MADISONVILLE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SOARING TOWARD EXCELLENCE
Gayle G. Sloan
Superintendent
Elizabeth P. Williams
PRINCIPAL
Frances S. Shea
ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL
October 2004
q For schools in School Improvement, and for schools with CSRP models, I hereby certify that this plan was developed with the assistance of a District Assistance Team in collaboration with the School Improvement Team and/or School Support Team, as applicable.
q I hereby certify that this plan was designed to improve student achievement, with input from all stakeholders.
q Assure that the school level personnel, including subgroup representatives responsible for implementation of this plan, have collaborated in the writing of the plan.
q I hereby certify that this plan has all of the following components as required in Bulletin 741:
q A statement of the school's beliefs, vision, and mission
q A comprehensive needs assessment, which includes the following quantitative and qualitative data:
q Student academic performances on standardized achievement tests (both CRT, NRT) and performance/authentic assessment disaggregated by grade
vs. content vs. exceptionality
q Demographic indicators of the community and school to include socioeconomic factors
q School human and material resource summary, to include teacher demographic indicators and capital outlay factors
q Interviews with stakeholders: principals, teachers, students, parents
q Student and teacher focus groups
q Questionnaires with stakeholders (principals, teachers, students, parents) measuring conceptual domains outlined in school effectiveness/reform research
q Classroom observations
q Measurable objectives and benchmarks
q Effective scientifically-based methods and strategies
q Parental and community involvement activities
q Professional development component aligned with assessed needs
q External technical support and assistance
q Evaluation strategies
q Coordination of resources and analysis of school budget (possible redirection of funds)
q Action plan with timelines and specific activities
q I further certify that the information contained in this assurance is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
______
Superintendent's signature Principal's signature
______
District Assistance Team Leader Chairperson School Improvement Team
______
______
District Assistance Team Members
ASSURANCE OF FACULTY REVIEW OF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The following faculty and staff members have reviewed the School Improvement Plan and have discussed their part in implementing it.
NAME TITLE/PISITIO SIGNATURE
Alfred, Ruby Teacher______
Armond, Linda Para ______
Arnold, Cynthia RHT______
Arroyo, Marci Teacher______
Bateman, Martha Teacher______
Belou, Paula Speech______
Bradburn, Beth Para______
Byrd, John Teacher______
Chelena, Sandra Teacher______
Conway, Sandee Teacher______
Danenhower, Sarah Teacher______
Dela Ossa, Judith Teacher______
Dupuis, Michelle Teacher______
Fenerty, Retta Teacher______
Ferrara, Frank Teacher______
Frederic, Cheryl Talented Drama______
Frederick, Lee Teacher______
Hesson, Vicki Counselor______
Kuerner, Ron Teacher______
Landry, Ernie Teacher______
LaPlace, Cherie Teacher______
Lyons, Marcia Teacher______
Marion, Clara Teacher______
Mendow, Cindy Librarian______
Meyer, Tammy Teacher______
Miller, Vicki Teacher______
Nelson, Patti Teacher______
Ostendorf, Jennifer Teacher______
Patton, Rita Teacher______
Peschlow, Gail Teacher______
Purvis, Christy Teacher______
Rome, Rene Teacher______
Saltalmachia, Kathryn Teacher______
Seleski, Laurie Teacher______
Shea, Frances Assistant Principal______
Smith, Carol Para ______
Smither, Stacy Teacher______
Taylor, JoEllen Teacher______
Thurlow, Linda Talented Art______
Tisdale, Tiffany Teacher______
Williams, Audrey Para______
Williams, Elizabeth Principal______
Williams, Yvette Teacher______
VISION STATEMENT
Every teacher will be accountable for every child, every day – in order for all students to succeed.
MISSION STATEMENT
Every Child, Every Day - Soaring Toward Excellence, the Eagle Way
STATEMENT OF BELIEFS
The faculty and staff of Madisonville Junior High School, working with the community, will prepare children for life in a rapidly changing and complex society.
· We are to educate the whole child – academically, physically, socially, and emotionally – in a
safe, supportive, disciplined learning environment.
· Students learn in different ways and at different rates, which require a variety of teaching strategies,
special services, programs, and resources.
· Students learn best when teachers’ expectations are high, and responsibility, self-discipline, and
problem solving are fostered through developmentally appropriate learning activities.
· A positive self-image enhances learning, increases motivation to learn, and encourages successful
interpersonal relationships necessary for success in a complex world.
· Educational success requires active involvement and participation from the student with the support
of parents, community, staff, and peers.
SCHOOL DEMOGRAPHICS/CHARACTERISTICS
A
DM / / Total # / # Certified / # Expected Vacancies / # in LA Principal Internship/Induction Program for SY 04 - 05
Principals
/2
/ 2 / 0 / 0T
EA
C
H
E
R
S
* / SchoolNon-Title I /
Title I
/ Total % in School / % Change from 2003Schoolwide / Targeted Asst.
HIGHLY QUALIFIED**
/ GeneralEd / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / Gen
Ed / Special
Ed
#Highly Qualifies Core Academic Teachers (subtotal)
/ 17 / 4 / 89.5% / 44.4% / +31.2% / +
44.4%
NOT HIGHLY QUALIFIED
/ GeneralEd / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed
Non-Standard
*** (TAT) (OFAT) (TEP) (EP) / 0 / 2 / 0% / 22.2% / -
4.2% / +
22.2%
Other / 2 / 3 / 10.5% / 33.3% / -
27% / -
26.7%
Subtotal Not Highly Qualified
/2
/5
/ / / / /10.5%
/55.6%
/-
31.2% /-
4.4%TOTAL TEACHERS (Highly Qualified and Not Highly Qualified)
/ 19 / 9 / 100% / 100%P
A
R
A
S /
HIGHLY QUALIFIED**
/ GeneralEd / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed
# Highly Qualified Paras / 1 / 1 / 100% / 25% / 100% / 25%
NOT HIGHLY QUALIFIED / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed / General
Ed / Special
Ed
# Not Highly Qualified Paras / 0 / 3 / 0% / 75% / 0% / -25%
Total Paraprofessionals /
1
/4
/ / / / / 100% / 100% / /* Teachers include all teaching in core academic courses (English/Reading/Language Arts; Math; Science; Civics/Government; Economics; Arts; History; Geography)
** Highly Qualified: Has met all requirements as specified by the LA Board of Elementary and Secondary Education’s definition of “Highly Qualified” under NCLB adopted June 19, 2003.
*** Temporary Authority to Teach (TAT); Out-of-Field Authorization to Teach (OFAT); Temporary Employment Permit (TEP); Emergency Permit
School SupportNumber of Related Service and Support Personnel and Areas (i.e., Speech Pathologist, Social Worker): 5
School Improvement Team Members/Position: E. Williams, Principal; F. Shea AP; C. Arnold, RHT; S Danenhower & M Arroyo, 4th; P Nelson, 5th; V. Miller, 6tth, M. Dupuis 6th/7th, K Saltalmachia S.E.
District Assistance Team Leader and Contact #
(if applicable): N/A / Distinguished Educator and Contact # (if applicable):
N/A
Parish Homeless Liaison: (Contact Parish Title I Supervisor to get further information) Ann Preseley, Title I Coordinator / Parish Homeless Liaison’s Contact #:
985 898-3360
Learning-Intensive Networking Communities for Success (LINCS) Information (if applicable)
Regional LINCS Coordinator: / Content Leader(s): / Content Area of Focus for School:
High Schools That Work (HSTW) Site Coordinator and Contact #: / Making Middle Grades Work (MMGW) Site Coordinator and Contact #:
Leadership Team Members/Position at the School: S. Danenhower, 4th; P. Nelson, 5th; M. Dupuis, 6th/English; M. Bateman,7th/8th Math; R. Patton, 7th/8th Reading; L. Fred, 7th/8th Science; D. Lindsey, 7th Social Studies; J. Del LaOssa, Special Education
Federal/State Instructional Programs and/or Initiatives
(Place a check in the status area for each program implemented at your school)
Program List: (Include during and after school programs) / Currently Using / Proposed Program / Deleted Program
21st Century Community Learning Centers
Big Buddy
Career to Work
DARE / X
Early Reading First
HIPPY
INTECH
INTECH 2 Science
INTECH Social Studies
K-3 Reading/Math Initiative
La GEAR-UP
Federal/State Instructional Programs and/or Initiatives
(Place a check in the status area for each program implemented at your school)
Program List: (Include during and after school programs) / Currently Using / Proposed Program / Deleted Program
LaSIP
LEAD TECH
Learning Intensive Networking Communities for Success (LINCS)
LINCS/High Schools That Work (HSTW)
LINCS/Making Middle Grades Work (MMGW)
Louisiana Virtual School
Making Middle Grades Work
SAGE
School Tech
School to Work
School wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Support / X
The Louisiana Literacy Corps
The Multisensory Structured Language Program / X
The Strategic Instruction Model (SIM) / X
Other: Accelerated Reader / X
List the Supplemental Educational Services provided for your students (Title I schools, if applicable):
List the Distance Learning (i.e., web-based, satellite, etc.) courses provided for your students:
School Policies
Policies / Yes / No
Discipline Policy / X
Security Procedures (Metal detectors, etc.) / X
Safe and Drug-Free Prevention Activities / X
Student Code of Conduct / X
Crisis Management (Emergency/evacuation plan) / X
School Partnerships: (Place the name of each partner in the space provided.)
University: / Southeastern Louisiana University, University of New Orleans, SUNO
Technical Institute:
Feeder School(s): / Madisonville Elementary, Mandeville High School, Covington High School
Community:
Business/Industry: / Piggly Wiggly, Dominos Pizza, Fun Land, Winn Dixie, Sicily’s Pizza
Private Grants: / Brown Foundation, Washington St. Tammany REA
Other: / PTA Grant, Louisiana Decentralized Arts Grant
Student Information
List the number of students in each area:
Total at School / # of grade 4 and above / Students w/ Disabilities / Gifted and Talented / 504 / Option III / LEP / Homeless / Migrant
446 / 446 / 84 / 51 / 11 / 0 / 5 / 0 / 0
Number of Households Served by School:
Subgroups by Ethnicity
American Indian / Asian/Pacific Islander / Black / Hispanic / White
2 / 3 / 47 / 4 / 388
Poverty Profile
# of Free/Reduced Lunch Students:
144 / Percent of Free/Revduced Lunch Students: 30.9%
Note 1. Additional community demographics and capital outlay data are located in the appendices.
DATA COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT
SUMMARY REPORT
Strengths and challenges were rank-ordered by evaluating the magnitude of the evidence in conjunction with its association with student achievement. Exogenous factors were eliminated from these results; however, they were included during the analytical phase as a contextual reference.
STRENGTHS / DATA SOURCE1. Writing and Conventions of Language, ELA Standards 2 & 3 / LEAP/IOWA Data, Teacher Focus Groups,
2. Geometry & Patterns, Relations, & Functions Standards 4 & 6 / LEAP/IOWA Data, Classroom Assessment,
3. Instructional support for student learning. / NSSE Survey, LEAP tutoring results, Observations (TLS)
4. Life Science / LEAP Data
5. Accommodating Individual Differences & Higher Order Thinking / Teaching & Learning Snapshots, other observations, teacher surveys
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE / DATA SOURCE
Strength 1. 4th and 8th grade LEAP increase in proficiency in ELA Stand. 2 & 3. / Testing Data – Math and ELA
Strength 2. 4th & 8th grade LEAP increase in proficiency in Math Stand. 4 & 6. / Teacher Focus Groups and Classroom Assessment
Strength 3. Spring 2004 Intervention, Remediation, and Acceleration programs showed improvement from predicted scores. / Spring 2004 LEAP scores
Strength 4. Classroom administrative observations / Teaching & Learning Snapshots
Strength 5. 4th & 8th grade average of 74% proficiency in LEAP Science Standard 3. / Testing Data - Science
CHALLENGES / DATA SOURCE
1. Read, Analyze, and Respond to Literature, ELA Standard 6 / Test Data
2. Patterns, Relations and Functions, Math St. 6 & Measurement St. 3
(although St. 6 showed improvement, it is still considered a challenge until all sub-groups show improvement, also targeted on parish plan) / Test Data, Classroom Assessment
Parish Strategic Plan
3. Thinking and Reasoning Skills / NSSE Survey, Observations (TLS)
4. Science as Inquiry St. 1 & Science & the Environment St. 5 / Testing Data - Science
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE / DATA SOURCE
1. ELA Standard 6, Math Standard 6 & 3, and Science Standard 1 & 5 showed the most need for improvement. / Test Data, Faculty Needs Assessment
2. Students are unable to accurately and effectively communicate their understanding of these ELA and Math concepts / Classroom Assessment, Observations
3. Students have difficulty gathering and using information effectively, classifying and organizing information, supporting inferences and justifying conclusions appropriately to their context and audience. / NSSE Survey of Goals
4. Science St. 1 –lowest proficiency (4th gr.) –St. 5 – lowest proficiency (8th gr.) / Testing Data - Science
Note 1. Supporting evidence included both quantitative and qualitative data using a standardized triangulation method specifically designed for District Assistance Teams and School Improvement Teams. The supporting evidence does not imply causal relationships.
MADISONVILLE JR. HIGH SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2004-2005 GOAL 1: ELA
GOAL 1: To improve student proficiency in students among those content standards (with emphasis on Standard #6- read, analyze, and respond to literature)associated with ELA. / School SPS 2004: 102.8 School GT 2005: 104.8OBJECTIVE 1:
1a. (La. Accountability) To increase by no less than 10% , the percentage of students scoring mastery or higher as measured by the ELA component of the standards-based assessment. (19.5% in 2004 to 21.5% in 2005)
1b. (NCLB Accountability) To increase by no less than 10%, the percentage scoring proficient on the ELA component of the standards-based assessment. (74.7% in 2004 to 82.2% in 2005)
ring proficient on the ELA component of the standards-based assessment
Black 53.3% to 58.6%, White 74.7% to 82.2%, ED 62.8% to 69.1%, SWD 28.6% to 47.4% / SCIENTIFICALLY BASED RESEARCH STRATEGY:
Stimulating higher order thinking at the appropriate grade levels
GOAL I ACTION PLAN
EXPECTED IMPACT
(Observable Change) /ACTIVITIES
/PERSONS
RESPONSIBLE / TARGET AUDIENCE and TIMELINE / 1 FUNDING SOURCES2 OBJECT CODE
3 COST / GOAL 1: ELA
IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS
(Benchmarks)
1 / 2 / 3
Students will be able to use higher order thinking strategies to:
recognize types of literature
(ELA-6-E3);
retell/ paraphrase a story (ELA-6-E3);
identify analogies (ELA-2-M6);
recognize and interpret figurative language
(ELA-6-E1);
recognize types of culture through literature (ELA-6-E1);
develop various modes of writing (ELA-2-M4) / Students will
1. Identify types of literature across the curriculum
2. Use multi-media to evaluate text using fact and opinion to support contextual learning
3. Compare and contrast specific elements and ideas in more than 2 passages of the same or different genres
4. Use Go Charts to develop all levels of thinking through the cognitive domain
5. Write interpretative/ reflective responses to stories, poems, and plays using text-based support;
6. Ccmpare and contrast tales from different cultures and recognize influences of cultures on each other
7. Identify, practice, and implement 6 traits of writing
Emphasis will be placed on:
ELA-6-E3;
ELA-2-M6
ELA-6-E1
ELA-2-M4 / RTL:
Danenhower
ELA teachers
LEAP tutors
RHT:
C. Arnold-
Librarian:
C. Mendow
T. Tisdale / All students-
Oct. - March
Effectiveness checks via grade group meetings the weeks of Oct.18, Jan. 19, March 14, and May 16
Implementation checks; November thru March / Instruct.
LEAP / 4180
100 / $ 400
$18,000 / IMPLEMENTATION:
Using school specific snapshots, the administration will observe each class at least 3 times giving feedback to teachers.
.
EFFECTIVENESS:
At grade level meetings, teachers will review, on a quarterly basis, selected student portfolios and rubrics to plan for future instruction and to assess student comprehension and response to text.
EXPECTED IMPACT