Prince George’s County Public Schools

Name of School

MSDE ID Number

School Strategic Plan

2013-2014

Cynthia Best-Goring, Principal

LEA: Prince George’s County Public Schools -16

School ID Number: 01201

Telephone Number: (301)749-4290

School System Mission

Prince George‘s County Public Schools (PGCPS) is committed to preparing all students to graduate college or workforce ready. To achieve this goal, the system must accomplish the following: improve the quality of teaching in every classroom; equip teachers with the requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities; and ensure that all facets of the system support teachers in this goal.

1

Section II: School Improvement Team Signature Roster

School Name/ MSDE ID Number: / Oxon Hill Elementary School/01201 / Area: / 2 / Cluster / 7
Instructional Director:
Signature / Date
We, the undersigned members of the School Improvement Team, have reviewed the School Strategic Plan.

Please sign in blue ink only.

Print Name / Position / Grade Level/Content Area / Signature / Date
Cynthia Best-Goring / Principal / Principal
Wanda Manson / Parent, PTSO President / Parent, PTSO President
Deborah Beatty / Parent/CSEP Secretary / Parent/CSEP Secretary
Julieta Perez / Parent/Grade 6 teacher / Parent/Grade 6 teacher
Yolanda Jackson / Parent / Parent
Twanda Gay / Grandparent, PTSO Vice President / Grandparent, PTSO Vice President
Community/Business Partnerships:
  • WSSC
  • Welburn Management
  • The Harbor Interiors, LLC
: / Jim Neustadt, Director Comm. for WSSC
Judy Popov, Marketing Mgr.
Joseph Combs, CEO / Community/Business Partners
Jamea Hunter / Grade 1 teacher / Grade 1 teacher
Fallyn Glenn / Grade 2 teacher and PBIS Coach / Grade 2 teacher and PBIS coach
Yvonne Smallwood / Grade 2 CSEP teacher and Science Dept. Chair / Grade 2 CSEP teacher and Science Dept. Chair
Michelle Macanlalay / Grade 3 teacher and Co-Math Dept. Chair / Grade 3 teacher and Co-Math Dept. Chair
Robin Scott / Grade 4 CSEP teacher and Admin Intern / Grade 4 CSEP teacher and Admin Intern
Jamea Hunter / Grade 3 teacher / Grade 3 teacher
Andrew Dalton / Adaptive P.E. teacher / Adaptive P.E. teacher
Mary Alyce Bauer / Primary Resource Teacher / Grades K – 3
Florence Baitwa / CSEP Coordinator / CSEP Coordinator
Charlene Miott-Jones / Speech Pathologist / Speech Pathologist
Tia Coates / Literacy Coach / Grades 1 and 2

1

Section III: Executive Summary

Please review the guidelines pages 3-5 before writing the narrative for this section.

  1. School Vision and Mission

The mission of Oxon Hill Elementary School is to establish a caring learning community in which teachers will deliver rigorous instruction and students will reach and exceed their full potential for academic growth with mastery level results. We passionately believe that all students can and will achieve the rigorous educational standards when they are:

  • Made to feel important
  • Expected to do well
  • Engaged in challenging and meaningful work
  • Supported by a unified community of teachers, staff, parents, and other concerned and involved adults.

We are Committed to Rigorous Work, Exponential Excellence. We are the Roadrunners Who Get Results. (The highlighted section is the abbreviated version that is posted in the front lobby of our school and the main office).

This vision of equity and access is accomplished through:

  • An intense focus and application of the Institute for Learning’s Principles of Learning (Organizing for Effort, Clear Expectations, Accountable Talk, Socializing Intelligence, Academic Rigor in a Thinking Curriculum), and
  • Implementation of the Common Core Educational Standards.

Each instructional day, this related mission and vision will be seen as we, the Oxon Hill Elementary School Professional Learning Community, intentionally engage in:

  • Collaborative Planning and Data Inquiry/Analysis
  • Examination of Student Work
  • Integrated Technology
  • Teacher-Directed and Differentiated Small Group Instruction
  • Lesson Studies and Learning Walks
  • PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports)
  • Student Attendance and Parental Communication
  • Collaboration with our Business Partnerships – External Communities

Our daily, uninterrupted Reading/ Language Arts blocks are: Grades Kindergarten, 1 and 2 (135 minutes), grades 3-5 (105 minutes), and grade 6 (72 minutes). Our daily, uninterrupted math blocks are: Grades Kindergarten, 1 and 2 (75 minutes), grades 3-5 (90 minutes), and grade 6 (72 minutes). Our daily, uninterrupted Science blocks are: Grades Kindergarten, 1 and 2 (45 minutes), grades 3-5 (60 minutes) and grade 6 (72 minutes).

  1. Demographics
  2. School Location

Oxon Hill Elementary School (OHES) is a diverse comprehensive school located in Southern Prince George’s County. Oxon Hill was built in 1975 and was designed as an open space school created with 6 areas, each housing 4 classroom sites and 4 individual bathrooms and sinks. Each area has one exterior door leading to the playground or front walkway. We have a full size cafeteria and stage and a full size gymnasium.

  1. Student enrollment and subgroup information

Oxon Hill Elementary School’s current student enrollment for school year 2013 - 2014 is 314 (Kindergarten to grade 6). Students transported as part of the Comprehensive Special Education Program (CSEP) number 81, approximately 26% of the total population. These students’ disabilities range from moderate to severe. The breakdown by disability equates to: mentally retarded, Speech/Language Impaired, Emotionally Disturbed, Other Health Impaired, Learning Disabled , Autism Spectrum Disorder, Developmental Delay, and Multiply Disabled. Approximately 2 of our special education students are included in mainstream classrooms and 79 are in separate classes. We have a total of 3 students with 504 plans, several potential candidates are in the referral process. In addition, approximately eleven (11) students receive Resource Room instruction comprising one hundred (100) service hours through the pull-out or inclusive delivery models. As a result, teachers are proficient in adapting lessons to meet the needs of students on a variety of levels and subject matter in a single classroom setting. Instruction is presented in many environments as we have a continuum of services ranging from consultation with the teacher about a given student, inclusion with the general education setting with instructional groupings for reading and math, separate classes where students receive intensive services and instruction or a combination of settings. This is supported with teacher services by a speech pathologist, motor development specialist, and Crisis Intervention Resource Teacher. Itinerant services such as occupational therapy, physical therapy, vision, mobility, and hearing services are also available based on the student’s I.E.P.

Our subgroups are: African American (Not of Hispanic Origin) 194 students for 62%, White (Not of Hispanic Origin) 19 for 0.06%, Hispanic 69 for 22%, American Indian or Alaskan Native 2 for 0.006%,, and Asian Pacific Islander 27 for 0.08% of the total enrollment, ELL (English Language Learners) 53 for 0.17%, and FARMS (Free and Reduced Meals Students) 214 for 0.68%. All students have equal access to and are included in all activities in the school, as well as all Parent Teacher Organization (PTO) sponsored activities.

  1. Staff experience and certification

Since the result of concerted and aggressive interviewing/hiring efforts with the Department of Human Resources (April 2008 - September 2008), our staff continues to consist of twenty-seven (27) Highly Qualified teachers. Twenty-one (21) staff members (classroom/non-classroom based) have Advanced Professional Certification, eleven (11) have Standard Certification I, one (1) has Residential Teaching Program Certification, one (1) has Teach for America, one (1) has Teaching Fellows Program Certification. On our staff are 16.5 Special Education Teachers (2.5 Resource teachers and 14 classroom based teachers) with 6 holding Advanced Professional Certification, 5 with Standard Certification 1, 1 with Residential Teaching Program Certification, 1 with Teaching Fellows Program Certification. Of these, 12 have 0-3 years of experience, 17 with 4-10 years, 4 with 11-15 years, and 9 with 16 plus years. For school year 2012 - 2013, all 27 classroom teachers, grades K – 6 are highly qualified. All non-classroom based teaching staff are also highly qualified (i.e. resource teachers, media specialist, Reading Recovery teacher, Instrumental Music teacher, Reading Specialist, etc).

  1. School Improvement Status

Oxon HillElementary School is no longer designated as a “School in Improvement.” Per the approval of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Waiver for the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), requirements for Local Educational Agencies’ (LEA) support and oversight of school improvement initiatives for schools were changed for the 2012-2013 school year and subsequent years . The label “Schools In Improvement” no longer exists (thus cancelling all of the various categories and levels such as “Year 1”, “Year 2”, “Corrective Action”, “Restructuring Planning”, “Restructuring Implementation” and “Alternative Governance”. Additionally the term “Adequate Yearly Progress” no longer exists. Other requirements rescinded include the following:

1. Schools are no longer required to have portfolio notebooks and parent notification or choice letters.

2. Schools are no longer required to have Peer/School-to-School reviews of the School Improvement Plan.

Former Alternative Governance schools, specifically Oxon Hill Elementary, will not be completing Action Step Monitoring and Staffing documents for MSDE. Oxon HillElementary School understands that the completion and submission of a school improvement plan continues to be required as directed on the School Improvement Google Site. MSDE - approved Alternative Governance and Corrective Action strategies are to continue to be embedded in the current school improvement plan if they support the school’s current data. As a result of this waiver and the continued implementation of Oxon HillElementary School’s operating theme “Rigorous Work, Exponential Excellence,” Oxon HillElementary School successfully met all of its targeted AMOs on the 2012 MSA assessments in Reading and Mathematics.

The Superintendent has reconfigured the administrative zones into smaller areas to ensure equity and access to a high quality education for all students, provide support and oversight for schools in school improvement as well as more effectively actualize the Performance Management paradigm shift remain. Performance Management Analysis and Planning Process (PMAPP) is a core process in Performance Management that provides a framework for using data to implement effective improvement strategies. A professional development timeline is crucial to implementing the school improvement plan which aligns with the Alternative Governance plan and PMAPP metrics and goals. Quarterly monitoring tool details topics and tasks that will be monitored by quarterly PMAPP meetings in the school and the Area II office. Both documents are included in this plan.

  1. Environmental Scan (Climate for Learning)

Math / Reading / Science
Subgroup / 2013
MCI or N / 2014
AMO / Subgroup / 2013 MCI or N / 2014
AMO / Subgroup / 2013
MCI or N / 2014
AMO
All
LBCI – Low Band Confidence Inter-val / N: 61.10 P
LBCI: 63.7
Diff.= (2.6)
AMO = 72.7
Diff. = (11.6) / 75.40 / All / N: 62.20 P
LBCI: 63.1
Diff. = (0.9)
AMO: 72.2
Diff. (10) / 75.0 / All / N: 40.0
American Indian / n/a / American Indian / n/a / American Indian / n/a
Asian / MCI: 80.0P
LBCI =77.4
Diff. = 2.6
AMO = 94.0
Diff. = (14) / 94.60 / Asian / N: 66.70 P
LBCI: 76.5
Diff. = (9.8)
AMO: 93.6
Diff.: (26.9) / 94.2 / Asian / M: 60.0
Black/Afr. Amer. / N: 52.30P
LBCI = 54.1
Diff.= (1.8)
AMO = 65.4
Diff. = (13.1) / 68.90 / Black/Afr. Amer. / MCI: 56.2P
LBCI: 51.8
Diff.: 4.4
AMO: 63.3
Diff.: (7.1) / 66.90 / Black/Afr. Amer. / N: 31.7
Hispanic/Latino / M: 85.7 P
AMO = 82.8
Diff. = 2.9 / 84.60 / Hispanic/Latino / MCI: 85.7P
LBCI: 70.9
Diff: 14.8
AMO: 87.7
Diff.: (2) / 89.0 / Hispanic/Latino / M: 61.5
White / n/a / White / n/a / White / n/a
Two or More Races / n/a / Two or More Races / n/a / Two or More Races / n/a
SPED / MCI: 37.7
LBCI: 36.7
Diff: 1.0
AMO: 52.1
Diff. = (14.4) / 56.80 / SPED / MCI: 39.0
LBCI: 32.1
Diff: = 6.9
AMO: 47.5
Diff: (8.5) / 52.7 / SPED / N: 25.0

ELEMENTARY ONLY

Grade 1 DRA - June / Grade 2 SRI - June / Kindergarten Readiness - June
2013 Target / 2013 School % / 2013 Target / 2013
School % / 2013
Target / 2013
School %
84 % / 77% / 84%
SY2013 MSA AMO Target & Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Analysis
(Identify AMO targets MET via confidence Interval by using MCI & NOT MET by using N)
Math / Reading / Science
Subgroup / 2013
MCI or N / 2014
AMO / Subgroup / 2013 MCI or N / 2014
AMO / Subgroup / 2013
MCI or N / 2014
AMO
All
LBCI – Low Band Confidence Inter-val / N: 61.10 P
LBCI: 63.7
Diff.= (2.6)
AMO = 72.7
Diff. = (11.6) / 75.40 / All / N: 62.20 P
LBCI: 63.1
Diff. = (0.9)
AMO: 72.2
Diff. (10) / 75.0 / All / N: 40.0
American Indian / n/a / American Indian / n/a / American Indian / n/a
Asian / MCI: 80.0P
LBCI =77.4
Diff. = 2.6
AMO = 94.0
Diff. = (14) / 94.60 / Asian / N: 66.70 P
LBCI: 76.5
Diff. = (9.8)
AMO: 93.6
Diff.: (26.9) / 94.2 / Asian / M: 60.0
Black/Afr. Amer. / N: 52.30P
LBCI = 54.1
Diff.= (1.8)
AMO = 65.4
Diff. = (13.1) / 68.90 / Black/Afr. Amer. / MCI: 56.2P
LBCI: 51.8
Diff.: 4.4
AMO: 63.3
Diff.: (7.1) / 66.90 / Black/Afr. Amer. / N: 31.7
Hispanic/Latino / M: 85.7 P
AMO = 82.8
Diff. = 2.9 / 84.60 / Hispanic/Latino / MCI: 85.7P
LBCI: 70.9
Diff: 14.8
AMO: 87.7
Diff.: (2) / 89.0 / Hispanic/Latino / M: 61.5
White / n/a / White / n/a / White / n/a
Two or More Races / n/a / Two or More Races / n/a / Two or More Races / n/a
SPED / MCI: 37.7
LBCI: 36.7
Diff: 1.0
AMO: 52.1
Diff. = (14.4) / 56.80 / SPED / MCI: 39.0
LBCI: 32.1
Diff: = 6.9
AMO: 47.5
Diff: (8.5) / 52.7 / SPED / N: 25.0
ELEMENTARY ONLY
Grade 1 DRA - June / Grade 2 SRI – June / Kindergarten Readiness - June
2013 Target / 2013 School % / 2013 Target / 2013
School % / 2013
Target / 2013
School %
84 % / 77% / 84%
Indicated below are the trends I have noticed over the last 2 years and a brief discussion about Oxon Hill Elementary school’s performance in the following areas and the attributing factors.
  1. Reading/Social Studies: Disaggregated data for Special Ed vs. General Ed. generally shows Gen. Ed students significantly performing at the proficient/advanced levels with Special Ed. students showing either increased progress or maintaining. This year, despite the removal of the Mod tests and reduction of accommodations for Sp. Ed students, the data suggests that our school-wide emphasis on the Close analytical reading process and comparing/synthesizing complex informational text may have positively impacted student performance. The one exception was grade 4 CSEP that comprised 3 students from the CRI program, 2 students for whom the recommended CRI more appropriate placement for student learning growth was rejected, 1 student who spent most of the year not in school due to surgeries and home/hospital teaching, 1 foster child student who spent significant time between schools due to foster care legalities. The one anomaly was the Asian subgroup who dropped significantly in Reading from the standard performance range of 80.0 to 92.0 Prof/Adv to 66.7. Grades 3 and 5 General Ed and Special Ed performed significantly at the proficient/advanced levels.
Grade / Special Ed / General Ed / Special Ed. African-American / General Ed African-American
P / Adv / P / Adv / P / Adv / P / Adv
3 / 61.5 / - / 63.0 / 14.8 / 63.6 / - / 63.6 / 9.1
4 / 6.7 / - / 75.0 / 10.0 / 10.0 / - / 69.2 / 7.7
5 / 39.1 / 13.0 / 45.7 / 28.6 / 44.4 / 11.1 / 42.9 / 23.8
6 / 28.1 / - / 43.8 / 37.5 / 24.1 / - / 45.0 / 25.0
  1. Math: Disaggregated data for Special Ed vs. General Ed. generally shows Gen. Ed students significantly performing at the proficient/advanced levels with Special Ed. students showing either increased progress or maintaining. School-wide fidelity of use with First-in-Math (classroom instruction, computer lab and home) continues to positively impact student performance. The precipitous drop in student math performance for grade 5 general ed to 46.6 % proficient and Special Ed. from 55.40 in 2012 to 37.7% proficient was shocking. Once again, the contributing factors aforementioned for reading as it pertains to grade 4 are similar for math as it pertains to grade 4. The Asian subgroup performance maintained at significantly high levels of proficient/advanced (80.0%) for math; unlike it’s puzzling drop in reading.
Grade / Special Ed / General Ed / Special Ed. African-American / General Ed African-American
P / Adv / P / Adv / P / Adv / P / Adv
3 / 69.2 / 7.7 / 63.0 / 18.5 / 63.6 / 9.1 / 63.6 / 13.6
4 / 28.6 / - / 45.0 / 55.0 / - / - / 61.5 / 38.5
5 / 21.7 / - / 60.0 / - / 16.7 / - / 52.4 / -
6 / 27.3 / - / 59.4 / 15.6 / 23.3 / - / 60.0 / -
  1. Science: Focused attention on delivery of science instruction using inquiry, mobile lab and STEM centric lessons have begun to positively impact student performance in science. Three years ago, student performance for all students was below 30% proficient. MSA 2013 results for all students was 42.4% proficient. Special Ed students climbed from 0% proficient three years ago to 20.7% proficient. General Ed students climbed from 37 % proficient to 53.3% proficient.
  1. Special Education: See aforementioned data for reading, math and science.
  1. ESOL: Our ESOL students continue to meet their AMO targets in reading and math at high levels of proficient and advanced. MSA 2013 showed student performance in reading at 88.90% proficient/advanced. This subgroup’s targeted AMO for 2013 was 85.30 for reading and 82.80 for math.
Based on the data and the KPI targets for Student Achievement, the Principal’s plan is to target the following for the required, 2 Student Learning Objectives:
  1. Reading and subgroup African-American males (African-American males interface with Special Ed and FARMS)
  2. Reading and subgroup Grade 2 students: Aggregate, General Ed., CSEP, ELL.
After reviewing the data, the Big Rock focus areas for school year 2013 – 2014 will center around High Student Achievement and Highly Effective Teaching.
  1. Collaborative Grade Level team lesson planning for full implementation of Common Core standards ( PGCPS google site for curriculum and instruction, Study Island (online transdisciplinary reading intervention site, aligned with Common Core, for home and school use), myon website that contains complex literary and informational texts by grade level and lexile level) UDL, etc)
  2. Using Assessment in Instruction: specific to learning task rubric criteria for students to self-assess and monitor their progress in the expected quality of work and for teachers to monitor student learning and provide timely, specific to rubric feedback to students for improvement in work)
  3. Professional Learning (facilitated by PDLTs and Principal) for building teacher capacity
  • Book Study: 10 Things Writers Need to Know by Jeff Anderson
  • Book Study: Notice and Note – Strategies for Close Reading by Kylene Beers, Robert E. Probst (staying alert for the signposts that inculcate a habit of paying close attention, a readiness to slow down and reflect, and a willingness to hear and explore other responses to a text)
  • Engaging students in complex text, extracting and employing evidence, building and applying knowledge
  • Digging deeper for classroom implementation of CC standards in reading and math: choosing close reading worthy texts, asking cognitively challenging that mirror PARCC prototypes EBSR, TECR, PCR and facilitating comparative thinking, comparative reading, comparative writing
  • Full day CC collaborative planning per each grade level with the outcome of having unpacked the CC standards for current unit of study and designed a CC Unit lesson plan for implementation
  1. Observing and Analyzing teacher and student performance: Learning Walks, Lesson Studies, Informal and Formal Observations with timely feedback to teachers and students
  2. Examination and analysis of student work
  3. PMAPP Data Inquiry/Analysis of student performance on county quarterly unit tests in reading, math, county SRI tests administered three times for grades 3 – 6 (September, January, May) and two times for grade 2 (December and May); student progress on SLOs.

Disciplinary Leadership characterized by shared authority, accountability and decision-making will be employed to accomplish the aforementioned instructional plan and is delineated in the indicated-below chart.