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.
2. Students scoring at the Needs Improvement and
Warning levels will continue to be identified as “at risk” and will receive
further targeted reading instruction to improve reading skills and bring to
proficient performance.
3. We will
continue to focus on this area and identify assessment measures to better
monitor the progress of students at risk for learning to read
proficiently.
4. The second area of focus will be to improve
student responses to open response and short answer questions to measure
reading comprehension, which has been identified as an area of weakness through
analysis of test results.
5. Most years we expect our third grade reading
scores to range between 83% and 85%. The
challenge will continue to be the 15% to 18%
of students identified as struggling readers from the earliest grades, to become proficient by the end of third grade by the year 2014 as mandated by No Child Left Behind.
Writing
1. Open response
questions have been identified as an area for improvement throughout the
district. Writing in all areas of the
curriculum is a necessary skill for students to become proficient in all style
s of writing. The MCAS assessments
require students to write proficiently in the four content areas tested. A focus on topic development will yield the
most improvement in scores.
2. School wide writing assessments will be
implemented at all grade levels to monitor student progress in writing.
3. Students require many opportunities to
practice writing across all curriculum areas to become resourceful,
self-reliant writers. Staff received
professional development during the 2003-04 school year with John Collins
Associates for developing a strong writing program that emphasizes teaching a
writing process from the earliest grades and incorporating the five types of
writing across the curriculum.
4. Further training is needed for all staff with
ongoing professional development focusing on the domains of writing.
5. Following the development and implementation
of learning outcomes at each grade level, our next step is to develop a school
wide assessment system for writing to determine proficiency levels and
consistency at each grade level.
SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR RUSSELL
STREET SCHOOL DATE: JULY
2005
|
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 English
Language Arts Writing |
§ Percentage of 4th grade students scoring at proficiency or higher in English Language Arts will increase from 68% to 82% by the end of the 2007-08 the school year as measured by the ELA MCAS administered in May of each year. §
Percentage of 3rd grade students
scoring at proficiency or higher in § The average number of possible points for 4th grade students will increase from 14.3/20 to 16.5/20 by the end of the 2007-08 school year as measured by the MCAS Writing Assessment administered in March of each year. § The average number of possible points for 3rd grade students will increase from2.0/4 to 3.0/4 by the end of the 2007/08 school year as measured by the end of the year school wide writing assessment administered in May of each year. § The average number of possible points for 4th grade students will increase from3.0/6 to 4.5/6 by the end of the 2007/08 school year as measured by the end of the year school wide writing assessment administered in May of each year. § The average number of possible points for 5th grade students will increase from 2.0 to 4.5/6 by the end of the 2007/08 school year as measured by the end of the year school wide writing assessment administered in May of each year. |
|
SUCCESS
INDICATORS (Measures, assessment
tools) |
Increase in the % of 4th grade students scoring in the advanced and proficient range of the MCAS English Language Arts Assessment Increase in the % of 3rd grade students scoring in the proficient range of the MCAS Third Grade Reading Assessment Increase in the average number of points out of a possible 20 points of 4th grade students on the MCAS 4th grade Long Composition Decrease the % of 3rd and 4th grade students in the warning range of the MCAS Reading and ELA Assessment Increase the average score at each grade level in school wide writing assessment administered each year Administer school wide reading assessment at beginning and end of school year |
|
ANNUAL
TARGETS (3
years) ELA |
TEST Baseline (3 year average) Spring 2005 (Target) Spring 2006 (Target) Spring 2007 (Target) Spring 2008 (Target) MCAS 4th 68% proficient/advanced 73% proficient/advanced 75% proficient/advanced 80% proficient/ adv. 82%proficient/advanced
71% actual MCAS 3rd 83% proficient 85% proficient 83% proficient 88% proficient 90% proficient 78% actualMCAS 4th grade Long Composition 14.3/20 points (average) 15/20 points (average) 16.5/20 points (average) 17/20 points (average) 17.5/20 points (average) 4th grade MCAS
15.6 actual School
wide Baseline 2004/05 3rd
grade Writing Prompt 2.0/4 points 2.2/4 points (average) 2.8/4 points (average) 3.0/4 points (average) 3.2/4 points (average) Baseline 2004/05 4th
