VISION/MISSION/BELIEF STATEMENTS
Note: Required for Title I
Each student can learn. Each student is capable of reaching his/her academic potential. Each student has an inherent right to receive the finest education possible for his or her future and for world class citizenship. Therefore, it is the mission of Fort Myers High School to provide a global education by creating and maintaining an orderly, business-like environment with an equitably enforced, uniform standard discipline policy in which each student may discover his/her respective potentials and bring them to fruition. Achievement at all performance levels shall be recognized and celebrated.
The vision of the School District of Lee County is: To be a world-class school system.
SCHOOL PROFILE DEMOGRAPHICS
Fort Myers High School is the oldest high school in Lee County. It is built on tradition, but is progressive in preparing students to be responsible, educated citizens of tomorrow. More than 400 students participate in the International Baccalaureate program offered at the school.In 2007-08 Fort Myers High School's IB program was awarded the largest number of IB diplomas in North America with 203 graduating seniors achieving this prestigious honor. Since the implementation of School Choice, space has been limited at FMHS. The staff and administration is committed to providing a quality and safe education to all students. We are number 1 in the district and academically competitive on the state and national level.
At Fort Myers High School, we are very proud of our student achievement. Again, in school year 07-08, FMHS led the district in all FCAT testing scores. On FCAT WRITES!, 93% of standard curriculum 10th graders tested met or exceeded a 3.5. The achievement is due to the commitment of both the students and staff to improve the quality of writing at Ft. Myers High School.
On FCAT 10th Mathematics, FMHS again led the district with 90.9% of the standard curriculum students meeting or exceeding standards. This achievement exceeded the district average by 18.5%.
With the focus given to FCAT Reading in school year 2007-08, the standard curriculum 10th grade students earning a level 3 or higher was 78.2% whereas the district average was 41.6%. In addition 75% of our standard curriculum 10th grade students scored a level 4 or higher.
2007-08 Demographic Data
Total Enrollment-1832
Minority-32.7%
ESE-Not gifted-9.6%
Gifted-28.6%
ESOL-2.2%
Free/Reduced lunch-21.0%
The short term challenge for FMHS is for greater than 50% of the lowest performing quartile to achieve learning gains in reading and the long term challenge is to make AYP.
In conclusion, Ft. Myers High is very proud of its students. This shows the commitment by all stakeholders in keeping FMHS a school of continued excellence.
SCHOOL MATCH
Note: Required for all Assistance Plus Schools
QUALITY STAFF
Highly Qualified Administrators
Note: Required for Title I
David LaRosa, Principal, is in his third year as Principal of Ft. Myers High. Mr LaRosa served as an Assistant Principal at FMHS 2004-05.
Kristin Bueno, Assistant Principal for Curriculum, is a former teacher at FMHS and is in her third year as an administrator at the school.
Michelle Cort-Mora is in her first as an administrtor at the school.
John Roszell, Assistant Principal, has been an administrator at FMHS for 17 years.
Trent Eckhardt, Assistant Principal, is in his fourth year at Fort Myers High School.
Recruitment/Retention of Highly Qualified Teachers
Note: Required for Title I
The Lee County School District is expanding recruitment efforts, including our own recruitment fair, providing a competitive starting salary for beginning teachers, and investigating low-cost housing options. The district expanded its employee wellness efforts and continues to explore insurance and benefits to meet the needs of all employees. All of these efforts should help the District recruit and retain highly qualified teachers in all areas.
Show Attached Staff List
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: Required for Title I
Title I, Title II and other programs coordinate through the SIP process. Each school completes a needs assessment before writing goals for the year. School improvement plans are written to ensure compliance with all state and national regulations. All school improvement plans are reviewed at the district level for appropriate use of funds and effective use of resources. This district level review prevents duplication of services and facilitates coordination between schools and departments. This collaboration ensures that all programs support schools.
School Wide Improvement Model
Note: Required for Title I
The School District of Lee County uses Sterling Quality as the improvement model.
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: Required for Title I
1. Quarterly newsletters
2. SAC meetings monthly
3. Athletic Booster Club meetings monthly
4. Band Booster meetings monthly
5. Parent Open House
6. ParentLink
7. Message on Hold
8. SchoolNotes
No Attached Public School Choice Notice to Parents file
No Attached Notification of SINI Status file
Pre-School Transition
Note: Required for Title I
MENTORING AND EXTENDED LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES
Teacher Mentoring
Note: Required for Title I
“Beginning July 1, 1997, teachers applying for their initial teaching position with The School District of Lee County enroll in an induction program with the acronym of A.P.P.L.E.S. - Accomplished Professional Practices for (the) Lee Educational System. A.P.P.L.E.S. is a program designed by and for teachers based on the 12 Educator Accomplished Practices, Florida Curriculum Frameworks & Sunshine State Standards, District Strategic Plan for The School District of Lee County, and legislation in FS 231.17.
The District’s induction program provides a support and information system for new teachers to:
retain the most promising teachers;
foster self-assessment and reflection;
improve instructional practice;
model professionalism;
offer professional growth opportunities;
and, familiarize new teachers with district and state initiatives.
New teachers are introduced to programs, practical tools, and strategies to enhance classroom performance in regularly scheduled regional sessions facilitated by experienced teacher-liaisons.
New teachers are also provided with a support system comprised of a Peer/Mentor Teacher and a building Administrator. The mentor provides support by:
Modeling professional practices of educators
Conducting formative observations
Assisting with the construction and implementation of the Professional Development
Plan
Orienting to school based information, programs, logistics and procedures
Meeting on a regular basis with the new teacher (initially once a week)”
At Fort Myers High School, new teachers are mentored as follows:
1. New teachers assigned a veteran peer teacher.
2. Regular meetings with Assistant Principal for Curriculum.
3. Participation in the "FMHS Green Apples Program". (Our inhouse program in addition to the district wide APPLES program).
4. Technology training in the use of Pinnacle, Staff Essentials, and Network protocol.
Show Attached Teacher Mentoring List
Extended Learning Opportunities
Note: Required for Title I
Summer school is provided to those students needing assistance in core subjects.
FCAT review is provided after school and during the summer prior to the test.
Credit retrieval is provided during the summer for those needing additional credits for graduation.
Night School is provided for those students pursuing additional credits.
Florida Virtual School provides an online opportunity for students seeking additional credits with flexible scheduling.
Classes are held during after school hours to support the learning needs of the ESOL students.
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
Teachers are trained and have begun implementation of Qulaity-based instructional tolls for goal-setting, data collection and reflection.
Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every Teacher
Teachers participate in school-wide reading program with their students each Wednesday. Teacher's also particpate quarterly in training conducted by the school's reading coach that focuses on effective instructional practices for the teaching of reading skills in all academic disciplines.
Quality Professional Development for Teachers and Leaders
Teachers are provided professional development opportunities once each quarter as a school-wide training aligned with the school's improvement goals. Also, throughout the year individual and groups of teachers participate in research-based trainings at local, state and national levels, then share the learning with collegaues and their respectuve departments.
Small Learning Communities (SLC)
All teachers are a part of a professional learning community that meets at least once a quarter to share effective practices, reflect on data and make decisions to continuously improve student achievement.
Intensive Intervention in Reading and Mathematics
Students identified to have intensive learning needs in reading and mathematics are serviced through specifically designed curriculum and ongoing assessments that target the learnere's needs. These students are given an extended period of time (2 period on schedule)to learn and study in the area of intensive need. Also, these students are serviced through extended day programs.
Parental Access and Support
Parents and community are able to support the school and its students through the school website, monthly booster and community meetings, volunteer opportunity, and academic assistance.
Applied and Integrated Courses
As an International Baccalaureate school, we have a curriculum program that is integrated and has cross-course application by it nature. Students progress through the curriculum as to prepare for end of program assessments that require application of cross-discipline ideas and concepts.
Course Choice Based on Student Goals / Interests / Talent
Students meet bi-annually with counselors and their parent to determine career goals, course of study and major areas of interest. Student interest inventories, academic potential, academic history, standardized assessment results and parent and teacher input are all a part of the process.
Master Schedules Based on Student Needs
The school's master schedule is designed to meet the students needs to satisfy graduation requirements and interests. After student course registration is held with the counselor, the student course requests are used to generate the courses, numer of sections and frequency of the classes in the master schedule. We use a software system called SILK.
