Single Plans for Student Achievement

Transcripción

Single Plan for Student Achievement
Brandon Elementary School
2015-16
A Resource for the School Site Council
Part II: The Single Plan for Student
Achievement
School: Brandon Elementary School
District: Goleta Union School District
County-District School (CDS) Code: 42-69195-6067110
Principal: Felicia Roggero
Date of this revision: 12/1/15
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic
performance of all students. 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 the 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: Felicia Roggero
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number: 805.571.3770
Address:
195 Brandon Drive, Goleta, CA 93117
E-mail Address: [email protected]
The District Governing Board approved this revision of the SPSA on January 13, 2016.
Table of Contents
II. Template for the Single Plan for Student Achievement
Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance
1
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student
Performance
7
Form C: Programs Included in This Plan
9
Form D: School Site Council Membership
12
Form E: Recommendations and Assurances
13
Form G: School Site Council Membership
15
Parent/Guardian Involvement Policy
17
The School Site Council has analyzed the academic performance of all student groups and has considered the effectiveness of key
elements of the instructional program for students failing to meet academic performance index and adequate yearly progress growth targets.
As a result, it has adopted the following school goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of students not
yet meeting state standards:
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between student
subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL #1: 100% of Brandon students will increase their reading proficiency scores as measured by the DIBELS assessment, the Basic
Phonics Skills Test (BPST), site-based comprehension assessments, SBAC interim assessments, and SBAC scores
What data did you use to form this goal?
DIBELS data: Students at CORE
K-71% (LNF)
1st-30% (LNF)
2nd-70% (ORF)
3rd-70% (ORF)
4th-74 (ORF)
5th-77% (ORF)
6th-78% (ORF)
●
●
●
BPST 1st-3rd
1st:
Adams/Sparre: 36.9%
Slauenwhite: 35.6%
Smart: 41.2%
2nd:
Cattaneo: 75.4 %
Hernandez: 61.5%
Smart: 66.7%
3rd:
Craig: 94.8%
Hetrick: 88.1%
Jacobs: 83.4%
SBAC scores: Students met or exceeded standards on the
Claim #1-reading
4th-66%
5th-71%
6th-71%
1
What were the findings from the analysis of this
data?
How will the school evaluate the
progress of this goal?
All grades levels scored in the 70% for CORE. First ●
grade will need support within the classroom with
certifcated tutors, as well as Tier 2 intervention with
researched based programs (SIPPS, Reads Naturally, ●
Lexia)
In classrooms K-4, we have push in and pull out
●
certificated tutor support to provide intervention in
identified areas.
We are still lacking in reading comprehension
●
benchmark data. We have created site based
assessments in order to monitor progress until the
district has developed benchmark assessments for ELA.
We are currently entering data onto our new data
systems in order to have a more effective way to
monitor progress throughout the year. This is a new tool
for all sites. In the interim, we will continue to use the
data sources as described.
Assessment data in the following areas:
fluency, reading comprehension, and
basic phonics skills.
Assessment data from the SBAC interim
assessments in ELA.
Data teams meetings five times a year to
discuss progress of students scoring in
the strategic or intensive area.
Progress monitoring six times or more per
year for students scoring in the strategic
or intensive area.
Where can a budget plan of the
proposed expenditures for this goal be
found?
There are no expenditures for this
goal.
STRATEGY: During 2015-16, Brandon will implement a school-wide assessment program to determine the needs of struggling
readers and English Language Learners as measured by benchmark assessments. We will assess students three-five times per
year to determine baseline scores and benchmark scores for the other two trimesters in order to monitor progress.
Action/Date
In August/September 2015, we
will do baseline assessments of
all students K-6th with the
DIBELS and BPST assessment.
Using the baseline data and data
from year end, we will determine
students in need of intervention
in specific areas of decoding,
reading fluency, or
comprehension.
Teachers will use differentiated
instructional strategies to provide
effective Tier 1 intervention.
Intervention programs such as
Reads Naturally to build fluency
and comprehension will be used.
SIPPS and Lexia will be
introduced this year to support a
systematic, sequential, researchbased differentiated intervention
support for those who need Tier
2 intervention.
Person(s) Responsible
Task/Date
Classroom teachers with
the support of the
Learning Center teacher
and Certificated Tutors
Assess all students K-6 for baseline DIBELS and BPST
scores in August and September to determine which
students will need additional support to reach
benchmark scores.
Instructional specialists
(IS) to provide support
with differentiation
Principal to provide
resources and
collaboration time for
classroom teachers.
Determine which students will be in need of Tier 2
intervention.
Learning Center teacher and certificated tutors will
provide targeted support with small group instruction as
determined by assessments. The intervention team will
use research-based programs such as SIPPS at three
levels based on the diagnostic tests within the program.
Teachers will meet within a data teams structure every
6-8 weeks to discuss progress of students and evaluate
whether the interventions are successful or if alternate
strategies and materials are needed. Differentiated
strategies will be discussed. Change in groupings will
be discussed based on student progress.
Support from the Instructional Specialists (IS) and
district Professional Learning communities that provide
support with professional development
Staff and grade level meetings focused on instructional
strategies to support student learning. Strategies
include close reading, TDQ’s, RAD responses, reading
strategies (Notice and Note), student Goal setting
SMART goals, Growth Mindset.
2
Cost and Funding
Source
(Itemize for Each
Source)
Cost of Learning Center
Teacher (provided at
District Expense) and
certificated tutor support
to reduce class size
Use of data teams
meetings and grade level
weekly planning to
discuss student progress
and determine effective
teaching practices.
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between
student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL #2: In math, 100% of Brandon students will show math growth as measured by unit assessments in Bridges and CPM,
Factswise (math fact fluency), SBAC interim assessments, and SBAC scores.
SBAC baseline data 2014-15:
4th grade-54% met or exceeded standards
Fact fluency baseline data:
K-Goal 1+
Cordero-Rabe: 11%
LaPlante/Paloczi: 6%
Frederick: 10%
Nuzzo: 0%
1st grade-Goal 1, both addition and subtraction, in
September and October
Adams/Sparre: 18% to 68%
Smart: 20% to 40%
Slauenwhite: 27% to 45%
2nd gradeCattaneo: 50%
Hernandez: 50%
Smart: 64%
3rd gradeJacobs, Hetrick, Craig: 50%
4th gradeMuhr and Herrera: 25%
5th gradeHusak: 70%
Lisle and Kornahrens: 60%
6th gradeIzmirian-70%
Hughes-68%
3
What were the findings from the analysis of
this data?
Based on this data, our teachers need to focus on
providing a coherent, common core standards aligned
math program throughout the year. With the adoption of
the new curriculum, we hope to show more coherency
in our instruction. We will also continue to use
resources like Factswise to support fact fluency on a
consistent basis, especially in grades K-3. We need to
incorporate differentiated strategies to support students
on both ends of the spectrum-intervention and
acceleration.
●
●
●
●
Formative assessments from the new
math curriculum (Bridges and CPM)
Unit assessments in the new math
curriculum (Bridges and CPM)
SBAC interim assessments
Factswise fluency assessments
STRATEGIES: During 2015-16, Brandon will implement a system for monitoring progress of all students in math fact fluency as
well as unit instruction in the new math curriculum to determine need for intervention and targeted support of specific students.
Action/Date
In October and November, we will
collect baseline data of all
students using Factswise and
grade level assessments.
Using this data, unit assessments,
and interim assessments,
students will receive intervention
in targeted areas based on their
number sense, fact fluency and
unit interventions (Bridges/CPM).
Teachers will use researched
based instructional strategies
such as Factswise as well as
implement the new math program
to fidelity.
Person(s)
Responsible
Classroom
Teachers, Learning
Center Teacher
and Certificated
Tutors
Task/Date
Assess all students K-6th for baseline Factswise goals at
each trimester.
Determine which students are in need of support based on
fact fluency and curriculum assessments.
Cost and Funding Source
(Itemize for Each Source)
None
Learning Center groups and intervention groups (support
provided by certificated tutors with ongoing collaboration
from classroom teachers) will be determined by data.
Students will be assessed every 6-8 weeks with progress
being shared during our data teams meetings.
Certificated tutors will provide math intervention to grades
K-6 at least 2-3 times per week in addition to differentiated
classroom strategies within the classroom setting provided
by the homeroom teacher.
$12,375 from LCAP and
General Ed funding
LEA GOAL: Goal 3: The District will meet or exceed CELDT requirements for the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives
(AMAOs) 1, 2, and 3 during the 2015-16 school year.
SCHOOL GOAL #3
English Learner Goal. 80% of Brandon students will demonstrate language fluency in order to meet CELDT requirements as defined by
the LEA Plan. We will use the CELDT assessments as well as the ADEPT assessments to monitor growth.
4
What were the findings from the
analysis of this data?
We looked at data from the 2014-15 CELDT and
from ADEPT formative assessments to determine
the needs of our students in order to meet language
proficiency.
When looking at the CELDT scores, Brandon’s
students are making progress in achieving
language fluency. We met all AMAO’s targets
last year. The majority of our students have
moved into the EA/A level (54%). Of those
students, 32% scored in the intermediate level
on reading on the CELDT assessment. When
looking at their fluency scores, 30 students met
fluency which tells us that we need to work on
reading comprehension strategies and
academic vocabulary with our EA/A EL’s.
We will assess the students up to three
times a year to determine areas of need
and monitor progress based on the
ADEPT. The CELDT test will be
administered in the Fall. These results will
be used to monitor additional language
needs going into the new year. We will
monitor reading comprehension using sitebased measures three times a year for
grades 2nd-6th grade.
79% of our 5th/6th graders in the EA/A level were
RFEP. (reclassified)
142 English Language Learner’s
Beginning-7%
EI-11%
I-28%
EA/A-54%
24/76 of our EA/A at Intermediate on the reading
portion of the CELDT=32%
30/76 of our EA/A scored in the CORE range on the
Dibels
proposed expenditures for this goal
be found?
School Site budget
Budget plan
STRATEGY: During 2015-16, teachers will provide systematic language development instruction. They will also embed opportunities
for students to use academic language across content areas during general education classroom time.
5
Action/Date
Assess students using the ADEPT in
September, December 2015, and May 2016
English Language Development instruction
will be provided to our English Language
Learners 30 minutes daily. Teachers will
group students by proficiency levels and
provide systematic instruction using the
Systematic ELD training and materials
provided by the district.
6
Classroom teachers and Learning
Center teacher
Certificated tutors, learning center
teachers, and classroom teachers
provide ongoing feedback to
homeroom teachers regarding student
progress throughout the year. This
progress is discussed at grade level
meetings as well as data team
meetings.
Task/Date
th
ADEPT testing of students in K-6 at
least twice a year to monitor growth
and provide placement information for
their language groups.
Cost of three certificated tutors to
support reduction in student group
size in order to provide appropriate
instruction at each proficiency level.
Professional development for new
teachers in Systematic English
Language Development. Site staff
meetings to share effective strategies
for teaching English Language
Learners.
Cost and Funding
Source
(Itemize for Each
Source)
Certificated tutors from LCAP
and Title III funds.
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student Performance
School Goal #1:
100% of Brandon students will increase their reading proficiency scores as measured by the
DIBELS assessment, the Basic Phonics Skills Test (BPST), site-based comprehension
assessments, SBAC interim assessments, and SBAC scores
School Goal #2:
In math, 100% of Brandon students will show math growth as measured by unit assessments in
Bridges and CPM, Factswise (math fact fluency), SBAC interim assessments, and SBAC scores.
School Goal #3:
English Learner Goal. 80% of Brandon students will demonstrate language fluency in order to
meet CELDT requirements as defined by the LEA Plan. We will use the CELDT assessments as
well as the ADEPT assessments to monitor growth.
Centralized administrative services are provided to facilitate implementation of categorical
programs. Centralized services assist the school to attain achievement objectives for every
student. These services include:
Actions to be Taken to Reach
1
This Goal
Consider all appropriate
dimensions (e.g., Teaching and
Learning, Staffing, and
Professional Development)
Start Date
2
Completion
Date
Proposed Expenditures
Estimated
Cost
Funding
Source
(itemize for
each
source)
Community Liaisons
August 2015May 2016
Provide support and
translations, as needed, to
homeless students and
families in need of school and
community services.
$182,291
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Professional Development
August 2015May 2016
Provided teachers and
principals with research-based
professional development that
supports the District’s plans for
improving student
achievement.
$9,503
Title I
$50,431
Title I &
LCAP
Private School Set Aside
Identification and assessment
of English Learners
1
August 2015May 2016
Provide in-service to
administer the California
English Language
Development Test and primary
language assessment;
administer test
See Appendix A: Chart of Legal Specifics for the Single Plan for Student Achievement for content required by each
program or funding source supporting this goal.
2
List the date an action will be taken, or will begin, and the date it will be completed.
7
Translation of NCLB
documents, communication to
parents, and notification of
student progress
August 2015May 2016
Required translation of
materials, parent letters, and
parent conferences
$35,000
Title I &
LCAP
District parent and staff
meetings to advise
implementation of
Compensatory Education
Programs and Programs for
English Learners
August 2015May 2016
meeting materials
$1,632
Title I
Coordination of reviews
regarding program compliance
with sate regulations
August 2015Ongoing
Multi-funded central office
administration to coordinate
categorical programs
$1,000
Title I
School Choice, and
Supplemental Services
August 2015May 2016
Required- set aside for
Program Improvement
$85,523
Title I
8
Form C: Programs Included in this Plan
State Programs
⌧
Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) – Base Grant
Purpose: To provide flexibility in the use of state and local funds
by LEAs and schools
LCFF – Supplemental Grant (LCAP)
Purpose: To provide a supplemental grant equal to 20 percent of
the adjusted LCFF base grant for targeted disadvantaged
students
LCFF – Concentration Grant
Purpose: To provide an additional concentration grant equal to
50 percent of the adjusted LCFF base grant for targeted students
exceeding 55 percent of an LEA’s enrollment
California School Age Families Education (Carryover only)
Purpose: Assist expectant and parenting students to succeed in
school
Economic Impact Aid/State Compensatory Education (EIASCE) (Carryover only)
Purpose: Help educationally disadvantaged students succeed in
the regular program
Economic Impact Aid/Limited English Proficient (EIA-LEP)
(Carryover only)
Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic proficiency of
English learners
Allocation
$
$50,600
$0
$0
$
$0
Peer Assistance and Review (Carryover only)
Purpose: Assist teachers through coaching and mentoring
$0
Professional Development Block Grant (Carryover only)
Purpose: Attract, train, and retain classroom personnel to
improve student performance in core curriculum areas
$0
Pupil Retention Block Grant (Carryover only)
Purpose: Prevent students from dropping out of school
$0
Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA)
Purpose: Funds are available for use in performing various
specified measures to improve academic instruction and pupil
academic achievement
School and Library Improvement Program Block Grant
(Carryover only)
Purpose: Improve library and other school programs
$0
$0
School Safety and Violence Prevention Act (Carryover only)
Purpose: Increase school safety
$0
Tobacco-Use Prevention Education
Purpose: Eliminate tobacco use among students
$0
List and Describe Other State or Local Funds (e.g., Career
and Technical Education [CTE], etc.)
$0
Total amount of state categorical funds allocated to this school
9
$50,600
Consolidated in
the SWP
Federal Programs
Allocation
Title I, Part A: Allocation
Purpose: To improve basic programs operated by local
educational agencies (LEAs)
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
Title I, Part A: Parental Involvement (if
applicable under Section 1118[a][3][c] of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act)
Purpose: Ensure that parents have
information they need to make well-informed
choices for their children, more effectively
$
share responsibility with their children’s
schools, and help schools develop effective
and successful academic programs (this is a
reservation from the total Title I, Part A
allocation).
For Program Improvement Schools only:
Title I, Part A Program Improvement (PI)
Professional Development (10 percent
minimum reservation from the Title I, Part A
reservation for schools in PI Year 1 and 2)
$
Title II, Part A: Improving Teacher Quality
Purpose: Improve and increase the number of highly qualified
teachers and principals
⌧
⌧
3
$0
Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for Limited-EnglishProficient (LEP) Students
Purpose: Supplement language instruction to help LEP students
attain English proficiency and meet academic performance
standards
$ 18,311
Title VI, Part B: Rural Education Achievement Program
Purpose: Provide flexibility in the use of ESEA funds to eligible
LEAs
$0
For School Improvement Schools only: School
Improvement Grant (SIG)
Purpose: to address the needs of schools in improvement,
corrective action, and restructuring to improve student
achievement
$0
Other federal funds Title III
$1,166
Other federal funds (list and describe)
$0
Title III funds may
not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP3
Title III funds are not a school level allocation even if allocated by the district to a school site. The LEA is responsible for
fiscal reporting and monitoring and cannot delegate their authority to a site at which the program is being implemented.
If Title III funds are spent at a school site, they must be used for the purposes of Title III and only for those students the
LEA has identified for services. For more information please contact the Language Policy and Leadership Office at 916319-0845.
10
$0
Total amount of federal categorical funds allocated to this school
$ 19,477
Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to this
school
$ 70,077
Note: Other Title I-supported activities that are not shown on this page may be included in the SPSA Action
Plan.
11
California Education Code describes the required composition of the School Site Council (SSC). The SSC shall
be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by teachers at the school; other school
personnel selected by other school personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by
such parents; and, in secondary schools, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.4 The current make-up
of the SSC is as follows:
Names of Members
Felicia Roggero
Principal
Classroom
Teacher
Parent or
Community
Member
⌧
Susan Hughes
⌧
Jennifer Adams
⌧
⌧
Jana Mora
Brian Holtz
⌧
Susan Salcido
⌧
Grace Chavez Moreno
⌧
Nancy Vasquez
⌧
Heather Gardner
⌧
Laura Wood
⌧
Amy Marston
⌧
Numbers of members in each category
4
Other
School
Staff
EC Section 52852
12
1
2
1
7
Secondary
Student
13
14
Form G: Single Plan for Student Achievement Annual Evaluation
Pursuant to California Education Code Section 64001(g), the School Site Council (SSC) must
evaluate at least annually the effectiveness of planned activities. In the cycle of continuous
improvement of student performance, evaluation of the results of goals will provide data to inform and
guide subsequent plans.
Plan Implementation
● Teachers attended the DIBELS assessment training in the Fall in order to be able to
administer and analyze fluency data. Teachers also were given site-based
comprehension text-dependent questions to monitor comprehension for each trimester.
● Certificated tutor support for English Language Development classes for all English
Language Learners has been fully implemented. Brandon has three certificated tutors 5
days a week to support each grade level’s 30 minutes of ELD instruction. We have also
added two additional certificated tutors to support math intervention and combo
classroom and kindergarten support.
● Teachers attended Professional Development sessions focused on the new math
curriculum: Bridges for K-5 and CPM for 6th grade. We have used staff meetings,
grade level planning and Instructional Specialist support to provide opportunities for
learning and collaboration.
● This year, we have four teachers who have been trained in SIPPS to provide Tier 2
intervention. We will use Lexia as an intervention program. Our 1st-6th grade teachers
were trained on how to use the program. Additional subscriptions were purchased so
more students have access to the Lexia program. Hard data on student progress in the
areas of Math and ELA were limited and not presently aligned with CCSS. This was an
area of need last year.
● Currently, we have no coherent data collection process except for the DIBELS and we
only have CFA’s in writing which gives us limited information. We are still working as a
district to provide more benchmark assessment data. This continues to be an area of
need.
Strategies and Activities
● In the areas of math and ELA, the use of certificated tutor support for the instruction of
ELD as well as small group instruction provided students opportunities to work in small
differentiated groups.
● Providing opportunities for teachers to collaborate regularly on site during release time,
data teams, and staff meetings, as well as attending professional development to inform
practice also proved to be an effective strategy.
● Based on the analysis of this practice, we recommend continuing our goals in ELA and
Math with the addition of adding systems for collecting data to monitor student progress
in a more coherent and consistent way. We have added an assessment timeline that
the site will follow throughout the year. We have increased our data team meetings to
five per year in order to provide additional opportunities to discuss progress monitoring
data.
15
Involvement/Governance
● Plan was drafted at the Site Council meeting on November 2014.
● The drafted plan was presented at the ELAC meeting and input was requested.
Questions clarifying our current ELD program were asked, but there were no changes to
the plan as a result of that meeting.
● The Plan was approved by the GUSD School Board in April.
● We will be writing the plan earlier in the year so as to allow for better monitoring of the
plan’s effectiveness by the SSC and other stakeholder groups throughout the year.
Outcomes
Goals for 2014-15
1. 80% of Brandon students will show grade level proficiency as determined by the DIBELS
assessment (K-6th) and benchmark reading comprehension assessments (2nd-6th
grade).
2. In math, 80% of Brandon students will show grade level proficiency at fact fluency based
on their appropriate grade level Factswise goal.
3. 80% of Brandon students will demonstrate language fluency in order to meet
CELDT requirements as defined by the LEA plan. We will use CELDT assessments to monitor growth.
Goals #1, #3 were met.
● We did not meet the second goal in that not all grades used Factwise to the fidelity of
the program in upper grades. We needed to provide more training for grades 5th and
6th in order to have Factswise be a more effective strategy/program. We also did not
monitor fact fluency on a trimester basis which would have been a more accurate picture
of growth throughout the year.
Plan Priorities
● Our priorities this past year was to ensure a focus on reading fluency as it connects to
reading comprehension. Teachers consistently monitored progress at least three times
a year. Our four data team meetings throughout the year to discuss progress supported
this goal in making sure we provided intervention for those in need. We will continue
with this goal so we can apply these skills as we take the SBAC for the second year.
● To meet Goal #3, we spent major expenditures for certificated tutors in order for grade
levels to provide instruction at identified proficiency levels for our second language
learners. We made sure that teachers had enough teacher support so students could
work at their language levels for daily instruction.
● We will continue to focus on fact fluency as well as math intervention for the following
year.
16
BRANDON SCHOOL
PARENT/GUARDIAN INVOLVEMENT
POLICY
Brandon School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
education of children are an integral part of achieving academic success and
developing capable citizens, and that schools and parents/guardians must work
together as knowledgeable partners to educate all students effectively. In order to
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Brandon School is committed to;
•
•
including parents/guardians as partners in the education of their children;
establishing and maintaining effective two-way communication with all
parents/guardians at both school and district office levels;
•
encouraging the development of programs to help parents/guardians acquire
parenting skills;
providing parents/guardians with the information and techniques to enable
them to assist their children with learning at home;
developing strategies and programmatic structures to enable
parents/guardians to directly participate in their children's education
through:
- involvement in classroom activities
- school advisory groups and parent/guardian support organizations;
fostering an environment at Brandon School that welcomes parents/guardians
as active participants in their children's education;
recognizing differences in the needs and interests between schools and
between parents/guardians in each school.
•
•
•
•
REGULATIONS/PROCEDURES
I.
MEETINGS AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS
A. School Site Meetings and Committees
1. Brandon School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
and parent/guardian organization meetings where the school's
philosophy, mission, opportunities for adult participation, the
core curriculum, and supplemental instruction are discussed.
2. Every effort shall be made to insure that the composition of
school committees reflects the population characteristics of
Brandon School.
17
3. School Site Council members shall vote on the school site plan
and categorical budget. All parents/guardians are welcome to
give input at meetings of the Council.
4. To build school and parent capacity for strong parental
involvement, and to support a partnership among school,
parents, and community to improve student achievement, the
School Site council will work in collaboration with school staff
to develop a schedule of parent educational activities that
include understanding:
• State standards for academic content and achievement
• State and school academic assessments and alternate
assessments
• Requirements for Title I and other categorical programs
• Ways that parents can monitor their child’s progress
• How to work as collaborative partners with educators
• The school-parent compact
Other topics of interest, to be considered annually by School Site
Council, may include:
• Family literacy
• Uses of technology
• How school personnel and parents can work as partners
5. Parents, school staff, district office, and external presenters will
be sought to provide the necessary parent involvement
workshops.
6. The list and schedule of parent involvement trainings will be
printed in school newsletters annually.
7. School Site Council will address funding needs for parent
involvement activities as appropriate through the site
categorical budget.
8. Parent/guardian organizations, such as the Parent-Teacher
Association, will be encouraged to provide opportunities for
adult education and participation.
9. Every effort shall be made to provide opportunities for adult
education and participation.
10. Accessibility and opportunities for parents with limited English
proficiency, disabilities, or parents of migrant students will be
offered through actions such as arranging school meetings at
varied times, in-home conference, phone contacts, and outreach
services through the school’s community liaison.
18
11. Translations will be provided as required by law.
B. Meetings with Certificated Personnel
1. Parents/guardians or teacher-initiated conferences to discuss
student progress and/or methods to improve student
achievement shall be a part of the educational program at
Brandon School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
parents/guardians with gaining access to community and
support services for families and children.
C. School Site Activities
1. Parents/guardians shall have reasonable opportunities to
observe and volunteer in classrooms in accordance with school
visitation procedures.
2. Activities designed to help parents understand school programs
and services shall be a part of school presentations.
II.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND
HOME
A. Parents/guardians who are unable to attend school events,
activities, or meetings shall be encouraged to telephone and/or
write school for information.
B. Materials such as school newsletters, classroom newsletters, and
general announcements that provide parents/guardians with
information about Brandon School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. Brandon School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
Expectations to parents/guardians at the beginning of each school
year and to the parents/guardians of new students after the start of
the school year. The handbook shall contain information about
current programs, criteria for pupil participation in these programs,
and other information designed to acquaint parents/guardians
with school regulations and procedures.
D. A letter explaining the purposes, organization, and services
provided by the Title I program shall be distributed annually to the
parents/ guardians of eligible students prior to participation in the
program.
19
ESCUELA DE BRANDON
PARTICIPACIÓN DE LOS PADRES/TUTORES
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Brandon reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
educación de sus niños es una parte integral del logro de éxito académico y del desarrollo
de ciudadanos capaces; y que las escuelas y los padres/tutores deben trabajar juntos como
socios informados para educar a todos los estudiantes con efectividad. Para asegurar la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Brandon se dedica a:
• incluir a los padres/tutores como socios en la educación de sus hijos;
• establecer y mantener la comunicación mutua y efectiva con todos los
padres/tutores tanto al nivel de la escuela como al nivel de la oficina del distrito;
• fomentar la creación de programas para ayudar a los padres/tutores a desarrollar
sus habilidades de crianza;
• proveer a padres/tutores de la información y las técnicas necesarias para ayudar a
sus hijos a aprender en casa;
• desarrollar las estrategias y la infraestructura del programa escolar para que los
padres/tutores puedan participar directamente en la educación de sus hijos a
través de:
- participar en actividades del salón de clase
- involucrarse en grupos para dar consejos a la escuela y en organizaciones de
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Brandon que acoge a los padres/tutores
como participantes activos en la educación de sus hijos;
• reconocer las necesidades y intereses distintos de cada escuela particular y de
cada padre/tutor dentro de la escuela.
REGLAMENTO/PROCEDIMIENTOS
I. REUNIONES Y PROGRAMAS ESPECIALES
A. Reuniones y comités en la escuela
1. La escuela de Brandon celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas, noches
de orientación para padres y reuniones de organizaciones para
padres/tutores en cuales se discuten la filosofía, misión,
oportunidades para participación adulta, el curso básico de estudios
y la instrucción suplementaria de la escuela.
20
2. Se hará todo esfuerzo posible para asegurar que la composición de
los comités escolares refleja bien las características de la población de
la escuela de Brandon.
3. Miembros del Consejo asesor escolar votarán en el plan escolar y el
presupuesto categórico. Se les invita a todos los padres y tutores a
contribuir sus opiniones en las reuniones del Consejo.
4. Para fomentar la capacidad de la escuela y de los padres para la
buena participación paternal, y para apoyar la sociedad entre
escuela, padres y comunidad para mejorar el rendimiento
estudiantil, el Consejo asesor escolar trabajará en colaboración con el
personal de la escuela para desarrollar un calendario de actividades
educativas para padres. Estas actividades les ayudarán a entender:
• Los estándares estatales para el contenido y aprovechamiento
académicos
• Las evaluaciones académicas del estado y de la escuela, y
evaluaciones alternativas
• Requisitos para programas del Título I y otros programas
categóricos
• Maneras en que los padres pueden seguir el progreso de sus
hijos.
• Cómo trabajar en colaboración con los maestros como socios
• El compromiso entre escuela y padres.
Otros temas de interés, para consideración anual por el Consejo
asesor escolar, pueden incluir:
• La alfabetización familiar
• Usos de la tecnología
• Cómo el personal escolar y los padres pueden trabajar como
socios
5. Se buscará a padres, personal de la escuela, la oficina del distrito y
presentadores de afuera para proveer de los talleres necesarios de
participación paternal.
6. La lista y el horario de los entrenamientos en la participación
paternal se incluirán en los boletines escolares cada año.
7. El Consejo asesor escolar se dirigirá a las necesidades monetarias de
las actividades de participación paternal como sea apropiado a través
del presupuesto categórico de la escuela.
8. Se animará a las organizaciones de padres y tutores, tal como la
Asociación de Padres y Maestros (PTA), a proveer de oportunidades
para la educación y participación adultas.
21
9. Se esforzará para proveer de oportunidades para la educación y
participación de los adultos.
10. Se ofrecerá la accesibilidad y oportunidades para padres con dominio
limitado del inglés, con incapacidades o padres de estudiantes
migratorios a través de medidas como la programación de reuniones
escolares en horas variadas, conferencias en casa, comunicación por
teléfono y servicios para alcanzar e involucrar a los padres por la
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de Brandon.
11. Se proveerá de traducciones según la ley.
B. Reuniones con personal certificado
1. Las conferencias para conversar sobre el avance estudiantil y/o
métodos para mejorar el aprovechamiento estudiantil, sean pedidas
por los padres/tutores o por los maestros, serán parte del programa
educativo en la escuela de Brandon.
2. Durante las conferencias, el personal escolar puede ayudar a los
padres/tutores a acceder los servicios comunitarios y auxiliares para
familias y niños.
C. Actividades en la escuela
1. Los padres/tutores tendrán oportunidades razonables para observar
y trabajar como voluntarios en los salones según los procedimientos
para visitas de la escuela.
2. Las presentaciones escolares deberán incluir actividades diseñadas
para ayudar a los padres a entender los programas y servicios
escolares.
II. COMUNICACIÓN ESCRITA ENTRE ESCUELA Y CASA
A. Se animará a los padres/tutores que no pueden asistir a eventos,
actividades o reuniones escolares a comunicarse con la escuela por
teléfono o por escrito para recibir información.
B. Materiales tal como los boletines escolares, boletines del salón y
anuncios generales que proveen a los padres/tutores de información
sobre la escuela de Brandon se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Brandon distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
Expectativas del nivel de grado a los padres/tutores al principio de cada
año escolar y a los padres/tutores de nuevos alumnos cuando entran
después del principio del año escolar. La guía contendrá información
22
sobre los programas en curso, los criterios para la participación
estudiantil en estos programas y otra información diseñada para
familiarizar a los padres/tutores con los reglamentos y procedimientos
de la escuela.
D. Se distribuirá anualmente una carta que les explica los motivos, la
organización y los servicios provistos por el programa de Título I a los
padres/tutores de estudiantes elegibles antes de que participen en el
programa.
23
EC
S
EL CAMINO SCHOOL
2015-2016
Achievement
School: El Camino Elementary
County-District School (CDS) Code: 6045405
Principal: Liz Barnitz
Date of this revision: December 3, 2015
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the
academic performance of all students. 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 the
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:
Liz Barnitz
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
(805) 692-5574
Address:
5020 San Simeon Dr. Santa Barbara, CA 93111
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
II. Single Plan for Student Achievement
1
Performance
6
7
10
11
12
16
elements of the instructional program for students failing to meet academic performance index and adequate yearly progress growth
targets. As a result, it has adopted the following school goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of
students not yet meeting state standards:
LEA GOAL: LCAP GOAL 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement
between student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL:
1. 100% of El Camino Students in grades 3-6 will grow 10% in the areas of: 1) Problem Solving and Communicating Reasoning in Math; and 2)
Reading and Writing ELA as measured by a comparison of Spring 2015 and Spring 2016 results of the CAASPP.
2. The percentage of students meeting projected growth targets in Math and Reading as measured by a comparison of Spring 2015 and Spring
2016 MAP RIT scores are as follows:
• 81% of kindergarten students will meet projected growth targets in Reading, and 76% will meet projected growth targets in Math
• 66% of 1st grade students will meet projected growth targets in Reading and 75% will meet projected growth targets in Math
• 64% of 2nd grade students will meet projected growth targets in Reading and 56% will meet projected growth targets in Math
• 64% of 3rd grade students will meet projected growth targets in Reading and 61% will meet projected growth targets in Math
• 62% of 4th grade students will meet projected growth targets in Reading and 68% will meet projected growth targets in Math
• 61% of 5th and 6th grade students will meet projected growth targets in Reading and 69% will meet projected growth targets in Math
this data?
Computer-based formative assessment
program Measures of Academic Progress
A comparison of the percentage of students
meeting MAP growth level targets per grade
level revealed an overall 56% of students
meeting projected growth targets in Reading
and 48% of students meeting projected
growth targets in Math. CAASSP 2015
baseline data shows
(MAP) data from Fall 2015 and CASSPP
Spring 2016 and 2015 Spring baseline
scores
How will the school evaluate the progress
of this goal?
Tri-annual MAP testing (September 2015, January
2016, and May 2016) and summative Spring 2016
CAASSP results
STRATEGY: During the 2015-2016 school year, El Camino will provide differentiated instruction to all students in the classroom, and
additional intervention and acceleration to students with identified learning needs.
1
Action/Date
Students will take MAP
test three times yearly in
the computer lab
September, January and
May.
Task/Date
Computer
Teacher/Tech Support
Principal
Classroom Teachers
Students
During two weeks of September, January and May,
the computer lab will be used for MAP testing. The
computer teacher will create the schedule and
manage the sessions, troubleshooting technology
issues if they arise. Classroom teachers will
proctor the tests. The principal will oversee the
scheduling and sessions.
Measures of Academic
Progress (MAP)
$3, 262.00
Microsoft
Teachers will meet in grade levels after the testing
windows to review and analyze MAP reports of
student data. Twice yearly the site will pay for
grade level half-day release to analyze data, and
discuss and determine ways to adjust instruction
accordingly.
Substitutes for bi-annual
Teacher Release Time for
Data analysis/PLCs
$2,000.00
Funding: Title 1, LCAP
Biannual Grade level
MAP PLCs
Student needs, both in
acceleration and
intervention, will be
identified and addressed
Provide targeted reading,
writing, and math
instruction in small group
for ELs and non-ELs who
need support
2
Classroom teachers
Learning Center
teacher, Certificated
tutors, instructional
aides
Classroom teachers
Learning Center
teacher, Certificated
tutors, instructional
aides
Tech Support and
Administration
$3,450.00
Funding: Title 1, LCAP
Using the MTSS model, teachers and support staff
will identify students who are performing above
and below cut points from data sources such as
DiBels, BPST, MAP, SIPPS, Corrective Reading,
Lexia and/or classroom assessment data, will
receive Tier 1 Differentiated Instruction (DI) in the
general classroom, during designated ELD time, .
Additional CT Learning
Center teacher for reading
and math intervention, CT
for before and after school
classes, CTs during ELD
Using the MTSS model, teachers and support staff
will identify students who are performing far below
using DiBels cut scores, MAP mean grade level
scores will receive Tier 2 and Tier 3 intervention in
addition to Tier 1 DI, in the Learning Center, during
ELD, in the Computer Lab, and in before and after
school classes
Computer teacher,
Center teacher, CT for
before and after school
classes, CTs during ELD
$36,120
Title 1, Title 3, LCAP, SUPG
$54,552: Titles 1 & 3, LCAP
th
LEA GOAL: LCAP GOAL 1 for English Learners: Increase the number of ELs being reclassified (R-FEP) by the end of 6
grade
SCHOOL GOAL: 100% of El Camino English Learners will be reclassified by the end of 6th grade.
this data?
of this goal?
CELDT data
ADEPT data
96% of ELs were reclassified by the end of
6th grade. Five out of the 164 students
(approximately 3%) who took the CELDT in
2013-2014 were 6th graders. Although 60%
(three) scored Early Advanced, none of the
three were reclassified.
CELDT data
RFEP reclassification criteria (currently
CWP writing sample and DiBels fluency
score)
MAP mean proficiency cut scores
STRATEGY: During the 2015-2016 school year, EL Camino will provide targeted instruction, including intervention and acceleration, in
order to successfully reclassify 100% of English Learners by the end of 6th grade.
Action/Date
Task/Date
English Learners (ELs)
will be assessed using
the ADEPT 3 times per
year, which will be used
with the CELDT to
determine proficiency
levels and create
appropriate groupings
Principal
Learning Center
Teacher
Classroom Teachers
Students
Students will be assessed in the Fall and/or Winter, ADEPT testing materials,
teachers
and Spring at the site level with ADEPT. Results
No cost
will be used in conjunction with CELDT scores to
determine proficiency levels and groupings.
Certificated tutors will be
Principal, certificated
ELs will be placed in appropriate groupings
3
Certificated Tutors
$18,432
hired to teach English
Only groups to facilitate
small, proficiency-level
based ELD classes
tutors
according to ADEPT and CELDT assessment data. Title 1, Title 3, LCAP
Certificated tutors will be hired to teach English
Only groups to facilitate small, proficiency-level
based ELD classes
English Learners will
receive daily 30 minute
English Language
Development instruction
at their proficiency level
as measured by CELDT
and ADEPT assessments
Classroom teachers
Classroom teachers will deliver daily ELD
instruction using Systematic ELD strategies and
lessons. Teachers will implement strategies for
ensuring systematic and explicit ELD instruction
occurs regularly in ELD including a daily schedule,
use of a language objective, structured oral
practice, and sentence frames
English Learners will
receive the same
intervention/acceleration
opportunities/support as
detailed in Goal 1: All
students
Classroom teachers,
computer teacher,
Learning Center
teachers, CTs during
ELD
Students who are performing above and below cut
points will receive Tier 1 Differentiated Instruction
(DI) in the general classroom, during ELD.
Students who are performing far below MAP mean
grade level scores will receive Tier 2 and Tier 3
intervention in addition to DI, in the Learning
Center, during ELD, in the Computer Lab, and in
before and after school classes
ELD classes will be
scheduled in the
afternoon to protect ELA
time and ensure EL
access to ELA instruction
Principal
EL student subgroup
MAP scores will be
analyzed, and identified
needs will be targeted
4
No Cost
Center teacher, CT for
before and after school
classes
$54,552
Title 1, Title 3, LCAP, SUPG
No cost
The principal will schedule ELD classes in the
afternoon to protect 85-135 minute Math and ELA
instructional blocks in the morning. This way, all
students will have access to core instruction and
intervention.
Students who are performing above and below cut
points will receive Tier 1 Differentiated Instruction
(DI) in the general classroom, during ELD, and in
the computer lab during daily ELA and Math
clinics. Students who are performing far below
MAP mean grade level scores will receive Tier 2
and Tier 3 intervention in addition to DI, in the
Learning Center, during ELD, in the Computer Lab,
Grade Level release
and in before and after school classes
Language objectives will
accompany learning
objectives during Math
and ELA
5
In grade level PLCs, classroom teachers will
identify assessed needs of EL students using
ADEPT and CELDT, as well as classroom
assessments to target these needs during Tier 1 DI
classroom time. Teachers will embed language
objectives in daily ELA and Math, and implement
strategies for ensuring systematic and explicit
language instruction with the use of a language
objective, structured oral practice, and sentence
frames during core instruction
Meetings during PE
specialist time
$1,115 CORE
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements In Student Performance
this Goal
Start/
Completion
Date
Estimated
Cost
Funding
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Centralized District Services
Centralized administrative services are provided
to facilitate implementation of categorical
programs. Centralized services assist the school
to attain achievement objectives for every
•
Community Liaisons
August
2015 May 2016
Provide support and
families in need of school
and community services
$182,291
•
August
2015 –
May 2016
principals with researchbased professional
development that supports
the District’s plans for
improving student
achievement
$9,503
Title I
•
Identification and assessment of
English Learners
August
2015 –
May 2016
English Language
Development Test and
primary language
assessment; administer
test
$50,431
Title I &
LCAP
•
Translation of NCLB documents,
communication to parents, and
notification of student progress
August
2015 –
May 2016
materials, parent letters,
and parent conferences
$35,000
Title I &
LCAP
•
District parent and staff meetings
to advise implementation of
English Learners
August
2015 –
May 2016
meeting materials
$1,632
Title I
•
with state regulations
August
2015 –
Ongoing
administration to
coordinate categorical
programs
$1,000
Title I
•
School Choice, and
August
2015 –
May, 2016
Required – set aside for
Program Improvement
$85,523
Title I
6
State Programs
Purpose: To provide flexibility in the use of state and local
funds by LEAs and schools
LCFF – Supplemental Grant
Purpose: To provide a supplemental grant equal to 20
percent of the adjusted LCFF base grant for targeted
disadvantaged students
Purpose: To provide an additional concentration grant
equal to 50 percent of the adjusted LCFF base grant for
targeted students exceeding 55 percent of an LEA’s
enrollment
California School Age Families Education (Carryover
only)
Purpose: Assist expectant and parenting students to
succeed in school
Economic Impact Aid/State Compensatory Education
(EIA-SCE) (Carryover only)
Purpose: Help educationally disadvantaged students
succeed in the regular program
Economic Impact Aid/Limited English Proficient (EIALEP) (Carryover only)
Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic
proficiency of English learners
$0
$29,325
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Professional Development Block Grant (Carryover
only)
$0
$0
specified measures to improve academic instruction and
pupil academic achievement
(Carryover only)
School Safety and Violence Prevention Act (Carryover
only)
7
Allocation
$0
$0
$0
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
List and Describe Other State or Local Funds (e.g.,
Career and Technical Education [CTE], etc.)
$0
Federal Programs
$29,325
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$52,679
$
allocation).
$
Purpose: Improve and increase the number of highly
qualified teachers and principals
Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for LimitedEnglish-Proficient (LEP) Students
Purpose: Supplement language instruction to help LEP
students attain English proficiency and meet academic
performance standards
1
8
$0
$18,002
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP1
Title III funds are not a school level allocation even if allocated by the district to a school site. The LEA is
responsible for fiscal reporting and monitoring and cannot delegate their authority to a site at which the
program is being implemented. If Title III funds are spent at a school site, they must be used for the
purposes of Title III and only for those students the LEA has identified for services. For more
information please contact the Language Policy and Leadership Office at 916-319-0845.
Title VI, Part B: Rural Education Achievement
Program
Purpose: Provide flexibility in the use of ESEA funds to
eligible LEAs
achievement
$0
$0
Other federal funds: Title III (Immigrant)
$0
$
$
$70,681
Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to
this school
$100,006
9
Alma Hernandez
James Woods
Olga Zermeño
Liz Barnitz
Kimbery Spiewak
Kandie White
2
EC Section 52852
10
1
1
2
Secondary
Student
Parent or
Community
Member
Other School
Staff
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
California Education Code describes the required composition of the School Site Council (SSC).
The SSC shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers selected by
teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school personnel at the school;
parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents; and, in secondary schools,
pupils selected by pupils attending the school.2 The current make-up of the SSC is as follows:
11
SPSA ANNUAL EVALUATION
Plan Priorities
•
•
LCAP GOAL 1 for all students: To work toward our overarching school-wide goal of,
“All Day Literacy for All”, 100% of El Camino grade levels will show a measured growth
of 10 points from Winter 2015 to Spring 2015 in Reading Comprehension (Literature and
Informational Text) and Foundational Skills as measured by mean RIT scores derived
from Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessments taken three times yearly. 4
out of 7 grade levels met the goals.
LCAP GOAL 1 for English Learners: 100% of El Camino English Learners will be
reclassified by the end of 6th grade GOAL 97% MET (all but 3 students qualified for
reclassification)
Funding Sources
•
Title 1, Title 111, and LCAP were the main funding sources supporting these
priorities.
• Students took MAP test three times yearly in September, January and May
12
•
Teachers participated in triennial Grade level MAP PLCs
•
Teachers engaged students in academic goal setting
•
Student needs, both in acceleration and intervention, were identified and
addressed
•
100% of students in grades 3-6 received intervention/acceleration in the
computer lab.
•
English Learners (ELs) were assessed using the ADEPT and was used with the
CELDT to determine proficiency levels to create appropriate groupings
•
Certificated tutors were hired to teach English Only groups to facilitate small,
proficiency-level based ELD classes
•
English Learners received daily 30 minute instruction in English Language
Development instruction at their proficiency levels as measured by CELDT and
ADEPT assessments
•
Reading and Writing experiences were included in daily ELD instruction
•
English Learners received the same intervention/acceleration
opportunities/support as detailed in Goal 1
•
ELD classes were scheduled in the afternoon to protect ELA time and ensure EL
access to ELA instruction
•
EL student subgroup MAP scores were analyzed, and identified needs were
targeted
Strategies or activities that were particularly effective in improving student
achievement
• The purchase, implementation, and professional development on a
computer-based school-wide formative assessment program Measures
of Academic Progress (MAP), that measures progress three times a
year in Reading, Language, and Math, and the full implementation of
goal setting that accompanies MAP.
• Computer-based programs such as Lexia and Reading Plus used on a
daily basis in and out of the classroom. Specifically, in before and after
school intervention, and during Computer Clinic times for small group
intervention/acceleration.
• Extended school day Kindergarten Success Institute to bring students
up to grade level.
Strategies or activities that were ineffective or minimally effective in improving
student achievement.
•
Continuing to use the district Math and Language Arts curriculum with fidelity
•
Limiting professional development opportunities to support implementation
•
Lack of effective follow-up or coaching to support implementation
Strategies not implemented or partially implemented:
•
Language objectives did not accompany learning objectives during Math
and ELA
•
6th grade students did not take MAP test in May due to the increase in
hours needed
for state testing. Teachers and principal felt that teaching and learning
would suffer due to loss of instructional time.
•
Teachers received release time once annually (February) in grade level
PLCs focused on MAP data.
The goal to meet 100% of each student’s intervention/acceleration needs
is ongoing
Based on the analysis of this practice, would you recommend:
• Providing, and taking advantage of, effective follow-up and coaching to
support implementation of the math curriculum and Differentiated
Instruction
•
13
•
•
•
•
•
•
Providing extra intervention for the 5th grade cohort of students
Parent education nights on how to help parents help students at home,
especially with reading
Keeping all day literacy for all as overarching goal, but add specific
sections for math and ELA
Implement math curriculum with fidelity
Focus on enrichment for students who excel; keeping students
engaged
Include Math problem solving academic language and discourse in
ELD
•
Input was sought and given by the ECSSC. Section G was completed during and
after a site council meeting.
•
Input was sought and received by the ELAC on the 2014-2015 plan, the old goal
was reviewed, and the same goal pertaining to English learners was suggested,
discussed, and agreed upon.
•
The school site council discussed and reviewed progress toward goals
throughout the year.
ELAC meetings were held at night and ECSSC meetings were held during lunch
to facilitate participation and attendance.
Outcomes
•
•
All but 3rd, 5th and 6th grades met the goal of 100% grade levels growing by ten
RIT score points. One major factor was that 6th grade did not take the May MAP
test due to the increased testing time and volume of testing that occurred due to
new State testing (CAASPP).
•
96% of ELs were reclassified by the end of 6th grade. Five out of the 164
students (approximately 3%) who took the CELDT in 2013-2014 were 6th
graders. Although 60% (three) scored Early Advanced, none of the three were
reclassified.
•
El Camino School met state and federal performance goals for attaining English
Proficiency for English Learners.
Based on this information, what might be some recommendations for future steps to
meet these goals?
• Expand goal to include Math and ELA sub-goals, with a focus on Meaning
Making and Effective Expression in ELA, and Problem Solving and
Communicating Reasoning in Math. Multiple measures will include formative
Writing CFAs, interim MAP assessments, and CAASPP results.
• The measures will be All students will grow: a) 10% overall in both Math and ELA
14
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
15
as measured by spring CAASPP results for grades 3-6 overall, b) 10-point overall
in both Math and ELA for grades 3-6 as measured by MAP, and 15-point overall
in both Math and ELA for grades K-2 as measured by MAP
Learning Neighborhoods focus on Academic Discourse to further meaning
making, effective expression, problem solving and communicating reasoning
Continue with the goal more measurable and reflect growth model
By the end of the year, 100% of teachers will fully implement the district-adopted
CCSS Math curriculum
Emphasize the School wide focus Math and English literacy through Academic
Discourse.
Continue walkthroughs, peer lesson studies, peer observations,
Continue partnering with United Way by implementing Lexia, Reading Plus, and
STRIDE academy for intervention and acceleration
Continuing NEU PD through parent nights and continue PD with staff and
parents (especially PTA members)
Including all students in the growth model, including accelerated students.
EL CAMINO SCHOOL
POLICY
El Camino School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in
the education of children are an integral part of achieving academic success and
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration El Camino School is committed to;
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at El Camino School that welcomes
parents/guardians as active participants in their children's education;
•
•
•
•
I.
1. El Camino School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
school committees reflects the population characteristics of El
Camino School.
16
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
17
achievement shall be a part of the educational program at El
Camino School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about El Camino School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. El Camino School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade
Level Expectations to parents/guardians at the beginning of each
school year and to the parents/guardians of new students after the
start of the school year. The handbook shall contain information
about current programs, criteria for pupil participation in these
programs, and other information designed to acquaint
parents/guardians with school regulations and procedures.
program.
18
ESCUELA DE EL CAMINO
POLÍTICA
La escuela de El Camino reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de El Camino se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de El Camino que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de El Camino celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas,
noches de orientación para padres y reuniones de organizaciones
para padres/tutores en cuales se discuten la filosofía, misión,
la escuela de El Camino.
19
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
20
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela.
educativo en la escuela de El Camino.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de El Camino se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de El Camino distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
de la escuela.
21
programa.
22
Ellwood Elementary School
7686 Hollister Ave
Goleta, CA 93110
CDS Code: 6045421
Date of Revision: December 2015
Part II: The Single Plan
for Student Achievement
School: Ellwood Elementary School
County-District-School (CDS) Code: 42-69195-6045421
Principal: Abby Vasquez
Consolidated Application (ConApp) and ESEA Program Improvement into the SPSA.
Contact Person:
Abby Vasquez
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
805.571.3774
Address:
7686 Hollister Avenue, Goleta, CA 93117
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance………………………….……1
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student Performance…..7
Form C: Programs Included in This Plan…………………………………………………..8
Form D: School Site Council Membership…………………………………………….....11
Form E: Recommendations and Assurances…………………………………..………..12
Form G: Single Plan for Student Achievement Annual Evaluation……………..….…..13
Parent/Guardian Involvement Policy………………………………………………………16
Glossary of Acronyms
ADEPT
BPST
CCSS
CDS
CE
CELDT
ConApp
CPM
CTE
DIBELS
EC
EL
ELA
ELD
EIA-LEP
EIA-SCE
ESEA
FPM
GUSD
LCAP
LCFF
LEA
LEP
LNF
MTSS
ORF
A Developmental English Proficiency Test
Basic Phonics Skills Test
Common Core State Standards
County-District-School Code
California English Language
Development Test
Consolidated Application
Undefined
Career and Technical Education
Dynamic Indicators of Basic
Early Literacy Skills
California Education Code
English Learner
English Language Arts
English Language Development
Economic Impact Aid/Limited
English Proficient
Economic Impact Aid/State
Elementary and Secondary
Education Act
Federal Program Monitoring
Goleta Union School District
Local Control Accountability
Plan
Local Control Funding Formula
Local Educational Agency (i.e. GUSD)
Limited-English-Proficient
Letter Naming Fluency
Multi-Tier System Support
Oral Reading Fluency
i
PI
QEIA
RenSTAR
RFEP
SBAC
SIG
SIPPS
SPSA
SSC
SST
SWP
SY
Title I-IV
Program Improvement
Quality Education Investment Act
Renaissance STAR Reading Program
Reclassified as Fluent English
Proficient
Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium
School Improvement Grant
Undefined
(i.e. this document)
School Site Council
Student-Study Team
Undefined
School Year
Strengthening and Improvement of
Elementary and Secondary Schools
(20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.)
students not yet meeting state standards.
Lead Educational Agency (LEA) GOAL: Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) GOAL 1: Demonstrate robust achievement
growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL 1: 100% of our student cohorts will increase reading proficiency as measured by Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early
Literacy Skills (DIBELS), Basic Phonics Skills Test (BPST), Renaissance STAR Reading Program (RenSTAR), and Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortium (SBAC) Tests.
What data did you use to form this
goal?
RenSTAR: year-to-year comparison - 40th
percentile ranking (PR) or higher
DIBELS data: Percent of students at
CORE (Level determined to be “at level”
by program)
2015 SBAC: students at Meet/Exceed
standard
K
56% Letter Naming Fluency (LNF)
st
1
59% LNF RenSTAR; 40 PR
nd
2
53% Oral Reading Fluency (ORF);
45% RenSTAR
rd
3
38% ORF; 44% RenSTAR
th
4
62% RenSTAR, SBAC; 44% Met or
Exceeded
th
5
48% RenSTAR SBAC; 74% Met or
Exceeded
th
6
64% RenSTAR SBAC; 49% Met or
Exceeded
What were the findings from the analysis
of this data?
We still suffer from a lack of systematic data
collection but the District is working to
remedy that, as described in the Goleta
Union School District (GUSD) Strategic Plan.
In fact, the list of multiple measures ensures
that staff can conduct productive data
analysis to intervene for students
Initial, mid and end-of-year assessments
on Renaissance STAR Reading
Initial, mid and end-of-year DIBELS in all
grades.
Progress monitoring (DIBELS) for targeted
students
found?
School Site Council documents
Budget documents
1
STRATEGY: The school will refine our Multi-Tier System of Support (MTSS) to address English Language Arts (ELA) needs of
struggling and advanced learners, as well as English Language Learners.
Action/Date
May 2016, refresh MTSS
training
October/November 2015,
conduct regular MTSS
meetings.
Monitor implementation
steps for School Year
(SY) 2015-2016.
Teaching staff
Administration
Learning Center Staff
Teaching Staff
Administration
MTSS Team- (general
education teacher,
principal, learning
center teacher, special
education staff, and
parents)
Classroom teachers
Task/Date
August-May- work with a core team in the MTSS
process
September 2015- Conduct baseline assessments
to identify students in need of intervention.
Identify and serve those students via classroom
and extra supports for intervention purposes.
November 2015- Administer interim assessments
according to assessment schedule.
SY15-16
Conduct meetings 4 times annually to develop
intervention plans for targeted students.
Conduct Tier II interventions in the classroom and
Learning Center Classroom.
Progress monitor targeted students
Conduct benchmark measures (3x year);
(Renaissance STAR, DIBELS, BPST)
Choose and purchase additional research-based
ELA intervention materials, i.e. SIPPS
Create a schedule conducive to MTSS
2
MTSS training - district
funded, see Form B, page 7
Learning Center Teacherdistrict funded
Learning Center Certificated
Tutors - $45,216
ELA intervention materials
($2,000 approximate)
Renaissance STAR $4,500
Release time for Bi-monthly
MTSS meetings - $3,200
LEA GOAL: LCAP GOAL 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between
student subgroups.
LEA Plan Goal II: Coherent standards-aligned Instructional program in all school to improve student achievement, including: the
development of fact-fluency and part-whole thinking; engaging the Mathematical Practices through Number Corners and mathematical
discourse; and implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) math content standards.
SCHOOL GOAL 2: Math: 80% of Ellwood students will show growth on SBAC state testing when compared to last year’s baseline
data.
Spring 2015 SBAC: % of students at
Meet/Exceed standard
3rd
4th
5th
6th
SBAC 29% Met or Exceeded
Target Area : Claim 2 - Problem
Solving/Data Analysis (34% below
standard)
Target Area : Claim 3 –
Communicating Reasoning (55%
below standard)
Target Area : Claim 3 –
Communicating Reasoning (29%
below standard)
Target Area : Claim 1 – Concepts
and Procedures (28% below
standard)
this data?
We still suffer from a lack of systematic data
collection but the district is working to
remedy that, as described in the GUSD
Strategic Plan. In fact, the list of multiple
measures ensures that staff can conduct
productive data analysis to intervene for
students.
3
Initial, mid and end-of-year assessments
as part of the Bridges (K-5th grades) and
CPM (6th grade), which are the adopted
math curricula
November and January Interim
assessments as a part of the SBAC
found?
Budget documents
STRATEGY: The school will refine our Multi-Tier System of Support (MTSS) (Figure 1) to address Math needs of struggling and
advanced learners as well as English Language Learners.
Action/Date
training
October/November 2015,
conduct regular MTSS
meetings.
steps for SY 2015-2016.
Classroom teachers will
use research based
instructional strategies
such as those included in
Teach Like A Champion
by Doug Lemov.
Teaching Staff
Administration
MTSS Team- (general
education teacher,
principal, learning
center teacher, special
parents)
Task/Date
process
September 2015- Monitor in-class assessments to
identify students in need of intervention.
Identify and serve those students via classroom
and extra supports for intervention purposes.
SY15-16
Conduct meetings 4 times annually to develop
Math intervention materials
4
MTSS training - district
funded see Form B, page 7
Tutor - $45,216
MTSS meetings - $3,200
LEA GOAL: Goal 3: The District will meet or exceed California English Language Development Test (CELDT) requirements for the
Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) 1, 2 and 3 during the 2015-16 school year.
SCHOOL GOAL 3: English Learner (EL) Goal: 100% of Ellwood students will demonstrate growth in language fluency as evidenced by
the Smarter Balanced State Tests (SBAC), California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and/or A Developmental English
Proficiency Test (ADEPT) assessments.
August-May- work with a core team in the
MTSS process
2015 19% of EL students met or exceeded September 2015- Conduct baseline
standards in ELA on SBAC.
assessments to identify students in need of
intervention.
Reclassified as Fluent English Proficient
Identify and serve those students via
(RFEP) - 52% of students in grades 3-6
classroom and extra supports for intervention
met or exceeded standards in ELA on
purposes.
SBAC.
November 2015- Administer interim
assessments according to assessment
CELDT scores - 74% met AMAO 1
schedule.
- 51% met AMAO 2
SY15-16
Conduct meetings 4 times annually to
ADEPT- 86% of 114 students
develop intervention plans for targeted
demonstrated growth over the course of
students.
the year.
Conduct Tier II interventions in the classroom
Band growth- 48% of 114 students
and Learning Center Classroom.
demonstrated band growth over the
course of the year.
Conduct benchmark measures (3x year)
5
of this goal?
CELDT Scores
ADEPT Scores
DIBELS
Reclassification rates
Band growth
SBAC Scores
found?
Budget documents
STRATEGY: Refine the MTSS process to support systematic English Language Development (ELD) instruction.
Action/Date
SY2015-2016
Conduct systematic ELD
with instructional strategies
that emphasize language
development.
Coordinate an MTSS
schedule that facilitates
integrated and designated
ELD support throughout
the school day.
Provide informational
flyers to ELL families
Principal
Learning Center
teachers
Classroom teachers
ELD instructors
Task/Date
August 2015- Provide MTSS refresh training to
staff
August-May- continue to train a core team in the
MTSS process
SY15-16- Implement ELD instruction using
systematic ELD with supplemental curricular
materials.
Progress monitor ELL students (DIBELS, ADEPT)
Utilize evidenced-based instructional strategies,
i.e. close reading, sentence frames, academic
language
6
District training on ELA/ELD
framework (district funded)
Certificated Tutors for ELD
($45,216 [LCAP/Title III/Title
III Immigrant])
Actions to be Taken to Reach This
Goal
Consider all appropriate
dimensions (e.g., Teaching and
Learning, Staffing, and Professional
Development)
Community Liaisons
Start Date
Completion
Date
August
2015
Provide support and
translations, as needed,
to homeless students and
May 2016
August
2015
development that
supports the District’s
plans for improving
student achievement
May 2016
Estimated
Cost
$182,291
$9,503
Funding
Source
(itemize
for each
source)
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Title I
English Learners
August
2015
May 2016
English Language
primary language
test
$50,431
Title I &
LCAP
$35,000
Title I &
LCAP
August
2015
May 2016
District parent and staff meetings to
advise implementation of
Compensatory Education Programs
and Programs for English Learners
August
2015
meeting materials
$1,570
Title I
Coordination of reviews regarding
program compliance with state
regulations
August
2015
administration to
programs
$9,650
Title I
School Choice, and Supplemental
Services
August
2015
May 2016
ongoing
Program Improvement
May 2016
7
$1,000
$10,650
$85,523
Title I
State Programs
Allocation
enrollment
only)
succeed in school
$0
$52,696
$0
$0
$0
$6,051
$0
only)
$0
$0
(Carryover only)
only)
8
$0
$0
$0
$0
Consolidated
in the SWP
Federal Programs
$0
$58,747
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$
allocation).
$
1
$0
$13,750
Program
eligible LEAs
$0
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP1
9
achievement
$0
$1,035
$
$
$14,785
this school
$73,532
10
Other School
Staff
Parent or
Community
Member
1
2
1
5
Abby Vasquez
Emily Althoen
Shane Holehouse
Cindy Haight
Andrew Bermond
Jyll Doubleday
Jennifer Pierce
Meredith Tynes
Rola Zieneddine
2
EC Section 52852
11
Secondary
Student
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
Pursuant to California Education Code Section 64001(g), the School Site Council (SSC)
must evaluate at least annually the effectiveness of planned activities. In the cycle of
continuous improvement of student performance, evaluation of the results of goals will
provide data to inform and guide subsequent plans.