grade 2.6 actual 14.3/20 points 15/20points (average) 16.5/20points (average) 17/20 points (average) 17.5/20 points (average) Baseline
2004/05 5th grade
15.6/20 points actual 3.0/6 points (average) 3.8/6 points (average) 3.8/6 points (average) 4.4/6 points (average) 4.8/6 points (average)
3.4/6 points actual
|
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? |
|
Mathematics Curriculum Development and
Alignment |
1. Provide teachers with MCAS test item
analysis information and provide time for review and discussion to identify
areas of strength and weakness of math curriculum and identify students in
need of remediation and advancement\ 2. Ongoing alignment of math curriculum to
state and district standards 3. Send teams of teachers/administration to
visit high performing districts to collect information for teaching math 4. Analyze information from other school
districts to identify best practices and need for including supplementary
materials across grade levels for teaching math to reinforce Everyday Math
program |
Evidence of data provided to teachers Ongoing review of outcomes assessed at each grade level Record of visits Analysis of information with plan for expanding resources
used for math instruction across grade levels |
2003/2004 school year and ongoing Ongoing Beginning fall 2004 and ongoing Spring 2005 and ongoing |
Gustafson/Hall Professional Learning Community Teams (PLC)/Curriculum Committee Gustafson Hall/Gustafson Hall/Gustafson PLC Leaders |
Allocate time to review analysis Establish curriculum review cycle |
Allocate time for teachers to review data
and develop strategies for improving instruction (professional development
days, faculty meetings, grade level meetings) Substitute teachers |
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? |
|
Writing
Curriculum Development and Alignment |
Develop a
writing curriculum, scope and sequence and identify benchmarks for mastery of
writing at each grade level |
Writing
benchmarks |
Begin winter
2005 and completed by Spring 2006 |
Gustafson/PLC
Teams |
Course in domains of writing Samples of writing curricula from other school districts |
Allocation of time |
|
Reading
Curriculum Development and Alignment |
Investigate
balanced literacy model and identify current best practices for reading
instruction |
Results of
investigation |
Winter 2005 |
Literacy
Coordinator |
Workshops in current practices for teaching reading
comprehension and other skills |
Funding for professional development |
|
Math Assessment |
1. Align Pre and Post
Assessment vertically across grade levels 2. Review and adjust pre and
post test assessment annually to align with the district/state standards and
MCAS 3. Continuity with end of unit
assessments and test administration 4. Develop and include MCAS
open response questions aligned to unit as part of end of unit math
assessment 5. Identify anchor papers and
rubrics to be used to score open response assessments across grade levels. |
Implementation of
assessment Tests
reviewed each fall and adjusted to meet curriculum standards End of unit assessments
aligned across grade levels and administered End of unit
assessments with open response questions Anchor papers
for scoring |
Fall 2005 Ongoing Fall 2005 Winter 2005 Fully
implemented fall 2005 |
Professional Learning Community
(PLC) Teams PLC
Teams PLC
Teams PLC
Teams PLC
Teams |
Allocation of Time for assessment review Develop open response questions requiring higher level
thinking and application of skills |
*Current assessment resources *Training in developing assessments Training in developing open response
questions |
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? |
|
Writing Assessment |
|
Scored student work Student work scored and analyzed Synopsis of analysis of student work |
Baseline fall 2004 Ongoing Winter 2005 Winter 2005/ongoing |
Hall/PLC leaders PLC Teams |
Examining student work Systematic scoring using anchor papers and rubric |
Workshops in how to implement Professional Communities
Model for examining student work to inform instruction |
|
Reading Assessment |
|
Results of reading assessment Trade Book activities/assessments |
Pilot 2004/05 school year and ongoing 2006/07 |
Literacy Coordinator Literacy Coordinator |
Training for classroom teachers in administration of
reading assessment Training in developing comprehension questions/tasks that
identify students level of mastery |
Funding to purchase reading assessment Professional development funding |
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 Instruction |
1. Structure math instruction to include a common
daily block of math instruction each day at each grade level 2. Investigate grouping practices using pre and
post unit testing for determining how best to differentiate math instruction
that meets the academic needs of all students 3. Increase number of students scoring in needs
improvement/warning range by analyzing best practices for providing math
instruction to struggling math students.
4. Develop and implement instructional practice
that teaches students how to solve word problems and respond to open response
questions on demand 5. Provide professional development
opportunities to increase knowledge and expertise in current best practices
for teaching math 6. Develop a math tutoring program using
volunteers to work with students
working
below grade level to increase
basic math skills. 7. Implement school wide initiative for 100% of
students to master math facts ·
Addition
and subtraction by end of third grade ·
Multiplication
by end of fourth grade ·
Division
and all by end of fifth grade |
Common math instruction times at each grade level Differentiated program Increase in number of students scoring in proficient and advanced range Systematic instruction and practice across grade levels Professional development schedule Volunteer program Develop implementation plan |
Fall 2005 Investigate 2004 Pilot 2005 in all grades Phase in Implementation 2006 Investigate 2004/05 Implement 2006 2004/05 and ongoing Summer 2005 and ongoing Winter 2005 full implementation 2005/06 |
PLC Teams Hall/PLC Teams Hall/Gustafson/ Huston Hall/PLC Teams Gustafson Hall/Packer/ |
Flexible grouping models Study grouping practices for best meeting the
needs of students for learning math Investigate Title I services/special
education delivery of services in other high performing districts Volunteer to develop program |
Investigate staffing patterns to ensure staff
utilization to its maximum potential Resources for teaching approaches to solve
word problems and open response questions Training for volunteers |
|
Writing Instruction |
1. Implement John Collins training for 5 types of
writing across the curriculum 2. Implement opportunities for students to do
type one and two writing every day across each grade level in various subject
areas |
Evidence of 5 types o writing in student writing folders Student work |
Winter 2005 Winter 2005 Full implementation 2005/2006 |
Gustafson/Hall PLC Teams |
|
On going Collins training |
|
Reading Instruction |
1. Investigate resources for teaching reading 2. Choose model for literacy instruction and
develop implementation plan 3. Increase range of trade books, fiction and
non fiction for all instructional reading levels 4. Increase number of teachers implementing
guided reading groups in classrooms. 5. Identify ELA resources to pilot in Fall 2005
to determine what best meets our needs for teaching ELA standards at 6. Organize reading initiative, celebrate
literacy days each year to raise the level of awareness for the importance
and enjoyment of reading |
Model and implementation plan More books to select for instruction using guided reading
instructional model Resources |
Winter 2005 Pilot fall 2005 Spring 2006 Beginning winter 2005 Identify 2004/05 Pilot 2005/06 Winter 2005 and ongoing |
Packer Packer/PLC Teams Packer/Literacy Committee Packer/PTSA |
Workshops in guided reading instruction Pilot Plan |
Materials to pilot Funding for purchasing sets of books Resources from various vendors Funding for reading incentives |
(For Each Goal)
MEASUREABLE SCHOOL
GOAL:
To
improve and define the School Climate/Culture at the
Background
Data
(Justification for this goal as a school priority):
Many
of the indicators used for identifying a need to focus on improving the climate
and defining the culture at the
Interpretation (What data indicate a
pattern? What data indicate an area on
which to focus? What do the data
suggest?)
Methods of assessment will be developed to collect data and feedback throughout the school year to monitor attitudes and identify concerns of parents, students and staff.
We will continue to identify and develop a comprehensive approach to support students and families as we continue to define our school culture.
|
DISTRICT
GOAL |
Inspire energy and excitement in a respectful, responsive and creative culture where everyone feels safe taking risks to challenge themselves in pursuit of our teaching and learning goals. |
|||||||
|
MEASUREABLE
SCHOOL GOAL |
· Develop and implement a parent/community volunteer program · Publish a school brochure · Develop a computer based reporting system that provides parents with their child’s performance levels at each grade level · Recognize positive student behavior · Build relationship with PTSA |
|||||||
|
SUCCESS
INDICATORS (Measures, assessment
tools) |
Volunteer program Brochure New
report card Monthly meetings with PTSA |
|||||||
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? |
||
|
Student Culture/Climate |
Investigate a school wide program to identify ways to recognize and acknowledge positive student behavior |
Selected program |
Fall 2005 |
Guidance |
Investigate other school programs |
Recognition at School wide meetings |
||
|
Parent/ Community Culture |
Create
a school brochure for parents and community to showcase the school |
Brochure |
Develop summer 2005 Distribute fall 2005 |
Hall |
|
Allocation of funds to publish brochure |
||
|
Parent Communication |
Investigate and implement reporting system for parents that better reflects student progress with mastery of grade level standards |
Report card |
Study winter/summer 2005 Implement fall 2005 |
Hall/PLC Teams/School Council |
Computer software |
Funding for software Allocation of time to study reporting
systems |
||
|
Parent volunteers |
Develop a volunteer program that utilizes the skills of our parents/community |
Volunteer program |
Pilot winter 2005 Implement fall 2005 |
Hall/School Council |
Training for volunteers |
|
||
Progress and Improvement Checks
Annual Report: Monitoring Our Progress
School:
________________________________________________ Date: __________________
Goal:
Progress (Report progress made on the strategies and
actions toward the achievement of the goal.
Describe efforts taken.)
Improvements Made (Describe the impact of the improvements
made.)