, Classroom be determined through student achievement as demonstrated on Writing Goal #1A: 2012 Current 2013 Expected 2012/2013 Writing followed up by Teacher monthly writing prompts and LBAs. Level of Level of FCAT. conferencing with Performance:* Performance:* teachers and writing 75%(111) 81% coach.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 134 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

opment on the utilization of anchor prompts, Benchmark Writing Task Cards & the District K-12 Writing Plan in the development of their lesson plans. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. 1A.2. Student Engagement Implement the “Being a Writer” Writing FCIM Effectiveness will curriculum to integrate engaging Coach, *Plan: Provide Inservice for be determined through student achievement as literature into writing. Administrat“Being a Writer” to 1st & 2nd demonstrated on monthly writing prompts and LBAs. ion & grades Students meeting high Classroom *Do: Implement the “Being standards in writing by Teachers a Writer” in 1st & 2nd grades achieving a level 3 or *Check: Monitor progress higher on the 2012/2013 *Act: Adjust instruction FCAT will increase by 6 when needed percentage points. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. 1A.3. More rigorous level of writing Implementation of DBQ Writing FCIM Effectiveness will in 4th grade to provide Coach, *Plan: DBQ coordinator will be determined through student achievement as opportunities for students to Administratmeet with grade levels to demonstrated on monthly writing prompts and LBAs. transform their thoughts into ion & discuss timeline and topics meaningful writing. Classroom *Do: Teachers will Teachers implement the DBQ lessons within the classrooms *Check: Monitor progress *Act: Adjust level of support when needed 1B. Florida Alternate Assessment: Students 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. 1B.1. scoring at 4 or higher in writing. Writing Goal #1B: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of N/A Performance:* Performance:* N/A N/A.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 135 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Writing Professional Development

Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Target and/or PLC Focus Fac Dates (e.g. ilit , Early ato Release) r PD Participants and Person or Position Responsible for Grade Level/Subject and Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or school-wide) Schedules Monitoring /or (e.g., PL frequency C of Lea meetings) der Being a Writer Ju FCIM: dy *Plan: Schedule Inservice for 1st & 2nd GradeEffectiveness will Sept. H *Do: Implement “Being A Writer” in grades be determined through student K-5 1st & 2nd Grade Teachers 28th & 1 & 2 achievement as demonstrated on monthly ol Oct. 25th *Check: Monitor progress writing prompts and LBAs. m *Act: Adjust Professional Development es support when needed FCAT Writing Anchor FCIM: La th Sets Inservice *Plan: 4 Grade Chair will meet with the ur grade level to teach the anchor paper set a Sept. criteria 4th M 4th Grade Teachers *Do: Implement the use of anchor papers in 27th an the classroom *Check: Monitor progress dr *Act: Adjust Professional Development ell support when needed

Writing Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities/materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 136 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Being A Writer Teaching Tools Title I $5,800.00 Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total:$5,800.00 End of Writing Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 137 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Civics End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (required in year 2014-2015)

* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Civics EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 138 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Civics. 2012 Current 2013 Expected Civics Goal #1: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical goal in this box. data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 139 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Levels 4 and 5 in Civics. Civics Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 140 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Civics Professional Development

Civics Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 141 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Subtotal: Total: End of Civics Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 142 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 U.S. History End-of-Course (EOC) Goals (required in year 2013-2014) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). U.S. History EOC Goals Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 143 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Students scoring at Achievement Level 3 in 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. U.S. History. 2012 Current 2013 Expected U.S. History Goal #1: Level of Level of Performance:* Performance:* Enter narrative for the Enter numerical Enter numerical goal in this box. data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 144 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

2. Students scoring at or above Achievement 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. 2.1. Levels 4 and 5 in U.S. History. U.S. History Goal #2: 2012 Current 2013 Expected Level of Level of Enter narrative for the Performance:* Performance:* goal in this box. Enter numerical Enter numerical data for current data for expected level of level of performance in performance in this box. this box. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2. 2.2.

2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3. 2.3.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 145 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 U.S. History Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic P and/or PLC Focus D Target Fa Dates cil (e.g. , ita Early tor Release) an PD Participants and Person or Position Responsible for Grade Level/Subject Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring d/ (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or school-wide) Schedule Monitoring or s (e.g., PL frequenc C y of Le meetings ad ) er

U.S. History Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 146 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of U.S. History Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 147 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Attendance Goal(s) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% [35]). Attendance Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Increase Attendance Based on the analysis of attendance data and reference to Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of Responsible for Monitoring improvement:

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 148 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Attendance 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Our ability to Update contact Administration, Monthly Reports generated from AS400 communicate with information at the end faculty, staff, 2012 Current parents is often of each nine weeks and school parent Attendance Goal #1: 2013 Expected hampered by address whenever parents visit liaison & MTSS/RtI Coach Attendance Attendance Rate:* and phone number the school. Increased Students will increase their Rate:* changes. parent involvement and attendance rate by four The transient nature of increased opportunities percentage points over the 94.32 % 98.32% 2012 Current some families. for parents to previous year. 2013 Expected participate in school sponsored Number of Number of Students with activities, Students with frequent and ongoing Excessive Excessive Absences contacts through the Absences school parent liaison. (10 or more) (10 or more)

209 150 2012 Current 2013 Expected Number of Number of Students with Students with Excessive Excessive Tardies (10 or Tardies (10 or more) more) 222 200

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 149 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

l outs to notify parents of events and needs throughout the school year *Do: Update phone numbers throughout the school year to ensure that all parents receive the messages 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. Parents not enforcing The classroom teacher Classroom FCIM mandatory school will send home notices Teacher, *Plan: Generate AS400 Monthly Reports generated from AS400 attendance within the when children are Guidance attendance notices from data home. absent for five days. Counselor, entry clerk and cross Once a child is absent Social reference with RtI meetings for ten days, Worker & *Do: Administration will Administration will Administraattend RtI meetings to schedule a Child Study tion discuss the attendance Meeting with the component Guidance Counselor, *Check: Progress monitor Social Worker, attendance Classroom Teacher & *Act: Schedule any addition Parent to discuss the meeting s with the social truancy issue. worker Attendance Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Strategy for Follow- Person or Position Responsible and/or PLC Focus Grade Level/Subject and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, Release) and Schedules (e.g., up/Monitoring for Monitoring PLC Leader or school-wide) frequency of meetings)

Attendance Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 150 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of Attendance Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 151 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Suspension Goal(s) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)). Suspension Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Decrease Suspension Based on the analysis of suspension data, and reference to “Guiding Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool Questions,” identify and define areas in need of improvement: Responsible for Monitoring

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 152 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Suspension 1.3. 1.3. 1.1. 1.1. Students continue to Implementation of PBS Administration & Effectiveness will make poor choices and to promote positive Classroom Teachers be determined Suspension Goal #1: 2012 Total Number of2013 Expected engage in suspension school-wide through the reports generated from AS400. The number of Out of In –School Number of level behaviors. expectations within the Core School Suspensions will Suspensions In- School Essentials Curriculum. decrease by 10 %. Suspensions Reinforcement for positive 0 0 behavior will be utilized in the The number of students 2012 Total Number of2013 Expected PRIDE Store. with Out of School Students Suspended Number of Students Suspensions will decreaseIn-School Suspended Use of the RtI process, by 10%. In -School Guidance referrals, 0 0 guidance group 2012 Total 2013 Expected support. Number of Out-of- Number of School Suspensions Out-of-School Suspensions 222 200 2012 Total Number of2013 Expected Students Suspended Number of Students Out- of- School Suspended Out- of-School

95 85

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 153 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

urriculum to use as the Core Curriculum *Do: Implement the Core Essentials Curriculum within the classrooms *Check: Progress

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 154 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Suspension Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Strategy for Follow- Person or Position Responsible and/or PLC Focus Grade Level/Subject and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, Release) and Schedules (e.g., up/Monitoring for Monitoring PLC Leader or school-wide) frequency of meetings) PBS PLC Fincher, Christ, LeMoyne, Noblin, Hayes, Monitor Discipline ALL Grades Jessica Noblin Monthly Gelb, H Greenwood, Holt, Reports from AS400 Williams

Suspension Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount PRIDE Store Funding provided to stock store for positive Discretionary $1,000.00 behavior

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of Suspension Goals

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 155 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Dropout Prevention Goal(s) Note: Required for High School- F.S., Sec. 1003.53 * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)). Dropout Prevention Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Dropout Prevention

Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of Responsible for improvement: Monitoring

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 156 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Dropout Prevention 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

2012 Current 2013 Expected Dropout Prevention Dropout Rate:* Dropout Rate:* Goal #1: Enter numerical Enter numerical data data for dropout for expected dropout Enter narrative for the goal rate in this box. rate in this box. in this box. 2012 Current 2013 Expected Graduation Rate:* Graduation Rate:* *Please refer to the Enter numerical Enter numerical data percentage of students data for for expected who dropped out during graduation rate in graduation rate in the 2011-2012 school this box. this box. year. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Dropout Prevention Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Grade Person or Position Responsible for and/or PLC Focus and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or Release) and Schedules (e.g., Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Level/Subject Monitoring PLC Leader school-wide) frequency of meetings)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 157 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Dropout Prevention Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of Dropout Prevention Goal(s)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 158 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Parent Involvement Goal(s) Upload Option-For schools completing the Parental Involvement Policy/Plan (PIP) please include a copy for this section. Online Template- For schools completing the PIP a link will be provided that will direct you to this plan. * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)). Parent Involvement Goal(s) Problem-solving Process to Parent Involvement Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool “Guiding Questions,” identify and define areas in need of Responsible for improvement: Monitoring

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 159 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Parent Involvement 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Single Parent with smaller Provide Babysitting Family School Liaison School Liaison Portal children Parent Involvement Goal 2012 Current 2013 Expected #1: Level of Parent Level of Parent Involvement:* Involvement:* Parental involvement in school 70%(595) 75% based activities will increase 5 percentage points during the 2012/2013 school year.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 160 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

TA to stay during after hours promotions *Do: Have TA watch after younger children to assist with parent’s attendance abilities 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. Parents Working Additional Flexible Hours through the Family FCIM School Liaison Portal Hours Parent Resource Room School *Plan: Plan after hours Liaison activities to include daytime & nighttime occurrences *Do: Implement the activities *Check: Progress monitor attendance *Act: Adjust hours as needed 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Parent Involvement Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Grade Person or Position Responsible for and/or PLC Focus and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or Release) and Schedules (e.g., Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Level/Subject Monitoring PLC Leader school-wide) frequency of meetings)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 161 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Parent Involvement Budget Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount Grade Level Nights Out Provide parents with instruction on Title I $3,000.00 classroom activities Subtotal:$3,000.00 Total:$3,000.00 End of Parent Involvement Goal(s)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 162 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Goal(s)

STEM Goal(s) Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement Based on the analysis of school data, Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Process Used to Determine Effectiveness Evaluation Tool identify and define Responsible for of areas in need of improvement: Monitoring Strategy STEM Goal #1: 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Before school class is scheduled Math Coach Effectiveness will To encourage and enrich the higher Time constraints during the “regular” school day. for 7:45 – 8:20. FCIM be determined through student achieving students through the use of *Plan: Math Coach will schedule STEM achievement as demonstrated on science, technology, engineering and classes Chapter Tests, LBAs and Achieve math problem based learning. *Do: STEM Classes will be implemented Mini Assessments. *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust attendance when needed

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. Location Thinking Lab utilized Math Coach FCIM Effectiveness will *Plan: Math Coach will schedule use of be determined through student the computer lab in the morning achievement as demonstrated on *Do: The computer lab will be utilized forChapter Tests, LBAs and Achieve STEM Classes Mini Assessments. *Check: Progress monitor *Act: Adjust times when needed 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. Engineering Assistance Contact parent who is engineer toMath Coach FCIM Effectiveness will provide real world application *Plan: Math Coach will make contact be determined through student with Engineer parent achievement as demonstrated on *Do: Parent will assist with instruction Chapter Tests, LBAs and Achieve *Check: Progress monitor Mini Assessments. *Act: Adjust assistance when needed

STEM Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Grade Person or Position Responsible for and/or PLC Focus and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or Release) and Schedules (e.g., Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Level/Subject Monitoring PLC Leader school-wide) frequency of meetings) Coordinators Training Conferences with District 3rd – 5th Rose Sedley& Science & Math Coaches Oct. 3rd, 2012 Administration & Math Coach Stephanie Luke Coordinators

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 163 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 STEM Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of STEM Goal(s)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 164 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Career and Technical Education (CTE) Goal(s)

CTE Goal(s) Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement Based on the analysis of school data, Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Process Used to Determine Effectiveness Evaluation Tool identify and define Responsible for of areas in need of improvement: Monitoring Strategy CTE Goal #1: 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. 1.1.

Enter narrative for the goal in this box.

1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

CTE Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Grade Person or Position Responsible for and/or PLC Focus and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or Release) and Schedules (e.g., Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Level/Subject Monitoring PLC Leader school-wide) frequency of meetings)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 165 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 CTE Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of CTE Goal(s)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 166 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Additional Goal(s) * When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents next to the percentage (e.g. 70% (35)). Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement Additional Goal(s) Based on the analysis of school data, identify and define Anticipated Barrier Strategy Person or Position Evaluation Tool areas in need of improvement: Responsible for Monitoring

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 167 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

1. Additional Goal 1.1 1.1. 1.1. 1.1. Problems within the outside Teaching the Core Essentials Classroom Teachers AS 400 Discipline Tracking community Curriculum through the “at &PBS Team Additional Goal #1: 2012 Current 2013 Expected school” behavior lens, rather than Level :* Level :* insulting engrained Leesburg Elementary School will neighborhood behaviors continue to monitor any bullying 0 0 reports.

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 168 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1

Essentials curriculum *Do: Implement the use of Core Essentials in the classrooms *Check: Progress 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2. 1.2.

1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3. 1.3.

Additional Goals Professional Development Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity. PD Content /Topic PD Facilitator PD Participants Target Dates (e.g. , Early Grade Person or Position Responsible for and/or PLC Focus and/or (e.g. , PLC, subject, grade level, or Release) and Schedules (e.g., Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring Level/Subject Monitoring PLC Leader school-wide) frequency of meetings)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 169 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Additional Goal(s) Budget (Insert rows as needed) Include only school-based funded activities/materials and exclude district funded activities /materials. Evidence-based Program(s)/Materials(s) Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Technology Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Professional Development Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Other Strategy Description of Resources Funding Source Amount

Subtotal: Total: End of Additional Goal(s)

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 170 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Final Budget (Insert rows as needed) Please provide the total budget from each section. Reading Budget Total: $112,000 CELLA Budget Total: Mathematics Budget Total: $2,500 Science Budget Total: $2,000 Writing Budget Total: $5,800 Civics Budget Total: U.S. History Budget Total: Attendance Budget Total: Suspension Budget Total:$1,000 Dropout Prevention Budget Total: Parent Involvement Budget Total: $3,000 STEM Budget Total: CTE Budget Total: Additional Goals Total:

Grand Total:$126,300.00

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 171 2012-2013 School Improvement Plan (SIP)-Form SIP-1 Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability (DA) Compliance Please choose the school’s DA Status. (To activate the checkbox: 1. Double click the desired box; 2.When the menu pops up, select Checked under “Default value” header; 3. Select OK, this will place an “x” in the box.)

School Differentiated Accountability Status Priority Focus Prevent

 Upload a copy of the Differentiated Accountability Checklist in the designated upload link on the Upload page

School Advisory Council (SAC) SAC Membership Compliance The majority of the SAC members are not employed by the school district. The SAC is composed of the principal and an appropriately balanced number of teachers, education support employees, students (for middle and high school only), parents, and other business and community members who are representative of the ethnic, racial, and economic community served by the school. Please verify the statement above by selecting Yes or No below.

Yes No

If No, describe the measures being taken to comply with SAC requirements.

Describe the activities of the SAC for the upcoming school year.

Describe the projected use of SAC funds. Amount

June 2012 Rule 6A-1.099811 Revised April 29, 2011 172