VISION/MISSION/BELIEF STATEMENTS
Note: Required for Title I
Newberry Elementary School and community working together will provide a child-centered learning environment that builds the foundation for successful life-long learners.
SCHOOL PROFILE DEMOGRAPHICS
Newberry Elementary has 530 students in Headstart thru 4th grade. 29% of our students are minority and 49% are on free/reduced lunch. 68% of our kindergartners consistently demonstrated readiness skills on the ESI-K test, 18% showed emerging/progressing and 11% did not yet demonstrate readiness skills.
Our small community has it's own elementary, middle and high school. The elementary school was built in 1974 and has 54,000 square foot of space. Many of our teachers have lived in the community all of their lives and have taught at Newberry Elementary for many years. We have 40 instructional staff members and one school based administrator. Our staff turnover is lower than the district and state averages. 58.6% of our teachers hold a bachelor's degree, 34.5% hold a master's degree and 6.9% hold a specialist degree. We have one full-time gifted teacher that serves 1st - 4th in mathematics. Three special education teachers co-teach in regular education classrooms to support students with disabilities.
Our school continues to encourage parent involvement, as that is a struggle for us. We offer creative opportunities both at night and during the day for parents to become involved in the school and have seen improvement over the past three years. Our media center is open once a month for families to have a Reading Night. We also host a monthly Moonlight Math Night for families to enjoy hands-on math activities to do at home.
SCHOOL MATCH
Note: Required for all Assistance Plus Schools
QUALITY STAFF
Highly Qualified Administrators
Note: Required for Title I
Lacy A. Redd, Principal for six years, has lead the school from a C grade to an A grade in 2004-2006, and dropped to a "B" grade for 2007 and 2008. Currently completing her doctoral degree, she holds a bachelor’s, masters and specialist degrees in education and educational leadership. She has presented at many conferences including the Florida Education Technology Conference, 2006 Holmes Partnership Conference and the 2007 & 2008 National PDC Conference. Jeanie Craig, Curriculum Resource Teacher, holds a bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education and a Master’s degree in Special Education. She is certified in reading and trains others teachers across the district in reading best practices.
Title I: PL 107-110 Sec 1119(a)(3)
PL 107-110 Sec 1116(b)(3)(A)(ii)
Recruitment/Retention of Highly Qualified Teachers
Note: Required for Title I
Title I Requirements: PL 107-110 Sec. 1114(b)(1)(C) and PL 107-110 Sec. 1114(b)(1)(E)
Our school prides itself on having a great climate that supports young teachers. Our partnership with the University of Florida as a Professional Development Community provides a large number of pre-service teachers each semester a place to grow and learn. Many select to do all of their pre-service work here and take jobs as first year teachers.
“District staff and administrators attend regional job fairs. The district hosts two local job fairs. Every administrator is expected to attend the local job fairs. The district offers district contracts to teachers who are exceptionally qualified. Stipends and substitutes are provided for teachers to participate in inservice training. All teachers are encouraged to participate in professional development. Many principals are encouraging teachers to pursue the reading endorsement. Stipends or substitutes are provided for teachers to participate in most inservice training.”
Show Attached Staff List
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: Required for Title I
Our school has one Federally funded Headstart program that helps prepare three and four year olds from underprivileged homes to enter Kindergarten. Our staff is trained through Title 2 Part A funds in curriculum areas such as reading and math. We also receive technology training through Title 2 part D. ESOL support is given through Title 3 funds. Safe and Drug Free Schools curriculum materials is funded through Title 4 funds. Homeless students support is given through Title 10 funds.
School Wide Improvement Model
Note: Required for Title I
At Newberry Elementary, our school improvement model is the FCIM model. The core curriculum utilizes a variety of research-based programs including Macmillan/McGraw-Hill Trophies Reading, Harcourt Math and Science Basals. Reading instruction is supplemented by SRA kits,Early Intervention Reading, Riverdeep Software, Accelerated Reader, Guided Level Readers, Great Leaps, STAR Reading, Leap Frog materials, and the Carbo Reading Program. Math instruction is supplemented by Everyday Math Counts, Riverdeep Software, Math Facts in a Flash, STAR Math and Saxon Math. Our goal is that every child will make at least one year's growth. Continuous staff development is planned throughout the year with follow-up discussions and implementation observed in the classrooms with documentation in plan books.
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: Required for Title I
Newberry Elementary sent a letter home to all parents in their native language sharing the school grade and AYP status.
Newberry Elementary also uses our school website, a monthly newsletter, phone home system, classroom newsletters, as well as our marquee to share information with parents. We host an Open House each fall as well as several night events during the school year to encourage parents to visit the school. Our staff holds night conferences to share student progress with parents in lieu of teacher workdays. We assist our bi-lingual parents by using teachers on staff to help translate school information and assessment results. The district also translates AYP and school choice information sent to parents.
Show Attached Public School Choice Notice to Parents file
Show Attached Notification of SINI Status file
Pre-School Transition
Note: Required for Title I
NES holds two entering kindergarten classes each summer to aide in the transition into kindergarten. Head start children are encouraged to attend.
Title I Requirement: PL 107-110 Sec. 1114(b)(1)(G)
MENTORING AND EXTENDED LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES
Teacher Mentoring
Note: Required for Title I
First year teachers involved in the induction program that includes support both school level and district level workshops and mentor guidance. The CRT works with all new staff to incorporate teaching instruction inline with the schools goals. NES is involved with the University of Florida in a Professional Development Community with intensive numbers of preservice teachers involved in the school and school improvement efforts. The Principal is an active member of the PDC to include observations of interns with feedback, presentations on IEP’s, AIP’s, use of data and use of technology with disabled students.
Show Attached Teacher Mentoring List
Extended Learning Opportunities
Note: Required for Title I
Before and after school our media center and computer lab are open for students to have access to reading material as well as Accelerated Reader software and our Reading and Math Riverdeep software. State Provided tutoring will occur on campus using outside companies in the areas of reading and mathematics for below level students on free or reduced lunch. Other students below grade level will receive tutoring from paraprofessionals and teachers as funds are available.
