School Improvement Plan
School:
Council Members Title Signature
Jane Hall Principal _____________________________________
Judy Dokus Special
Education Teacher _____________________________________
John Henshaw 4th
Grade Teacher _____________________________________
Andrea Biron Art
Teacher – Gr. 1-5
____________________________________
“Whatever
it takes, we will learn”
The
We offer a sequentially structured
curriculum and educational practices which encourage our children to realize
their highest potential for learning while enabling them to acquire a body of
knowledge, including the application of reasoning, analytical, and
technological skills. Our environment
encourages students to develop an appreciation for cultural diversity and
awareness of the interdependence of the global community.
We strive to foster an atmosphere of
mutual respect, tolerance, and optimism wherein each child will develop
positive self-esteem. The dedication of the staff is evident through the
professional and personal commitment to the student's academic and emotional
development. We recognize that only
through high expectations for our own performance can we, in turn, establish
high expectations for our students. Through
the collaborative efforts of students, teachers, parents, administrators, and
community, the
Reach
for the stars! Do Your best!
Enjoy
many different cultures!
Respect
and tolerate others!
Be
positive!
Demonstrate
your excitement to learn!
(For Each Goal)
MEASUREABLE SCHOOL GOAL:
Percentage of grade four students scoring at proficiency or higher in Mathematics will increase from 50% to 67% by the end of the 2007-08 school year as measured by the state required MCAS assessment administered in May of each year.
Background
Data (Justification for this goal as a school priority):
MCAS
4th grade math test results over a six-year period
|
Performance Levels |
Math
Spring 1999 |
Math
Spring 2000 |
Math
Spring 2001 |
Math Spring 2002 |
Math Spring
2003 |
Math Spring 2004 |
|
Advanced |
20% |
19% |
11% |
16% |
20% |
19% |
|
Proficient |
32% |
45% |
36% |
31% |
37% |
28% |
|
Needs Improvement |
46% |
28% |
49% |
48% |
37% |
41% |
|
Warning |
2% |
8% |
5% |
5% |
6% |
13% |
Interpretation (What data indicate a
pattern? What data indicate an area on
which to focus? What do the data
suggest?)
1.
The
data suggest that over a six-year period our math scores remain flat
particularly in the proficient and advanced categories. Our lack of consistent progress indicates
that math must continue to be our area of focus for increasing student
achievement.
2.
The
Everyday Math program (Chicago Math), as implemented has not had a significant
impact on improving mathematics MCAS test scores in the fourth grade.
3.
As a
staff we need to further investigate strengths and weaknesses of our math
curriculum and develop and implement strategies for improvement.
4.
On
going professional development in math is needed for teachers to increase their
knowledge of the math curriculum and their expertise in using the program as an
instructional tool for students to achieve mastery.
5.
Analysis
of 4th grade math MCAS results/data will be done yearly, to identify
areas of strength and weakness of the math curriculum. Strategies will be developed yearly to
strengthen the curriculum, to improve instruction and to identify students in
need of remediation and advancement.
6.
For
the past four years the greatest area of weakness identified is student
response to open response questions. The
2004 MCAS results indicate that about one third of our fourth grade students
did not answer the short answer questions.
7.
Informal pre and posttests have been
developed to monitor student progress throughout the year beginning with pre and
posttests in grades 3-5 to measure student mastery of the essential outcomes.
|
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 GOAL |
Percentage of fourth grade students scoring at proficient or higher will range between 65% and 70%by the end of June 2008 as measured by the state required MCAS Math assessment (results available in Oct of each year). By June 2008, 85% of students at each grade level will score 80% or above on end of the year math assessment (results available in June of each year). |
|
SUCCESS
INDICATORS (Measures, assessment
tools) |
· Increase the % of fourth grade students scoring in the advanced and proficient range of the MCAS Math Assessment · Decrease the number of students scoring in the warning range of the MCAS Math Assessment · Increase math scores each year as measured by the end of the year math assessment administered at each grade level · Improve proficiency scores of open response and short answer math problems |
|
ANNUAL
TARGETS 4th
Grade MCAS MATH |
Baseline (3
yr. Average, 02,03,04)
Spring 2005 Spring
2006* (Target) Spring 2007
(Target) Spring 2008 (Target) 50%
proficient/advanced 55% proficient/adv. (target) 57% actual 61% proficient/adv. 65% proficient/adv. 70% proficient/adv. |
|
ANNUAL TARGETS End
of Year Math Assessment
teacher developed |
Grade average Baseline established (June
04) June 2005 (Target) June 2006 (Target) June 2007 (Target) June 2008 (Target) 3rd grade 84% scored at 80% or above 86% (80% actual) 86% 90% 92% 4th grade 57% scored at 80% or above 65% (68% actual) 75% 80% 85% 5th grade 63% scored at 80% or above 49% 67% 75% 80% |
|
ANNUAL TARGETS 4th
Grade Math Open Response |
Baseline
Established (Spring 04) June 2005
(target) June 2006 (Target) June 2007 (Target) June 2008 (Target) 21.4 out of 40 points
23 out of 40 points 28
out of 40 points 29 out of 40
points 30 out of 40 points 26.6 out of 40 points actual |
(For Each Goal)
Background
Data (Justification for this goal as a school priority):
Performance Levels 4th
grade MCAS English Language Arts
|
4th Grade ELA Spring 2001 |
4th Grade ELA Spring 2002 |
4th Grade ELA Spring 2003 |
4th Grade ELA Spring 2004 |
|
Advanced |
4% |
7% |
13% |
10% |
|
Proficient |
66% |
61% |
60% |
52% |
|
Needs Improvement |
29% |
30% |
24% |
28% |
|
Warning |
1% |
2% |
3% |
10% |
|
Performance Levels 4th Grade
Writing Prompt |
14.0/20 points (Average score) |
14.2/20 points (Average score) |
14.8/20 (Average score) |
14.1/20 (Average score) |
|
Performance Levels 3rd grade MCAS
reading |
3rd Grade 2001 |
3rd Grade 2002 |
3rd Grade 2003 |
3rd Grade 2004 |
|
Proficient |
83% |
88% |
78% |
83% |
|
Needs Improvement |
16% |
12% |
16% |
15% |
|
Warning |
2% |
0% |
6% |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interpretation (What data indicate a
pattern? What data indicate an area on
which to focus? What do the data
suggest?) English Language Arts
Although we saw a dip in the ELA
scores this year, the data suggest that over time the Language Arts program has
been an area of strength at the elementary school level.
We intend to bring our ELA
scores back to where we were in 2003 and continue an upward trend in
improvement at the advanced and proficient levels. Analysis of
4th
grade long composition scores
indicate strength in conventions and a weakness in topic development. This is also supported by the scores of the
grade level school wide writing
assessments.
Four years of data suggest that students are
performing well on the third grade reading test. Although we did see a dip in 2003, after
careful data analysis we believe this was a one year decline for several
reasons:
|
Year |
Proficient |
Needs Improvement |
Warning |
|
Spring 2002 |
29-40 |
16-28 |
0-15 |
|
Spring 2003 |
32-40 |
19-31 |
0-18 |
|
Spring 2004 |
30-40 |
17-29 |
0-16 |
ü There has been a fluctuation in the
performance levels for raw score intervals as the table above indicates:
ü The
2002 MCAS Reading test scores do not reflect an accurate reporting of students
with disabilities, thus the scores are most likely inflated creating a bubble
in the scores for this class.
ü The current fifth grade class, where we saw
the dip when they were in third grade, has a larger than expected number of
students receiving special education and Title I compensatory services in
reading and writing with double the number of students receiving support in
reading and written language than in previous years.
1. With the No Child Left Behind legislation
requiring that all students read proficiently by the end of third grade by the
year 2014, we need to continually assess our grade K –5 reading/literacy
program to ensure that we are implementing best practices for teaching reading
and writing to improve instruction.