Annual evaluation by the SSC and local educational agency (LEA) is a critical part of
the continuous cycle of improvement for a school. Furthermore, it is an integral
component of the Compensatory Education (CE) Federal Program Monitoring (FPM)
review process for Single Plan for Student Achievements (SPSAs). During an FPM
review, the SSC and LEA must be able to provide evidence of the evaluation process to
determine if the needs of students are being met by the strategies described in the
SPSA.
The SPSA annual evaluation may be a summary description of the school’s progress
toward implementation of the strategies and actions in the SPSA. The report may also
include a data analysis of the school’s progress towards its student achievement goals
based on local, state, or national assessment data.
During the evaluation process, it is important for the SSC and LEA to exercise caution
about jumping to conclusions about the effectiveness or non-effectiveness of specific
activities and programs without examining the underlying causes. The SSC and LEA
should consider all relevant factors when evaluating the plan, such as the degree of
implementation, student enrollment changes, and health and safety issues.
Plan Priorities
Our priorities this past year was to ensure our students were progressing in English
Language Arts (ELA).
Similarly, we wanted to ensure our English Language Learner (ELL) students were
progressing in language acquisition as well.
Last, we prioritized Math facts fluency improvement based upon anecdotal evidence
and one indicator (i.e. FactsWise).
The majority of our budgets- local, state, and federal, were dedicated to the supports
necessary to implement our action and tasks associated with the plan.
Our major expenditures included staffing, ELA intervention materials, Renaissance
STAR, and release time for staff. We continue to need data to inform and guide
subsequent plans.
13
Plan Implementation
We accomplished three strategies associated with our goals- implement an MTSS to
address students’ needs in ELA, provide systematic ELL instruction, and improve math
facts fluency. While, we have accomplished our intended plan, the outcomes identified
the need to refine our systems to increase our effectiveness to identify and intervene for
the varied needs of our students.
The actions listed in the 2014-2015 SPSA were implemented but not refined. We:
• Trained staff in MTSS
• Established a Student-Study Team (SST)
• Conducted systematic ELD instruction
• Conducted systematic FactsWise implementation and Number Talks K-6
Still, we fell short in some of our tasks. As noted in this year’s goals, our data collection
system was limited last year and therefore, is a focus this year in monitoring student
progress. As noted in the 2014-2015 goals, the absence of data indicates a need to
increase assessment use systematically. The district has moved to DIBELS for all K-5
students.
Additionally, we started Tier II interventions and are working to improve the process.
The school (and district) has implemented a benchmark system as well as progress
monitoring process for students in need of intervention. While we have implemented
many of the tasks listed in the plan, this year should be a refining process to ensure
effective implementation.
Based on our analysis of available data last year, we determined specific strategies to
accomplish our goals. We were able to train a core team, provide initial MTSS training
to all staff, use our limited data to identify students in need of targeted instruction, create
a process to document students in need of intervention, provide extended day, use
appropriate intervention materials, and create a schedule conducive to MTSS.
We accomplished many of our listed activities but need another year, at least, to refine
the process of MTSS and its accompanying components- assessments, interventions,
data analysis and instructional response.
The School Site Council met regularly to discuss budget priorities, the school handbook,
and the Single Plan for Student Achievement among other topics. The SSC discussed
and then drafted the Single Plan aligned with available data.
For input from a wider array of stakeholders, we surveyed parents, students and staff to
prioritize next year’s objectives.
14
Outcomes
Goals for 2014-2015
The following outcomes were accomplished:
1. 88% of Ellwood students demonstrated growth according to the Renaissance
Student Grade Equivalency.
100% of our planned actions were implemented: MTSS training, SST process,
monitor implementation.
2. ELL – 80% of our ELL students demonstrated growth in language fluency as
evidenced on CELDT or ADEPT scores.
3. Ellwood students worked hard to meet grade level FactsWise Goals. There was
not a comprehensive data collection process to see if we met these schoolwide
targets.
Based on this information, we recommend that a more comprehensive data system be
used to meet this goal.
Figure 1: Multi-Tiered Systems of Academic Support
Tiers 1 and 2 are usually delivered in the general education classroom. Level 2 and 3 may
be Learning Center (general education) or Special Education (determined by
Individualized Education Plan). Tier 3 is nearly always though Special Education.
15
ELLWOOD SCHOOL
POLICY
Ellwood School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Ellwood School is committed to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at Ellwood School that welcomes parents/guardians
I.
1. Ellwood School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
School.
16
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
17
Ellwood School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about School will be sent home on a regular basis.
C. Ellwood School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
program.
18
ESCUELA DE ELLWOOD
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Ellwood reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Ellwood se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Ellwood que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de Ellwood celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas, noches
19
la escuela de .
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
20
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de Ellwood.
educativo en la escuela de .
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Ellwood distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
21
de la escuela.
programa.
22
2015-2016
Foothill Elementary School
711 Ribera Drive
Santa Barbara, CA 93111
CDS Code: 6045447
Date of Revision: September 2015
Achievement
School: Foothill Elementary / Goleta Family School
Principal: Bridget Braney, Ed.D.
Contact Person:
Bridget Braney, Ed.D.
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
805-681-1268
Address:
711 Ribera Drive, Santa Barbara, CA 93111
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
1
Performance
5
6
9
10
11
14
LEA GOAL: Demonstrate robust student achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between
student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL: 100% of our student cohorts will increase reading proficiency as measured by DIBELS, BPST, RenSTAR, and Smarter Balanced
Assessments.
Renaissance STAR year-to-year comparison
DIBELS data
Percent of students at CORE
K- 67% (LNF)
1st- 57% (LNF), 44% average on BPST,
2nd- 75% (ORF), 74% average on BPST, RenSTAR48th Percentile Rank (PR)
3rd- 80%, RenSTAR-67PR,
4th- 73%, RenSTAR-66PR, SB 67% Met or Exceeded
We still suffer from a lack of systematic
data collection but the district is working to
remedy that. In fact, the list of multiple
measures ensures that staff can conduct
productive data analysis to intervene for
students. Additionally, we lack a
mathematics goal because we are
implementing a new math program and
therefore will not identify growth measures
until the program is implemented for at
least one year.
of this goal?
Initial, mid and end-of-year assessments on
Renaissance STAR Reading
Initial, mid and end-of-year DIBELS in all
grades.
Progress monitoring (Six-Minute Solution,
DIBELS) for targeted students
Collaborative inquiry decisions
Where can a budget plan of the proposed
expenditures for this goal be found?
Budget documents
STRATEGY: The school will refine our Multi-Tier System of Support (MTSS) to address ELA needs of struggling and advanced learners as well
as English Language Learners.
1
Action/Date
training
September 2015, conduct
regular MTSS meetings.
Monitor implementation steps
for SY 2015-2016.
Person(s)
Responsible
Teaching staff
Administration
Learning Center
Staff
Learning Center
Staff
Teaching Staff
Administration
MTSS Team(general education
teacher, principal,
learning center
teacher, special
parents)
Classroom teachers
2
Task/Date
process
September 2015- Conduct baseline assessments
to identify students in need of intervention.
Identify and serve those students via classroom and
extra supports for intervention purposes.
October 2015- Provide extended-day intervention
for qualifying students
SY15-16
Conduct bi-monthly meetings to develop
Conduct benchmark measures (3x year);
(Renaissance STAR, DIBELS, BPST)
ELA intervention materials, i.e. Six minute, SIPPS
Implement a bank of research-based interventions
for the Big 5- Phonics, phonemic awareness,
fluency, vocabulary, comprehension.
MTSS training (district
funded)
Tutors - $45,216
($2,000 approximate)
Renaissance STAR, $4,500
(PTA)
MTSS meetings ($3,200)
LEA GOAL: Demonstrate robust student achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between
student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL: Eighty percent or more of Foothill/GFS English Learners (EL) will demonstrate growth in language fluency as evidenced by
Smarter Balanced, CELDT and/or ADEPT assessments.
goal?
2015 SB percent met or exceeded and
mean scale score.
SED- 50% of students in grades 3-6 met or
exceeded standards and had a mean scale
score of 2411.1, 2441.8, 2515.6 and
2549.6 in 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th grade
respectively.
RFEP- 73% of students in grades 3-6 met
or exceeded standards and had a mean
scale of 2485.1, 2519.2, and 2599.3 in 4th,
5th, and 6th grade respectively. No scale
score for 3rd grade is available due to <10.
CELDT scores- 36% met AMAO 2
Attaining English Proficiency
ADEPTS- 82% demonstrated growth
Band growth- 11 (50%) out of 22 students
demonstrated band growth.
What were the findings from the analysis of this data?
36% of our EL students who attained English proficiency have
been in the ELD program less than five years. Fifty percent of our
students demonstrated band growth from 2013-2014 to 2014-2015
CELDT scores.
Last, when comparing English Only to English Learning students
on the Smarter Balanced, 6 out of 7 data points (average level)
indicate that EL students consistently score lower than their EO
counterparts.
Seventy Four percent of our overall population met or exceeded
How will the school
evaluate the progress of
this goal?
CELDT Scores
ADEPT Scores
DIBELS
Band growth
SB Scores
STRATEGY: Refine an MTSS process to support systematic ELD instruction.
Action/Date
SY2015-2016
Conduct systematic ELD with
instructional strategies that
emphasize language development.
Coordinate an MTSS schedule that
facilitates integrated and
designated ELD support throughout
the school day.
Provide informational flyers to EL families
3
Person(s)
Responsible
ELD
instructor
Principal
Learning
Center
teachers
Classroom
teachers
Task/Date
August 2015- Provide MTSS refresh training to staff
August-May- continue to train a core team in the MTSS
process
SY15-16- Implement ELD instruction using systematic
ELD with supplemental curricular materials.
Utilize evidenced-based instructional strategies, i.e.
close reading, sentence frames, academic language
Cost and Funding
Source
District training on
ELA/ELD framework
(district funded)
Certificated Tutor for
ELD ($22,608 [LCAP])
LEA GOAL: Provide effective learning environments.
SCHOOL GOAL: Increase the percent of intermediate students (4-6) reporting a positive school climate (77%) as evidenced by perception surveys.
According to perception surveys conducted in
March 2015, 88% of parents responded
positively to school climate conditions. For
second grade, 98% of our students responded
positively, while 77% of our 5th graders
responded positively to school climate
conditions.
this data?
Perception survey results point to an overall
positive response but our 5th grade responses
contrast with parents and 2nd grade results.
of this goal?
Student leadership participation rates
Student (4-6) comparative perception surveys
STRATEGY: Establish a positive school culture among all stakeholders using behavioral components of an MTSS model.
Action/Date
May 2016- Refresh
training in MTSS with a
focus on systematic
intervention processes for
behavioral issues.
Consistently provide
positive, encouraging
messages
Increase student
leadership and Service
Learning opportunities
Engage parents through
varied venues
Monitor attendance rates.
4
Person(s)
Responsible
Teachers
PTA members
Site Council
ELAC
Task/Date
April 2016- administer student perception surveys
May 2016- review results with staff and Site Council to plan for
2016-2017.
SY 2015-2016
Continue to train a core team in the MTSS process.
Conduct bi-monthly meetings (MTSS) to develop intervention
plans for targeted students, i.e. behavior plans, behavior
contracts
Provide leadership opportunities for 5th and 6th grade studentsstudent leadership, Tech Team, Library Helpers
Expand student responsibility in delivering and modeling the
Character Counts message, i.e. Spirit Days, Project Wisdom
Engage parents through multiple venues- CCSS Evening,
Monthly PTA meetings, Newsletter, Parent square, Science
Night, ELAC, Site Council, etc.
Develop ‘Lunch and Learn’ meetings to demonstrate technology
Develop New Family Folder for tours and orientation
MTSS training (district
funded)
Learning Center
Certificated Tutors
(combination of district
and site funded; site=
$68,000)
ELA intervention
materials ($4,000
approximate)
Renaissance STAR,
$4,500 (PTA funded)
Release time for Bimonthly MTSS
meetings ($3,200)
Actions to be Taken to Reach this Goal
Start/
Completion Date
Estimated
Cost
Funding
Centralized administrative services are provided to facilitate
implementation of categorical programs. Centralized
services assist the school to attain achievement objectives for
every student. These services include:
•
Community Liaisons
August 2015 May 2016
Provide support and translations,
as needed, to homeless students
and families in need of school
$182,291
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
Provided teachers and principals
with research-based professional
development that supports the
District’s plans for improving
student achievement
$9,503
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Title I
•
Identification and assessment of English
Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
Provide in-service to administer
the California English Language
administer test
$50,431
Title I & LCAP
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
Required translation of materials,
parent letters, and parent
conferences
$35,000
Title I & LCAP
•
advise implementation of Compensatory
Education Programs and Programs for
English Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
Required translation of meeting
materials
$1,632
Title I
•
regulations
August 2015 –
Ongoing
$1,000
Title I
•
Services
August 2015 –
May, 2016
Required – set aside for Program
Improvement
$85,523
Title I
5
State Programs
enrollment
only)
succeed in school
$0
$51,175
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
only)
$0
$0
(Carryover only)
only)
6
Allocation
$0
$0
$0
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$0
Federal Programs
$51,175
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$
allocation).
$
1
7
$0
$4,345.00
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP1
Program
eligible LEAs
achievement
$0
$0
$0
$
$
$4,345.00
this school
$55,520.00
8
Other School
Staff
Parent or
Community
Member
1
3
1
5
Bridget Braney
Dani Martinazzi
Natasha Heinrich
Deirdre Li
Karen Pickford
Talia Feder
Lauren Gleason
Cindy McNulty
Cara O’Callaghan
Michele Villano
2
9
EC Section 52852
Secondary
Student
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
10
SPSA.
The SPSA annual evaluation may be a summary description of the school’s progress
toward implementation of the strategies and actions in the SPSA. The report may also
include a data analysis of the school’s progress towards its student achievement goals
based on local, state, or national assessment data.
During the evaluation process, it is important for the SSC and LEA to exercise caution
about jumping to conclusions about the effectiveness or non-effectiveness of specific
activities and programs without examining the underlying causes. The SSC and LEA
should consider all relevant factors when evaluating the plan, such as the degree of
implementation, student enrollment changes, and health and safety issues.
SPSA ANNUAL EVALUATION
Plan Priorities
Our priorities this past year was to ensure our students were progressing in English
Language Arts.
Similarly, we wanted to ensure our English Learner students were progressing in
language acquisition as well.
Last, we prioritized school climate improvement based upon anecdotal evidence and
one indicator (CA Healthy Kids Survey).
The majority of our budgets- local, state, and federal, were dedicated to the supports
necessary to implement our action and tasks associated with the plan.
Our major expenditures included staffing, ELA intervention materials, Renaissance
STAR, and release time for staff.
Plan Implementation
We accomplished three strategies associated with our goals- implement an MTSS to
address students’ needs in ELA, provide systematic EL instruction, and establish a
positive school climate. While, we have accomplished our intended plan, the outcomes
identified the need to refine our systems to increase our effectiveness to identify and
intervene for the varied needs of our students.
The actions listed in the 2014-2015 SPSA were implemented but not refined. We:
11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trained staff in MTSS
Established a Student-Study Team (SST)
Conducted systematic ELD instruction
Coordinated an MTSS schedule that facilitated integrated and designated ELD
support throughout the school day.
Minimized historical delays in intervention due to ELD program
Increased student leadership and Service Learning opportunities
Engaged parents through varied venues and
Monitored attendance rates.
Still, we fell short in some of our tasks. As noted in this year’s goals, our data collection
system was limited last year and therefore, is a focus this year in monitoring student
progress. As noted in the 2014-2015 goal, the absence of data indicates a need to
increase assessment use systematically. We did not administer the San Diego Quick
assessment for our K-1 students. The district has moved to DIBELS for all K-5 students.
Additionally, we started Tier II interventions and are working to improve the process.
The school (and district) have implemented a benchmark system as well as progress
monitoring process for students in need of intervention. While we have implemented
many of the tasks listed in the plan, this year should be a refining process to ensure
effective implementation.
Based on our analysis of available data last year, we determined specific strategies to
accomplish our goals. We were able to train a core team, provide initial MTSS training
to all staff, use our limited data to identify students in need of targeted instruction, create
a process to document students in need of intervention, provide extended day, use
appropriate intervention materials, and create a schedule conducive to MTSS.
We accomplished many of our listed activities but need another year, at least, to refine
the process of MTSS and its accompanying components- assessments, interventions,
data analysis and instructional response.
The School Site Council met regularly to discuss budget priorities, the school handbook,
and the Single Plan for Student Achievement among other topics. The SSC discussed
and then drafted the Single Plan aligned with available data.
For input from a wider array of stakeholders, we surveyed parents, students and staff to
prioritize next year’s objectives.
12
Outcomes
Goals for 2014-2015
The following outcomes were accomplished:
1. 88% of Foothill students demonstrated growth according to the Renaissance
Student Grade Equivalency.
2. 100% of our planned actions were implemented-MTSS training, SST process,
monitor implementation.
2. EL- 80% of our EL students demonstrated growth in language fluency as evidenced
on CELDT and/or ADEPT scores.
3. According to perception surveys conducted in March 2015, 88% of parents
responded positively to school climate conditions. For second grade, 98% of our
students responded positively, while 77% of our 5th graders responded positively to
school climate conditions.
13
FOOTHILL SCHOOL
POLICY
Foothill School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Foothill School is committed to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at Foothill School that welcomes parents/guardians
I.
1. Foothill School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
Foothill School.
14
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
15
Foothill School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about Foothill School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. Foothill School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
program.
16
ESCUELA DE FOOTHILL
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Foothill reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Foothill se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Foothill que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de Foothill celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas, noches
17
la escuela de Foothill.
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
18
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de Foothill.
educativo en la escuela de Foothill.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de Foothill se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Foothill distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
19
de la escuela.
programa.
20
Part II : The Single Plan for Student Achievement
School: Hollister Elementary School
County-District-School (CDS) Code: 42-69195-6045462
Principal: Ryan Sparre
performance of all students. 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 the Consolidated Application
(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:
Ryan Sparre
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
805-681-1271
Address:
4950 Anita Lane, Santa Barbara, CA 93111
E-mail Address:
Table of Contents
Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance………………………….……1
Form B: Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student Performance…..7
Form C: Programs Included in This Plan…………………………………………………..8
Form D: School Site Council Membership…………………………………………….....11
Form E: Recommendations and Assurances…………………………………..………..12
Form G: Single Plan for Student Achievement Annual Evaluation……………..….…..13
Parent/Guardian Involvement Policy……………………………………………..………..16
Glossary of Acronyms
ADEPT
BPST
CCSS
CDS
CE
CELDT
ConApp
CPM
CTE
DIBELS
EC
EL
ELA
ELD
EIA-LEP
EIA-SCE
ESEA
FPM
GUSD
LCAP
LCFF
LEA
LEP
LNF
MTSS
ORF
A Developmental English Proficiency Test
Basic Phonics Skills Test
Common Core State Standards
County-District-School Code
California English Language
Development Test
Consolidated Application
Undefined
Career and Technical Education
Dynamic Indicators of Basic
Early Literacy Skills
California Education Code
English Learner
English Language Development
Economic Impact Aid/Limited
English Proficient
Economic Impact Aid/State
Elementary and Secondary
Education Act
Federal Program Monitoring
Goleta Union School District
Local Control Accountability
Plan
Local Control Funding Formula
Local Educational Agency (i.e. GUSD)
Limited-English-Proficient
Letter Naming Fluency
Multi-Tier System Support
Oral Reading Fluency
i
PI
QEIA
RenSTAR
RFEP
SBAC
SIG
SIPPS
SPSA
SSC
SST
SWP
SY
Title I-IV
Program Improvement
Quality Education Investment Act
Renaissance STAR Reading Program
Reclassified as Fluent English
Proficient
Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium
School Improvement Grant
Undefined
(i.e. this document)
School Site Council
Student-Study Team
Undefined
School Year
Strengthening and Improvement of
Elementary and Secondary Schools
(20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.)
HOLLISTER SCHOOL
POLICY
Hollister School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Hollister School is committed to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at Hollister School that welcomes parents/guardians
I.
1. Hollister School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
Hollister School.
16
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
17
Hollister School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about Hollister School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. Hollister School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
program.
18
ESCUELA DE HOLLISTER
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Hollister reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Hollister se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Hollister que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de Hollister celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas, noches
19
la escuela de Hollister.
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
20
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de Hollister.
educativo en la escuela de Hollister.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de Hollister se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Hollister distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
21
de la escuela.
programa.
22
Isla Vista Elementary School
2015-2016
Isla Vista School
School: Isla Vista Elementary School
Principal: Mary Kahn
Contact Person:
Mary Kahn
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
(805) 685-4418
Address:
6875 El Colegio Road, Goleta, CA 93117
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
1
Performance
8
10
13
14
15
18
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils: reduce disparity in levels of achievement
between student groups.
SCHOOL GOAL(s) 1: English Language Arts
All Isla Vista School students will increase reading proficiency as measured by DIBELs, SRI, and CAASPP assessments.
Formative Assessment Guiding Targets:
65% of K-6th grade Isla Vista students will demonstrate grade level proficiency (Core Level) in reading achievement as measured by the DIBELs
end of year benchmark assessments.
60% of 2nd-6th grade students will perform at the Core or Enrichment levels of the Scholastic Reading Inventory.
60% of 3rd-6th grade students will meet or exceed standards in English Language Arts as measured by the CAASPP.
Less than 20% of students school-wide will be classified as needing intensive intervention as measured by end-of-year grade level benchmarks
on the DIBELs assessment.
Baseline fall benchmark data was
collected school-wide (TK-6th) for
reading fluency with the DIBELs
assessment.
Core: 61%, Intensive: 24%
Baseline benchmark data was collected
in grades 2nd-6th grade for reading
comprehension with the Scholastic
Reading Inventory (SRI).
Core: 54%, Intensive: 29%
CASSPP data:
54% Met/Exceeded standards
1
this data?
of this goal?
Overall, we are significantly up in
performance in English Language Arts as
compared to a year ago. Students
maintained their achievement from spring
benchmarks to fall benchmarks.
Students will participate in benchmark
assessments 3x year for both the DIBELs
(TK-6th) and SRI (2nd-6th). Progress
monitoring will be performed monthly for
all students determined as needing
intensive and strategic intervention.
A larger than expected number of students
remained in the range of needing intensive
intervention. It was noted that many
students made significant gains, although not School Site Council documents
enough to move to the strategic level of
achievement.
STRATEGY: During 2015-2016, Isla Vista School will fully implement our MTSS (Multi-Tiered System of Supports) to support students with
superior core instruction as well as support additional needs identified for achieving grade level standards in English Language Arts.
Cost and Funding
Source
No additional expense
Action/Date
Person(s)
Responsible
August/Sept. 2015
Teachers, principal
Professional Development, K-6th assessments administration
& benchmarks review, student goal setting
August – May 2015-2016
Teachers, principal
Students will be assessed in reading with the DIBELs
assessment (K-6th) and SRI (2nd-6th) three times per year by
the classroom teacher. Students with intensive or strategic
needs will be progress monitored a minimum of once per
month.
SRI Technical Support,
$1850/General Ed.
Teachers, principal
Staff will meet in Monthly Data Team meetings to set student
goals, monitor progress, analyze data, and determine next
steps.
Teachers, principal
Teachers will meet multiple times per week to collaborate
regarding student progress and next steps during students’
specialist times
CORE Funds used for
student specialists, no
additional expense for
teacher collaboration time
September 2015
Teachers, site tech
leads, principal
Teachers will be trained on Google Classroom as a means for
posting information weekly regarding grade level collaboration
meetings in order to share information vertically across grade
levels
Funds for 1 additional site
tech leads/year
$750/LCAP
Teachers, staff
Learning Team time will provide 45 minutes daily
(160days/year) in 1st-6th grades to target skills needed for
intervention or extension. Additional Credentialed Teacher
Tutors contracted. Smaller class ratios are used for more
intensive groups.
CT (Credentialed Teacher)
support
$21,600/LCAP, Title I
August 2015
Teachers
Additional SIPPs systematic phonics instruction curriculum
purchased to be used during Learning Teams.
Cost of SIPPs program
$7418.20/LCAP
2
Task/Date
Learning Center
teachers, 4th-6th grade
General education students (4th-6th) with intensive reading
needs will participate for one hour, 3-5x/week in the
systematic READ 180 intensive intervention program.
System upgrade to Next
Generation READ 180
(Microsoft Funds covered
majority, $4239.10/Gen.
Ed.
Library Media
Specialist
All students will participate in a school wide reading incentive
program through our library and classroom teachers with
Scholastic Reading Counts.
Reading Counts annual
tests update
$800/Gen. Ed.
December – May 20152016
Learning Center
K-6th students determined to have significantly intensive
needs not making adequate progress will participate in a Tier
III intervention, of additional intervention support 1:1/small
group targeting specific goals.
ASES Director
Students with significant learning or social/emotional needs
will be identified as high priority to participate in our afterschool program serving ~145 students daily.
$192,600/ASES grant &
IVYP collaboration
Teachers, CTs
Grade levels will be supported daily with additional CT
(credentialed teacher) time to allocate based on needs from
student progress monitoring.
CT Support
$60,538.26/LCAP, Title I,
Title III Immigrant, Title III
LEP
December – May 20152016
Learning Center, K
Teachers
Kindergarten intervention will be available for the students
identified as needing the most intensive intervention by the
KSEP, DIBELs, and other K benchmark assessments.
Partnership with THRIVE
Isla Vista (KSEP data), CT
support $16,200
Principal, Site Tech
Leads, Computer
Teacher
A blend of technology devices (iPads and Chromebooks) will
be purchased and utilized to give students additional access
points to rich material as well as more complex and immediate
feedback. Self-assessment and evaluation skills, problemsolving, and the ability to determine relevance are also
addressed.
Purchase of devices
$20,900/ LCAP
Teachers, Principal
Professional Development for teachers to implement and
integrate technology in classroom. Attend CUE (Computer
Using Educator’s Conference and Google Summit)
$4500/Title I
3
Principal, Data Teams,
MTSS Team (includes
school personnel and
parents of individual
child of concern)
Students not determined to be making adequate progress will
be discussed with grade level colleagues during Data Team
meetings. Progress will be documented. Students not making
progress after multiple Data Team meetings will be brought to
a MTSS (Multi-Tiered System of Supports) meeting with
parents and school experts to further analyze data, work
samples, targeted goals, interventions, and next steps.
Progress on goals and the students’ response to increasing
intensity of interventions will be monitored closely by the
MTSS team.
Funds for MTSS meeting
substitutes
$720/LCAP
Teachers, School
Psychologist, Principal
MTSS/RTI team participates in district professional
development following up on the successful implementation of
the MTSS process on our site.
Teachers, Principal,
parents
Parents will be supported in learning about advocating for
their child academically, working as a partner in collaboration
with the school, and learning more about Common Core
Standards during parent-teacher conferences, PTA, ELAC,
and SSC meetings
After-School Tutoring
Coordinator
After school tutoring for 5th-6th grade students by community
volunteers
$750/LCAP, Fund
Coordinator/year
4
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal 3: Apply best practices in teaching and learning, including effective implementation of new State
Standards, including mathematics, ELA, and science
SCHOOL GOALs 2: Math
During the 2015-2016 school year, teachers will become trained and implement the new district adopted math materials with fidelity to support all
students in the teaching, instruction, and learning of the new CCSS in mathematics. Assessment tools and processes for the collection of
mathematics data will be reviewed and determined to be in place for data collection and analysis for the 2016-2017 year.
GUSD adopted a new math curriculum
this year. Bridges for K-5, CPM for 6th
grade.
We currently do not collect common
mathematics assessments data.
this data?
of this goal?
Math curriculum and development has been
a focus during the last several years’ teacher
collaboration meetings. GUSD adopted new
math curriculum this year. Teachers have
identified this process as an area of needed
focus for the year before we can move
forward with systematic mathematics
intervention and supports.
Assessments for data collection will be
determined and ready for school-wide
decision making for identifying additional
math needs systematically in 2016-2017.
Teacher feedback and observation will be
utilized to determine full-scale math
implementation was achieved.
STRATEGY: Student learning will be strengthened through professional development and collaboration.
Action/Date
Task/Date
August – May
2015-2016
Teachers in Grade
Level Teams, principal
Grade level teams will focus on math during district
professional development and grade level collaboration.
No additional site expense
August – May
2015-2016
Teachers in Grade
An additional grade level planning day is allocated for
each team to further support the development of math
curriculum, planning, discussion of student progress, and
identification of assessments useful for data collection.
Grade Level Time for
planning & observations
$6000/LCAP
5
August – May
2015-2016
Teachers in Grade
Grade level teams will collaborate and focus on problemsolving daily—supporting each other with the
development of curriculum and rubrics, as well as
discussing student progress.
August – May
2015-2016
Teachers in Grade
Grade levels will share successes and challenges with
vertical teams during staff meetings and on staff’s
Google Classroom
August – May
2015-2016
Curriculum Council
teachers, principal
Several teachers will participate on the GUSD
Curriculum Council and bring information back to the
staff during staff meetings
LEA GOAL: Goal 3: The District will meet or exceed CELDT requirements for the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives
(AMAOs) 1, 2 and 3 during the 2015-16 school year.
SCHOOL GOAL 3: English Learners
62% of Isla Vista students will demonstrate growth in language fluency in order to meet CELDT requirements as delineated in the LEA Plan, as
determined by the annual CELDT test and ADEPT benchmark assessments.
Data from 2014-2015 CELDT and
ADEPT formative assessments. The
Gap Finder formative assessment is
utilized for long-term English Learners
making minimal progress.
this data?
of this goal?
Isla Vista’s English Learning students are
making steady progress in achieving
language fluency as measured by the
CELDT and ADEPT assessments. Some
students are taking longer than one year to
move from the Intermediate fluency level into
Early Advanced.
ADEPT assessment will be given 3 times
during the year to all students. (Baseline,
mid-year, end of year)
CELDT will be given during the state
mandated window ending on Oct. 30.
6
STRATEGY: During 2015-2016, English Learners at Isla Vista will participate in a school-wide 30 minute, daily designated English Language
Development period, taught at their language level with lower than average teacher to student class size. Teachers are Systematic ELD trained
and implement systematic instruction. Student groupings are flexible through the year based on CELDT and ADEPT assessments. Additionally,
teachers will explore the implementation of English Language Learner instructional strategies throughout the day in all content areas to make
curriculum more accessible.
Action/Date
Task/Date
August – May 20152016
Classroom Teachers
and Learning Center
Teacher
Classroom teachers and Learning Center Teacher
will baseline and benchmark ADEPT test
No additional cost
ELD Teachers in
conjunction with
ongoing feedback from
classroom teachers.
Certificated Tutors will support the Systematic
School-Wide Designated ELD time (8 tutors x 180
days, .65hour/day for instruction & planning)
Certificated Tutor cost
$24,570
Classroom Teachers,
Learning Center
Teacher, Principal
Classroom teachers will use of Academic
Language and engagement strategies (Kate
Kinsella) throughout content area instruction.
No additional cost
Classroom Teachers,
Learning Center
Teacher, Principal
Professional Development during Site Staff
Meetings (Principal/Classroom Teachers)
No additional cost
Teachers, Principal
Principal and team of teachers will attend
Turnaround Schools Conference. Team will
provide professional development for staff during
staff meetings. Staff will work collaboratively to
review and implement best practices.
Teachers, Principal
Character education development to support
student social/emotional progress, allowing for
students’ full focus on academic achievement
ELAC Committee,
Principal
Parent Education and training in school student
expectations, CCSS standards, and advocacy for
their children, & ELAC committee routines
7
Conference, substitutes,
accommodations, travel
$7280/Title I
Character Counts and
Second Step curriculum and
materials, $5000/LCAP
$350/ Title III LEP
All Isla Vista School students will increase reading proficiency as measured by DIBELs, SRI, and
CAASPP assessments.
Formative Assessment Guiding Targets:
65% of K-6th grade Isla Vista students will demonstrate grade level proficiency (Core Level)
in reading achievement as measured by the DIBELs end of year benchmark assessments.
60% of 2nd-6th grade students will perform at the Core or Enrichment levels of the Scholastic
Reading Inventory.
60% of 3rd-6th grade students will meet or exceed standards in English Language Arts as
measured by the CAASPP.
Less than 20% of students school-wide will be classified as needing intensive intervention
as measured by end-of-year grade level benchmarks on the DIBELs assessment.
SCHOOL GOALs 2: Math
During the 2015-2016 school year, teachers will become trained and implement the new district
adopted math materials with fidelity to support all students in the teaching, instruction, and learning
of the new CCSS in mathematics. Assessment tools and processes for the collection of
mathematics data will be reviewed and determined to be in place for data collection and analysis for
the 2016-2017 year.
62% of Isla Vista students will demonstrate growth in language fluency in order to meet CELDT
requirements as delineated in the LEA Plan, as determined by the annual CELDT test and ADEPT
benchmark assessments.
Actions to be Taken to Reach This
1
Goal
Consider all appropriate dimensions
(e.g., Teaching and Learning, Staffing,
and Professional Development)
•
Community Liaisons
Start Date
Completion
Date
August
2015 May 2016
•
2
August
2015 May 2016
Provide support and
translations, as needed,
to homeless students and
development that
supports the District’s
plans for improving
student achievement
Estimated
Cost
$182,291
$9,503
Funding
Source
(itemize for
each
source)
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Title I
1
2
See Appendix A: Chart of Legal Specifics for the Single Plan for Student Achievement for content required
by each program or funding source supporting this goal.
List the date an action will be taken, or will begin, and the date it will be completed.
8
•
English Learners
August
2015 -
English Language
primary language
test
$50,431
Title I &
LCAP
$35,000
Title I &
LCAP
May 2016
August
2015 -
meeting materials
$1,632
Title I
$1,000
Title I
$85,523
Title I
May 2016
•
•
advise implementation of
Compensatory Education Programs
and Programs for English Learners
August
2015 -
May 2016
•
regulations
August
2015 –
Ongoing
administration to
programs
•
Services
August
2015 -
Program Improvement
May 2016
9
State Programs
enrollment
only)
succeed in school
$72,681
$
$
$
$
$
$
only)
$
$
(Carryover only)
only)
10
Allocation
$
$
$
$
Consolidated
in the SWP
$
$
Federal Programs
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$75,828
$
allocation).
$
3
$
$25,164
Program
eligible LEAs
$
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP3
11
achievement
$
Other federal funds (Title III Immigrant)
$2,704
$
$
$
this school
$176,377
Note: Other Title I-supported activities that are not shown on this page may be included in the
SPSA Action Plan.
12
1
Laura Zizumbo, Chairperson
Shreya Parikh
Morgan Gainer
Regina Davis
Janet Seiler
Mary Kahn
4
EC Section 52852
13
1
3
Secondary
Student
Other School
Staff
1
Parent or
Community
Member
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
14
SPSA.
SPSA 2014-2015 ANNUAL EVALUATION
SPSA Priorities (2014-2015)
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils:
reduce disparity in levels of achievement between student groups.
70% of TK-6th grade Isla Vista students will demonstrate grade level proficiency (Core Level) in
reading achievement as measured by the DIBELs end of year benchmark assessments.
60% of 2nd-6th grade students will perform at the Core or Enrichment levels of the Scholastic
Reading Inventory.
Less than 20% of students school-wide will be classified as needing intensive intervention as
measured by end-of-year grade level benchmarks on the DIBELs assessment.
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal 3: Apply best practices in teaching and learning, including
effective implementation of new State Standards, including mathematics, ELA,
and science
SCHOOL GOAL 2: Math
During the 2014-2015 school year, teachers will develop strategies and curriculum to support
the teaching, instruction, and learning of the new CCSS in mathematics to support all students.
LEA GOAL: Goal 3: The District will meet or exceed CELDT requirements for the
Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) 1, 2 and 3 during the 2014-15
school year.
80% of Isla Vista students will demonstrate growth in language fluency in order to meet CELDT
requirements as delineated in the LEA Plan, as determined by the annual CELDT test and
ADEPT benchmark assessments.
15
Plan Implementation, Strategies and Activities
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
16
Teachers were trained in assessments and the use of data to guide instruction.
All students were benchmark assessed three times per year. Students identified
with additional needs were progress monitored monthly.
All students set reading goals.
Teachers and support staff met monthly during Data Teams to review student
progress and update student goals.
Targeted intervention was implemented in first through third grade during
Learning Teams, Kindergarten and Fourth grades provided intervention
embedded in the classroom with additional support, and fifth/sixth grade
participated in an intensive program for those with that need.
Students not making adequate progress toward their goals were referred to Child
Success Team meetings to review alternative solutions and strategies. Our
MTSS (multi-tiered system of supports) team participated in further professional
development in this area of need.
Materials were purchased to support systematic implementation of intervention
and extension.
All students participated in our Reading Counts program as a collaboration
between librarian and teachers.
Approximately 145 students participated in our after-school program, daily.
Priority was given to those students with the greatest academic and/or
social/emotional needs as identified by classroom teachers and school
personnel. About an average of 50 students participated in our before-school
drop-in program for students in need of childcare or tutoring.
Our school psychologist, psychologist intern, and UCSB Power of Play
undergraduate volunteers supported many students on campus with a range of
social/emotional needs—such as self-regulation instruction and friendship skills.
Teachers collaborated around instructional planning during monthly release
times provided by the district, substitute days provided for teams to plan and
implement math strategies, as well as weekly grade level collaboration time
during PE.
Additional technology devices were acquired to support sixth grade to 1:1 iPads,
allowing for a flipped classroom model during math as well as more student
engagement overall.
Several teachers attended training on the New ELD/ELA standards, sharing this
information with staff. Teachers were encouraged to expand ELD strategies
throughout all subject areas.
A parent education night was hosted for parents to learn more about the
Common Core standards in ELA and Math. Additionally, several families
participated in a district joint partnership at the Community Center for Spanish
speaking families to learn more about how to support their children in school.
Seven teachers and the principal attended the No Excuses University Institute.
Staff planned steps for implementation for the 2015-2016 year.
• School Site Council reviewed the teacher and family survey data, student
achievement data, and budget information to develop school priorities, goals, and
strategies.
• The ELAC (English Language Learner Advisory Committee) reviewed the same
teacher and family survey data, student achievement data, and budget
information as the SSC. They asked questions and provided feedback that the
principal shared with the SSC.
• As data was collected and student goals set, this information was shared with
SSC, ELAC, teachers at staff meetings, and families during student-teacher
conferences.
Outcomes
• Fall 2014 DIBELs fluency data identified 25% of K-6 students as needing
intensive intervention, 16% of K-6 students as needing strategic intervention, and
59% of students on grade level or above. DIBELs data is designed to be one
data point to help teachers identify which students may need further support to
be on grade level by the end of the year. It should be noted that we observed a
large number of kindergarten students showing no need for intervention at the
beginning of the year based on this one measure. We anticipate looking at an
additional measure for K in the 2015-2016 school year to better identify student
needs.
• Spring 2015 DIBELs fluency data identified 24% of K-6 students as needing
intensive intervention, 15% of students needing strategic intervention, and 61%
as grade level or above.
• Fall 2014 SRI comprehension data for grades 2nd-6th identified 49% of students
with intensive/strategic needs, 21% of students at grade level, and 23% of
students above grade level with a baseline of 44% of students on or above
grade level in the fall of 2014 in reading.
• Spring 2015 SRI comprehension data identified 47% of K-6 students as having
intensive/strategic needs, 23% as at grade level, and 30% as above grade level
with an overall of 54% of students at or above grade level in the spring of
2015 in reading.
• CAASPP data (formerly referred to as SBAC) shows that 55% of Isla Vista
students in 3rd through 6th grade for the 2014-2015 school year met or
exceeded the standard in English Language Arts. This is above the state
average (44%) and above the Goleta Union School District average (54%).
• CAASPP data (formerly referred to as SBAC) shows that 46% of Isla Vista
students in 3rd through 6th grade for the 2014-2015 school year met or
exceeded the standard in Mathematics. This is above the state average
(33%) and above the Goleta Union School District average (45%).
• 61.1% of English Learners have made their annual target progress. We
exceeded the state target of 59%. Our data shows that our beginning students
make significant progress, but growth out of early Intermediate and intermediate
progress gains are slower.
17
ISLA VISTA SCHOOL
POLICY
Isla Vista School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Isla Vista School is committed to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at Isla Vista School that welcomes
I.
1. Isla Vista School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
school committees reflects the population characteristics of Isla
Vista School.
18
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
19
achievement shall be a part of the educational program at Isla
Vista School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about Isla Vista School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. Isla Vista School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
program.
20
ESCUELA DE ISLA VISTA
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Isla Vista reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Isla Vista se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Isla Vista que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de Isla Vista celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas,
21
la escuela de Isla Vista.
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
22
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela.
educativo en la escuela de Isla Vista.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de Isla Vista se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Isla Vista distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
23
de la escuela.
programa.
24
Kellogg Elementary School
2015 - 2016
Part II: The Single Plan for Student Achievement
School: Kellogg Elementary
Principal: Kim Bruzzese
performance of all students. 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 the 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:
Kim Bruzzese
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
(805) 681-1277
Address:
475 Cambridge Drive
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
1
Performance
8
9
12
13
Form G: Single Plan For Student Achievement
14
21
LEA GOAL: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between student
subgroups. (LCAP, Goal 1)
SCHOOL GOAL #1: On the Spring DIBELs (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills), 70% of K-6 students will be at the core
level. Grade 3 through 6 students will show a 5% increase from 64% to 69% on the 2016 ELA Smarter Balanced Assessment.
A combination of AimsWeb and DIBELs
assessment data from last year was used to
write this year’s goal. The following
assessments were given for different grade
levels (LNF-Letter Naming Fluency; NWNonsense Word; RCBM-Reading CurriculumBased Measurement)
DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early
Literacy Skills - Kindergarten and third grade)
SBAC (Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium-Grade 3-6)
Percent of students at CORE:
K- 73% LNF-DIBELs
1st- 80% NW
2nd- 75% RCBM
3rd-70% DIBELs, SBAC 70% Met or Exceeded
4th- 94% RCBM, SBAC 62% Met or Exceeded
5th- 71%,RCBM, SBAC 66% Met or Exceeded
6th- 63% RCBM, SBAC 58% Met or Exceeded
Multiple measures ensure that the staff
can conduct ongoing, productive data
analysis to provide systematic
interventions for students needing Tier 2
and Tier 3 interventions. The combination
of 2014-15 AimsWeb/DIBELs data
indicated 73% of Kellogg students met
benchmark targets by the spring trimester.
Initial, mid- and end-of-year DIBELS in all
grades.
Progress monitoring (SIPPs, DIBELS) for
targeted students.
Review SBAC scores following 2016
assessment.
Budget documents
School-wide 64% of students Met or Exceeded
ELA Standards as measured on the SBAC.
1
STRATEGY: During 2015–16, Kellogg will implement school-wide, research-based ELA instructional strategies and interventions to identified
students as part of the Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) structure. We will use the DIBELs ELA Assessments in grades K-6th to identify
students who could benefit from weekly intervention in ELA provided by the Learning Center Staff in the areas of reading fluency and
comprehension. The progress of struggling readers and English learners will be measured by benchmark assessments (baseline, trimester probes,
summative) administered throughout the year as part of Kellogg’s MTSS strategy.
Action/Date
Task/Date
Sept 2015 - Baseline
Assessment of all students
K-6 with DIBELs
assessment tool and review
of Spring 2015 SBAC
scores for current 4th-6th
grade students.
Teaching staff, Learning
Center Staff,
School Psychologist, and
Principal
Oct 2015- Using the
baseline data as well as
additional classroom data,
grade level teams, LCT
staff, principal and
psychologist hold a data
team meeting is held to
discuss assessment and
progress monitoring data.
Students needing Tier 2 and
Tier 3 interventions receive
targeted, small group
intervention instruction,
specifically in reading
comprehension and reading
fluency. Tier 2 and Tier 3
level students will also
access online Lexia
programming to support
Learning Center Teacher
and staff in coordination
with classroom teachers,
principal and
psychologist
August-May- work with core MTSS team members to
implement MTSS strategies throughout site.
September/October 2015- Conduct baseline
assessments to identify students in need of intervention
at a grade level data team meeting. Identify and serve
students via classroom and LCT supports for
intervention purposes during targeted, grade level
intervention time. Create schedule that can
accommodate grade level intervention time.
October 2015- Provide ELA intervention for identified
Tier 3 and Tier 2 students.
November/December 2015- Administer progress
monitoring assessments according to district
assessment schedule assessments to faciliatate
February data team check in.
SY15-16
Conduct trimester meetings to develop intervention
plans for targeted students.
Learning Center Classroom where appropriate.
Progress monitor targeted students.
Conduct benchmark measures (3x year); (DIBELS,
BPST)
Choose additional research-based ELA intervention
materials, i.e. Six minute fluency, SIPPS
Create a schedule conducive to MTSS intervention.
Principal will create Lexia access for Tier 2 and Tier 3
MTSS training -district funded
Tutors - $60,000
($500 approximate)
100 site licenses for Lexia,
$4,255 (T3 LEP)
Release time for Data Team
Meetings ($2,000)
2
ongoing growth in ELA.
January & April 2016 Using assessment program
data, grade level data
teams will meet again with
administration, LCT staff
and psychologist to discuss
progress via DIBELs data.
Learning Center Teacher
and staff in coordination
with classroom teachers,
principal and
psychologist
MTSS meetings will be
scheduled throughout the
year for students not
showing progress and/or
those who have potential of
learning disability present.
MTSS Team: Principal,
psychologist, regular
education teacher,
special education
teacher, speech
pathologist
steps for SY 2015-2016.
Principal
intervention students. Teachers will help promote usage
at home by families at conference time. (Oct. – June)
3
LEA GOAL: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce disparity in levels of achievement between student
subgroups. (LCAP Goal 1)
Coherent standards-aligned Instructional program in all school to improve student achievement, including; the development of factfluency and part-whole thinking; engaging the Mathematical Practices through Number Talks and mathematical discourse; and
implementation of the CCSS math content standards. (LEA Plan Goal II)
SCHOOL GOAL #2: Teachers shall fully implement the Bridges K-5 and College Preparatory Math (CPM) Programs during the 2015-16
school year. Teachers will record post assessment data on a google data sheet and later the EADMs data management system to
provide information for grade level MTSS data team meetings as well as individual MTSS meetings.
AimsWeb year-to-year comparison (QDMQuantity Discrimination Measurement; NWNonsense Word; M-CAP- Mathematics Concepts
and Applications; M-COMP – Mathematics
Computation.)
SBAC (Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium)
Percent of students at CORE:
K- 73% QDM
1st- 78% QDM
2nd- 43% M-CAP
3rd-37% M-COMP, SBAC 72% Met or Exceeded
4th- 53% M-COMP, SBAC 40% Met or Exceeded
School-wide 58% of students Met or Exceeded
Mathematics Standards as measured on the
SBAC.
data?
Multiple measures ensure that the staff can conduct
ongoing, productive data analysis to provide
systematic interventions for students needing Tier 2
and Tier 3 interventions. The combination of 2014-15
AimsWeb data indicated 74% of Kellogg students
met benchmark targets by the spring trimester.
Discrepancies between AimsWeb and SBAC scores
were noted, specifically in grade 3.
Post unit/chapter assessments will be
monitored through the MTSS process in
all grades at the three, data team
meetings and as needed for individual
student MTSS meetings.
Review SBAC scores following 2016
assessment.
Using curriculum based assessments and a math
program with a strong scope and sequence, a more
predictable connection between classroom
assessment and Smarter Balance results is
expected.
Budget documents
4
STRATEGY: During 2015–16, teachers will complete the Bridges and CPM adopted math programs and record post assessment data for review by
the MTSS team at data team meetings. This is an implementation goal.
Action/Date
Sept 2015 - Assessment of all students K-6
with Bridges and CPM (6th) assessment tools
and review of Spring 2015 SBAC scores for
current 4th-6th grade students will take place.
Teaching staff, Learning
Center Staff,
School Psychologist,
and Principal
Nov/Dec 2015- Using the baseline
curriculum-based data as well as additional
SBAC scores in grades 4-6, grade level team
members along with principal and LCT staff
determined which students would best benefit
from Tier 2 and Tier 3 interventions.
Learning Center
Teacher and staff in
coordination with
classroom teachers,
principal and
psychologist
This year’s implementation of the MTSS
model with a focus on ELA was rolled out with
the understanding that Math intervention
would be added once personnel were in place
with ELA intervention schedules are up and
running. Grade levels with the greatest
student needs were started mid-October.
Learning Center
Teacher and staff in
coordination with
classroom teachers,
principal and
psychologist
February & April 2016 - Using assessment
data from the math program, grade level data
teams will meet with principal, LCT staff and
psychologist to discuss progress via math
concepts.
MTSS meetings will be scheduled for
students not showing progress and/or have
potential of learning disability present.
Monitor implementation steps for SY 20152016.
MTSS Team: Principal,
psychologist, regular
education teacher,
special education
teacher, speech
pathologist
Principal
Task/Date
Cost and Funding
Source
August-May- Train staff in Bridges and
CPM curriculums. Conduct district-wide
PD to provide training in available
interventions and research-based
practices.
September/October 2015- Provide
google sheet for teachers to input
Bridges/CPM end of unit/chapter
assessments.
February & April 2015- Review
intervention assessment data in a data
team format to monitor progress of Tier 2
and Tier 3 students.
*MTSS training -district
funded
SY15-16
Conduct data team meetings to develop
intervention plans for targeted students in
mathematics.
*Release time for Data
Team Meetings ($2,000)
*Learning Center Teacherdistrict funded
*Learning Center
Certificated Tutors $60,000
*Math intervention
materials ($200
approximate)
*Listed also in Goal 1
Develop Tier II and Tier III interventions in
the classroom and Learning Center
Classroom.
Ongoing support through weekly grade
level collaboration meetings, professional
development opportunities, and staff
meetings will be provided to staff to ensure
best instructional practices are being used
to support our English Language Learners.
5
LEA GOAL: The District will meet or exceed CELDT requirements for the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) 1 and 2
during the 2015-16 school year.
SCHOOL GOAL #3: English Learner (EL) Goal - 62% of Kellogg’s EL students will demonstrate growth in language fluency in order to meet AMAO
1 (Annual Growth) goal as determined by CELDT requirements for the 2015-16 school year as delineated in the LEA Plan. Kellogg EL students with
less than 5 years in the United States will meet the AMAO 2 (Attaining English Proficiency) target of 25.5% for the 2015-16 school year. Progress
will be monitored throughout the year using CELDT data and ADEPT benchmark assessments.
goal?
data?
of this goal?
AMAO 1 derived from 2014-15 CELDT
score:
75.3% grew a minimum of one level in
their English proficiency rates . (Federal
target: 60.5)
38.3% of our EL students who attained English
proficiency have been in the ELD program less than
five years.
75.3% of our students demonstrated band growth from
2013-2014 to 2014-2015 CELDT scores.
21% or 7 of our 34 grade 3-6 students Met or Exceeded
ELA standards in the baseline year of SBAC.
40% or 15 grade 3-6 students Met or Exceeded
standards in Mathematics in the baseline year of SBAC.
Additionally, out of 73 EL students last year, 18
demonstrated no growth as determined by the CELDT.
Last, when comparing English Only to English Learning
students on the Smarter Balanced, EL students
consistently score lower than their EO counterparts.
83% of English Only students Met or Exceeded ELA
standards and 79% of English Learners Met or
Exceeded standards in Mathematics as evidenced in
the 2015 SBAC
CELDT Scores
ADEPT Scores
DIBELS
Band growth
SBAC Scores
AMAO 2 derived from 2014-15 CELDT
score: 38.3% proficiency rate. (Federal
target: 24.2)
SBAC ELA: 21% of ELs Met or
Exceeded Standards
SBAC Math: 40% of ELs Met or
Exceeded Standards
during the year to all students. (Baseline, midyear, end of year) The May 2015 ADEPT
score will be reviewed and compared to the
fall 2015 ADEPT score.
mandated window ending on Oct. 30.
Principal will monitor effective practices
through use of formal and informal
observations.
6
STRATEGY: During 2015–16, Kellogg will implement research-based instructional strategies and interventions in coordination with the data from
the ADEPT and CELDT assessments, to determine and address the language fluency needs of English learners (baseline, at trimesters, annually).
Additionally we will continue to refine the MTSS process as a way to support and monitor progress of our EL students.
Action/Date
SY2015-2016
Conduct systematic ELD with instructional
strategies that emphasize language
development.
Coordinate an MTSS schedule that facilitates
integrated and designated ELD support
throughout the school day.
Provide informational flyers to EL families
Sept. 2015 – ADEPT administered to
kindergarten ELs and new EL students; 30
minutes of daily English Language Development
instruction provided to all EL’s by proficiency
level using Systematic ELD best practices.
Classroom teachers will use instructional
practices from Kate Kinsella to scaffold learning
when necessary, incorporate use of sentence
frames and academic vocabulary to ensure
rigorous and relevant Tier 1 instruction for
particularly EL students.
Dec. 2015 – ADEPT administered to all EL
students; EL groups revisited in January to
determine best placement after reviewing
ADEPT/CELDT data. Final ADEPT May 2016.
Person(s)
Responsible
ELD instructor
Principal
Learning
Center
teachers
Classroom
teachers
Teachers and
ELD
Certificated
Tutors
Principal,
Teachers
Principal, ELD
Certificated
Tutors,
Teachers
Task/Date
August-May- continue to train a core team in the MTSS
process along with staff
SY15-16- Implement ELD instruction using systematic
ELD with supplemental curricular materials.
Utilize evidenced-based instructional strategies, i.e.
close reading, sentence frames, academic language
ADEPT Testing of all new students in K-6 will take
place in September, with returning students being
reassessed in December. Based on proficiency levels,
staff will provide 30 minutes of targeted, daily ELD
instruction.
Ongoing support through weekly grade level
collaboration meetings, professional development
opportunities, and staff meetings will be provided to
staff to ensure best instructional practices are being
used to support our English Language Learners.
Cost and Funding
Source
(Itemize for Each
Source)
ELA/ELD framework
(district funded)
Systematic ELD
training (district
funded)
Learning Center
Teacher
(district funded)
Certificated Tutors for
ELD $60,000
(LCAP)
Staff will review December ADEPT data and revisit the
need to regroup students based on proficiency level
findings based upon CELDT and ADEPT scores.
Administration of the May ADEPT will be reviewed and
will determine fall placements for ELD instruction.
7
Start/
Completion Date
Estimated
Cost
Funding
•
Community Liaisons
$182,291
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
student achievement
$9,503
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Title I
•
Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
administer test
$50,431
Title I & LCAP
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
conferences
$35,000
Title I & LCAP
•
English Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
materials
$1,632
Title I
•
regulations
August 2015 –
Ongoing
$1,000
Title I
•
Services
August 2015 –
May, 2016
Improvement
$85,523
Title I
8
State Programs
enrollment
only)
succeed in school
Allocation
$0
$56,525
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
only)
$0
$0
(Carryover only)
only)
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$0
$0
9
$0
$0
Federal Programs
$56,525
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$
allocation).
$
1
$0
$9,868
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP1
10
Program
eligible LEAs
achievement
$0
$0
$2,069
$
$
$11,937
this school
$68,462
11
1
Secondary
Student
Other School
Staff
4
Parent or
Community
Member
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
California Education Code describes the required composition of the School Site Council
(SSC). The SSC shall be composed of the principal and representatives of: teachers
selected by teachers at the school; other school personnel selected by other school
personnel at the school; parents of pupils attending the school selected by such parents;
and, in secondary schools, pupils selected by pupils attending the school.2 The current
make-up of the SSC is as follows:
Kim Bruzzese
Amy Damron
Alejandra Navarro
Sora Young
Nora Zwehl Quintero
Rhonda Redkey
Linda Andrews
Nadra Ehrman
Diana Garza
Karie Ide
Dena Schultz
Karen van Gool
2
1
6
0
EC Section 52852
12
KELLOGG SCHOOL SPSA ANNUAL EVALUATION
Plan Priorities:
Form G: Goals from the 2014-2015 Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA):
GOAL #1:
SCHOOL GOAL #1: ELA 80% of Kellogg students will meet grade level performance
expectations in English Language Arts in the spring of 2015 as determined by the AimsWeb
assessment in all grades, with the exception of third grade which will be using the DIBELs
(Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) assessment.
Kindergarten students will perform at “benchmark” using the AimsWeb Letter Naming Fluency
assessment.
First grade students will perform at “benchmark” using the AimsWeb Nonsense Word Fluency
assessment.
Students will be expected to score at “benchmark” using a reading fluency assessment in grades
2-6.
(LEA GOAL: LCAP GOAL 1: Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils; reduce
disparity in levels of achievement between student subgroups.)
GOAL #2:
SCHOOL GOAL: Math 75% of Kellogg students will show grade level proficiency at numerical
fact fluency as determined by reaching mastery of grade level FactsWise goals in grades 1-3.
70% of Kellogg students in grades 4-6 will show grade level proficiency as evidenced using
AimsWeb math assessments.
disparity in levels of achievement between
student subgroups.
LEA PLAN GOAL 2: Coherent standards-aligned Instructional program in all school to improve
student achievement, including; the development of fact-fluency and part-whole thinking;
engaging the Mathematical Practices through Number Talks and mathematical discourse; and
implementation of the CCSS math content standards.)
GOAL #3:
SCHOOL GOAL: English Learner Goal 60.5% of Kellogg’s English Learner students will
demonstrate growth in language fluency in order to meet AMAO 1 (Annual Growth) goal as
determined by CELDT requirements for the 2014-15 school year as delineated in the LEA Plan.
Kellogg students with less than 5 years in the United States, will meet the AMAO 2 (Attaining
English Proficiency) target of 24.2 for the 2014-15 school year.
Progress will be monitored throughout the year using CELDT data and ADEPT benchmark
assessments.
disparity in levels of achievement between
student subgroups.
LCAP GOAL 3: The District will meet or exceed CELDT requirements for the Annual
Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) 1, 2
and 3 during the 2014-15 school year.)
14
Major expenditures supporting these priorities:
1. Certificated Tutors to support ELD and two combination classes- $42,498
2. Instructional materials to support new standards - $6,196
3. Funds used to provide AimsWeb and Lexia - $5,015
4. Teachers attended conferences off site to support ELD and Math
Instruction (FactsWise, Daily 5 ELA Training, ADEPT training) - $3,719
Plan Implementation:
1. Staff received materials, time lines, staff meeting and district release time to
review AimsWeb data throughout the year. Data was used to identify students
needing extra support in the learning center in both math and ELA. A google
document was maintained to monitor progress three times over the course of the
year. (Site measures using AimsWeb and DIBELS was used in the absence of
standardized state test scores, (i.e. STAR).
2. Teachers were given district Professional Development opportunities to teach
strategies for writing summaries of narrative and summaries of expository text at
the beginning of the year. District Teacher On Special Assignment (TOSA)
provided support to teachers across the district. Grade level meetings were held to
review samples, discuss patterns and plan future instruction to meet needs of
students in their writing. Results were shared at a staff meeting.
3. Certificated Tutor support for English Language Development and Academic
Language Development classes for Learning Teams was fully implemented 30
minutes a day to all English Language Learners. Kellogg used Certificated Tutors
daily to support reduced teacher to student ratios for each grade level’s 30
minutes ELD instruction.
Strategies in the current SPSA that were not fully implemented as described in the
plan or were not implemented within the specified timelines:
1. Although 80% was the school-wide target for ELA, school-wide 73% of Kellogg
students performed at the proficient level in ELA, with specific grade level
performances indicated on Table 1.
2. Although 70% was the school-wide target for Math in grades 4-6, school-wide
73% of Kellogg students performed at the proficient level in Math using either the
M-COMP or M-CAP AimsWeb assessment. Specific grade level performances
indicated on Table 2.
3. FactsWise fluency rates were consistently monitored throughout the year in
grades 1-3, although difficulty with our AimsWeb google document prevented an
accurate tool to monitor progress. Tracking of growth across the year was only
possible in second grade.
4. All AMAO 1 and 2 state targets were met based on the CELDT scores. No federal
15
accountability was available for last year due to the State’s test piloting of
Smarter Balance Assessment. No AMAO 3 could be determined due to the lack of
state standardized testing data. (This was true for all California public schools.)
What specific actions related to those strategies were eliminated or modified during
the year?
Hard data on student progress in the areas of ELA and Math were limited and not aligned
with CCSS. Collection of common data was not comprehensive or relevant to goals. This
was an area of weakness last year.
Identify barriers to full or timely implementation of the strategies identified above.
Last year we had a limited, district-wide data collection process and no Common
Formative Assessments in the areas of Math. The use of DIBELS assessments in third
grade and later kindergarten, provided an opportunity to view some district-wide
progress. The use of DIBELS and the newly adopted math program (Bridges, grades K-5
and CPM, grade 6) will provide a more indepth progress monitoring system this year
along with Smarter Balance assessments, both summative and interim.
What impact did the lack of full or timely implementation of these strategies have
on student outcomes? What data did you use to come to this conclusion?
We recognized the need to track and monitor progress toward proficiency without the
standardized data and used AimsWeb/DIBELS to partially fill that void knowing that it
was newer to our site and would take time to adjust and implement fully.
Strategies and Activities:
Identify those strategies or activities that were particularly effective in improving
student achievement.
1. The activities that we can determine to have been most effective based on data are
the use of Certificated Tutor support for the instruction of ELD. We can use
CELDT, ADEPT and redesignation information as evidence of student growth
and achievement.
2. Kellogg EL students met AMAO 1 and AMAO 2 targets based on 2014-2015
CELDT data.
3. Teachers implemented district-wide instructional practices, such as NumberTalks
and FactsWise with on-going professional development as we transitioned into
new, state standards without an adopted curriculum. District TOSAs (Teachers on
Special Assignment) assisted teachers during strategic release time to support
growth in these areas.
Identify those strategies or activities that were ineffective or minimally effective in
improving student achievement.
AimsWeb assessments were still new to the teaching staff. We experienced a period of
adjustment as staff members became more familiar with the assessment tool and
timelines for trimester assessments were established and how they related to current
curriculum. We recognize the AimsWeb materials is not curriculum-based and often a
16
timed assessment which is not a desired practice, especially in math assessments.
Although principal created google spreadsheet to record data the year before, the use of
the Google spreadsheet continued to present challenges to staff members and continued
to take time to train staff how to access and upload data. Some data was lost and difficult
to retrieve. The district has purchased a new data management system, EADMS, and will
continue to work to incorporate this new system to assist with a more consistent data
collection system to support instruction.
Assessment data was used to identify students for learning center intervention support
with a newer learning center teacher. Progress monitoring strategies and scheduling of
small group intervention took time to establish this first year.
The implementation of the new, district-wide Number Talks instructional strategy was
introduced in August of 2013 and revisited throughout last year.
Considerations for the 2015-2016 School Year:
The district has adopted the use of DIBELS as a K-6 universal screening tool for ELA.
This will provide greater consistency across grade levels and district.
Additional Learning Center certificated staff have been hired to support targeted
intervention by grade level providing a more systematic approach to providing ELA
support. Both fall assessment data (DIBELS, KSEP, CELDT, ADEPT, and classroom
assessments) were used to identify students needing additional support.
Team of Kellogg teachers and support staff attended Multi-Tiered System of Support
(MTSS) training at the district with six other schools. Training is looked at 3 tiers of
intervention support and how school sites can maximize use of their resources to meet
students’ needs. This structure has been implemented at Kellogg to maximize our use of
personnel to meet our students’ needs across grade levels.
With consideration of the new, math adoption, the expectation of weekly Number Talks
has been dropped and is now replaced by the Number Corner learning activity in grades
K-5. Sixth grade has a similar collaborative inquiry that values this instructional practice.
New ELD Tutor has helped keep EL students meeting annual progress targets in English
proficiency levels as determined by state CELDT scores. This continues to provide
success to our EL students. She is also embedded into our grade level, intervention
support model.
Involvement/Governance:
How was the SSC involved in development of the plan?
SPSA Plan was drafted and reviewed with Site Council at meeting on November, and
approved at the February meeting .
How were advisory committees involved in providing advice to the SSC?
Drafted plan was presented at the winter ELAC meeting and input was requested. Parents
17
at that time asked questions, but had no suggestions.
How was the plan monitored during the school year?
The Plan was approved in April by the Board. There was no time for monitoring built in
to the plan due to timeline presented at the time.
What changes are needed to ensure involvement of all stakeholders and adequate
monitoring of planned activities and outcomes?
It was discussed that a new timeline of writing and approving the SPSA earlier in the year
will allow for better monitoring of the effectiveness of the plan by the SSC and other
stakeholder groups.
Table 1: Spring AimsWeb/DIBELS* English Language Arts (ELA):
ELA Grade Level Assessments: LNF: Letter Naming Fluency
NWF: Nonsense Word Fluency
PSF: Phonemic Sound Fluency
RCBM: Reading Curriculum-Based Measurement
* Number in parentheses reflect score from 2013-2014 school year for comparison
Grade Level:
AimsWeb
Total
Total
Percentage
Assessment:
Number of
Number of
of Students
Students
Students in
Proficient
Proficient:
Grade
Based on
Level:
AimsWeb
Criteria:
Kindergarten:
(*DIBELS)
Grade 1:
Grade 2:
LNF
NS
PSF
RCBM
Grade 3:
(*DIBELS)
Grade 4:
RCBM
Grade 5:
RCBM
Grade 6:
RCBM
Total
Grades:
---
RCBM
37
(36)
41
(40)
43
(35)
39
(39)
47
(39)
32
(40)
33
(23)
251
(252)
51
(53)
51
(54)
56
(43)
56
(51)
50
(50)
45
(51)
52
(30)
343
(332)
73%
(68%)
80%
(74%)
77%
(81%)
70%
(76%)
94%
(78%)
71%
(78%)
63%
(77%)
73%
(76%)
Additional information:
1. Grade levels did not meet the expected 80% proficiency level on the
AimsWeb assessments. AimsWeb was used in the absence of a state-wide
18
standardized assessment for the 2014-15 school year to monitor student
progress. Smarter Balance test results will provide performance information in
the future.
2. Teachers administered the AimsWeb or DIBELS assessments, three times
over the course of the year in addition to classroom assessments. Results
were recorded onto a google document and reviewed throughout the year.
The spring assessments showed an increase in the benchmark score from fall
to spring.
3. Weekly Learning Center Support was provided to students based on a
combination of teacher recommendation and AimsWeb data.
4. The District has moved to using the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early
Literacy (DIBELS) assessments as a universal screening tool to monitor
progress throughout the year.
Table 2: Spring AimsWeb Math Results:
Math Grade Level Assessments:OCM: Oral Counting Measurement
QDM: Quantity Discrimination Measurement
M-CAP: Mathematics Concepts and Application
M-COMP: Mathematics Computation
Grade Level:
AimsWeb
Total
Total
Percentage
Assessment:
Number of
Number of
of Students
Students
Students in
Proficient
Proficient:
Grade
Based on
Level:
AimsWeb
Criteria:
Kindergarten:
QDM
(OCM)
QDM
18
42
43%
(28)
(53)
(53%)
Grade 1:
39
50
78%
(42)
(54)
(78%)
Grade 2:
*M-CAP
18
42
43%
(M-COMP)
(28)
(42)
(67%)
Grade 3:
M-COMP
21
57
37%
(32)
(52)
(62%)
Grade 4:
M-COMP
27
51
53%
(36)
(50)
(72%)
Grade 5:
M-COMP
27
46
59%
(35)
(51)
(69%)
Grade 6:
M-COMP
38
49
78%
(15)
(42)
(36%)
TOTAL
--252
342
74%
GRADES:
(216)
(344)
(63%)
*45 out of 55 first grade students increased their FactWise fluency goal between
December 2014 and March 2015.
19
*Second grade data was not collected in a manner to reflect growth similar to first
grade.
Additional Information:
1. Although individual grade levels did not meet the expected 70% proficiency
level on the math AimsWeb assessments, the school wide target was met.
AimsWeb was used in the absence of a state-wide standardized assessment
for the 2014-15 school year to monitor progress over the year. Smarter
Balance test results will provide performance information in the future.
2. Teachers administered the assessments three times over the course of the
year in addition to classroom assessments. Results were recorded onto a
google document and reviewed throughout the year. The spring assessments
showed an increase in the benchmark score from fall to spring.
3. Weekly Learning Center Support was provided to students based on a
combination of teacher recommendation and AimsWeb data.
Table 3: Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAO)
Data:
AMAO 1: Annual
Growth (60.5%)
Number
in
Cohort
Number
Met
AMAO
1
Percent
Met
AMAO 1
73
55
75.3%
AMAO 2: Attaining English Proficiency
Less than 5 years (24.2%)
Number
Number
Percent
in
Attaining
Attaining
Cohort
English
Eng.
Proficiency Proficiency
94
36
38.3%
More than 5 years (50.9)
Number
Number Number
Attaining
in
Attaining
English
Cohort English
Proficiency Proficiency
13
*
*
* Requires a minimum of 30 students.
Additional Information:
1. Kellogg EL’s are exceeding federal requirements in both AMAO 1 and 2
requirements as determined by the CELDT assessment.
2. Only two schools in Goleta Union have scores in the “More than 5 years.”
3. Our English Development Program is having a positive impact on helping
students transition into English Proficiency.
20
KELLOGG SCHOOL
POLICY
Kellogg School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Kellogg School is committed to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at Kellogg School that welcomes parents/guardians
I.
1. Kellogg School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
Kellogg School.
21
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
22
Kellogg School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about Kellogg School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. Kellogg School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
program.
23
ESCUELA DE KELLOGG
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Kellogg reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Kellogg se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Kellogg que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de Kellogg celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas, noches
24
la escuela de Kellogg.
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
25
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de Kellogg.
educativo en la escuela de Kellogg.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de Kellogg se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Kellogg distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
26
de la escuela.
programa.
27
La Patera Elementary School
Goleta, CA
School: La Patera Elementary School
Principal: Ricardo Araiza
Contact Person:
Ricardo Araiza, Ed.D.
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
805.681-1280
Address:
555 N. La Patera Avenue, Goleta, CA 93117
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
Planned Improvements in Student Performance……………………………….1
Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student Performance.…6
Programs Included in This Plan………………………….………..……………..8
School Site Council Membership……………………………………………….11
Recommendations and Assurances……………………………….…………..12
Single Plan for Student Achievement Annual Evaluation…..…….…….……13
Parent/Guardian Involvement Policy…………………….. …..………….……16
Planned Improvements in Student Performance
student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL: All student cohorts will increase reading proficiency as measured by the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessment (K6), DIBELS, BPST and CAASPP Assessments.
CAASPP Assessments
MAP Assessments
BPST
DIBELS
Teacher created assessments
We recognize a need to track and monitor
student proficiency as determined by last
year’s measures.
this data?
of this goal?
For grades 3-5, the baseline data from the
CAASPP Assessments has been established.
Since there are no previous administrations of
this test, we will be using this baseline data to
compare to next year's CAASPP administration.
According to the MAP assessment, there are two
areas that we need to continue to focus: reading
comprehension and analysis of informational
text. As students steadily acquire the
foundational skills in the lower grades, there is a
need for more exposure and practice in reading
comprehension as well as more practice utilizing
non-fiction text. These two areas will continue to
be our instructional foci.
The following assessment will be given 3 times
during the year to all students to evaluate the
progress (Baseline, Mid-year, and End of Year):
• MAP (Grades K-6)
• DIBELS (Grades K-5)
• BPST (Grades 1-2)
The CAASPP assessments are administered once
a year in the spring to measure student growth and
will be utilized to evaluate school progress.
STRATEGY: During 2015–16, La Patera will implement a school-wide Multiple Tier System of Support (MTSS) to address the reading fluency and
comprehension needs of struggling readers and English learners as measured by benchmark assessments (baseline, mid-year and end of year).
1
Action/Date
September 2015
Administer all baseline
assessments.
September 2015
Use the baseline and
interim data to identify
students who will receive
targeted intervention
instruction on specific
areas, such as decoding
and/or reading fluency as
well as reading
comprehension.
September 2015
Teachers will provide
rigorous and effective
teaching strategies that
they have acquired
through district training.
October 2015
Identify students who are
struggling in decoding
and reading
comprehension, as
determined by the MAPS
assessment, will be using
the computer based Lexia
program on a daily basis
2
Task/Date
Learning Center
Teachers
-Assess students (K-5) for baseline DIBELS scores
-Assess students (K-6) for baseline MAPS
-Assess students (1-2) for baseline BPST
District General Fund
Learning Center
Certificated Tutors
Teachers
-Learning Center groups will conduct targeted
instruction/remediation for 6-8 week periods, then
reassess the skills to monitor progress.
-Identify intervention groups in focus areas
Title I - $65,000
Principal
Teacher on Special
Assignment
Teachers
-Ongoing support through District Grade Level
release times (Instructional Specialists/Classroom
Teachers)
-Professional Development though District PLCs
and Site Staff Meetings (Instructional
Specialists/Principal/Classroom Teachers).
Trainings include strategies such as close reading,
analyzing complex text and writing.
-Students will be utilizing the Lexia program, on a
daily basis, in the classroom computers and
computer lab. Teachers will be responsible to
monitor the Lexia program data.
General - $3000
Principal
Teachers
Computer Lab
Technician
student subgroups.
SCHOOL GOAL: Math - All student cohorts will increase mathematics proficiency as measured by the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)
assessment (K-6) and CAASPP Assessments.
MAPS Assessments
Teacher Created Assessments
We recognize a need to track and monitor
student proficiency as determined by last
year’s measures.
this data?
of this goal?
According to the MAPS assessment data,
Operations and Algebraic Thinking and
Number and Operations are the two areas
where most students are struggling. Even
though we recognize that these are the most
heavily tested, there has been a concerted
effort as a school to focus on these areas
through our new math adoption. This focus
will allow students to acquire their math skills
to be able to demonstrate their learning in
the MAPS assessment and CAASPP testing.
MAP assessments will be given three
times during the year to all students.
The CAASPP tests are administered once
a year in the spring to measure student
growth and will be utilized to evaluate
school progress
STRATEGY: During 2015–16, La Patera will develop a system for monitoring progress of all students and this data will be utilized to target
remediation/support for those students.
3
Action/Date
September 2015
Administer MAP baseline
assessments for all K-6
students
October 2015
Using the baseline and
interim data students will
receive targeted
intervention instruction
October 2015
Teachers will provide
rigorous and effective
teaching strategies that
they have acquired
through district training
Task/Date
Classroom Teachers
Certificated Tutors
Administer the MAP assessments to all K-6
students
Classroom Teachers
Teacher will differentiate instruction to provide
additional support to struggling students on the
areas identified by each grade level.
Principal
Teacher on Special
Assignment
Teachers
-Ongoing support through District Grade Level
release times (Instructional Specialists/Classroom
Teachers)
-Professional development through District PLCs
and Site Staff Meetings (Instructional Specialists/
Principal/Classroom Teachers) such as Math
Bridges support, specific content area by grade
level and analyzing student work.
Title I - $65,000
LEA GOAL: Goal 3: The District will meet or exceed CELDT requirements for the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs)
1, 2 and 3 during the 2015-16 school year.
SCHOOL GOAL: English Learner Goal All La Patera English Language Learner (ELL) students will demonstrate growth in language fluency in
order to meet CELDT requirements as delineated in the LEA Plan, as determined by the annual CELDT test and ADEPT benchmark assessments.
4
Data from 2014 CELDT and from ADEPT
formative assessments.
We recognized a need to track and
monitor student proficiency as determined
by last year’s measures.
this data?
of this goal?
La Patera’s English Learning students are
making steady progress in achieving
language fluency as measured by the
CELDT and ADEPT test. Some students are
taking longer than one year to move from the
Intermediate fluency level into Early
Advanced.
during the year to all students (baseline,
mid-year and end of year).
mandated window.
STRATEGY: During 2015–16 school year, La Patera will utilize research based instructional strategies and interventions, as well as implement the
use of the ADEPT assessments, to determine and address the language fluency needs of English learners (baseline, mid-year and end of year).
Action/Date
Administer the ADEPT on
-Sept 2015
-Jan 2016
-April/May 2016
Teachers
Certificated Tutors
August 2015
Implement researchbased instructional
strategies
August 2015
-Develop English Learner
(EL) curriculum for all
levels
-Throughout the year/
Implement ELD lessons
5
Task/Date
ADEPT Testing of students K-6
Title I - $65,000
Title III - $16,000
Teachers
Certificated Tutors
Learning Center
-Cost of 2 Certificated Tutors to support reduction
of student group size at lowest EL fluency levels.
-English Language Development (ELD) instruction
30 minutes daily by fluency level.
District General Funds
Title I - $65,000
Title III - $16,000
Principal
ELD Certificated Tutor
-Create and develop ELD lessons for all levels and
assist with ELD implementation in the classroom
- Implement ELD lessons/Ongoing
Title III - $16,000
Centralized Services for Planned Improvements in Student Performance
Goal 1
• All student cohorts will increase reading proficiency as measured by the Measures of
Academic Progress (MAP) assessment (K-6), DIBELS, BPST and CAASPP Assessments.
Goal 2
Mathematics
• All student cohorts will increase mathematics proficiency as measured by the Measures of
Academic Progress (MAP) assessment (K-6) and CAASPP Assessments.
Goal 3
English Learner Goal
• All La Patera English Language Learner (ELL) students will demonstrate growth in language
fluency in order to meet CELDT requirements as delineated in the LEA Plan, as determined
by the annual CELDT test and ADEPT benchmark assessments.
6
this Goal
Start/ Completion
Date
Estimated
Cost
Funding
implementation of categorical programs. Centralized services
assist the school to attain achievement objectives for every
•
Community Liaisons
Provide support and
$182,29
1
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
development that supports
the District’s plans for
improving student
achievement
$9,503
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Title I
7
•
English Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
English Language
primary language
assessment; administer test
$50,431
Title I &
LCAP
•
Translation of NCLB
documents, communication to
parents, and notification of
student progress
August 2015 –
May 2016
$35,000
Title I &
LCAP
•
District parent and staff
meetings to advise
implementation of
English Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
meeting materials
$1,632
Title I
•
with state regulations
August 2015 –
Ongoing
$1,000
Title I
•
School Choice, and
August 2015 –
May, 2016
Program Improvement
$85,523
Title I
Programs Included in this Plan
State Programs
enrollment
only)
succeed in school
$0
$49,680
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
only)
$0
$0
(Carryover only)
only)
8
Allocation
$0
$0
$0
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$0
Federal Programs
$49,680
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$65,386
$
allocation).
$
9
$0
$18,363
Program
eligible LEAs
$0
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP1
achievement
$0
$463
$
$
$84,212
this school
$133,892
10
School Site Council Membership
1
Ricardo Araiza
Teresa Chavez-Madrigal
Laura Buratto
Sheila Abshere
Julie Fischer
Sanya Kubel
Nancy Naretto
Michael Parisse
Tammy Merritt
Maricela Luna
11
1
5
Secondary
Student
Other School
Staff
3
Parent or
Community
Member
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
12
Single Plan for Student Achievement Annual Evaluation
Plan Implementation
•
Certificated Tutors support for English Language Development classes for all
English Language Learners was fully implemented. La Patera has 6 Certificated
Tutors (5 days per week for 4 hours each day) to support reduced teacher to
student ratios for each grade level’s 30 minutes ELD instruction.
•
Certificated Tutors also support the Multiple Tier System of Support (MTSS)
intervention system of support. This intervention system is utilized for all grade
levels and is done 4 days a week for 30 minutes per grade level.
•
Teachers have been given professional development opportunities to teach
students the strategies for writing summaries of narrative and summaries of
expository text.
•
The only available and reliable data was the MAP and CAASPP assessment
results. The CAASPP data is considered baseline and will be used next year to
measure student growth. Collection of common data was not comprehensive or
relevant to goals.
•
Currently there are no CFAs in the areas of Math and ELA.
•
We recognize an urgent need to track and monitor progress toward proficiency
as determined by last year’s absolute lack of measureable data.
13
•
The activities that we can determine to have been most effective based on data
are the use of Certificated Tutor support for the instruction of ELD and MTSS. We
can use CELDT, ADEPT and redesignation information as evidence of student
growth and achievement.
•
Based on the analysis of this practice, we recommend:
!
Continuing our plans for our Goal #1 and 2 for ELA and Math with
the modification of adding systems for collecting data to monitor
student progress in a more concrete manner.
!
Continuing our plan as it stands for our Goal #3 in ELD
•
Plan drafted with Site Council at meeting on 11/09/15.
•
Drafted plan presented at ELAC meeting, input requested. Parents asked some
questions, but had no suggestions.
•
Plan was approved by the GUSD School Board in _____________. No specific
time for monitoring was built in to the plan.
•
Moving the writing and approval of the plan to early in the year will allow better
monitoring of the effectiveness of the plan by the SSC and other stakeholder
groups.
Outcomes
Goals for 2015-2016
1. All La Patera students will improve in English Language Arts and math as identified
on site measures.
2. 100% of teachers will instruct students in the writing of summaries of narratives
and/or expository text (grades 2-6) and opinion writing (grades K-1) which meets
the College and Career Readiness Anchor Standard in Reading:
• Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development;
Summarize the key supporting details and ideas.
14
3. 100% of teachers will implement the new Math Bridges program to engage students
in the new common core state standards.
4. La Patera will meet state and federal performance goals for attaining English
Proficiency for English Learners.
• We can identify that goals 2 and 3 were met.
• We have limited data to support that goal #1 was met or to what degree
implementation was successful.
• Based on this information, we recommend that a more comprehensive data
system be used to meet this goal.
Plan Priorities
•
All students will improve in both ELA and Math as identified by site measures.
•
La Patera will meet state and federal performance goals for attaining English
Proficiency by English Language Learners.
•
Instructional goals for implementation of writing summaries of narrative and
expository texts to 100% of students over the school year. Implementation of the
new Math program Bridges.
Major expenditures supporting these priorities were:
•
Certificated Tutors to support ELD and MTSS
•
Certificated tutors to support all grades and Learning Center intervention class.
15
LA PATERA SCHOOL
POLICY
La Patera School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support in the
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration La Patera School is committed to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at La Patera School that welcomes
I.
1. La Patera School shall hold open houses, back-to-school nights,
school committees reflects the population characteristics of La
Patera School.
16
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
17
achievement shall be a part of the educational program at La
Patera School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about La Patera School will be sent home on a regular
basis.
C. La Patera School shall distribute a school handbook and Grade Level
program.
18
ESCUELA DE LA PATERA
POLÍTICA
La escuela de La Patera reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores en la
colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de La Patera se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de La Patera que acoge a los padres/tutores
1. La escuela de La Patera celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas,
19
la escuela de La Patera.
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
20
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de La Patera.
educativo en la escuela de La Patera.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de La Patera se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de La Patera distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
21
de la escuela.
programa.
22
2015 - 2016
Achievement Template
School: Mountain View Elementary School
Principal: Ned Schoenwetter
Contact Person:
Ned Schoenwetter
Position:
Principal
Telephone Number:
805-681-1284
Address:
5465 Queen Ann, Santa Barbara, CA 93111
E-mail Address:
[email protected]
Table of Contents
1
Performance
9
11
14
15
16
17
LEA GOAL: LCAP Goal #1 Demonstrate robust achievement growth for all pupils.
SCHOOL GOAL 1: Mountain View will see a 10% growth in the number of students performing in the “standards met” or “standards exceeded”
performance bands on the 2015-2016 California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress in both mathematics and language arts when
compared to scores from the 2014-2015 assessments.
goal?
What were the findings from the analysis
of this data?
CASSPP data from 2014-2015 for grades
3-6
Analysis of the 2015 CASSPP data showed
that 67% of our students met or exceeded
standards expectations in math and 71% in
English Language Arts. While these
numbers exceeded the district averages of
45% in math and 54% in English Language
Arts, there is room for growth.
Grades 3-6 will give the Interim block
assessments from CASSPP to gauge
student mastery of concepts using the
state testing formats. Results will be
discussed with the data and intervention
teams. This will give us useful data to
evaluate our instruction of the tested
concepts and progress towards our goal of
growth on the CASSPP.
Dibels assessment data from Fall 2015
Teacher created assessment data
Our analysis also showed a general increase
of proficiency as the grades progressed.
This was determined to be partly due to
students’ experience using technology,
keyboarding skills and taking assessments in
a computer-based format.
We also found that our scores may be
correlated with our school and district not
having a consistent Common Core
Standards aligned mathematics or EnglishLanguage Arts program.
1
CELDT data will be gathered for our
English learner student and analyzed by
data teams including the ELD tutor,
classroom teachers, principal and school
psychologist.
The Dibels assessment will be given three
times per year, in September, January and
May. The school leadership team will
analyze the data to look for areas of
growth and areas in need of improvement.
Grade level teaching teams will meet with
our learning center teacher and certificated
tutors to determine appropriate
interventions for students. Pre and post
assessments will help gauge student
growth and mastery. Teacher teams will
meet weekly during p.e. time to review
student progress.
STRATEGY: During the 2015-2016 school year, Mountain View School and the school district will be using a new, CCSS aligned, math program.
Teachers will now have 100 minutes of team planning time each week to implement the new program, analyze student assessment data and plan
necessary interventions. District professional development will focus on the new math program and its effective implementation. District
Instructional Specialists will meet six times per year with each grade level teaching teams to plan math instruction and assessment. Every staff
meeting during the school year will involve discussion and learning regarding the new math adoption. In addition, targeted intervention time for
academic interventions for both math and English Language Arts will be implemented three times per week for forty-five minute time periods.
Classroom teachers, certificated tutors, the learning center teacher, resource teacher and ELD teacher will all be involved in providing targeted
interventions for students based on grade level assessment data.
Action/Date
Task/Date
June 2015 - Site
specialist schedules
organized to allow
common time for targeted
intervention. 3x per week
for a total of 135 minutes
per week.
Principal, MTSS Team
Specialist schedules will be reorganized to provide
common meeting time for intervention within grade
levels.
Extra duty pay for two
teachers to help with
specialist schedule
organization. LCAP funding
- $240
August 2015 - Second
physical education
teacher will be hired .
Principal
Second p.e. teacher will be hired to allow
classroom teachers to have 100 hundred minutes
of common planning time each week. Time will
include data analysis and planning for necessary
interventions.
District covers costs $11,000
2
August 2015 - District
Training on new math
programs, Bridges and
College Preparatory
Mathematics
District Instructional
Services department,
Instructional
Specialists, Principal
Teachers will be trained by Bridges and CPM
trainers on the new math program. Instructional
specialists and principals will support in training.
Continued training will happen at all staff meetings
throughout the school year and at district inservice
days.
District covers all costs
August 2015 - Site MTSS
team will train staff on
new referral process for
students in need of
academic assistance.
(Student success team
meetings)
MTSS team - Principal,
school psychologist,
learning center
teacher, resource
specialist and two
classroom teachers
Team will move all SST meetings, IEP meetings
and 504 plan meetings to Tuesdays during the
school day. New referral forms will be shared with
teachers along with training on how and who to
refer. School psychologist will meet with principal
every two weeks to review students in need of
academic assistance.
Substitute teachers for
classroom and special
education teachers
attending meetings. Costs
for IEP and 504 meetings
covered by district special
education department. SST
meeting sub costs covered
by LCAP funding. - $2,000
September 2015 Teachers review
CASSPP results
Teachers, Principal
Teachers will review CASSPP results from 2014No cost. Teachers will meet
2015. They will identify strength areas and areas
during staff meetings and
for growth in their coverage of the standards. They team planning time.
will also analyze student results and set goals for
their students. School results will be compared
with other GUSD schools and similar schools in the
Santa Barbara area. The school leadership team
will reach out to similar schools to find best
practices and see what can be incorporated at
Mountain View.
September 2015 - Give
baseline Dibels
assessment to all K-6
students
Learning center
teacher, classroom
teachers, certificated
tutors
Learning center teacher and certificated tutors
assist classroom teachers in giving baseline
assessment. Classroom teachers can give
assessment on their own, if they are ready to do
this independently.
Learning center teacher provided by district
Certificated tutors - 20
hours - $1,000 from LCAP
funds
September 2015 CELDT testing given to
initial English learners
ELD tutor
ELD tutor will give initial CELDT test to English
learner students new to our school or state
ELD tutor paid for by Title III
funds and LCAP funds.
3
September 2015 - ELD
ELD Tutor
services provided for ELD
students
ELD tutor will provided 30 minutes of service three
times a week for identified English Learners as
mandated by Ed. Code
ELD Tutor paid by Title III
Funds - $3,396, $16,583
from LCAP paid by
September 2015 Purchase Chromebooks
for grades 3-6 and
charging stations
Technology committee, Purchase 70 Chromebooks to get grade 3-6 grade
leadership team,
classes closer to 1:1 student to device ratio.
Principal
District will provide 115 Chromebooks for 5th and
6th grade students. iPads in upper grades will be
moved to primary grade to get closer to a 2:1 ratio.
Devices in hands will allow students to become
more proficient with their use, increase typing
skills, and familiarize them with taking
assessments online.
October 2015 - District
Math Training
Assistant
Superintendent,
Principal
Teacher training on Bridges and CPM Math
program.
Costs covered by district
October 2015- Goal
Setting Meetings
Teachers, Principal
During annual goal setting meetings teachers will
identify goals for year from the GUSD Professional
Teaching Standards. They will also discuss all
students and identify students with possible
intervention needs. Services may be set up at this
time.
Costs covered by district
October 2015CELDT testing given to
English learners
ELD tutor
ELD tutor will give CELDT test to English learner
students
ELD tutor paid for by Title III
funds and LCAP funds.
December 2015February 2016 - Give
CASSPP Interim Block
Assessments to grades
3-6
Classroom teachers,
computer lab
specialists
Students take CAASPP interim Block Assessments Costs covered by district
to assess mastery of standards and to familiarize
students with testing format. Each class will give
assessments in math and English-language arts.
January, February 2016 Give mid-year Dibels
assessment to all K-6
Learning center
teacher, classroom
Classroom teachers will give mid-year Dibels
assessments to all K-6 students. Learning center
teacher and certificated tutors will assist with
4
District will provide funds for
5th and 6th grade
Chromebooks. PTA will
contribute $10,000 and
$7,000 will come from
General Budget. Charging
stations will cost $3,261 and
be paid for by LCAP funds.
students
tutors
assessment and data recording and analysis.
and SUPG funds
All year - Classroom
teachers and learning
center teacher will use
baseline and mid-year
data along with other
formative assessment
data to provide needed
intervention and
differentiation
Learning center
teacher, classroom
tutors, and teachers on
special assignment
Teachers will review Dibels data weekly in grade
level teams to guide instruction or needed
intervention. District Instructional Specialists will
work with grade level teams to look at grade-level
data and plan instruction during monthly strategic
release times. Three times a week students will be
grouped into targeted intervention groups.
Classroom teachers, certificated tutors, ELD tutor,
resource teacher and learning center teacher will
instruct intervention groups.
Instructional Specialist paid
for by school district.
May, 2016 - Give end of
year Dibles assessment
to all students in grade K6.
Learning center
teacher, classroom
tutors
Classroom teachers will give end of year Dibels
assessments to all K-6 students. Learning center
teacher and certificated tutors will assist with
assessment and data recording and analysis.
Teachers will reflect on individual student growth
and class growth. Grade levels will reflect on the
successful area of their instructional program and
areas in need of improvement during the 2015-16
school year.
and SUPG funds
5
Certificated tutors paid for
through LCAP funds $14,476.
Form A
st
LEA GOAL: Promote 21 Century Learning Skills
Strategic Plan Reference: Student learning environments are aligned with real world environments by integrating curriculum with
21st Century Learning Skills: Critical thinking and problem solving; communication; collaboration; creativity; innovation; life and
career skills; and information, media and technology skills.
SCHOOL GOAL: By June of 2016 Mountain View School will have implemented a defined technology plan that addresses needs and skills
outlined in the 21st Century Learning Skills. We will have a 1:1 student to device ratio of Chromebooks in grades 4-6 and a 2:1 ratio of iPads in
grades K-2. We will also introduce a STEM science program that teaches students the 21st Century Learning Skills in an engaging and handson environment.
GUSD technology survey from 2014-2015.
CASSPP Results
this data?
A GUSD survey of technology done in 20142015 showed that Mountain View students did
not have sufficient ratios of technology devices
in their hands on a daily basis to master the
technology demands of the 21st Century
Learning Skills.
Results from the CASSPP pointed to the fact
that our students did not test as well as
comparable schools that had 1:1 laptop
programs.
Our teachers and staff members will need to
continue to receive professional development
on the use of educational technology.
of this goal?
Our technology team will assess our
progress toward this goal throughout the
year.
This will be done by monitoring the number
of devices in use. We will monitor the growth
of students’ typing skills using our typing
programs. We will survey our staff for
professional development needs. Ultimately,
we hope to see an increase in CASSPP
scores as students are more comfortable
using technology to test.
STRATEGIES: During the 2015-16 school year, we will increase the number of devices in students’ hands. We will train our teachers how to
use the technology effectively by having two Technology Teacher Leads serve on a district committee and train our teachers. We will send
teachers to technology conferences and professional development opportunities. We will help develop a district-wide technology scope and
sequence and then implement it at our school.
6
Action/Date
Person(s)
Responsible
Task/Date
September 2015 June 2016 Technology Teacher
Leads and Principal
serve on district
technology committee
TTL’s, Principal
The district technology committee meets monthly
throughout the school year. Goals for this year include
increasing numbers of devices in students’ hands, training
of teachers, and development of technology standards.
No costs
September 2015 June 2016 Technology leads
meet monthly to
review site needs and
plan professional
development
TTL’s, Principal
The site technology leads plus the principal and computer
specialist meet bi-monthly to discuss needs and plans for
site technology.
No costs
September 2015 June 2016 - TTL’s
release time
Teachers
TTL’s are provided with two sub days to observe other
teachers, train teachers, teach model lessons, etc.
District funds cover sub
costs.
September 2015 June 2016 - Typing
Practice
Teachers
Teachers will have student work on Ultimate Typing and
Typing Web weekly for 30 minutes in grades 2-6.
Software costs covered by
MAGIC program.
September 2015 Move staff to using
Google Suite
TTL’s, Principal
The year will start with all staff documents being shared
with teachers through Google docs and the Google suite.
All teacher will be required to have a Google calendar and
subscribe to the school’s calendars. All specialists
schedules will be prepared and shared through Google
sheets.
No costs
7
September 2015 - Site Principal
technology committee
determines priorities
for school year.
Priorities are to follow guidance of district. Purchase 70
Chromebooks to get grade 3-6 grade classes closer to 1:1
student to device ratio. District will provide 115
Chromebooks for 5th and 6th grade students. iPads in
upper grades will be moved to primary grade to get closer
to a 2:1 ratio. Devices in hands will allow students to
become more proficient with their use, increase typing
skills, and familiarize them with taking assessments online.
District will provide funds for
5th and 6th grade
Chromebooks. PTA will
contribute $10,000 and
$7,000 will come from the
general budget. Charging
stations will cost $3,261 and
will be paid for through LCAP
funds.
October 2014 Professional
Development
TTL’s,
teachers,
Principal
TTL’s and the Principal will attend the Google Summit in
San Diego. The conference focuses on the Google suite
and its use in education. Participants will share with staff
members when they return.
PTA will cover costs of
registration. Hotel, food and
mileage covered by general
budget. $700
December 2015
TTL’s, Principal
District adopted technology scope and sequence adopted
by district and implemented at schools.
No cost
Seven teachers from grades K - 6 will attend the CUE
Conference in Palm Springs. Information gained will be
shared with other staff when they return.
PTA will cover $5,000 of
costs for registration, hotels,
food and mileage.
March 2016 Teachers
Teachers attend
Computer Using
Educators Conference
in Palm Springs.
8
Start/
Completion Date
Estimated
Cost
Funding
•
Community Liaisons
$182,291
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
student achievement
$9,503
Title I & III,
ELA, LCAP
Title I
•
Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
administer test
$50,431
Title I & LCAP
•
August 2015 –
May 2016
conferences
$35,000
Title I & LCAP
•
English Learners
August 2015 –
May 2016
materials
$1,632
Title I
•
regulations
August 2015 –
Ongoing
$1,000
Title I
•
Services
August 2015 –
May, 2016
Improvement
$85,523
Title I
9
Performance
The following actions and related expenditures support this site program goal
and will be performed as a centralized service. Note: the total amount for each
categorical program in Form B must be aligned with the Consolidated
Application.
School Goal # 1
Mountain View will see a 10% growth in the number of students performing in the
“standards met” or “standards exceeded” performance bands on the 2015-2016
California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress in both mathematics and
language arts when compared to scores from the 2014-2015 assessments.
School Goal # 2
By June of 2016 Mountain View School will have implemented a defined
technology plan that addresses needs and skills outlined in the 21st Century
Learning Skills. We will have a 1:1 student to device ratio of Chromebooks in
grades 4-6 and a 2:1 ratio of iPads in grades K-2. We will also introduce a STEM
science program that teaches students the 21st Century Learning Skills in an
engaging and hands-on environment.
Note: Centralized services may include the following direct services:
•
Research-based instructional strategies, curriculum development, school
climate, and data disaggregation for instructional staff
•
District-wide staff providing specific services to schools, e.g., English
Language Development Coordinator, Teachers on Special Assignment,
Instructional Coaches
•
After–School and Summer School programs funded by categorical
programs
•
Data analysis services, software, and training for assessment of student
progress
Centralized services do not include administrative costs.
10
State Programs
enrollment
only)
succeed in school
$0
$39,560
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
only)
$0
$0
(Carryover only)
only)
11
Allocation
$0
$0
$0
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$0
Federal Programs
$39,560
Allocation
Consolidated
in the SWP
$0
$
allocation).
$
1
$0
$3,396
Title III funds
may not be
consolidated as
part of a SWP1
12
Program
eligible LEAs
achievement
$0
$0
$0
$
$
$3,396
this school
$42,956
13
Ned Schoenwetter
Joana Pattison
Alena Avedissian
Holly Bosse
Patrice Zubas
Anita LaBau
Adam Gray
Yesenia Thomas
Andrew Firestone
Lisa Vance
2
EC Section 52852
14
Secondary
Student
Parent or
Community
Member
Other School
Staff
Classroom
Teacher
Names of Members
Principal
15
Pursuant to California Education Code Section 64001(g), the School Site Council
(SSC) must evaluate at least annually the effectiveness of planned activities. In
the cycle of continuous improvement of student performance, evaluation of the
results of goals will provide data to inform and guide subsequent plans.
Plan Priorities
•
•
Identify the top priorities of the current SPSA. (No more than 2–3.)
Identify the major expenditures supporting these priorities.
Plan Implementation
The goals for the 2014-15 SPSA were focused on English-Language Arts and
Mathematics performance by pupils. The first goal was that 90% of Mountain
View students would be at the Core level or higher on the Dibels oral reading
fluency assessment at the end of the 2014-15 school year. The percent of
students at that level at the beginning of the year was 85.7%. Our beginning of
the year 2015-16 data actually gave us better information to see how our
students had progressed over one full year. In the fall of 2015-16 89.5% of the
same students were in the Core level or higher. This is an increase of 3.8%. It
was close to hitting our goal of 90%.
We attribute the growth to a variety of factors including the increase in the
amount of time our learning center teacher works with our students on reading
and language skills. In the 2014-2015 year we had her full time versus half time
in the years previous. She was able to double the number of students she
worked with. The other large factor was using the Dibels assessment to monitor
student growth and to help form our intervention group and point to specific
student needs. We were able to be more efficient and targeted with our
intervention services.
The second goal was a math goal to have 95% of our students meet proficiency
levels on the CAASPP. We were far from meeting this goal. Only 67% of our
students tested on the CAASPP in mathematics in the Met Standards or
Exceeded Standards levels. This is due a number of factors. The CASSPP had
not released their cut points when we made our site goals at the beginning of the
2014-2015 school year. The cut points were set high in comparison to the cut
points on the former CST tests. The state and district averages of students
meeting or exceeding proficiency levels dropped significantly.
Strategies in the SPSA that were fully implemented were district professional
development for CCSS mathematics and English-Language Arts. This included
district professional development, site professional development at staff meetings
and working with Teachers on Special Assignment during strategic release time.
All teachers teach Number Talks four to five days per week.
The School Site Council discussed goals to be included in the Single Plan for
Student Achievement at meetings in the late fall and winter of 2014-15. Each
member of the group gave their thoughts and opinions on possible goals. The
group gave its support of the goals listed in this document. The ELAC was also
included on the review and forming of the SPSA.
16
MOUNTAIN VIEW SCHOOL
POLICY
Mountain View School recognizes that parent/guardian involvement and support
in the education of children are an integral part of achieving academic success and
assure parent/guardian/school collaboration Mountain View School is committed
to;
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
parenting skills;
through:
fostering an environment at Mountain View School that welcomes
I.
1. Mountain View School shall hold open houses, back-to-school
nights, and parent/guardian organization meetings where the
school's philosophy, mission, opportunities for adult
participation, the core curriculum, and supplemental instruction
are discussed.
17
Mountain View School.
assessments
• Family literacy
workshops.
categorical budget.
18
Mountain View School.
2. During
conferences,
school
personnel
may
assist
II.
HOME
information about Mountain View School will be sent home on a
regular basis.
C. Mountain View School shall distribute a school handbook and
Grade Level Expectations to parents/guardians at the beginning of
each school year and to the parents/guardians of new students
after the start of the school year. The handbook shall contain
information about current programs, criteria for pupil participation
in these programs, and other information designed to acquaint
parents/guardians with school regulations and procedures.
19
program.
20
ESCUELA DE MOUNTAIN VIEW
POLÍTICA
La escuela de Mountain View reconoce que la participación y apoyo de los padres/tutores
en la educación de sus niños es una parte integral del logro de éxito académico y del
desarrollo de ciudadanos capaces; y que las escuelas y los padres/tutores deben trabajar
juntos como socios informados para educar a todos los estudiantes con efectividad. Para
asegurar la colaboración entre padres/tutores y la escuela, la escuela de Mountain View
se dedica a:
través de:
apoyo paternal
• fomentar un ambiente en la escuela de Mountain View que acoge a los
padres/tutores como participantes activos en la educación de sus hijos;
1. La escuela de Mountain View celebrará jornadas de puertas abiertas,
21
la escuela de Mountain View.
académicos
categóricos
hijos.
socios
22
Ayudante en la Comunidad de la escuela de Mountain View.
educativo en la escuela de Mountain View.
familias y niños.
escolares.
sobre la escuela de Mountain View se mandarán a casa con regularidad.
C. La escuela de Mountain View distribuirá una guía para la escuela y las
23
de la escuela.
programa.
24

Single Plans for Student Achievement

Transcripción

Documentos relacionados

Newsletter 3-22-16 PDF

March 2015 Trainings - Day Care Council of New York, Inc.