Title I Requirement:
PL 107-110 Sec. 1116(b)(3)(A)(ix)
PL 107-110 Sec 1116(c)(7)(a)(vi)
PL 107-110 Sec. 1115(c)(1)(c)(i)
PL 107-110 Sec. 1114(b)(1)(B)(ii)(ll)
SCHOOLS GRADED C OR BELOW
Professional Development
Disaggregated Data
Informal and Formal Assessments
Alternative Instructional Delivery Methods
SCHOOLS OFFERING PRIMARILY GRADES 6 THROUGH 12
Different Innovative Approaches to Instruction
Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every Teacher
Quality Professional Development for Teachers and Leaders
Small Learning Communities (SLC)
Intensive Intervention in Reading and Mathematics
Parental Access and Support
Applied and Integrated Courses
Course Choice Based on Student Goals / Interests / Talent
Master Schedules Based on Student Needs
Academic and Career Planning
GOALS
Goal: Reading
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
Black students did not make AYP Targets, as 40% scored at or above grade level. 52% of lowest 25% are making a year's worth of progress in reading.
65% of all students are making learning gains in Reading.
Title I Requirement: A comprehensive needs assessment of the entire school
|
| *Objective: |
All students will improve reading skills. Continue working to have students on grade level in reading by the end of grade 3. Sixty five percent (65%) of the students in each identifiable subgroup will score Level 3 or above on the FCAT. OR we will have a 10% decrease in the level of students scoring level 1 or 2 in each subgroup.
Title I Requirement:
PL 107-110 Sec 1116(b)(3)(A)(v)
PL 107-110 Sec 1116(c)(7)(A)(iv)
PL 107-110 Sec 1111(b)(2)(G)(iii)
|
| *Strategies: |
1. Continue to implement Kagan structures to increase student engagement.
2. Implement the Comprehensive Reading Plan with 90 minutes of reading instruction daily which includes time devoted to differential instruction (leveled).
3. Implement Early Intervention Reading Program with 1st grade students below grade level.
4. Utilize the nine high yield strategies from Marzano as frequently as possible when planning and implementing instruction.
5. Provide for leveled reading instruction in the content area in grades K-3.
6. Provide practice with FCAT skills and concepts and direct instruction in test-taking skills.
7. Summer programs to include entering Kindergarten classes to reinforce basic skills need for school.
8. Maximize inclusion of students with disabilities while still providing needed specific interventions for each student to increase his/her achievement.
9. Media center and computer lab will also be open to all families one night a week during the summer and one night a month during the school year.
10. Media center and computer lab will be open before and after school to allow access to books and software to students and parents beyond the school day.
11. Continue school wide Reading as primary homework in all grade levels. Students will track their reading with signed reading logs.
12. Continue to seek volunteers to expand Great Leaps program to target potential level one students.
13. Participate in PDC (Professional Development Community) with the University of Florida to provide site for preservice educators. UF Students will assist with small group reading instruction, provide additional assistance to students, and share current research based methods of instruction with staff.
14. Use paraprofessionals to provide assistance with engagement and monitoring of students while teacher provides small group instruction to at risk students.
15. Utilize Riverdeep Reading Software and earobics in Lab and classroom to reinforce and reteach reading skills
16. Staff will continue to utilize the Oncourse Lesson Planning software to align instruction to standards.
17. Implement CIMS Model to include data meetings, focus calendars and lessons.
18. Hire one half-time teacher to remediate at risk students in reading.
Title I Requirement:
PL 107-110 Sec 1116(b)(3)(A)(i)
PL 107-110 Sec 1115(c)(1)(C)
PL 107-110 Sec 1114(b)(1)(B)(ii)
PL 107-110Sec 1114(b)(1)(l)
PL 107-110 Sec 1114(b)(1)(B)(ii)(lll)
PL 107-110 Sec 1114(b)(1)(B)(iii)
|
| *Evaluation: |
Evaluation information for this objective will include the following:
1. FCRR Reading Assessment for K-4 students
2. STAR reading assessment of students in grades 1-4
3. FCAT simulation assessments conducted in grades 3 and 4
4. McMillan basal reading assessments
5. Oral fluency assessments in grades 1-4
6. FCAT assessment of grades 3 and 4
|
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. CRISS Strategies
2. Five Keys to Reading
3. Marzano's High Yield Strategies
4. McMillan Reading Series
5. Kagan Structures
6. Accelerated Reader
7. Destination Riverdeep Reading
8. Great Leaps
9. Earobics
10. CIMS model
|
| *Professional Development: |
Professional Development which will be provided at the school level includes the following:
1. CIMS Training Preplanning and ongoing
2. Kagan Training Preplanning and ongoing
3. EIR Training Fall
4. Training on the Comprehensive Reading Plan Fall
5. Teacher Book Clubs : Understanding Poverty Spring Semester
6. Inclusion Support - ongoing
7. Oncourse Lesson Planning - preplanning and October
8.Paraprofessional training on engagement and classroom supervision
9. Ongoing training on implementing the new Macmillan/McGraw-Hill Trophies Reading Series
10. Training on giving the new FCRR Assessment instrument
11. Training on fluency practice and assessments
12. Training on word walls, and word work for all classrooms
|
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Early Intervention Reading |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Macmillan/McGraw-Hill additional materials |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| SRA Kits |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Total: $1,500.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Earobics |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Total: $500.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| CIMS |
District Title 1 |
$0.00 |
| Kagan Strategies |
|
$0.00 |
| Early Intervention |
District Title 1 |
$0.00 |
| Word Work |
|
$0.00 |
| Fluency |
|
$0.00 |
| Macmillan/McGraw-Hill |
District |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Five Engagement Paraprofessionals |
Title 1 |
$44,699.85 |
| Half-time teacher to do remediation of at Risk Students in Reading |
Title 1 |
$25,000.00 |
| Total: $69,699.85 |
| Final Total: $71,699.85 |
|
|
*Non-Highly Qualified Instructors:
|
All Kindergarten - fourth grade classroom teachers are certified in elementary, and therefore highly qualified to teach reading. All three Special Education teachers are certified in elementary education and reading. Our gifted teacher is also certified in elementary education. Five faculty members including the school's Reading Coach, Curriculum Resource Teacher and Principal are working towards the Florida State Reading Endorsement. Teachers supporting students with disabilities are certified in specific learning disabilities or varying exceptionalities as well as elementary certification. |
| End of Reading Goal |
|
Goal: Mathematics
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
All AYP targets were not met. Black students 55% and students with disabilities 50% did not meet AYP targets. 57% of lower 25% made a year's worth of progress in Math. 56% of total student population made learning gains in Math.
