VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS
Our Vision
It is our vision that students at Bethlehem School can become productive learners if they are provided with effective instruction, appropriate curriculum, and a supportive school environment.
Our Mission
The staff members at Bethlehem School believe that the school exists to promote and nurture student learning and development academically, physically, socially, and emotionally. We also believe that it is our role to provide various methods, technology, materials, and experiences to enable students to maximize their capabilities. We will actively seek and explore new ideas and research-based strategies, in order to provide students with quality educational experiences. We will also seek to foster an atmosphere of respect and support. By doing so, we will provide a supportive, safe environment in which students can reach their full potential.
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
Brief History and Background of the School
Bethlehem High School is a K-12 school located in the north end of Holmes County, close to the Alabama state line. It has in recent years developed career academies for the high school, including a culinary arts academy that runs the Wildcat Cafe on Fridays.
Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Bethlehem HS made a number of key changes over the summer, including re-assigning teachers in areas of school weakness. We paid particular attention to adolescent reading, as reading scores have tended to decline around 6th grade. Throughout the last school year, the school received the ongoing support of a reading coach, who helped to implement school-wide reading processes (Seven Steps to Success). BHS also benefited from the full-time support of a school improvement specialist, who conducted walk-throughs, strengthened the writing program, and reoriented the school academically.
Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year
Due to budgetary constraints, this year BHS will have only a half-time school improvement specialist and a half-time reading coach.
Student Demographics
BHS has approximately 537 students, K-12, enrolled for the 2009-2010 school year. The majority of students are white (fewer than 10 students are non-white). Of the 537 students, 296, or 55 percent, are eligible for free- or reduced-price lunch. (Of these, 73 percent are free and 27 percent are reduced.)
Student Attendance Rates
BHS calculates a daily attendance rate. Between August 24 and October 1, an average of 34 students (6 percent) are absent on a given day.
Student Mobility
Student mobility is extremely low. On occasion, a student will leave to attend another school for a week (such as Poplar Springs or a school in Alabama) and will quickly return. BHS has developed a reputation as a good school and this contributes to the stability of the population.
Student Suspension Rates
In school year 2008-09, there were 17 out-of-school suspensions and 1 placement into an alternative setting. These numbers resulted from 10 incidents, involving 12 boys and 6 girls. All students were white.
Student Retention Rates
Not available.
Class Size
Class sizes are below the constitutionally required limits in all grade levels.
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
BHS is its own feeder pattern. It is essentially a self-contained K-12 school with little in- or out-migration.
Partnerships and Grants
N/A
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA
Note: The following links will open in a separate browser window.
School Grades Trend Data
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data
Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data
HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS
| Position | Name | Degree(s)/ Certification(s) | # of Years at Current School | # of Years as an Administrator | Prior Performance Record * |
|
Principal
|
Jerry Dixon
|
School Principal, Social Studied, Physical Education
|
3
|
16
|
Under Mr. Dixon's leadership, BHS moved last year from a D to a B school.
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Janie Lolly
|
Elementary Education, Educational Leadership
|
2
|
5
|
Ms. Lolly served as the school's school improvement specialist and guided the curricular changes that led to improvement.
|
* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)
HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES
| Subject Area | Name | Degree(s)/ Certification(s) | # of Years at Current School | # of Years as a Coach | Prior Performance Record * |
|
Reading
|
Rosanne Mitchell
|
Elementary Education; Reading Endorsement
|
18
|
6
|
Ms. Mitchell has assisted the school in establishing school-wide academic routines and shares in the credit for the school's improved school grade
|
* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)
HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS
| Description of Strategy | Person Responsible | Projected Completion Date | Not Applicable (If not, please explain why) |
|
Holmes County's policy is to hire only Highly-Qualified teachers whenever possible. Holmes County School Board is currently participating in the FastPacks grant that assists teachers in becoming Highly Qualified.
|
Human Resources at the District Office
|
05/2010
|
All BHS teachers are highly qualified per the NCLB definition
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
Staff Demographics
| Total Number of Instructional Staff | % of First-Year Teachers | % of Teachers with 1-5 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 6-14 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 15+ Years of Experience | % of Teachers with Advanced Degrees | % Highly Qualified | % Reading Endorsed Teachers | % National Board Certified Teachers | % ESOL Endorsed |
| 43 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 26 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Teacher Mentoring Program
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
| No data submitted |
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Title I, Part A
Title I, Part A, supports additional instructional staff and supplemental academic programs and materials such as computer-based remediation.
Title I, Part C- Migrant
NA
Title I, Part D
Part D funds are used to support dropout prevention activities and the alternative school that receives students who need an alternative setting.
Title II
These funds are used for professional development to assist teachers in improving their instructional methods and for classroom reduction.
Title III
NA
Title X- Homeless
NA
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
SAI funds are primarily used to support summer school and summer reading camp.
Violence Prevention Programs
Holmes County operates programs in conjunction with the county health department, using Title IV funds, targeting alcohol, tobacco and other drug use.
Nutrition Programs
Holmes County participates in the US Department of Agriculture free breakfast and lunch programs. As noted above, approximately 55 percent of BHS students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch.
Housing Programs
NA
Head Start
NA
Adult Education
Holmes County partners with Washington-Holmes Technical Center to provide adult education services.
Career and Technical Education
Career and Technical Education programs are offered to high school students in areas such as culinary arts, business and agricultural sciences.
Job Training
NA
Other
NA
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)
School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model
Professional Learning Communities
| PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.) | PLC Leader | Frequency of PLC Meetings | Schedule (when) | Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis) |
|
PLCs are not in use at BHS. There is no common planning time and in a small school, there are not natural groupings of teachers to organize as PLCs.
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: For Title I schools only
Pre-School Transition
Holmes County is a rural county with few pre-K offerings, including VPK. However, as a small district most young children have siblings already established in Holmes County schools and so transition is not really an issue of concern.
Postsecondary Transition
Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.
Most students at BHS who pursue higher education, do so at one of the regional community colleges (such as Chipola). Others attend FSU or UF, or attend college in Alabama. Counselors meet individually with students, beginning in the 8th grade, to figure out major areas of interest and coursework. BHS finds that its students who pursue higher education are prepared for their coursework.
PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS
Reading Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?
What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
5, 7, 8, 9 reading - percent of students at 3 or above
|
While maintaining reading gains in other grades, strengthen instruction in grades 5, 7, 8 and 9 to raise the percentage of students scoring at or above 3 on FCAT
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Reassign faculty teaching reading in those grades and ensure students scoring at L1 or L2 are enrolled in a double block and/or reading supplemental instruction
|
Janie Lolley
|
Ongoing progress monitoring
|
FAIR
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
1
|
Reading strategies for struggling students
|
Roseann Mitchell
|
12/09
|
Classroom visits
|
Roseann Mitchell
|
For Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every Teacher
The reading coach, Roseann Mitchell, works with every content area teacher on incorporating reading strategies. The district offers CAR-PD for any teacher who is interested.
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| McDougal-Littel Literature |
Textbook Allocation |
$26,000.00 |
| Total: $26,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Hiring of subs for professional development on FAIR and reading strategies. |
Title I and Tile II |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $28,000.00 |
|
| End of Reading Goal |
|
Mathematics Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?
What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Grades 3, 5, 8, 9 - math
|
While maintaining increases at other grade levels, enhance instruction in math at these grade levels so that a greater percentage of students score at/above 3 on FCAT
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Identify RTi strategies to support these students within their existing classrooms
|
Marcy Dixon
|
Ongoing progress monitoring
|
FLDOE Math tests
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
1
|
RTi
|
Marcy Dixon
|
12/09
|
Classroom walk-throughs by school leaders and district teams
|
Jerry Dixon
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Additional Textbooks |
Textbook allocation |
$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 |
| Subs for DA training on baseline and mid-year assessment reports and RTI training. |
Title I and Title II |
$500.00 |
| Total: $500.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $1,500.00 |
|
| End of Mathematics Goal |
|
Science Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Only 17% of eleventh graders scored a level 3 or higher on the FCAT Science.
|
30% of eleventh graders will score a level 3 or higher on the FCAT Science.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Determine FCAT science content for each grade level.
2. Review FCAT science specifications for each grade level.
3. Administer periodic assessments in FCAT format provided by the Bureau of School Improvement using the Bureau's calendar.
|
Janie Lolley
|
1. Monitor instruction in classroom with weekly visits by the principal.
2. Review completed student assessments.
|
2009-2010 FCAT
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
1
|
Review of Science Standards tested both annually and content sampled. Review of mid-year and baseline assessment reports furnished by the SI office at DOE.
|
Janie Lolley
|
01/10
|
District walkthroughs
|
Jerry Dixon
|
|
| |
| 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 |
| Review of science mid-year and baseline reports. |
Title I and Title II |
$500.00 |
| Total: $500.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $500.00 |
|
| End of Science Goal |
|
Writing Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Maintain recent gains
|
Maintain recent gains in writing across all tested grade levels
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Monitor writing instruction and student work products
|
Janie Lolley
|
Ongoing progress monitoring
|
District-developed writing prompts
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
| No data submitted |
|
|
| |
| 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 Science Goal |
|
Parent Involvement Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on information from School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Were parent involvement activities and strategies targeted to areas of academic need?
Based on information from surveys, evaluations, agendas, or sign-ins:
Was the percent of parent participation in school activities maintained or increased from the prior year?
Generally, what strategies or activities can be employed to increase parent involvement?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Parent academic support for students' academic work
|
Increase parent knowledge and ability to support students' academic work
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Host FCAT nights to inform parents of the role of families in supporting academic achievement
|
Jerry Dixon
|
Survey parents; examine FCAT scores
|
Survey
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
| No data submitted |
|
|
| |
| 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 Parent Involvement Goal |
|
Other Goals
No Other Goals were submitted for this school
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
McDougal-Littel Literature |
Textbook Allocation |
$26,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Additional Textbooks |
Textbook allocation |
$1,000.00 |
| Total: $27,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Hiring of subs for professional development on FAIR and reading strategies. |
Title I and Tile II |
$2,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Subs for DA training on baseline and mid-year assessment reports and RTI training. |
Title I and Title II |
$500.00 |
| Science |
Review of science mid-year and baseline reports. |
Title I and Title II |
$500.00 |
| Total: $3,000.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $30,000.00 |
Differentiated Accountability
School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance
No Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance
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 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.
| Projected use of SAC Funds | Amount |
|
To support school improvement initiatives.
|
2675
|
Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year
The SAC meets regularly to discuss school activities, academic progress and parent involvement.
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
Jerry Dixon,
Principal
|
|
2)
Betty Lewis,
SAC Chair
|
|
3)
Ross Hawthorne,
Student
|
|
4)
Mindy Dampier,
Student
|
|
5)
Tonya Amerson,
Teacher
|
|
6)
Mark Bryan,
Teacher
|
|
7)
Susan Steverson,
Teacher
|
|
8)
Babs Miller,
Business Member
|
|
9)
Don Hatcher,
Parent
|
|
10)
Alison Justice,
Parent
|
|
11)
William Yarbrough,
Parent
|
|
12)
Sherry Myers,
School Support Personnel
|
|
13)
Janie Lolley,
Assistant Principal
|
AYP DATA
No Data Found
No Data Found
No Data Found
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Holmes School District BETHLEHEM HIGH SCHOOL 2008-2009
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
66%
|
69%
|
92%
|
28%
|
255
|
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 |
62% |
70% |
|
|
132 |
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? |
58% (YES) |
65% (YES) |
|
|
123
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
520 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Holmes School District BETHLEHEM HIGH SCHOOL 2007-2008
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
63%
|
69%
|
85%
|
36%
|
253
|
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 |
62% |
73% |
|
|
135 |
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? |
68% (YES) |
66% (YES) |
|
|
134
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
522 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Holmes School District BETHLEHEM HIGH SCHOOL 2006-2007
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
55%
|
57%
|
60%
|
36%
|
208
|
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 |
48% |
66% |
|
|
114 |
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? |
38% (NO) |
67% (YES) |
|
|
105
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
427 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
D |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |