Monte Vista Middle School
Tracy Unified School District
CDS: 39-75499-6042840
Principal: Susan O’Hara-Jones
Single Plan for Student Achievement
2013/14
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic performance of all students to the level of performance goals established under the California Academic Performance Index. California Education Code sections 41507, 41572, and 64001 and the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) require each school to consolidate all school plans for programs funded through ConApp, and ESEA Program Improvement into the SPSA.
For additional information on school programs and how you may become involved locally, please contact the following person:
Contact Person: Susan O’Hara-Jones
Position: Principal
Telephone Number: 209-830-3340
E-mail Address:
The School Site Council approved this revision of the SPSA on: October 11, 2013
The District Governing Board approved this revision of the SPSA on: enter date
SECTION I: SCHOOL PROFILE
A. Description of any Significant Changes
1. Description of School Demographic composition
Source / 2011/12 / 2012/13 / 2013/14Enrollment (#) / Oct CBEDS / 871 / 841 / 876
AFDC/Free & Reduced (%) / Oct CBEDS / 77% / 65% / 73.17%
English Learners R-30 (%) / Oct CBEDS / 28% / 242/29.8% / 283/31.1%
Fluent English (FEP/R-FEP) (%) / Oct CBEDS / 21% / 205/25.3% / 210/22.5%
Students redesignated to FEP (#) / Oct CBEDS / 27 / 40/16.3% / 187/20.5%
Ethnicity: White (%) / Oct CBEDS / 13% / 19% / 16%
Hispanic(%) / Oct CBEDS / 60% / 50% / 47%
African American(%) / Oct CBEDS / 10% / 9% / 7%
Asian(%) / Oct CBEDS / 13% / 9% / 8%
2. Description of Staff Characteristics/Changes in Staffing
2012/13 / 2013/14number of classroom teachers / 35 / 35
number and type of support certificated staff (including special education staff) / RSP=2
SDC=3 / RSP=2
SDC=3
number of classified staff / 23 / 23
· Number/percent of NCLB highly qualified teachers / 90% / 100%
· Number/percent of teachers with EL Certification / 100% / 100%
3. Addition or Removal of categorical programs or feeder programs (check one)
X No significant changes
Significant changes
4.Changes in District Core Programs (check one)
X No significant changes
Significant changes
5.Changes in Facilities (check one)
X No significant changes
Significant changes
B. Programs included in this Plan
Check the boxfor each state and federal categorical program in which the school participates and, if applicable, enter amounts allocated. (The plan must describe the activities to be conducted at the school for each of the state and federal categorical program in which the school participates. If the school receives funding, then the school plan budget must include the proposed expenditures.)
State Programs / AllocationEIA: Economic Impact Aid/ English Learner Program
Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic proficiency of English learners. / $ 145,580
Gifted and Talented Education
Purpose: To support instructional programs for identified gifted and talented students.
Other State or Local funds (site allocation and MAA)(and AVID) / $ 33,425
Total amount of state categorical funds allocated to this school / $ 157,585
Federal Programs under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) / Allocation
Title I, Part A: Schoolwide Program
Purpose: Upgrade the entire educational program of eligible schools in high poverty areas / $ 191,964
Title II, Part A: Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting
Purpose: Improve and increase the number of highly qualified teachers and principals / $ 6,000
Other Federal Funds (list and describe[1]) / $
Total amount of federal categorical funds allocated to this school / $ 197,964
Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to this school / $ 380,569
SECTION II: Presentation and Analysis of Data
A. Analysis of Current Instructional Program - Academic Program Survey
The following evaluation is based on the Academic Program Survey and provides a rubric rating on a four point scale (1-4) for each area as well as a brief narrative assessment for each area. The rubric is as follows:
(1) = Minimally – rarely used/found
(2) = Partially – sometimes used/found
(3) = Substantially – in regular use
(4) = Fully - in regular use in all classrooms and followed completely
ELEMENT / 2012Rating / 2013 Rating / Comments
EPC #1 Instructional Program
1.1 / 4 / 4 / All students have textbooks which are State-approved for English Language Arts.
1.2 / 4 / 4 / MVMS uses State-approved intervention textbooks for any student receiving English Language Development services.
1.3 / 4 / 4 / MVMS uses State-approved intervention textbooks for any student receiving Reading intervention services.
1.4 / 4 / 4 / All students have textbooks which are State-approved for Math instruction.
1.5 / 4 / 4 / MVMS uses State-approved intervention textbooks for any student receiving Math intervention services.