Academic and Career Planning
Students meet with counselors bi-annually, with their freshman success teacher freshman year, and with their faculty mentor weekly, to work through career and academic planning activities and to monitor progress toward achieving their goals. The counselors revisit with the students their identified high school major, anually, as well.
GOALS
Goal: Reading
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
Analysis of 07-08 FCAT Reading Scores and FL DOE AYP report data shows 72% of all students were proficient in reading (level 3 or above).
Disaggregated data by subgroups show 86% white students met AYP which is an increase of 10%. Subgroups: 32% African-American which is a 13% increase and 39% of students that are Economically Disadvantaged met AYP as determined by the state which is a 12% increase. |
| *Objective: |
In 2007-08, 49% of the lowest 25% showed learning gains. By June 2009, 50% of the lowest 25% will make learning gains in FCAT Reading. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Content area reading strategies training for all teachers serving the lowest 25%.
2. Analysis of FCAT strand sub-scores will drive lesson planning for all reading teachers.
3. FMHS will continue to address school-wide literacy through support of the school reading leadership team.
4. The FMHS reading coach will assist all teachers in strategies and methods to increase student reading performance.
5. Students will have access to FCAT Explorer.
6. Students will have access to technology to enhance reading skills and practice.
7. ELL students will receive additional academic support from a paraprofessional who works in the classroom with students.
8. The implementation of the Achieve 3000 web-based reading support program.
9. Identification of lowest performing students on individual teachers lesson plans.
10. School-wide adult to student mentoring program.
11. Student maintained data folders for each class enrolled.
12. The utilization of the NovaNet learning lab to provide support for increased FCAT and ACT achievement.
13. Positive behavior support program. |
| *Evaluation: |
1. Students in intensive classes will be tested quarterly for fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension progress: MAZE, Sopris Language! Placement Test, and FORF. Scores will be analyzed at the school and district level to maintain appropriate placement.
2. Analysis of 2008 FCAT Reading scores for placement.
3. District-Wide pre and post course assessments in content areas.
4. Individual course assessments aligned with the Sunshine State Standards. |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. Language! Program by Sopris West Educational Services.
2. Marzano's High Yield Instructional Strategies.
3. Reciprocal Teaching Strategies.
4. Sterling Quality and goal setting.
5. School-wide vocabulary development program based on the research by Kylene Beers.
6. Positive behavior support program. |
| *Professional Development: |
1. Reciprocal teacher training.
2. District-wide vocabulary and writing in content areas.
3. Struggling reader training.
4. Goal Setting with Sterling Quality.
5. Researched based best practices.
6. Positive behavior support training for instructional staff.
|
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
|
|
$0.00 |
| Reading text materials |
Textbook Funds |
$5,000.00 |
| Total: $5,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Software/web-based programs to support ELL and lowest quartile performing students learning aligned with SSS |
SIP |
$400.00 |
| Total: $400.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| State reading training in best practices and model instructional strategies |
SIP |
$1,275.00 |
| Training at the International reading conference |
Title II |
$1,000.00 |
| Total: $2,275.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Extended Day reading instruction in small group learning environment |
SAI |
$6,000.00 |
| Implementation of One School, One Book program |
SIP |
$400.00 |
| Total: $6,400.00 |
| Final Total: $14,075.00 |
|
|
*Non-Highly Qualified Instructors:
|
FMHS has four teachers who teach reading. All have their reading certification.
|
| End of Reading Goal |
|
Goal: Mathematics
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
Analysis of 07-08 math scores and FL DOE AYP Report data shows that 83% of all students at FMHS were proficient in mathematics (level 3 or above). African-American sub-group (42%) and Economically Disadvantaged (58%) met AYP goals as determined by the state. |
| *Objective: |
In School Year 2007-08, 89% of the Standard Curriculum Students met or exceeded the standard. By June 2009, the percentage of Standard Curriculum Students meeting or exceeding will be 90%. |
| *Strategies: |
1. FCAT strand sub-scores will be analyzed by the mathematics teachers.
2. All mathematics teachers participated in writing and vocabulary pre-school training.
3. Students will have access to technology to use FCAT Explorer.
4. Mathematics teachers will implement reading strategies to improve problem-solving skills.
5. All students scoring a one or two on FCAT Mathematics will be scheduled into an intensive math class.
6. Students will be monitored by the Learning Strategies instructor.
7. Content area reading strategies training for all teachers serving the lowest 25%.
8. Analysis of FCAT strand sub-scores will drive lesson planning for all math teachers.
9. The FMHS reading coach will assist all teachers in strategies and methods to increase student math performance.
10. Students will have access to technology to enhance mathematics skills and practice.
11. ELL students will receive additional academic support from a paraprofessional who works in the classroom with students.
