School Improvement Plan
School:
Team
Members/Titles/Signature
Name Title Signature
Karen Anderson Teacher _____________________________________
Jo-Ann Dery Parent _____________________________________
Mary Dugan Parent _____________________________________
Nancy Marrese Teacher _____________________________________
Robert O’Neill Parent _____________________________________
Kelly Rogers Community
Representative _____________________________________
School
District Strategic
Plan)
The
To
support every child’s quest for knowledge, our curriculum, founded on sound
educational research, is developmentally appropriate and based on the
Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks. We
believe that a hands-on, interdisciplinary instructional approach is essential
in fostering a life-long love of learning.
Additionally, we know that the high standards of accomplishment we set
for the children must be matched by the high expectations we establish for
ourselves.
Finally,
we strive to provide each child the opportunity to interact positively with
peers and adults, to respect and share ideas, and to develop a positive
self-esteem. The interdependence of
students, parents, teachers, and community is essential for the achievement of
educational excellence in our child-centered school. We maintain an open-mind,
open door, and open heart spirit at the
(For Each Goal)
MEASUREABLE SCHOOL
GOALS:
Measure A - Percentage of students who score 18 or above at the end of first grade will increase as measured by the DRA reading assessment.
Measure B - Percentage of second grade students who meet or exceed the 50th percentile in reading will increase as measured by the Stanford Achievement Test.
Measure C - Percentage of second grade students who meet or exceed the 75th percentile in reading will increase as measured by the Stanford
Achievement
Test.
Measure D - Percentage of second grade students who meet or exceed the 90th percentile in reading will increase as measured by the Stanford
Achievement Test.
Measure E – Establish baseline performance levels for writing.
Background
Data
(Justification for this goal as a school priority):
DRA results for Grade 1 Students
over a three year period
|
Performance Level |
2002-2003 |
2003-2004 |
2004-2005 |
|
Level 18 or above |
70% |
73% |
76% |
Stanford Achievement Test Score for Grade 2 students over a three year period
|
Performance Level |
2002-2003 |
2003-2004* |
2004-2005 |
|
Exceeds 50th Percentile |
83% |
86% |
83% |
|
Exceeds 75th Percentile |
60% |
57% |
57% |
|
Exceeds 90th Percentile |
37% |
35% |
35% |
*In 2003-2004 an updated version of the Stanford Test was administered. This same version will be used in future years.
Interpretation (What data indicate a
pattern? What data indicate an area on
which to focus? What do the data
suggest?)
· There has been a slight increase in the percentage of grade one students who are reading at a DRA level of 18 or above
· During the three-year period, second grade students have performed relatively consistently on the Reading Portion of the SAT.
· Student performance on the Reading Vocabulary portion of the SAT continues to be a relatively weak area among second grade students, while Reading Comprehension is a relative strength
·
Staff needs to continue to closely examine
current strategies for teaching vocabulary
·
To ensure that we meet the goals of 98% of students meeting or exceeding the
50%ile, the School Improvement Plan outlines strategies for intervention at all
grade levels for the students not meeting this goal.
WRITING
· Throughout the district, student performance in answering open-response questions has been targeted as an area of need in all curriculum areas.
· This school year (2004-2005), grade level writing prompts have been introduced and are/will be administered at all grade levels.
· Open response questions will be developed and included in unit and end of year assessments in math. Using a rubric, these responses will be scored and serve as the baseline of student performance.
· After implementation of writing assessments and there is baseline data indicating student performance, proficiency targets must be established.
· Further staff training and professional development may be necessary.
|
DISTRICT GOAL |
Create and implement a challenging and comprehensive Pre-K—12 curriculum that meets the needs of all students and is consistent across grade levels. |
|
MEASUREABLE SCHOOL GOALS |
Measure A - By June, 2008, 90% of first grade students will score 18 or above at the end of the academic year as measured by the DRA reading assessment. |
|
|
Measure
B: By June, 2008, of second
grade students will meet or exceed the 50th percentile in |
|
|
Measure
C: By June, 2008, of second
grade students will meet or exceed the 75th percentile in |
|
|
Measure
D: By June, 2008, of will meet or exceed the 90th
percentile in |
|
|
Measure E: Student performance on writing assessment will improve |
|
SUCCESS INDICATORS (Measures, assessment tools) |
Increase in the percentage of students scoring at a level 18 or above on the DRA at the end of grade one. Increase
in the percentages of students scoring at the 50th, 75th
and 90th percentiles on the Increase in the average score of grade level writing assessments.
|
|
(3 years) |
2005-2006(target)
2006-2007(target)
2007-2008(target) Measure A 80% 85% 90% Measure B Establish Baseline Measure C Establish Baseline Measure D Establish Baseline Measure E Grade 1 – 83%, Grade 2-92% Continue collection of baseline data |
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING
(For Each Goal)
MATHEMATICS
MEASUREABLE SCHOOL
GOALS:
Measure A - Percentage of second grade students who meet or exceed the 50th percentile in Math will increase as measured by the G-MADE
Measure
B - Percentage of second grade students who meet or exceed the 75th
percentile in Math will increase as measured by the G-MADE
Measure C - Percentage of second grade students who meet or exceed the 90th percentile in Math will increase as measured by the G-MADE
Measures D and E – Percentage of grade 1 and 2 students scoring 85% or above will increase as measured by the year end Math Assessment
Measure F – Establish baseline performance levels for answering open ended questions in Math.
Background
Data
(Justification for this goal as a school priority):
Stanford Achievement Test Score for Grade 2 students over a three year period
|
Performance Level |
2002-2003 |
2003-2004* |
2004-2005 |
|
Exceeds 50th Percentile |
88% |
85% |
83% |
|
Exceeds 75th Percentile |
71% |
61% |
57% |
|
Exceeds 90th Percentile |
47% |
24% |
31% |
*In 2003-2004 an updated version of the Stanford Test was administered. This same version will be used in future years.
|
|
Baseline – 2003-2004 |
2004-2005 |
|
Grade 1 |
87% scored at 85 % or above |
87% scored at 85 % or above |
|
Grade 2 |
68% scored at 85% or above |
67% scored at 85% or above |
Interpretation (What data indicate a
pattern? What data indicate an area on
which to focus? What do the data
suggest?)
·
The End of the Year Assessments include
Open-Response questions.
·
Currently there is no standardized Math
Assessment given in grade 1.
·
Data from MCAS tests informs us that continued
students need more on-going practice in answering open response questions.
·
We need to continue to research the strengths
and weaknesses of the Everyday Math Program and implement changes if necessary.
·
Continued professional development in Math is
necessary.
·
Continued and on-going analysis of assessment
results is necessary.
|
DISTRICT GOAL |
Create and implement a challenging and comprehensive Pre-K—12 curriculum that meets the needs of all students and is consistent across grade levels. |
|
MEASUREABLE SCHOOL GOALS |
Measure A: By June, 2008, of second grade students will meet or exceed the 50th percentile in Math as measured by the G-MADE |
|
|
Measure B: By June, 2008, of second grade students will meet or exceed the 75th percentile in Math as measured by the G-MADE |
|
|
Measure C: By June, 2008, of second grade students will meet or exceed the 90th percentile in Math as measured by the G-MADE |
|
|
Measure D: By June, 2008, 100% of first grade students will score 85% or above on the grade 1 Math Assessment |
|
|
Measure E: By June, 2008, 90% of second grade students will score 85% or above on the grade 2 Math Assessment |
|
|
Measure F: Student performance on open-ended questions will improve (baseline to be established after data is collected in Spring, 2005) |
|
SUCCESS INDICATORS (Measures, assessment tools) |
Increase in the percentages of students scoring at the 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles on the Math portion of the Stanford Achievement Test at the end of grade two. Increase in the average score of grade level writing assessments. |
|
ANNUAL TARGETS (3 years)- Stanford Achievement Test |
2005-2006(target) 2006-2007(target) 2007-2008(target) Measure A Collect Baseline Data Measure B Collect Baseline Data Measure C Collect Baseline Data |
|
ANNUAL TARGETS – End of Year Math
Assessment |
Measure E 80% 85% 90% Measure F Collect Baseline Data Collect Baseline Data |
Strategy
In what general ways can you move key elements of the problem in order to achieve the school goal? |
Activities
(Action Plan) What will occur in order to accomplish the strategy and reach the school goal? |
Success
Indicator(s) What measure(s) will be used to determine the success of
this strategy? |
Timeline Start/ End Date What is the time frame for implementation of the key action? |
Person Responsible Who is primarily responsible for coordinating the key action? |
Professional
Development What do staff or families need to know and be able to do to ensure the achievement of this goal? |
Cost/
Resources What existing resources can be redirected? What “new” resources are needed? How will they be acquired? |
|
Reading Curriculum Development |
Continue work with Literacy Specialist and Literacy Team investigating best practices for reading instruction and conduct site visits to districts with high achieving test results Analyze best practices from other districts and research and make recommendations for supplementary instructional materials |
Site visits conducted Recommendations made |
Winter/Spring 2005 Winter/Spring 2005 |
M. Packer/ R.Faherty /N.Gastafson M. Packer/ R.Faherty /N.Gastafson |
Allocate time Allocate time/Possible Professional Development |
Substitutes Professional Development funding |
|
Writing Curriculum Development |
Continue work with Literacy Specialist and Literacy Team investigating best practices for writing instruction and conduct site visits to districts with high achieving test results Develop four writing prompts to be administered at the beginning of each school year and the end of each trimester |
Site visits conducted Writing Prompts developed |
Winter/Spring 2005 Winter/Spring 2005 |
Rich Faherty PLT Rich Faherty PLT |
Allocate Time Allocate Time |
Substitutes Professional Development funding |
|
Math Curriculum Development |
Provide teachers with data on student performance in, standardized, unit and year end assessments as well as MCAS data analysis and identify areas of strengths and weaknesses in student performance Provide staff with time to review and discuss the data |
Data provided to staff Data provided to staff |
2004/2005 school year and on- going On-going |
Rich Faherty and Nancy Gustafson Rich Faherty Nancy Gustafson, Professional Learning Teams |
Allocate time Allocate time |
Professional Development time Professional Development time |
Strategy
In what general ways can you move key elements of the problem in order to achieve the school goal? |
Activities
(Action Plan) What will occur in order to accomplish the strategy and reach the school goal? |
Success
Indicator(s) What measure(s) will be used to determine the success of
this strategy? |
Timeline Start/ End Date What is the time frame for implementation of the key action? |
Person Responsible Who is primarily responsible for coordinating the key action? |
Professional
Development What do staff or families need to know and be able to do to ensure the achievement of this goal? |
Cost/
Resources What existing resources can be redirected? What “new” resources are needed? How will they be acquired? |
|
Math Curriculum Development |
Identify students in need of remediation and enrichment and based on information create flexible groupings for instruction |