EPC #2 Instructional Time
2.1 / 4 / 4 / Reading/Language Arts classrooms have the appropriate time allocations for students.
2.2 / 3 / 3 / 8th grade Reading/Language Arts intervention classes have the appropriate time allocations for students.
2.3 / 4 / 4 / All English Language Development classrooms have the appropriate time allocations for students.
2.4 / 4 / 4 / 8th grade Reading/Language Arts intervention classes have the appropriate time allocations for ELD students
2.5 / 4 / 4 / Math classes have the appropriate time allocations for students.
2.6 / 1 / 1 / Math intervention classes are provided to 8th graders only at this time.
2.7 / 3 / 3 / 8th grade Math intervention classes have the appropriate time allocations for students
EPC #3 Lesson Pacing Schedule
3.1 / 4 / 4 / All teachers use a common sequence of grade-level instruction and common assessments for ELA and ELD classes.
3.2 / 4 / 4 / All teachers use a common sequence of grade-level instruction and common assessments for Math classes.
3.3 HS / n/a
EPC #4 Professional Development for School Administrators
4.1 / 4 / 4 / The district provides the principal and vice-principal(s) with professional development focused on leadership, support and monitoring needed for the full implementation of ELA and ELD classes
4.2 / 4 / 4 / The district provides the principal and vice-principal(s) with professional development focused on leadership, support and monitoring needed for the full implementation of Math classes
4.3 ES / n/a
EPC #5 Credentialed Teachers and Teacher Prof. Development Opportunity
5.1 / 3 / 4 / All classrooms have highly qualified teachers.
5.2 / 4 / 4 / All teachers of RLA/ELD and intensive intervention are engaged in instructional materials-based professional development.
5.3 / 4 / 4 / All teachers of mathematics, Algebra I, and Algebra Readiness are engaged in instructional materials-based professional development.
EPC #6 On-Going Instructional Assistance and Support for Teachers
6.1 / 4 / 4 / TUSD and MVMS provide on-going assistance to support teachers in effective classroom instruction for ELA.
6.2 / 4 / 4 / TUSD and MVMS provide on-going assistance to support teachers in effective classroom instruction for math.
EPC #7 Student Achievement Monitoring System
7.1 / 4 / 4 / The district provides and supports an easily accessible electronic data management system, and the school is uniformly administering, scoring, analyzing, and using student achievement data from entry-level and/or diagnostic assessments, progress monitoring assessments (including frequent formative and curriculum-embedded assessments), and summative assessments, on a timely basis for ELA and ELD.
7.2 / 4 / 4 / The district provides and supports an easily accessible electronic data management system, and the school is uniformly administering, scoring, analyzing, and using student achievement data from entry-level and/or diagnostic assessments, progress monitoring assessments (including frequent formative and curriculum-embedded assessments), and summative assessments, on a timely basis for Math.
EPC #8 Teacher Collaboration by Gr. Level/Subject Matter
8.1 / 4 / 4 / Under the principal’s direction, teachers collaborate weekly around assessment results in order to use data to direct effective instruction in ELA.
8.2 / 4 / 4 / Under the principal’s direction, teachers collaborate weekly around assessment results in order to use data to direct effective instruction in Math.
EPC #9 Fiscal Support
9.1 / 4 / 4 / All ELA goals in the school plan are fully funded with general and categorical monies.
9.2 / 4 / 4 / All Math goals in the school plan are fully funded with general and categorical monies.
Analysis of Data – Current Instructional Program (APS):
All students participate in a rigorous, relevant, and coherent standards-based curriculum that supports the achievement of academic standards. In addition, long-term English Learners are provided with an intervention period during the school day to help them increase their language proficiency. However, only 8th grade students have an intervention program for Math during the school day.Academic Performance:
1a. AYP - Adequate Yearly Progress: Schools will meet or exceed their AYP goal OR demonstrate an increase of 5% in percent of students scoring proficient for schools meeting their AYP Targets
Group(NCLB target)
ES/MS
HS / 2011
% Prof.
ELA
(³ 67.6%)
(³ 66.7%) / 2012
% Prof.
ELA
(³ 78.4%)
(³ 77.8%) / 2013
% Prof.
ELA
(³ 89.2%)
(³ 89.9%) / AYP Goal Met? / 5% growth Goal Met? / 2011
% Prof.
Math
(³ 68.5%)
(³ 66.1%) / 2012
% Prof.
Math
(³ 79.0%)
(³ 77.4%) / 2013
% Prof.
Math
(³ 89.5%)
(³ 88.7%) / AYP Goal Met? / 5% growth Goal Met?
School Total / 47.5 / 48.6 / 41.6 / N / 36.2 / 33.2 / 34.8 / N
Sub-group #1
Hispanic or Latino / 42.0 / 41.5 / 34.9 / N / 28.7 / 27.9 / 29.5 / N
Sub-Group #2
White not Hispanic / 53.3 / 59.6 / 54.2 / N / 31.4 / 37.5 / 36.4 / N
Sub-Group #3
Socioecon. Disad. / 40.9 / 43.1 / 35.3 / N / 29.1 / 29.0 / 29.2 / N
Sub-group #4
ELL students / 33.3 / 34.0 / 23.7 / N / 24.5 / 27.3 / 23.7 / N
Sub-group #5
Stu. w/ Disabilities / 36.4 / 32.7 / 33.7 / N / 30.2 / 21.8 / 23.8 / N
Achievement Gap Data
Longitudinal AYP 2008 – 2013 English Language Arts
ELA / target / School / White / Afr.Amer. / Hispanic / Low SES / EL / Stu w/DisES/HS / AYP / AYP / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap
2008 / 35.2/33.4 / 36.9 / 51.4 / 29.9 / 21.5 / 29.9 / 21.5 / 31.0 / 20.4 / 27.0 / 24.4 / 27.7 / 5.2
2009 / 46.0/44.5 / 42.7 / 54.5 / 47.7 / 34.7 / 38.2 / 32.9 / 32.5
2010 / 56.8/55.6 / 52.1 / 60 / 44.4 / 48.1 / 46.2 / 42.7 / 38
2011 / 67.6/66.7 / 47.5 / 53.3 / 44.4 / 42.0 / 40.9 / 33.3 / 36.4
2012 / 78.4/77.8 / 48.6 / 59.6 / na / 41.5 / 43.1 / 34.0 / 32.7
2013 / 89.2/89.9 / 41.6 / 54.2 / 31.3 / 22.9 / 34.9 / 19.3 / 35.3 / 15.9 / 23.7 / 30.5 / 33.7 / 20.5
Change / -7.0 / -5.4 / -6.6 / -7.8 / -10.3 / +1.0
The Achievement Gap is calculated by subtracting the subgroup AYP from the White subgroup AYP.
Longitudinal AYP 2008 – 2013 Math
The Achievement Gap is calculated by subtracting the subgroup AYP from the White subgroup AYP.
Math / target / School / White / Afr.Amer. / Hispanic / Low SES / EL / Stu w/DisES/HS / AYP / AYP / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap / AYP / Gap
2008 / 37.0/32.2 / 20.1 / 25.7 / 13.4 / 12.3 / 15.5 / 10.2 / 16.7 / 9.0 / 16.7 / 8.0 / 20.5 / 5.2
2009 / 47.5/43.5 / 30.2 / 34.3 / 26.2 / 26.2 / 27.3 / 27.3 / 32.5
2010 / 58.0/54.8 / 36.7 / 38.6 / 29.2 / 33.4 / 33.4 / 33.4 / 35.2
2011 / 68.5/66.1 / 32.6 / 31.4 / 24.7 / 28.7 / 29.1 / 29.1 / 30.2
2012 / 79.0/77.4 / 33.2 / 37.5 / na / 27.9 / 29.1 / 29.1 / 21.8
2013 / 89.5/88.7 / 34.8 / 36.4 / 26.2 / 10.2 / 29.5 / 6.9 / 29.2 / 7.2 / 23.7 / 12.7 / 23.8 / 12.6
Change / +1.6 / -1.1 / +1.6 / +0.1 / -5.4 / +2.0
1b. AYP - Adequate Yearly Progress Schools will have a 95% participation rate in state testing
Group / % TestedELA 2013 / Target Met
Yes or No / % Tested
Math 2013 / Target Met
Yes or No
School Total / 100 / YES / 100 / YES
Subgroup #1
Hispanic / 100 / YES / 100 / YES
Subgroup #2
White Not Hispanic / 100 / YES / 100 / YES
Subgroup #3
Socio-economically Disadvantaged / 100 / YES / 100 / YES
Subgroup #4
English Learners / 100 / YES / 100 / YES
Sub-group #5
Stu. w/ Disabilities / 100 / YES / 100 / YES
Program Improvement Status for 2013/14: Not in PI __X__ in PI year 5
Written Notification of Program Improvement Status was mailed to parents on September 11, 2013
Analysis of Data – Student Achievement - AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress):