Comprehensive School Improvement Plan 2005

Cane Run Elementary

COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOl IMPROVEMENT Plan

SCHOOL ASSURANCE REVIEW

SCHOOL YEAR 2004-2005

The Cane Run Elementary school council and school planning committee reviewed the Assurances in the Kentucky Comprehensive Improvement Planning School Framework (2004) prior to approval of our plan.

Brennon Sapp _____2/23/05______

Chairperson, School Council Date

Marla Squires _____2/23/05______

Chairperson, School Planning Committee Date

Plan Approved by the School Council:

______2/23/05______

Date

School Council Members:

Brennon Sapp
Marla Squires
Chris Kindred
Jeff Vincent
Rob Brown
Greg Wilson

Note: Although the Assurance Certification is not included in the school’s improvement plan, the assurances for the categorical programs should be reviewed by the school council and the school planning committee prior to approval of the plan by the school council. The Assurances for 2004-2005 are in the Comprehensive School Improvement Planning Framework (2004) and can be downloaded from the KDE Web Page at: http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Administrative+Resources/School+Improvement/Comprehensive+Improvement+Planning/default.htm

School Plan Format Copyright Ó Kentucky Department of Education, 2005


COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

PLAN SUMMARY

Cane Run will focus primarily on maintaining the current level of excellence in reading while closing achievement gaps. We will achieved our goals by continuing to implement the 5 block literacy program, identifying students below the proficient level, increasing the multiculturalism of our school, and improve family involvement.

Process summary

The legal requirements for Planning involve how you developed the Plan as well as what you put in the Components, and this Process section shows that you are in compliance on those issues. In the Process Summary, answer the following questions:

1.  When and how did your school develop its mission statement? When and how did your school community last review it?

During the 2004-2005 school year, the staff reconsidered the Mission statement. After getting input from the staff, the SBDM readopted an older form of what was then the current mission statement. The adopted mission statement was clean and concise and said exactly what our mission is.

2.  Did the council use a Needs Assessment process aligned with Kentucky’s Standards and Indicators for School Improvement? If not, please identify and describe the process that was used.

The Needs Assessment used was the Kentucky Standards and Indicators for School Improvement.

All staff: Brennon Sapp, Marla Squires, Chris Kindred, Jeff Vincent, Rob Brown, and Greg Wilson

3.  When did the council complete each step of its Needs Assessment Work? If some parts were completed in past years and not repeated in the current school year, please identify those parts and when they were most recently completed.

February, 2005

4.  When did the council decide on Priority Needs, Causes, Goals, and Objectives?

Brennon Sapp, Marla Squires, Chris Kindred, Jeff Vincent, Rob Brown, and Greg Wilson

5.  When did the council identify substantive achievement gaps, set gap targets, and adopt its time schedule for closing the gaps?

February, 2005

6.  When did the council review drafts of the components?

February 2005

7.  When did the council review estimates for costs and drafts of Section 7 requests?

N/A

8.  When was the public meeting held to present the Plan to the community, and who attended?

March 9, 2005 at 4:30 PM

9.  When did the council officially adopt your revised Plan?

February 23, 2005

10.  When did the council officially adopt any Section 7 requests?

N/A

11.  When and why has the Plan been revised since that data?

N/A

12.  How will you evaluate your Plan, and when?

Approximately every 8 weeks, the staff will do an Impact/Implementation check on the plan in small horizontal groups. This assures input from all stakeholders. The impact and Implementation sheet will then be shown to the council for revising. Any changes/updates that need to be made to the plan will be at that time.

3

Comprehensive School Improvement Plan 2005

Action Component: Academic Performance

District Name: Jefferson County Component Manager: Amy Dennes

School Name: Cane Run Elementary Date: 2/23/05

Priority Need / Goal (Addresses the Priority Need)
According to the 2004 Performance Report (KPR), 17% of students scored below the proficient level at Cane Run in Reading.
Additionally in 2004, there was a substantive gap of 24 points between African-American and other students performing at the Novice-level in Reading.
According to the 2004 KPR, there was a point 45 point difference in scale score between ECE and non-ECE students in reading. / Reduce the overall percent of students performing at the Novice and Apprentice-level by 10%.
Causes and Contributing Factors / Objectives with Measures of Success
Data used for performance analysis has been based on classroom performance rather than individual student performance.
Teaching techniques have not been geared toward a multi-cultural classroom.
ECE students have not been held to the schools high expectations. / 1.  By 2006, annually reduce the gap between African-American and Other students performing at the Novice and Apprentice level in reading by 5%.
2.  By 2006, annually reduce the gap between ECE and Non-ECE students performing at the Novice and Apprentice level in reading by 5%.


Action Component: Academic Performance

District Name: Jefferson County Component Manager: Amy Dennes

School Name: Cane Run Elementary Date: 2/23/05

Strategies/Activities

Objective Label / Strategy/Activity / Expected Impact in Terms of Progress and Success / Responsible Person / Start Date / End Date / Estimated Resources and Costs
1A.
2A.
1B.
2B.
1C.
2C. / In order to maintain the level of excellence currently achieved, teachers will refine implementation of the 5 block Literacy Method.
Teachers will meet regularly to analyze individual students to determine the next steps needed to help each student reach proficiency in reading.
According to teacher observations and DRA, individual students scoring below the proficient level will be identified and assigned reading specialist for individual/small group tutoring. / Students will maintain or surpass the current level of performance in the classroom and on the KPR (100.1768)
Students scoring below the proficiency level will be identified through classroom observation and assessment tools. School resources will be allocated to help these students reach proficiency.
50% of identified students will improve their reading level at least one tier on the DRA. / Reading Specialist
Team Leaders and Teachers
Classroom Teachers and Reading Specialist / 8/05 / 5/06
Objective Label / Strategy/Activity / Expected Impact in Terms of Progress and Success / Responsible Person / Start Date / End Date / Estimated Resources and Costs
1C.
2C.
1D.
2D. / The learning environment committee will identify reading/teaching materials that reflect the multi-cultural population of our school.
The Family Resource Center will organize and implement a community reading literacy program. / Lesson plans, literacy center, and library will better reflect the multicultural population of our school.
The school will host one community reading literacy event each quarter with at least 25% of the school’s families in attendance. / Chairman of the Learning Environment Committee
FRC