Stanford 10 achievement data for grades 1 and 2 show the average percentile score in math to be 63%ile and 59%ile. |
| *Objective: |
All students will improve mathematic skills. Continue working to have students on grade level in mathematics by the end of 3rd grade. Sixty eight percent (68%) of the students in each identifiable subgroup will score Level 3 or above on the FCAT Mathematics assessment. OR we will have a 10% decrease in the number of students scoring a level 1 or 2 in each subgroup. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Provide enrichment mathematics to gifted students in grades 1-4.
2. Utilize integrative and hands-on programs which emphasize problem solving and real-world applications; ie. AIMS, GEMS, etc.
3. Differentiate instruction for students at all levels, providing acceleration for above level students.
4. Provide direct instruction and regular practice of problem solving strategies and FCAT style questions in grades 3-5.
5. Align curriculum with tested benchmarks and maximize instructional time in mathematics.
6. Provide for basic facts instruction, practice, and challenges across grade levels in 3rd and 4th grades, including basic facts practice at home.
7. Provide extended learning opportunities through the EDEP Program and state providing tutoring
8. Computer lab open before school to provide access to Riverdeep Math software and math facts in a flash, as well as weekly visits by each class during the week.
9. Include students with disabilities in the regular education setting with support from paraprofessionals and ESE teachers.
10. Utilize Everyday math counts program in grades 1-4.
11. Staff will continue to use the Oncourse Lesson Planning software to align instruction to state standards.
12. Implement CIMS strategies including data meetings, instructional focus calendars and lessons.
13. Utilize paraprofessionals to improve engagement and assist teachers with supervision during small group instruction. |
| *Evaluation: |
1. Harcourt Math assessments for students in grades K-4.
2. District benchmark testing in grades 3 & 4.
3. FCAT simulation assessments and basic facts assessments in grades 1-4.
4. Math fluency assessments and basic facts assessments in grades 1-4.
5. FCAT assessment for grades 3 and 4.
6. Weekly drill on Math Facts in a Flash |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
Newberry utilizes the following research based programs in the area of mathematics
1. Everyday Math Counts
2. Harcourt Mathematics Program - 2004 series
3. GEMS
4. AIMS
5. Math Facts in a flash basic facts computer assisted program
6. Destination Riverdeep Math Software
7. Kagan Strategies
8. CIMS model |
| *Professional Development: |
Professional development, which will be provided at the school level, includes the following:
1. Kagan Training Preplanning and ongoing
2. GEMS Training
3. Differentiating Math Instruction
4. Everyday Math Counts
5. FCIMS Training Preplanning and ongoing
|
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Everyday Math Counts |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Kagan Materials |
Title 1 |
$750.00 |
| Gems |
Title 1 |
$400.00 |
| Total: $2,150.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Math Facts in a Flash Upgrades |
Title 1 |
$300.00 |
| Total: $300.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| CIMS |
District Title 1 |
$0.00 |
| Everyday Math Counts |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| GEMS |
Title 1/School Improvement |
$350.00 |
| Kagan |
School Improvement |
$300.00 |
| Total: $1,150.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Five Paraprofessionals to assist in engagement |
Title 1 |
$44,699.85 |
| Total: $44,699.85 |
| Final Total: $48,299.85 |
|
|
*Non-Highly Qualified Instructors:
|
All teachers are certified in elementary education, and therefore are highly qualified to teach mathematics. Gifted teacher is also gifted certified. All ESE and resource teachers providing supplemental instruction in mathematics are certified in elementary and specific learning disabilities. |
| End of Mathematics Goal |
|
Goal: Writing
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
1. The average combined writing score for 4th grade on the FCAT writing assessment dropped from 3.8 to 3.5.
2. 84% Improved writing performance in writing by 1%.
3. The economically disadvantaged students dropped from 93% to 84%.
|
| *Objective: |
All students will improve writing skills. Increase percentage of students scoring 3.5 and above on the FCAT Writing assessment. Ninety percent (90%) of the total school population will score Level 3.5 or above on the FCAT Writing assessment or we will increase by 1% and ninety percent (90%) of the students in each identifiable subgroup will score Level 3.5 or above on the FCAT Writing assessment or we will increase by 1%. OR We will have a 10% decrease in the number of students scoring a level 1 or 2 in each subgroup. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Utilize research-based strategies provided through Kathy Robinson's "Just Write" program in grades K-4, including coaching in grades 3&4.
2. Provide daily mini lessons with adequate opportunity for practice in all grades.
3. Provide adequate practice with FCAT style writing to a prompt in 3rd and 4th.
4. Regularly assess and monitor student writing.
5. Increase opportunities for authentic writing among students; ie. pen pals, writing buddies, story writing and publishing, etc.
6. Provide assistive technology to support students with disabilities that are fully included in mainstream classrooms.
7. Utilize PDC Partnership with UF to provide additional support to students thru interns, preinterns, and use inquiry projects to study writing and achievement.
8. Utilize Oncourse lesson planning software to ensure sunshine state standard coverage
9. Scoring training and practice sessions for teachers
10. Teachers will teach expository writing the first 9 weeks and narrative writing the 2nd 9 weeks. Practice both the last few weeks prior to testing.
11. Train primary teachers on mini-lessons and writing activities for the classroom. |
| *Evaluation: |
1. K: One scored sample every 9 weeks of student-produced writing.
2. 1-3: One scored student composition every nine weeks using a 6-point rubric and writing prompt.
3. 4th: Two scored pieces every 9 weeks for the 1st semester and one scored piece every 9 weeks for the second semester, using the 6 point rubric and writing to a prompt. Peer scoring and work analysis will occur once every 9 weeks during the first semester.
4. Florida Writing Assessment administered in February.
5. Coaching/Mentoring model used in grades 3 & 4 to assess implementation of strategies |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. Kathy Robinson's "Just Writes"
2. Kagan Structures
3. McMillan/McGraw-Hill Trophies Series |
| *Professional Development: |
1. Attend Kathy Robinson Training Fall and ongoing
2. Kagan Structures Preplanning and ongoing
3. Oncourse Lesson Planning Preplanning and October
4. Scoring Training and Practice Sessions Fall and ongoing
5. Primary teacher training on mini lessons and writing activities Fall and Ongoing |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Kathy Robinson Just Writes material |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Total: $1,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Kathy Robinson |
District Title 1 and Title 1 |
$2,000.00 |
| Scoring Training |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Primary Grade Mini Lessons and activities |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Total: $4,000.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $5,000.00 |
|
| End of Writing Goal |
|
Goal: Science
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
54% met high standards in Science. Newberry Elementary will not have 5th grade as part of our school for the 2008-09 school year. We will continue to support science in grades K-4th. |
| *Objective: |
Support Science in grades K - 4 to ensure as they move to middle school for 5th grade they can master the FCAT Science state assessment. 70% of students will show mastery on the district science benchmark assessments. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Continue holding an annual science based educational fair that includes school-wide projects based on the scientific method as well as guest speakers from a variety of science fields.
2. Incorporate science topics into literacy program through integrated units.
3. Classroom libraries will house a variety of science themed leveled readers.
4. Word walls will include some science vocabulary
5. Hands-on experiments will be incorporated into science lessons regularly.
6. Utilize AIMS materials and GEMS materials |
| *Evaluation: |
1. District benchmark assessments
2. Harcourt science basal assessments |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. Harcourt Science Textbook
2. AIMS
3. GEMS |
| *Professional Development: |
1. AIMS Staff Development
2. Hands-on labs for the classroom
3. GEMS |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| AIMS Materials |
School Improvement |
$1,000.00 |
| GEMS |
School Improvement/AP Funds |
$500.00 |
| Total: $1,500.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| AIMS Training |
School Improvement |
$2,000.00 |
| Hands-on Science Lessons |
School Improvement |
$400.00 |
| GEMS |
School Improvement |
$300.00 |
| Total: $2,700.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Science Supplies |
AP Funds |
$500.00 |
| Total: $500.00 |
| Final Total: $4,700.00 |
|
|
*Non-Highly Qualified Instructors:
|
All teachers who teach Science are certified in elementary education. |
| End of Science Goal |
|
Goal: Parental Involvement
*Note: Required for Title I
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
Annual Spring Climate Survey had 60% return rate from parents. Continue to try and improve this low percentage. Comments and data show very positive results in most all areas. Positives include 91% said that it is a parent friendly school, 92% said there are high expectations for behavior and achievement, 92% feel the school is safe and 90% believe the reading homework every night has helped their child. |
| *Objective: |
Improve parent survey results by continuing to expand parent volunteer opportunities, improved communication with parents, and improve communication about school goals, programs and opportunities for struggling learners. Improve interactions with families from poverty. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Publicize volunteer opportunities and recruit from community
2. Monthly school newsletter and each classroom will publish a monthly newsletters sharing activities, progress toward improvement efforts, and publicizing parent training opportunities
3. Annual “Meet the Teacher” night
4. Communicate information about our Parent Compact
5. Distribute Title 1 information and parent compact and collect signed compacts
6. Provide family training in areas of FCAT weakness
7. Provide family literacy information to parents through Title 1 parent support materials including entering Kindergartners at K roundup
8. Continue use of planners in 4th grade as a parent communication tool
9. Continue Media center and computer lab hours to encourage parent participation and extend learning hours.
10. Distribute parent rights
11. All title 1 information will be given in parents home language.
12. Use of take home literacy kits from Leapfrog
13. Staff book study using "Understanding Poverty"
14. "Second Cup of Coffee" / "Panther Power Lunch" parent trainings on reading with your child and the Reading is Fundamental Program.
|
| *Evaluation: |
1. Parent climate survey will show increased positive support for school and school program
2. Volunteer hours will increase by 10%.
3. Parent workshops and programs with positive evaluations.
4. Book study completion, evaluation |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1.Parent training on benefits of reading every night with your child
2.Literacy Kits from Leapfrog
3.Faculty Book Study
4. RIF Program
|
| *Professional Development: |
1. Book study on working with parents in poverty
|
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Literacy Kits from Leapfrog |
Title 1 Parent Involvement |
$500.00 |
| RIF Books and materials for Parent Training |
Title 1 |
$1,200.00 |
| Total: $1,700.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Understanding Poverty Book Club |
School Improvement/Title 1/Grant |
$600.00 |
| Total: $600.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $2,300.00 |
|
| End of Parental Involvement Goal |
|
Goal: Return on Investment
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Compared to similar schools, Newberry Elementary's percentile ranking (previous year) is 49 and the percent of the highest ROI value is 57%. |
| Objective: |
Newberry Elementary's ROI percentile ranking will increase by at least one percentile point. |
| Strategies: |
To Improve annual learning gains:
1. Use student data analysis results to find or construct more effective educational strategies that fit the needs of students and staff.