12. Identification of lowest performing students on individual teachers lesson plans.
13. School-wide adult to student mentoring program.
14. Student maintained data folders for each class enrolled.
15. The utilization of the NovaNet learning lab to provide support for increased FCAT and ACT achievement.
16. Positive behavior support program. |
| *Evaluation: |
1. FCAT Math test scores will be analyzed.
2. FCAT practice tests will be given.
3. Teachers will assess students through classroom tests and evaluations. |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. Marzano's High-Yield Instructional Strategies.
2. Prentice Hall textbooks and supplemental materials.
3. Sterling Quality and goal setting.
4. Reciprocal teaching strategies.
5. Positive behavior support program. |
| *Professional Development: |
1. All Mathematics Teachers participated in writing and vocabulary pre-school training.
2. All Mathematics Teachers are highly qualified.
3. School inservice will contain a reading component.
4. Researched based best practices
5. Positive behavior support program. |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Manipulatives and interactive teaching tools to support teaching of the SSS |
SIP |
$1,000.00 |
| Textbook and Workbook materials |
Textbook Materials |
$12,000.00 |
| Total: $13,000.00 |
| 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 |
| State and National Training in research based best practices aligned with SSS |
SIP |
$1,075.00 |
| Participation in Florida Educational Technology Conference to learn effective implementation of programs and equipment to support mathematics instruction. |
Title II |
$1,600.00 |
| Training in the development and implementation of student data folders. |
Title II |
$1,200.00 |
| Total: $3,875.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Extended day math instruction in small group learning environment. |
SAI |
$6,080.00 |
| Total: $6,080.00 |
| Final Total: $22,955.00 |
|
|
*Non-Highly Qualified Instructors:
|
All Mathematics teachers are highly qualified and in field. |
| End of Mathematics Goal |
|
Goal: Writing
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
In school year 2007-08, 93% of the students tested on FCAT Writes! scored a level 3.5 and above. This percentage was based on a written response to a persuasive prompt. |
| *Objective: |
In school year 2007-08, 93% of the students tested on FCAT Writes! scored a level 3.5 and above. For school year 2008-09, it is our goal to increase the percentage to 94. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Language Arts teachers will implement instruction in preparation for FCAT Writes.
2. Teachers and students will have access to FCAT Explorer.
3. Language Arts teachers will administer an FCAT Writes! mirror test to all 9th and 10th graders.
4. A school-wide vocabulary development program.
5. District-wide vocabulary and writing pre-school inservice.
6. ELL students will receive additional academic support from a paraprofessional who works in the classroom with students.
7. Analysis of FCAT strand sub-scores will drive lesson planning for all language arts teachers.
8. Students will have access to technology to enhance writing skills and practice.
9. Identification of lowest performing students on individual teachers lesson plans.
10. School-wide adult to student mentoring program.
11. Student maintained data folders for each class enrolled.
12. Positive behavior support program.
|
| *Evaluation: |
1. An FCAT mirror test will be given.
2. Language Arts teachers will administer classroom assessments. |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. The FMHS reading plan is supported by researched-based programs including Classroom Instruction that Works by Dr. Marzano.
2. School-wide vocabulary development program by Dr. Kylene Beers.
3. Sterling Quality and goal setting.
4. Positive behavior support program. |
| *Professional Development: |
1. All teachers will receive training through staff meetings regarding accessing and using FCAT Explorer.
2. All teachers participated in district-wide vocabulary and writing pre-school inservice.
3. Sterling Quality and goal setting inservice.
4. Research based best practices.
5. Positive behavior support program. |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Writing Workbooks |
Textbook funds |
$5,000.00 |
| Total: $5,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Participation in Florida Council of Teachers of English Conference |
Title II |
$800.00 |
| Total: $800.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $5,800.00 |
|
| End of Writing Goal |
|
Goal: Science
*Note: Required for Title I
Scroll down for school data
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
In school year 2007-08, 58% of standard curriculum students met or exceeded the standard for science. This score exceeded both the state and district average, however was a drop from the FMHS score the previous year. |
| *Objective: |
In school year 2007-08, the mean scale score for 11th graders tested by FCAT Science was 316. By June 2009, the mean scale score for 11th grade students tested by FCAT Science will be 319. |
| *Strategies: |
1. Science teachers will implement instruction in preparation for FCAT Science.
2. All teachers will have access to FCAT Explorer to practice FCAT skills.
3. The school will provide students and parents with information on accessing FCAT Explorer.
4. A school-wide vocabulary development program.
5. District-wide vocabulary and writing pre-school inservice.
6. Science teachers developed a standards matrix to align classroom activities with standard-based instruction.
7. Annually assessed Sunshine State Standards will be taught and evaluated quarterly in each science course.
8. Standards-based training to all new science teachers.
9. FMHS will continue to address school-wide literacy through support of the school reading leadership team.
10. Students will have access to FCAT Explorer.
11. ELL students will receive additional academic support from a paraprofessional who works in the classroom with students.
12. School-wide adult to student mentoring program.
13. Student maintained data folders for each class enrolled.
|
| *Evaluation: |
1. An FCAT Science practice test will be administered to all 11th grade students.
2. FMHS Science teachers will document FCAT strategies in their lesson plans.
3. Science teachers will administer classroom assessments. |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. The FMHS reading plan is supported by the Marzano reading strategies.
2. School-wide vocabulary development program by Dr. Kylene Beers.
3. Sterling Quality and goal setting.
|
| *Professional Development: |
1. All teachers participated in district-wide vocabulary and writing pre-school inservice.
2. Sterling Quality and goal setting inservice.
3. Research based best practices. |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Textbook, workbooks and lab manuals |
Textbook funds |
$14,000.00 |
| Total: $14,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Training in the development and implementation of student-data folders. |
Title II |
$1,200.00 |
| Total: $1,200.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $15,200.00 |
|
|
*Non-Highly Qualified Instructors:
|
One science teacher is out of field teaching physics. |
| End of Science Goal |
|
Goal: Parental Involvement
*Note: Required for Title I
|
| *Needs Assessment: |
Parental involvement at the high school level is far below that of the elementary and middle school level. |
| *Objective: |
In 2007-08,an average of two parent involvement activities were held monthly. In 2008-09, an average of 50% of the Ft. Myers High parents will participate in meetings and/or activites on the school campus during the 2008-09 school year. |
| *Strategies: |
1. A SAC meeting is held once a month.
2. An Athletic Booster club meeting is held once a month.
3. The FMHS Music Boosters meet once a month.
4. Parentlink will be used as a tool to send messages to parents regarding open houses, testing dates, FCAT days, as well as parent access to student grades, assignments, and communicating with the teachers.
5. The school message on hold will be updated regularly.
6. School-wide open houses are held throughout the school year.
7. A quarterly newsletter will be sent to all parents that will include parental involvement activities.
8. Curriculum and assessment evening meetings will be provided for parents. |
| *Evaluation: |
1. Attendance taken at various booster meetings.
2. Documentation of Parentlink usage through a survey.
3. Attendance at Annual Open House. |
| *Evidence-based Program(s): |
|
| *Professional Development: |
Researched best practices. |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Hardware, software |
SIP |
$2,500.00 |
| Total: $2,500.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| ink, paper |
SIP |
$1,500.00 |
| Total: $1,500.00 |
| Final Total: $4,000.00 |
|
| End of Parental Involvement Goal |
|
Goal: Return on Investment
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Analysis of 07-08 FCAT Reading Scores and FL DOE AYP report data shows 72% of all students were proficient in reading (level 3 or above).
Disaggregated data by subgroups show 86% white students met AYP which is an increase of 10%. Subgroups: 32% African-American which is a 13% increase and 39% of students that are Economically Disadvantaged met AYP as determined by the state which is a 12% increase.
Analysis of 07-08 math scores and FL DOE AYP Report data shows that 83% of all students at FMHS were proficient in mathematics (level 3 or above). African-American sub-group (42%) and Economically Disadvantaged (58%) met AYP goals as determined by the state. |
| Objective: |
In 2007-08, 78% of the FMHS 10th grade standard curriculum students met high standards in reading. For 2008-09, 80% of the FMHS 10th grade standard curriculum students will meet high standards in reading.
In School Year 2007-08, 89% of the Standard Curriculum Mathematics Students met or exceeded the standard. By June 2009, the percentage of Standard Curriculum Students meeting or exceeding will be 90%. |
| Strategies: |
1. Content area reading strategies training for all teachers serving the lowest 25%.
2. Analysis of FCAT strand sub-scores will drive lesson planning for all reading teachers.
3. FMHS will continue to address school-wide literacy through support of the school reading leadership team.
4. The FMHS reading coach will assist all teachers in strategies and methods to increase student reading performance.
5. Students will have access to FCAT Explorer.
6. Students will have access to technology to enhance reading skills and practice.
7. ELL students will receive additional academic support from a paraprofessional who works in the classroom with students.
8. The implementation of the Achieve 3000 web-based reading support program.
9. Identification of lowest performing students on individual teachers lesson plans.
10. School-wide adult to student mentoring program.
11. Student maintained data folders for each class enrolled.
12. The utilization of the NovaNet learning lab to provide support for increased FCAT and ACT achievement. |
| Evaluation: |
1. Students in intensive classes will be tested quarterly for fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension progress: MAZE, Sopris Language! Placement Test, and FORF. Scores will be analyzed at the school and district level to maintain appropriate placement.
2. Analysis of 2008 FCAT Reading scores for placement.
3. District-Wide pre and post course assessments in content areas.
4. Individual course assessments aligned with the Sunshine State Standards.
|
| End of Return on Investment Goal |
|
ADDITIONAL GOALS
Additional Goal: AYP Goal |
| Needs Assessment: |
In 2007-08, 32% of black students met AYP in reading. This subgroup is our focus as it is the largest AYP subgroup for our school that is not meeting AYP standards. |
| Objective: |
In 2007-08, 32% of black students met AYP in reading. By June 2009, 45% of the black students will meet AYP in reading. |
| Strategies: |
1. Content area reading strategies training for all teachers serving the lowest 25%.
2. Analysis of FCAT strand sub-scores will drive lesson planning for all reading teachers.
3. FMHS will continue to address school-wide literacy through support of the school reading leadership team.
4. The FMHS reading coach will assist all teachers in strategies and methods to increase student reading performance.
5. Students will have access to FCAT Explorer.
6. Students will have access to technology to enhance reading skills and practice.
7. ELL students will receive additional academic support from a paraprofessional who works in the classroom with students.
8. The implementation of the Achieve 3000 web-based reading support program.
9. Identification of lowest performing students on individual teachers lesson plans.
10. School-wide adult to student mentoring program.
11. Student maintained data folders for each class enrolled.
12. The utilization of the NovaNet learning lab to provide support for increased FCAT and ACT achievement. |
| Evaluation: |
1. Students in intensive classes will be tested quarterly for fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension progress: MAZE, Sopris Language! Placement Test, and FORF. Scores will be analyzed at the school and district level to maintain appropriate placement.
2. Analysis of 2007 FCAT Reading scores for placement.
3. District-Wide pre and post course assessments in content areas. |
| Evidence-based Program(s): |
1. Language! Program by Sopris West Educational Services.
2. Marzano's High Yield Instructional Strategies.
3. Reciprocal Teaching Strategies.
4. Sterling Quality and goal setting.
5. School-wide vocabulary development program based on the research by Kylene Beers. |
| Professional Development: |
1. Reciprocal teacher training.
2. District-wide vocabulary and writing in content areas.
3. Struggling reader training.
4. Goal Setting with Sterling Quality.
5. Researched based best practices.
|
| Budget:
|
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| 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 |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of AYP Goal Goal |
|
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
|
|
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Reading text materials |
Textbook Funds |
$5,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Manipulatives and interactive teaching tools to support teaching of the SSS |
SIP |
$1,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Textbook and Workbook materials |
Textbook Materials |
$12,000.00 |
| Writing |
Writing Workbooks |
Textbook funds |
$5,000.00 |
| Science |
Textbook, workbooks and lab manuals |
Textbook funds |
$14,000.00 |
| Total: $37,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Software/web-based programs to support ELL and lowest quartile performing students learning aligned with SSS |
SIP |
$400.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Hardware, software |
SIP |
$2,500.00 |
| Total: $2,900.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
State reading training in best practices and model instructional strategies |
SIP |
$1,275.00 |
| Reading |
Training at the International reading conference |
Title II |
$1,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
State and National Training in research based best practices aligned with SSS |
SIP |
$1,075.00 |
| Mathematics |
Participation in Florida Educational Technology Conference to learn effective implementation of programs and equipment to support mathematics instruction. |
Title II |
$1,600.00 |
| Mathematics |
Training in the development and implementation of student data folders. |
Title II |
$1,200.00 |
| Writing |
Participation in Florida Council of Teachers of English Conference |
Title II |
$800.00 |
| Science |
Training in the development and implementation of student-data folders. |
Title II |
$1,200.00 |
| Total: $8,150.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Extended Day reading instruction in small group learning environment |
SAI |
$6,000.00 |
| Reading |
Implementation of One School, One Book program |
SIP |
$400.00 |
| Mathematics |
Extended day math instruction in small group learning environment. |
SAI |
$6,080.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
ink, paper |
SIP |
$1,500.00 |
| Total: $13,980.00 |
| Final Total: $62,030.00 |
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 FMHS SAC meets monthly. The activities of the SAC include to review, approve, and monitor the progress of the School Improvement Plan, to make recommendations for the expenditure of SIP funds, and provide a representative to serve on the District Advisory Council.
The 2008-09 SIP was approved by the SAC on Monday September 8, 2008.
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
David LaRosa,
Principal
|
|
2)
Rich McConville,
SAC Chair
|
|
3)
Nadia Nieves,
Student
|
|
4)
Natalie Watson,
Student
|
|
5)
Ada Corbett,
Teacher
|
|
6)
Robin Miller,
Teacher
|
|
7)
Amy Markovich,
Parent
|
|
8)
Diana Durante,
Parent
|
|
9)
Jamie Kaner,
Parent
|
|
10)
Claudia Cowart,
Parent
|
|
11)
Franky Margolin,
Parent
|
|
12)
Barbara Siegel,
Parent
|
|
13)
Annette Booker,
Community Member
|
|
14)
Nancy Nieves,
School Support Personnel
|
|
15)
Christine Cummings,
School Support Personnel
|
IMPLEMENTATION EVALUATION
Adequate progress for Ft. Myers High School is defined as the school meeting 5 out of 7 of academic goals in the 2008-09 School Improvement Plan.
Exceeds adequate progress for Ft. Myers High School is defined as the school meeting 7 out of 7 of all goals in the 2008-09 School Improvement Plan or achieving the state grade of A.
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 |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| 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 |
| |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Name of Assessment Used |
|
|
|
|
|
| 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
|
End of Baseline Data Report
Mid-Year Report
2008 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MID-YEAR REPORT
Differentiated Accountability Status:
|
| FCAT Assessed Grade Level: 3 |
| |
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: 4 |
| |
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: 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 |
Empty data from baseline data aggregated for your school.
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.
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.
4. What specific strategies will be used to improve the achievement of 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.
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.
4. What specific strategies will be used to improve the achievement of 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.
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.
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.
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 |
| No data submitted |
|
Please describe the academic improvement that has occurred for participating students (please refer to specific data points).
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 |
| No data submitted |
|
Based on the baseline and mid-year data, what additional professional development will be offered before the FCAT to help teachers increase student performance?
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 |
| No data submitted |
|
Based on the baseline and mid-year data, what additional parent involvement activities will be offered before the FCAT to address student achievement needs?
End of Mid-Year Report
AYP DATA
| 2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Lee FORT MYERS HIGH SCHOOL 0221 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 870
Math: 870
|
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 |
72 |
Y |
83 |
Y |
|
|
Y |
79 |
89 |
Y |
35 |
28 |
NA |
18 |
17 |
NA |
72 |
NA |
87 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
86 |
Y |
|
Y |
|
|
Y |
90 |
94 |
Y |
22 |
14 |
NA |
7 |
|
NA |
84 |
NA |
|
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
32 |
N |
47 |
N |
86
|
80 |
N |
46 |
69 |
Y |
81 |
68 |
N |
54 |
53 |
N |
39 |
N |
62 |
N |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
91
|
|
Y |
66 |
82 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ASIAN
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
39 |
N |
58 |
N |
87
|
85 |
N |
52 |
71 |
Y |
73 |
61 |
N |
51 |
42 |
N |
45 |
N |
70 |
N |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
29 |
77 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
43 |
46 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Lee FORT MYERS HIGH SCHOOL 0221 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 833
Math: 833
|
2006-2007
School Grade1: |
A
|
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? |
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
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
65 |
Y |
82 |
Y |
92
|
|
Y |
78 |
79 |
Y |
32 |
35 |
NA |
16 |
18 |
NA |
67 |
NA |
80 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
78 |
Y |
93 |
Y |
|
|
Y |
91 |
90 |
Y |
21 |
22 |
NA |
6 |
7 |
NA |
72 |
NA |
86 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
98 |
Y |
97 |
Y |
19 |
N |
46 |
N |
71
|
86 |
Y |
44 |
46 |
Y |
78 |
81 |
N |
57 |
54 |
N |
44 |
N |
60 |
Y |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
89
|
91 |
Y |
59 |
66 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
94 |
94 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
27 |
N |
49 |
N |
78
|
87 |
Y |
51 |
52 |
Y |
65 |
73 |
N |
46 |
51 |
N |
48 |
N |
59 |
Y |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
50 |
29 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
97 |
Y |
96 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
35
|
|
NA |
25 |
43 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2005-2006 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Lee FORT MYERS HIGH SCHOOL 0221 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 1039
Math: 1037
|
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
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
68 |
Y |
84 |
Y |
94
|
92 |
Y |
81 |
78 |
N |
32 |
32 |
NA |
19 |
16 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
79 |
Y |
94 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
88 |
91 |
NA |
21 |
21 |
NA |
8 |
6 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
98 |
Y |
98 |
Y |
22 |
N |
43 |
N |
84
|
71 |
NA |
56 |
44 |
NA |
78 |
78 |
NA |
60 |
57 |
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
56 |
Y |
68 |
Y |
|
89 |
NA |
64 |
59 |
NA |
40 |
44 |
NA |
32 |
32 |
NA |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
35 |
N |
54 |
Y |
87
|
78 |
NA |
56 |
51 |
NA |
67 |
65 |
NA |
50 |
46 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
97 |
Y |
97 |
Y |
14 |
NA |
32 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
63 |
50 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
98 |
Y |
98 |
Y |
|
NA |
9 |
NA |
50
|
35 |
NA |
41 |
25 |
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Lee School District
FORT MYERS HIGH SCHOOL
2007-2008
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
78%
|
89%
|
93%
|
58%
|
318
|
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 |
71% |
80% |
|
|
151 |
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? |
49% (NO) |
69% (YES) |
|
|
118
|
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.
|
| % of 11th and 12th graders meeting the graduation requirement on the FCAT retake |
63% |
63% |
|
|
10 |
If 50% of 11th and 12th graders meet the graduation requirement on the retake in both reading and math, ten bonus points are awarded |
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
597 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Lee School District
FORT MYERS HIGH SCHOOL
2006-2007
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
71%
|
88%
|
95%
|
65%
|
319
|
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% |
75% |
|
|
140 |
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? |
55% (YES) |
58% (YES) |
|
|
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.
|
| % of 11th and 12th graders meeting the graduation requirement on the FCAT retake |
52% |
54% |
|
|
10 |
If 50% of 11th and 12th graders meet the graduation requirement on the retake in both reading and math, ten bonus points are awarded |
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
582 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Lee School District
FORT MYERS HIGH SCHOOL
2005-2006
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
74%
|
90%
|
93%
|
257
|
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 |
68% |
78% |
|
146 |
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? |
54% (YES) |
|
|
54
|
Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students . Yes, if 50% or more make gains .
|
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
457 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |