Preliminary / Revised
District Name / Lewis County / Component Manager / Jerry Bloomfield
School Name / Laurel Elementary / Current Date / June 2004
Priority Need / Goal
Laurel Elementary CATS Assessment data indicates:
· Academic Index of 72.5
· !00% of 4th & 5th graders scored proficient on the writing portfolio.
· 66% of 4th and 5th grade students scored proficient in one or more content areas (excluding writing).
· 19% of accountability grade students (3rd and 6th) below the 50th percentile.
· 16.15% novice
· 61% novice among females (6% gap)
· 71% novice among free/reduced lunch participants
· Did not meet AYP in 2003 due to Other Academic Indicators- meet 3 of 4 goals (75%).
· Math scores dropped to 59.8 – state mean 67.7.
· Reading Scores dropped to 69.7 – state mean 83.5. / Assessment data will reflect: / 2004 / 2007
Academic Index / 77.1 / 84.9
4th and 5th grade students proficient in all content areas / 75.0 / 85.0
Percent accountability grade students (3rd and 6th) below 50 percentile / 36.7 / 25.6
Percent Novice / 14.2 / 10.1
Percent novice among females / 30.5
(3% gap) / 15.3 (1.5% gap)
Percent novice among free/reduced lunch participants / 35.5 / 17.8
Causes of the Need / Objectives For Reaching the Goal
Curriculum:
1. Curriculum standards are not completely connected across all levels, allowing unnecessary overlaps and gaps in what students learn as they move from level to level and from school to school.
2. Curriculum is aligned with state standards such as the Learner Goals, Core Content for Assessment, and the Program of Studies but is not completely refined.
Instruction:
3. Instructional practices and learning activities are not fully aligned with school, district, and state assessment expectations.
4. At-risk students need adequate access to additional assistance beyond their initial classroom instruction.
5. Technology is incorporated on a limited basis into classroom use.
6. Instructional time needs to be analyzed to maximize individual student learning.
Standards and Assessments:
7. Classroom assessments of student learning are not sufficiently frequent, rigorous and aligned with Kentucky’s Core Content for Assessment.
8. Students cannot adequately explain the academic expectations in each class and what is required to be proficient
9. Improving system for analyzing samples of student work to inform instruction and assess student progress but needs refinement and practice.
Student/Community Needs:
10. Barriers to learning for some students still exist.
11. Staff do not yet have the full knowledge they need on ways to meet individual student needs.
12. School does not adequately support students making a transition from one level to the next.
13. Families/community have not been made full, active partners in educating all students.
Academic Areas:
14. Do not have a consistent, standards based math program inschool/district.
15. Declining enrollment and increase in number of special needs students affect scores.
16. Multiage grouping patterns in 4/5 and 5/6 split classes inhibits complete coverage of core content especially in the reading core content.
/ By the end of the 2007 school year:
1. Professional development sessions to address instructional methods, performance standards, ways to meet individual student needs and content will be scheduled throughout the School Improvement Plan time frame to refine curriculum standards to avoid unnecessary overlaps and gaps in student learning during transitions from level to level. (#1, #4, #6, #7, #9, #10, #11)
2. LES certified staff will have time to examine student work, plan instructional strategies to continue and expand curriculum instructional programs, discuss assessment tasks and authentic assessment opportunities and fully implement the improvement plan activities to reflect real-life applications and student achievement needs. (#4, #2)
3. Identified LES students will have access to additional assistance beyond their initial classroom instruction through Title I, ESS, Gifted/Talented, one-to-one reading tutors, speech therapy, occupational therapy, physical therapy, mental health therapy and services provided by the school nurse to reduce student learning barriers. (#4, 11)
4. Use of technology as a learning tool will be reflected in student use/achievement.(#5)
5. Instructional time will be refined to allow for maximum student learning. (#6)
6. Student work samples will reflect evidence of varied instructional strategies to address individual learning styles and frequent, rigorous assessment opportunities that are aligned with performance standards and indicators. (#3, #5, # 8, #10, #12)
7. Students will understand academic expectations and proficiency level requirements. (#9)
8. More LES parents will become involved in the development of their child’s educational plan through increased home/school communication. (#13, #14)
9. LES will adopt a standards based math program K-6 that will be fully implemented in all grade levels. (# 16, 8, 6)
10. Special needs students will be provided with a special needs teacher to address their individual education plan and collaborate with regular education teachers to provide continuous, consistent service. (#15, 10, 12, 10)
11. Students will be provided core content/POS in specific grade groupings. ( #16, 8, 6)
Evidence of Causes / Measures of Objectives (Practice and Results)
1a. KY Core Content data
· 55.75% of students scored below proficient level in one or more content areas
1b. Students scoring below state standard in content areas:
· Reading-57.9%
· Math-70%
· Science-57.9%
· Social Studies-50.9%
· On DemandWriting-89.5%
· Portfolio Writing-0%
· Arts/Humanities-80%
· Practical Living/Vocational Studies-48.9%
1c. CATS Desegregation data:
· 61 % of females scored novice in one or more content areas
· 55% of males scored novice in one or more content areas
· 71% of free/reduced lunch participants scored novice in one or more content areas
1d. STAR Assessment data:
35.8% of students (grades1-6) are reading below grade level
2a. See “1a”
3a. CTBS data: 47.6 % of accountability grade (3rd and 6th ) students scored below the 50th percentile
3b. No data available to evidence lack of assistance beyond initial classroom instruction.
4a. According to teacher interviews, 80% of staff need additional professional development in using technology to enhance classroom instruction.
4b. Assessment samples, rubrics and lesson plan review does not always show evidence of state assessment expectations.
5a. The master schedule does not completely reflect a maximum of time on student achievement.
6a No evidence available
6b. Student work samples, assessment samples and classroom observations do not indicate frequent, quality authentic assessment opportunities at all grade levels.
7a. Student questionnaire and student survey shows evidence that students are not aware of proficient requirements.
7b. No school policy on analysis of student work samples to inform instruction and assess student progress.
8a. Documentation of student emotional, social, and physical problems are recorded with school administration.
9a. Teacher interviews and survey data show that there is a need for professional development addressing individual student learning styles.
10a. No exit criteria at each grade level.
10b. According to Effective Schools Survey, PTO, Parent/Teacher Conference sign-in sheets, all parents do not feel they are full active partners with the school. / 1a. Laurel Elementary staff will review and refine the aligned curriculum to identify and address overlaps and reduce gaps in student achievement by 50% during the 2002-04 biennium
1b. PD logs and teacher growth plans will reflect adequate training and support in all content areas.
1c. Individual RAP sheets, IEPs, and remediation plans will reflect efforts to reduce achievement gaps among free/reduced lunch participants and special needs students.
2a*. Staff will continue to implement and expand curriculum instructional programs, authentic assessment opportunities and reduce achievement gaps by 50% as measured by 2004 CATS.
2b*. All LES staff will develop and implement four (4) standards-based interdisciplinary units to address state learning goals and assessment expectations as measured by 2006 CATS.
2c. Standards based units, student work samples, and lesson plans will indicate full implementation of CP activities as monitored by the principal.
3a. Comparing the 2003 and 2006 support staff roster, the number of LES students who will have access to additional assistance beyond initial classroom instruction through various support programs and staff will increase by 30%.
4a. Classroom instructional staff trained in the implementation of technology in classroom instruction and the use of technology during instruction will increase as evidenced by lesson plans, student work samples and principal observation during the 2002-04 biennium.
4b. Student assessments and work samples will reflect state assessment expectations as evidenced by lesson plans, assessments, and student performance.
5a. The instructional schedule at LES will be amended to reflect maximum student time as evidenced by Master Schedule beginning 2004-05 school year.
6a. By January, 2005 the faculty will have documentation of providing a minimum of 5 authentic assessment opportunities per classroom.
6b. Student work samples will continue to be analyzed by staff at the end of each 9 week grading period to reflect standards/indicators, student learning styles and varied instructional strategies throughout the school year.
7a. According the 2004 CATS student questionnaire and the student survey, the number of students who understand proficiency requirements will increase by 10%.
7b. School committee will develop a school-wide policy to set standards for analysis of student work samples to guide instruction and assess student interim progress by Fall 2006.
8a. School administrators will continue to document services to students reflecting efforts to respond to emotional, social and physical problems.
9a. Professional development records will reflect teacher training in strategies to work with multiple intelligences and learning styles.
10a. Exit criteria will be developed by district committees for each grade level, sent to parents, and communicated clearly to faculty and students by 2006.
9a. Parent and community involvement will increase by 5% as measured by committee and parent activity rosters.
School Consolidated Plan • Component • Page 1 of 15 • Draft of 6/25/04
Objective 1: Professional development sessions to address instructional methods, performance standards, ways to meet individual student needs, and subject content will be scheduled throughout the Consolidated Plan time frame to refine curriculum standards to avoid unnecessary overlaps and harmful gaps in student learning during transitions from level to level.Activity / Measure / Responsible Person / Start Date / End Date / Cost / Fund Source
District sponsored training will be provided for staff to reviewand refine the curriculum, to expand curriculum maps to include core content/POS, essential questions, skills/knowledge, resources and assessment, revise course matrixes to eliminate overlaps and achievement gaps, and to develop exit criteria for all grade levels. / 1a, 1b 3a / Instructional Supervisor
Principal
Teachers / July 2004 / On- going / SEEK
PD Funds
Provide four ½ days of released time to analyze CATS data through the collaborative inquiry process, revise the school improvement plans, and to plan and reflect on assessment practices. / 1a, 1b, 3a, 3b / Instructional Supervisor
Certified Staff / Oct., Jan., and Feb. 2005 / Feb. 2005 / SEEK
Teachers will participate in training on “Differentiated Instruction” to address individual student needs and reduce achievement gaps. / PD Coordinator
DFP / Summer 2004 / June 2005 / SEEK
PD Funds
School committee will develop a school literacy plan K-6 to increase student reading achievement and promote a climate for reading success based on the PERKS document. / Principal
Teachers / Summer
2004 / June 2005 / SEEK
PD Funds
Staff will continue to develop standards based units based on policy that includes:
A. Timeline for rough drafts and final drafts
B. Feedback from principal
C. Implementation date
D. Follow-up procedures / 3b / Principal / July 2004 / On going / NA / SEEK
Teachers will have flexible professional development opportunities in on-line training such as KET, Annenburg, etc. / Principal / June 2005 / On-going / SEEK
Teachers will participate in content related PD as determined by the individual growth plan and have the opportunity to attend KDE, ASMP and ARSI summer academies, KEDC sponsored sessions, and state/national professional conferences. / 1a, 3b / Principal
PD Coordinator / Summer, 2004 / On going / PD Funds
Primary teachers will have the opportunity to participate in all district provided Reading First professional development trainings starting in summer of 2004 and will be encouraged to attend the Reading First Institutes in the summer of 2005. / District Reading First Coach / Summer 2004 / June
2012 / PD Funds
SEEK
Training will be provided to teachers on the use/implementation of new math adoption kits/materials. / 1a, 3a / Program Consultants / Summer 2004 / Summer 2005 / SEEK
Faculty will chose two (2) research based instructional practices to implement school wide each year. Faculty will implement strategies and provide feedback to colleagues during team planning. (job-embedded PD) / 1b, 3c, / Certified Staff
Principal / Fall, 2004 / On going / NA / SEEK
PD Funds
Teachers will have the opportunity to visit/observe reading instruction at KRP demonstration sites. / Principal / August 2004 / June 2006 / PD Funds
Teachers will participate in 3 hours of training in “Inclusion/Collaboration” strategies to address the goals of special needs students and to differentiate instruction for all students. / DOSE / August
2005 / June 2006 / SEEK
PD Funds
Teachers will participate in technology training determined by needs assessment that reflects the use of technology to increase student/teacher utilization in classroom instruction/projects. / Technology Staff / August 2004 / On-going / SEEK
PD Funds
Objective 2: LES certified staff will have time to examine student work, plan instructional strategies to continue and expand curriculum instructional programs, discuss assessment tasks and authentic assessment opportunities, and fully implement the consolidated plan activities to reflect real-life applications and student achievement needs.
Activity / Measure / Responsible Person / Start Date / End Date / Cost / Fund Source
LES staff will review, revise or develop policies addressing:
· Curriculum standards and assessment
· Portfolio scoring, analysis and instruction
· Evaluation of performance levels
· Instructional practices
· Homework
· Student assignment to classes and programs
· Staff time assignments
· ESS