2. Identify the lowest quartile students early and provide additional assistance
3. Provide strategies to parents for their student's academic improvement
4. Continue to provide high quality teacher professional development and monitor its implementation.
To lower the cost:
1. Purchase research based materials and utilize the district warehouse for materials/supplies
2. Use purchased programs effectively and increase student participation
3. Increase participation in programs provided by the Department of Education, such as FCAT Explorer and Science Modules
4. Utilize school and district inservice training. |
| Evaluation: |
The percentage of students with learning gains will be divided by the program costs per weighted FTE student at the school. |
| End of Return on Investment Goal |
|
ADDITIONAL GOALS
No Additional Goals were submitted for this school
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Early Intervention Reading |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Reading |
Macmillan/McGraw-Hill additional materials |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Reading |
SRA Kits |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Mathematics |
Everyday Math Counts |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Kagan Materials |
Title 1 |
$750.00 |
| Mathematics |
Gems |
Title 1 |
$400.00 |
| Writing |
Kathy Robinson Just Writes material |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Science |
AIMS Materials |
School Improvement |
$1,000.00 |
| Science |
GEMS |
School Improvement/AP Funds |
$500.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Literacy Kits from Leapfrog |
Title 1 Parent Involvement |
$500.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
RIF Books and materials for Parent Training |
Title 1 |
$1,200.00 |
| Total: $7,850.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Earobics |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Mathematics |
Math Facts in a Flash Upgrades |
Title 1 |
$300.00 |
| Total: $800.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
CIMS |
District Title 1 |
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Kagan Strategies |
|
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Early Intervention |
District Title 1 |
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Word Work |
|
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Fluency |
|
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Macmillan/McGraw-Hill |
District |
$0.00 |
| Mathematics |
CIMS |
District Title 1 |
$0.00 |
| Mathematics |
Everyday Math Counts |
Title 1 |
$500.00 |
| Mathematics |
GEMS |
Title 1/School Improvement |
$350.00 |
| Mathematics |
Kagan |
School Improvement |
$300.00 |
| Writing |
Kathy Robinson |
District Title 1 and Title 1 |
$2,000.00 |
| Writing |
Scoring Training |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Writing |
Primary Grade Mini Lessons and activities |
Title 1 |
$1,000.00 |
| Science |
AIMS Training |
School Improvement |
$2,000.00 |
| Science |
Hands-on Science Lessons |
School Improvement |
$400.00 |
| Science |
GEMS |
School Improvement |
$300.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Understanding Poverty Book Club |
School Improvement/Title 1/Grant |
$600.00 |
| Total: $8,450.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Five Engagement Paraprofessionals |
Title 1 |
$44,699.85 |
| Reading |
Half-time teacher to do remediation of at Risk Students in Reading |
Title 1 |
$25,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Five Paraprofessionals to assist in engagement |
Title 1 |
$44,699.85 |
| Science |
Science Supplies |
AP Funds |
$500.00 |
| Total: $114,899.70 |
| Final Total: $131,999.70 |
SCHOOL ADVISORY COUNCIL
School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance
The majority of the SAC members are not employed by the school district.
The SAC is composed of the principal and an appropriately balanced number of teachers,
education support employees, students (for middle, junior high and high school only),
parents, and other business and community citizens who are representative of the ethnic,
racial, and economic community served by the school.
Yes. Agree with the above statement.
SAC Involvement
The School Advisory Council is made up of eleven members representing instructional and non-instructional staff, parents and community members. We meet six to eight times a year to review student achievement data, review climate survey results, and to develop goals for the next year's school improvement plan. The first meeting all members are oriented to the process and the bylaw's are reviewed. Each subsequent meeting, one academic area is focused on ie. reading, math, writing, science. Every member participates in the development of the school improvement plan, reviews the plan, then a final presentation is made to the SAC in conjuction with the PTO (Parent Teacher Organization) members.
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
Lacy A. Redd,
Principal
|
|
2)
Kyra Purvis,
SAC Chair
|
|
3)
Dana Mitchell,
Teacher
|
|
4)
Teri Jones,
Teacher
|
|
5)
Penny Cheramie,
Parent
|
|
6)
Laurel Severino,
Parent
|
|
7)
Rhonda Leschanz,
Parent
|
|
8)
Richard Blalock,
Community Member
|
|
9)
Roosevelt Ford,
Community Member
|
|
10)
Susan Morton,
Community Member
|
|
11)
Tania Roland,
School Support Personnel
|
IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION
Using the Florida Continuous Improvement Model, we will monitor student data weekly to determine curriculum changes, staff development needs, and the implementation success of this plan. Baseline assessments will be given in September and May, and formative assessments in October and January. An instructional focus calendar will be implemented and monitored. All teachers will be given explicit instruction on addressing the FCAT tested SSS benchmarks. Focus lessons will be available to teachers. Mini Assessments will be used to monitor progress of students mastery of benchmarks. Remediation and enrichment will be done with small groups. Administrators will visit classrooms daily when on campus. Professional development will focus on instruction and staff will indicate satisfaction with trainings.
REPORTING
Baseline Data Report
Note: Baseline Data Report is required for all Repeating F, F schools and D schools that were F in 2005-2008
and all Schools in Need of Improvement (SINI).
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 3 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
23 |
77 |
6.8 |
93.2 |
17 |
83 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
On Track District Benchmark Assessment
|
|
Grade Level Writing Prompt |
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 4 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
10.3 |
89.7 |
9.6 |
90.4 |
39 |
61 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
On Track District BenchmarkAssessment |
|
Grade Level Writing prompt |
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 5 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 6 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 7 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 8 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 9 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 10 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 11 |
| |
Reading Baseline Data |
Mathematics Baseline Data |
Writing Baseline Data |
Science Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
Baseline data aggregated at school level
|
Reading
Baseline Data |
Mathematics
Baseline Data |
Writing
Baseline Data |
Science
Baseline Data |
Baseline Data
|
Subgroup(s)
not making
AYP | % mastery | %Non- mastery | % mastery | %Non- mastery | % mastery | %Non- mastery | % mastery | %Non- mastery |
% mastery
|
%Non- mastery
|
|
3rd Grade Black
|
|
100
|
|
100
|
11
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
3rd Grade White
|
32.3
|
67.7
|
9.7
|
90.3
|
21
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
|
3rd Grade ESE
|
|
100
|
|
100
|
13
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
3rd Grade Free/Reduced Lunch
|
11.9
|
98.1
|
2.3
|
97.7
|
10
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th Grade Black
|
|
100
|
|
100
|
15
|
85
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th Grade White
|
15.2
|
84.8
|
14.1
|
85.9
|
45
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th Grade ESE
|
|
100
|
5.6
|
94.4
|
12
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
4th Grade Free/Reduced
|
6
|
94
|
6.4
|
93.6
|
21
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
End of Baseline Data Report
Mid-Year Report
2008 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MID-YEAR REPORT
Differentiated Accountability Status: NA
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 3 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
23.00 |
77.00 |
6.80 |
93.20 |
17.00 |
83.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
34.80 |
65.20 |
30.30 |
69.70 |
57.00 |
43.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
11.80 |
-11.80 |
23.50 |
-23.50 |
40.00 |
-40.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 4 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
10.30 |
89.70 |
9.60 |
90.40 |
39.00 |
61.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
17.30 |
82.70 |
24.70 |
75.30 |
86.00 |
14.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
7.00 |
-7.00 |
15.10 |
-15.10 |
47.00 |
-47.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 5 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 6 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 7 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 8 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 9 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 10 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 11 |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
Science |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
Data aggregated at school level.
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 3rd Grade Black |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
100.00 |
0.00 |
100.00 |
11.00 |
89.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
5.30 |
94.70 |
10.50 |
89.50 |
52.00 |
48.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
5.30 |
-5.30 |
10.50 |
-10.50 |
41.00 |
-41.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 3rd Grade White |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
32.30 |
67.70 |
9.70 |
90.30 |
21.00 |
79.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
46.00 |
54.00 |
36.50 |
63.50 |
55.00 |
45.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
13.70 |
-13.70 |
26.80 |
-26.80 |
34.00 |
-34.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 3rd Grade ESE |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
100.00 |
0.00 |
100.00 |
13.00 |
87.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
100.00 |
0.00 |
100.00 |
33.00 |
67.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
20.00 |
-20.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 3rd Grade Free/Reduced Lunch |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
11.90 |
98.10 |
2.30 |
97.70 |
10.00 |
90.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
19.00 |
81.00 |
16.70 |
83.30 |
46.00 |
54.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
7.10 |
-17.10 |
14.40 |
-14.40 |
36.00 |
-36.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 4th Grade Black |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
100.00 |
0.00 |
100.00 |
15.00 |
85.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
0.00 |
100.00 |
0.00 |
100.00 |
82.00 |
18.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
67.00 |
-67.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 4th Grade White |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
15.20 |
84.80 |
14.10 |
85.90 |
45.00 |
55.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
25.40 |
74.60 |
34.80 |
65.20 |
86.00 |
14.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
10.20 |
-10.20 |
20.70 |
-20.70 |
41.00 |
-41.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 4th Grade ESE |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
0.00 |
100.00 |
5.60 |
94.40 |
12.00 |
78.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
10.50 |
89.50 |
16.70 |
83.30 |
78.00 |
22.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
10.50 |
-10.50 |
11.10 |
-11.10 |
66.00 |
-56.00 |
| Subgroup not marking AYP: 4th Grade Free/Reduced |
| |
Reading |
Mathematics |
Writing |
| |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
% Mastery |
%Non- Mastery |
| Baseline Data |
6.00 |
94.00 |
6.40 |
93.60 |
21.00 |
79.00 |
| Mid-Year Data |
8.00 |
92.00 |
10.00 |
80.00 |
86.00 |
14.00 |
| % Change from Baseline Data |
2.00 |
-2.00 |
3.60 |
-13.60 |
65.00 |
-65.00 |
Reading Data Analysis
1. Describe the gains and/or decreases in mastery that have occurred since the baseline assessment. Include specific information about the grade levels or subgroups where improvements or declines have occurred.
Both 3rd and 4th grade made gains in reading as a whole. However, black students did not make gains in 4th grade and ESE 3rd grade did not make gains.
2. Describe the specific strategies or school improvement activities that have contributed to increases in student mastery. Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup.
1.Continue to implement Kagan structures to increase student engagement. All
2. Implement the Comprehensive Reading Plan with 90 minutes of reading instruction daily which includes time devoted to differential instruction (leveled). All
3. Utilize the nine high yield strategies from Marzano as frequently as possible when planning and implementing instruction. All
4. Provide for leveled reading instruction in the content area in grades K-3.
5. Provide practice with FCAT skills and concepts and direct instruction in test-taking skills. All
6. Maximize inclusion of students with disabilities while still providing needed specific interventions for each student to increase his/her achievement. ALL
7. Media center and computer lab will also be open to all families one night a week during the summer and one night a month during the school year. ALL
8. Media center and computer lab will be open before and after school to allow access to books and software to students and parents beyond the school day. ALL
9. Continue school wide Reading as primary homework in all grade levels. Students will track their reading with signed reading logs.
10. Continue to seek volunteers to expand Great Leaps program to target potential level one students. 3-4 k-2
11. Participate in PDC (Professional Development Community) with the University of Florida to provide site for preservice educators. UF Students will assist with small group reading instruction, provide additional assistance to students, and share current research based methods of instruction with staff. ALL
12. Use paraprofessionals to provide assistance with engagement and monitoring of students while teacher provides small group instruction to at risk students. ALL
13. Utilize Riverdeep Reading Software and earobics in Lab and classroom to reinforce and reteach reading skills. All
14. Staff will continue to utilize the Oncourse Lesson Planning software to align instruction to standards. All
15. Implement CIMS Model to include data meetings, focus calendars and lessons. All
16. One Half time and one full time teacher on staff to remediate students in reading.
3. What changes to instruction, strategies, and/or school improvement activities will be made prior to the administration of the FCAT to ensure that students reach mastery? Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup that saw declines.
Teachers are differentiating instruction, hosting intervention groups and reteaching skills not mastered. This occurs in all grade levels with all subgroups not reaching mastery.
4. What specific strategies will be used to improve the achievement of non-AYP subgroups?
The changes listed above in #3 in addition to the continued use of School Improvement strategies will be used to improve the achievement of our non-AYP subgroups.
Mathematics Data Analysis
1. Describe the gains and/or decreases in mastery that have occurred since the baseline assessment. Include specific information about the grade levels or subgroups where improvements or declines have occurred.
Overall 3rd and 4th grade made gains. However, the 4th grade black subgroup did not make gains and 3rd grade ESE did not make gains.
2. Describe the specific strategies or school improvement activities that have contributed to increases in student mastery. Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup.
1. Provide enrichment mathematics to gifted students in grades 1-4.
2. Utilize integrative and hands-on programs which emphasize problem solving and real-world applications; ie. AIMS, GEMS, etc.
3. Differentiate instruction for students at all levels, providing acceleration for above level students.
4. Provide direct instruction and regular practice of problem solving strategies and FCAT style questions in grades 3-5.
5. Align curriculum with tested benchmarks and maximize instructional time in mathematics.
6. Provide for basic facts instruction, practice, and challenges across grade levels in 3rd and 4th grades, including basic facts practice at home.
7. Provide extended learning opportunities through the EDEP Program and state providing tutoring
8. Computer lab open before school to provide access to Riverdeep Math software and math facts in a flash, as well as weekly visits by each class during the week.
9. Include students with disabilities in the regular education setting with support from paraprofessionals and ESE teachers.
10. Utilize Everyday math counts program in grades 1-4.
11. Staff will continue to use the Oncourse Lesson Planning software to align instruction to state standards.
12. Implement CIMS strategies including data meetings, instructional focus calendars and lessons.
13. Utilize paraprofessionals to improve engagement and assist teachers with supervision during small group instruction.
3. What changes to instruction, strategies, and/or school improvement activities will be made prior to the administration of the FCAT to ensure that students reach mastery? Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup that saw declines.
Teachers are differentiating instruction, hosting intervention groups and reteaching skills not mastered. This occurs in all grade levels with all subgroups not reaching mastery.
4. What specific strategies will be used to improve the achievement of non-AYP subgroups?
The changes listed above in #3 in addition to the continued use of School Improvement strategies will be used to improve the achievement of our non-AYP subgroups.
Writing Data Analysis
1. Describe the gains and/or decreases in mastery that have occurred since the baseline assessment. Include specific information about the grade levels or subgroups where improvements or declines have occurred.
Gains were made across both grade levels.
Improvement was made in all sub groups in both third and fourth grades.
2. Describe the specific strategies or school improvement activities that have contributed to increases in student mastery. Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup.
*Kathy Robinson and 2 push-in writing teacher tutors were hired with Title 1 money.
*ESE teacher, and all third and fourth grade teachers as well as the two teacher push in tutor’s worked with writing consultant Kathy Robinson.
*Kathy Robinson worked in classrooms modeling lessons
*Kathy Robinson reviewed and critiqued the student writing skills of students by repeatedly looking at our scored prompts and giving feedback to teacher and students
*Kathy Robinson guided lessons taught in our classrooms
*Two push in teachers worked daily in third/fourth grade small groups with low writers
*Newberry teachers met through out the year with other schools to share ideas
*Newberry teachers met as a team to practice and discuss strategies and update their writing plan
*Teacher trained in scoring and writing strategies, with K. Robinson and Title 1
*Writers Workshop format was implemented in one classroom
*Leadership team at NES was paired with fourth grade teachers for support
3. What changes to instruction, strategies, and/or school improvement activities will be made prior to the administration of the FCAT to ensure that students reach mastery? Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup that saw declines.
Teachers are differentiating instruction, hosting intervention groups and reteaching skills not mastered. This occurs in all grade levels with all subgroups not reaching mastery.
Science Data Analysis
1. Describe the gains and/or decreases in mastery that have occurred since the baseline assessment. Include specific information about the grade levels or subgroups where improvements or declines have occurred.
Newberry Elementary does not have 5th graders
2. Describe the specific strategies or school improvement activities that have contributed to increases in student mastery. Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup.
3. What changes to instruction, strategies, and/or school improvement activities will be made prior to the administration of the FCAT to ensure that students reach mastery? Please be specific for each grade level and/or subgroup that saw declines.
Extended Learning Programs for Students
Describe the activities (e.g. after school, pull-outs, etc) that have taken place to date.
| SUBJECT AREA | FREQUENCY | DURATION | TOTAL # OF LEVEL 1 AND 2 STUDENTS IN THE SCHOOL | AVERAGE # OF LEVEL 1 AND 2 STUDENTS PARTICIPATING | AVERAGE % OF LEVEL 1 AND 2 STUDENTS PARTICIPATING |
|
4th Grade Great Leaps Reading
|
3 times per week
|
school year
|
17
|
10
|
58.82 %
|
|
4th Grade SES
|
2 times per week
|
first semester
|
17
|
12
|
70.59 %
|
|
4th Grade Writing/Push In
|
5 times per week
|
second semester
|
17
|
13
|
76.47 %
|
|
Math Support Group 3rd Grade
|
5 times per week
|
all year long
|
25
|
14
|
56.00 %
|
|
Reading Support Group 3rd Grade Triumphs
|
5 times per week
|
all year long
|
25
|
15
|
60.00 %
|
|
3rd Grade Great Leaps
|
3 times per week
|
second semester
|
25
|
13
|
52.00 %
|
Please describe the academic improvement that has occurred for participating students (please refer to specific data points).
Students are working on fluency with Great Leaps. Furthermore, students are receiving individual/small group instruction in weak areas during SES tutoring and writing push in.
Research-based Professional Development Activities for Teachers
Describe the professional development activities to date that are aligned with the school’s instructional needs.
| NAME OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY | DATE
(MM/DD/YYYY) | INSTRUCTIONAL NEEDS ADDRESSED | # OF TEACHERS PARTICIPATING |
|
Just Write-Making AYP in Writing Grade 3 and 4
|
8/4/2008
|
Writing
|
15
|
|
Everyday Counts
|
8/6/2008
|
Math
|
6
|
|
CIMS planning
|
8/15/2008
|
Reading, Writing, Math
|
10
|
|
Florida Reading Assessment
|
8/7/2008
|
Reading
|
24
|
|
Elementary Reading
|
8/14/2008
|
Reading
|
3
|
|
Everyday Counts Math
|
9/3/2008
|
Math
|
7
|
|
Writing Rubrics and Scoring 4th Grade
|
9/9/2008
|
Writing
|
3
|
|
Fluency Data
|
10/1/2008
|
Reading
|
30
|
|
Analyzing Fluency Data
|
11/14/2008
|
Reading
|
36
|
|
Working with students with ADHD
|
12/10/2008
|
All Areas
|
38
|
|
Student Achievement for AYP Gains
|
1/14/2009
|
Reading/Writing
|
33
|
Based on the baseline and mid-year data, what additional professional development will be offered before the FCAT to help teachers increase student performance?
NES will hold another Student Achievement for AYP Gains on February 25, 2009
Parent Involvement Activities
Describe the parent involvement activities to date that are aligned with the school’s student achievement needs.
| ACTIVITY | DATE
(MM/DD/YYYY) | ACHIEVEMENT NEED ADDRESSED | # OF PARENTS PARTICIPATING |
|
Open House
|
8/26/2008
|
Reading/Homework
|
520
|
|
Meet the Teacher
|
8/15/2008
|
Learning Goals/Expectations
|
127
|
|
Title 1 Tips for helping your child at home
|
9/3/2008
|
Reading/Math/Writing
|
50
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
6/10/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
10
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
6/17/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
20
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
6/26/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
10
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
7/1/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
34
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
7/15/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
20
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
7/8/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
29
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
7/22/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
32
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
7/29/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
35
|
|
Accelerated Reading Night
|
8/7/2008
|
Reading Comprehension
|
18
|
|
Kindergarten Training
|
10/28/2008
|
Reading
|
75
|
|
Family Fun Math In-Service
|
11/6/2008
|
Math
|
16
|
|
Great Leaps
|
12/2/2008
|
Reading Fluency
|
5
|
Based on the baseline and mid-year data, what additional parent involvement activities will be offered before the FCAT to address student achievement needs?
None
End of Mid-Year Report
AYP DATA
| 2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Alachua NEWBERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0531 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 290
Math: 290
|
2007-2008
School Grade1: |
B
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading
Tested 95% of the students? |
Math
Tested 95% of the students? |
58% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
62% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe
Harbor
Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe
Harbor
Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
79 |
Y |
73 |
Y |
|
84 |
N |
|
|
NA |
20 |
21 |
NA |
33 |
27 |
NA |
70 |
NA |
65 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
89 |
Y |
79 |
Y |
|
87 |
N |
|
|
NA |
14 |
11 |
NA |
30 |
21 |
NA |
75 |
NA |
67 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
40 |
N |
55 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
60 |
NA |
|
45 |
NA |
49 |
NA |
62 |
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
68 |
Y |
60 |
N |
93
|
84 |
N |
|
|
NA |
29 |
32 |
NA |
40 |
40 |
NA |
61 |
NA |
55 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
59 |
Y |
50 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
50 |
41 |
NA |
60 |
50 |
NA |
63 |
NA |
52 |
NA |
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Alachua NEWBERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0531 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 283
Math: 283
|
2006-2007
School Grade1: |
B
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
YES |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading
Tested 95% of the students? |
Math
Tested 95% of the students? |
51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
56% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe
Harbor
Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe
Harbor
Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
80 |
Y |
67 |
Y |
92
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
33 |
21 |
NA |
33 |
33 |
NA |
78 |
NA |
62 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
86 |
Y |
70 |
Y |
93
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
25 |
14 |
NA |
25 |
30 |
NA |
83 |
NA |
64 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| HISPANIC
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
71 |
Y |
60 |
Y |
87
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
43 |
32 |
NA |
47 |
40 |
NA |
71 |
NA |
62 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
50 |
N |
40 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
67 |
59 |
Y |
67 |
60 |
Y |
53 |
NA |
50 |
NA |
| 2005-2006 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Alachua NEWBERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0531 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 261
Math: 261
|
2005-2006
School Grade1: |
A
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? 5 |
PRO |
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
| Group |
Reading
Tested 95% of the students? |
Math
Tested 95% of the students? |
44% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
50% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe
Harbor
Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe
Harbor
Math |
| |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2004 |
2005 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
71 |
Y |
67 |
Y |
83
|
92 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
23 |
29 |
NA |
29 |
33 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
77 |
Y |
75 |
Y |
83
|
93 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
15 |
23 |
NA |
23 |
25 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
50 |
NA |
38 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
62 |
Y |
53 |
Y |
73
|
87 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
32 |
38 |
NA |
38 |
47 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
30 |
N |
33 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
50 |
70 |
N |
50 |
67 |
N |
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Alachua School District
NEWBERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2007-2008
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
85%
|
79%
|
63%
|
61%
|
288
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
65% |
56% |
|
|
121 |
3 ways to make gains:Improve FCAT LevelsMaintain Level 3, 4, or 5Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2 |
| Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? |
52% (YES) |
57% (YES) |
|
|
109
|
Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
|
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
518 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Alachua School District
NEWBERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2006-2007
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
89%
|
75%
|
84%
|
60%
|
308
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
83% |
54% |
|
|
137 |
3 ways to make gains:Improve FCAT LevelsMaintain Level 3, 4, or 5Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2 |
| Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? |
77% (YES) |
36% (NO) |
|
|
113
|
Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
|
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
558 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Alachua School District
NEWBERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2005-2006
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
83%
|
78%
|
86%
|
247
|
Writing: Takes into account % scoring 3.5 and above. Sometimes the District writing average is substituted for the writing average.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
57% |
61% |
|
118 |
3 ways to make gains:Improve FCAT LevelsMaintain Level 3, 4, or 5Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2 |
| Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? |
62% (YES) |
|
|
62
|
Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students . Yes, if 50% or more make gains .
|
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
427 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |