VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

Vision: Dixieland Elementary will address the achievement needs of all diverse students during the 2008-2009 school year.

Dixieland Elementary will provide a quality education for students as they acquire the skills necessary to succeed in the twenty-first century. A nurturing environment will provide support for integrated curriculum, cooperative learning, and use of technology as the achievement needs are addressed for all diverse students.



Mission:
The mission of Dixieland Elementary is to promote life-long enthusiastic achievement that is relevant and rigorous in a nurturing environment.

Belief Statements:
Our guiding principles are respect, responsibility, perseverance, optimism, and honesty.
Our message:
We believe that learning is for everyone, everyday, everywhere!


PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS


Brief History and Background of the School

Dixieland Elementary School is one of the few remaining neighborhood schools in Polk County. Dixieland was constructed in 1924 and remodeled to the present state 15 years ago. The campus features an updated two story building with an adjoining kindergarten wing, six portables, cafeteria, and one additional stand alone classroom. All of the classrooms are equipped with ceiling mounted projectors and student computers. Most classrooms are equipped with SMARTBOARDS and other technological tools for instruction. The current enrollment at Dixieland Elementary is 430 students. Our school population is comprised of 36 percent white, 34 percent black, 28 percent Hispanic, 1 percent Asian and 1 percent multiracial. With 87percent of the students receiving free or reduced lunch, Dixieland is a Title I school. The majority of students come from the older neighborhood surrounding the school. Dixieland serves as the site school for the students residing at the Florida Baptist Home. Students not only come from a variety of economic, social, and racial backgrounds, but also have various needs. Nine percent of our students attend special education classes, and nine percent of our students attend classes for students who speak little or no English. In 2007-2008 Dixieland was recognized as a model school by Learning Focused Solutions for leadership with an emphasis on support, monitoring, planning, and classroom application of exemplary instructional practices. Dixieland was also recognized as a Five Star school for involvement with community. Dixieland is supported by the community through an active volunteer program hosted by several neighborhood retirement communities.


Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Dixieland Elementary has made AYP for the past three years. Instructional strategies that are evidence based, and research based have been implemented school wide. The school has a strong support for Hispanic students, including a weekly after school reading club for Hispanic students.


Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Dixieland Elementary has consistently closed the gap for African American students in reading and math. However, this subgroup is still lagging behind the other groups within the school.


Student Demographics

Dixieland Elementary School serves a multi-ethnic school population that consists of 430 students from a predominantly economically disadvantaged community. 25% of students are Hispanic, 29% are Black,38% are White, and 8% are American Indian, Asian, or multi-racial. Economically disadvantaged students account for 86% of the population .Additionally, 9% of students are Students with Disabilities (SWD), 11% are classified as English Language Learners (ELL), and nearly 3% of students are gifted.


Student Attendance Rates

Dixieland Elementary has maintained a slight increase over the district during the last three years in attendance.
Dixieland Elementary has exceeded the growth of the district over the years: Dixieland Elementary School,
2006-2007: 95.20%; 2007-2008: 94.65%; 2008-2009: 95.08%; Polk District 2006-2007: 94%; 2007-2008:
94.32%; 2008-2009: 94.56%.


Student Mobility

The mobility rate of the school during 2007-2008 was 38.15%. This number decreased to 29.70% during the 2009-2009 school year.


Student Suspension Rates

2006-2007: Out-of-school 84 days; 2007-2008: Out-of-school 67 days; 2008-2009: Out-of-school 23 days. The suspension rates have decreased over the past three years.


Student Retention Rates

The retention rate slightly increased from 2007-08 (9.67%) to 2008-09 (12.99%). However, the school had a drastic reduction in retentions from 2006-07 (25.87%)


Class Size

The school has maintained the school average for class size in 2006-2007 for K-3 Classrooms at 17.13 and 4-5 Classrooms at 20.23. The class size average for 2007-2008 for K-3 Classrooms was 17.13 and 4-5 Classrooms was 18.95.


Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Dixieland Elementary feeds into two middle schools. The majority of students attend Southwest Middle School, which earned a school grade of “A” in 2008-2009. The school did not make AYP. A few students feed to Sleepy Hill Middle School, which earned a grade of “C” and did not make AYP during the 2008-2009 school year.


Partnerships and Grants

Partnerships and Grants
The school will continue its strong partnership with Westminster Presbyterian Church, which
provides a number of resources, including tutors during the school week and tutoring on Saturday mornings for the Hispanic student population.
Dixieland also partners with Lakeland High School through the Teen Trendsetter Grant in which high school students dedicate one hour a week to reading and mentoring for second grade classrooms.
The Lakeland Rotary is also a generous partner in providing school supplies and clothing for students in need.



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

PositionNameDegree(s)/ Certification(s)# of Years at Current School# of Years as an AdministratorPrior Performance Record *
Principal Debbie Henderson BA- Elementary
Education, Oklahoma Baptist University; Master of
Science- Educational
Leadership,
Nova Southeastern University;
Principal Certification-
State of Florida
4 7 Principal of Dixieland Elementary in 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
75%, Math mastery: 81%,
Science Mastery: 53%. AYP:
100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math.
2007-2008: Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 65%, Math Mastery
71%, Science Mastery 33%.
AYP 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math
2006-2007: Grade A, Reading
Mastery: 74%, Math Mastery
75%. AYP: 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math.
2003-2006 Assistant Principal at Elbert Elementary
2005-2006: Grade A, Reading
Mastery 74%, Math Mastery
74%. AYP: 100%,
2004-2005:: Grade: A,
AYP: 100%
Assis Principal Mary Dwight BS- Elementary
Education,
University of South Florida; Master
of Science- Educational Leadership,
Nova Southeastern University
Certification-
Educational
Leadership, State of
Florida
5 5 Assistant Principal of Dixieland Elementary in 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
75%, Math mastery: 81%,
Science Mastery: 53%. AYP:
100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math.
2007-2008: Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 65%, Math Mastery
71%, Science Mastery 33%.
AYP 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math
2006-2007: Grade A, Reading
Mastery: 74%, Math Mastery
75%. AYP: 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math.

* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

Subject AreaNameDegree(s)/ Certification(s)# of Years at Current School# of Years as a CoachPrior Performance Record *
Math and Science Joy Conley Professional
Educator’s:
Elementary Ed.
1-6, Gifted Ed. Endorsement
12 4 Instructional Coach at Dixieland Elementary in 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
75%, Math mastery: 81%,
Science Mastery: 53%. AYP:
100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math.
2007-2008: Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 65%, Math Mastery
71%, Science Mastery 33%.
AYP 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math
2006-2007: Grade A, Reading
Mastery: 74%, Math Mastery
75%. AYP: 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math
Reading Beth Dawson Professional
Educator’s:
Elementary Ed.
1-6, ESE Certification
Master of Science, Instruction and Curriculum
8 8 Reading Coach at Dixieland Elementary in 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
75%, Math mastery: 81%,
Science Mastery: 53%. AYP:
100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math.
2007-2008: Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 65%, Math Mastery
71%, Science Mastery 33%.
AYP 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math
2006-2007: Grade A, Reading
Mastery: 74%, Math Mastery
75%. AYP: 100%, all subgroups made AYP in Reading and Math

* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)


HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Description of StrategyPerson ResponsibleProjected Completion DateNot Applicable (If not, please explain why)
1. Regular meetings of new teachers with
Principal
Principal Ongoing
2.Partnering new teachers with veteran mentors Principal Ongoing
3.Collaborative Planning Time Weekly / Teams Principal Weekly, ongoing


Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

NameCertificationTeaching AssignmentProfessional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified
No data submitted


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
240383329191000077


Teacher Mentoring Program

Mentor NameMentee AssignedRationale for PairingPlanned Mentoring Activities
AIF, Beth Dawson Marla Pyle AIF will provide support for implementation of effective instructional strategies. Weekly observations and collaboration/feedback/modeling



ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration


Note: For Title I schools only

Title I, Part A

Title I, Part A, funds school-wide services to Dixieland Elementary School. The Title I funds provide supplemental instructional resources and interventions for students with academic achievement needs. Title I, Part A, support provides after-school and summer instructional programs, supplemental instructional materials, resource teachers, technology for students, professional development for the staff, and resources for parents.


Title I, Part C- Migrant

Migrant students enrolled in Dixieland Elementary School will be assisted by the school and by the District Migrant Education Program (MEP). Students will be prioritized by the MEP for supplemental services based on need and migrant status. MEP Teacher Advocates, assigned to schools with high percentages of migrant students, monitor the progress of these high need students and provide or coordinate supplemental academic support. Migrant Home-School Liaisons identify and recruit migrant students and their families for the MEP. They provide support to both students and parents in locating services necessary to ensure the academic success of these students whose education has been interrupted by numerous moves.


Title I, Part D

Title I, Part D, provides Transition Facilitators to assist students with transition from Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) facilities back into their zoned school. The Transition Facilitators communicate with the Guidance Counselors at schools to facilitate the transfer of records and appropriate placement.


Title II

Professional development resources are available to Title I schools through Title II funds. In addition, School Technology Services provide technical support, technology training, and licenses for software programs and web-based access via Title II-D funds. Funds available at Dixieland Elementary School are used to purchase Accelerated Reader Web-Based and PD 360 for staff development.


Title III

Title III provides supplemental resources for English Language Learners (ELL) and their teachers in this Title I school, as well as professional learning opportunities for school staff.


Title X- Homeless

The Hearth program, funded through Title X, provides support for identified homeless students. Title I provides support for this program, and many activities implemented by the Hearth program are carried out in cooperation with the Migrant Education Program (MEP) funded through Title I, Part C.


Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

SAI units provided to Dixieland Elementary School enhance achievement by providing small group instruction through the Kaplan Spell Read program for striving readers.


Violence Prevention Programs

Title IV provides violence and drug prevention programs in schools in order to promote a safe school environment. Examples of violence prevention programs include anti-bullying, gang awareness, gun awareness, etc.


Nutrition Programs

Dixieland Elementary is a location for a summer feeding program for the community.


Housing Programs

N/A


Head Start

Head Start is not located on our campus.


Adult Education

N/A


Career and Technical Education

N/A


Job Training

Not Applicable


Other


Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)


School-based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Debbie Henderson (Principal), Mary Dwight (Asst. Principal), Arvilla Stokes Facilitator (Guidance Counselor), Peggy Donaldson (ESE Inclusion), Joyce Shrack (ESE ), Julie Dean (School Psychologist), Beth Dawson (Academic Instructional Facilitator), Patty Houk (Classroom Teacher), Steve Myers (Classroom Teacher).


Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g. meeting processes and roles/functions).

The PS/RtI Leadership team will meeting monthly for the purpose of improving school/teacher effectiveness and student achievement using the Problem Solving Model. The Leadership Team will identify students at moderate or high risk for not meeting benchmarks.


Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership Team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan

The PS/RtI Leadership Team will meet with the School Advisory Council (SAC) and principal to help develop the School Improvement Plan. The team will focus on students in Tiers 1, 2 and 3 target areas. The team will facilitate the development of a systematic approach to teaching and align processes and procedures.




RtI Implementation

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Baseline data is collected in August and September. Fair data is processed through the Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN). Kindergarten and First Grade data is gathered for the SBAR and the previous year SAT 10 data for first and second grade. Third through Fifth will use data from the previous year’s FCAT scores. Progress Monitoring is gathered mid-year and toward the end of the year. Other progress monitoring data will be collected every nine weeks. Diagnostic data will be gathered through FAIR. End of Year data is gathered through FAIR, SAT 10, FCAT and SBAR.
Data is discussed and analyzed at least monthly at the PS/RtI Leadership Team Meetings.


Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

Professional learning will be provided during the teachers’ common planning time and sessions will occur throughout the year. The PS/RtI Overview will be provided in mid-August-September. The District has provided five mini-modules that will be provided throughout the year.



School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Plan

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data


What strengths and weaknesses were identified in the 2009 data by grade level, subject area, and clusters/strands?


Fourth Grade Reading scores excelled with 86% of students proficient in reading. Fifth grade words and phrases had 505 of the mean points earned in fifth grade as an area of weakness. 90% of fourth grade students were proficient in Math, and 82% of third grade students were proficient in math. Geometry and Spatial Sense were strengths in all grades. Fifth Grade students were weak in Data Analysis.


Instructional Calendar Development


What is the process for developing, implementing, and monitoring an Instructional Focus Calendar for reading, writing, mathematics, and science?

As an initial step towards implementing FCIM the school will focus on reading. The district has created reading curriculum maps that are accompanied by a course timeline. The course timeline is the starting point for each school’s Instructional Focus Calendar. The district has created a timeline for Reading Comprehension Mini-Lessons which will serve as the school’s Reading Instructional Focus. The implementation of the lessons will be monitored by the AIF, school leadership team, and administration.


Which instructional Benchmarks will be given priority focus, based on need, for each content area (reading, writing, mathematics, and science)?

Priority focus based on school need will be in reading, particularly main idea and author’s purpose, as well as comparisons.
In math priority focus will be based on number sense and algebraic thinking. Science focus will include all benchmarks. Writing will include focus of writing, organization, and conventions of writing.


What is the process to ensure instruction is based on individual students’ needs, as opposed to the master schedule?

Disaggregation of FCAT data and monthly PLCs (team) will use the data from FAIR and other progress monitoring tools to identify student needs and provide appropriate interventions.


How does the school incorporate applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between subjects and relevance to their future?

Dixieland Elementary begins an early focus with students for building expectations that students will graduate from high school.


How does the school incorporate students’ academic and career planning, as well as promote student course selections, so that students’ course of study is personally meaningful?

Administrators meet with students each nine weeks to discuss student progress from benchmark assessments and align progress with year end goal setting and targets.




DO

Direct the Instructional Focus


How are lesson plans and instructional delivery aligned across grade levels and subject areas?


Aligned and prioritized curriculum maps and time lines are used in all core areas. Teachers implement Acquisition Lesson Plans for planning and delivery of core curriculum which includes essential questions, activating strategies, high-yield instructional strategies, summarizing and reteaching as needed. Teachers meet weekly for collaborative planning as grade level teams. The district-wide Monthly Reading Comprehension Focus will be used as the basis of the reading mini-lessons.


How are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

Model instructional focus lessons were developed by master teachers and are posted within the district curriculum maps. Collaborative teams plan units of instruction for reading, math, writing, and science. Unit planning days are dedicated to developing quality focus lessons. School Leadership Team monitors the lesson plans, pacing of instruction, and quality of delivery.


How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

Vertical teams and articulation centered on high quality student work and the results of progress monitoring will guide the delivery of lessons. Teachers are proficient in the instructional strategy of “error analysis” to monitor common misconceptions in the learning and provide support for re-teaching.




CHECK

Assessment


Describe the types of ongoing formative assessments to be used during the school year to measure student progress in core, supplemental, and intensive instruction/intervention.


FAIR, Fast Forward, Harcourt Trophies, Compass Odyssey, Accelerated Reading, Weekly Focus Skill Assessments for Reading


How are assessments used to identify students reaching mastery and those not reaching mastery?

Achievement thresholds will be set for each grade level and subject area. Students not reaching the threshold will be targeted for additional support as well as monitoring. Formative benchmark assessments are consistently used: school-wide and in all core areas. They are given frequently and used for progress monitoring, as well as for planning and instruction.


Maintenance


How is ongoing assessment and maintenance of Benchmark mastery for each grade level and content area built into the Instructional Focus Calendar?

Dates for ongoing assessments and spiraled review are built into the instructional focus calendar at the conclusion of each month’s comprehension focus. Main Idea is spiraled into weekly lesson plans and taught in each lesson in addition to the focus skill of the month. Additional learning support and scaffolding will be offered to striving students.


Describe the process and schedule for teams to review progress monitoring data (summative and mini assessments) to identify the required instructional modifications that are needed to increase student achievement.

Monthly “Data Day” PLCs will collaborate and review progress monitoring data which will in turn drive instruction. This data will also provide direction for enrichment, target, and striving students.


Monitoring


Describe the Principal’s and Leadership Team’s roles as instructional leaders and how they will be continuously involved in the teaching and learning process.

The administration and the leadership team facilitate PLCs with staff members/teams which address data, student work, instruction, and curriculum. The administrators and the leadership team schedule coaching and monitoring visits to classrooms on a daily basis.




ACT

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions


Identify the core, supplemental, and intensive instruction and interventions.


Core: Trophies/Harcourt Reading, Math/Scott Foresman
Supplemental: SRA, Kaplan Spell Read, Compass, Odyssey
Intensive: Fast Foward


How are supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions and tutorials structured to re-teach non-mastered target areas?

Multiple opportunities for evidence based, research based extending learning activities including: extended time for math and reading, extended day for math and reading, summer school, accelerating and previewing, as well as re-teaching.


How does the school identify staff’s professional development needs to improve their instructional strategies?

The LIFT, or Learning Focused Implementation Tool will be administered at the beginning of the 2009-2010 school year to assist with areas of need for professional development.


Which students will be targeted for supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions?

Any student scoring a Level 1 or Level 2; a student with an ASP, or a student who is struggling with the Core Instruction.


How will the effectiveness of the interventions be measured throughout the year?

Ongoing progress monitoring checks, mini-assessments, formative assessments, student data chats, and FAIR.


Enrichment


Describe alternative instructional delivery methods to support acceleration and enrichment activities.

Above level reading instruction will be provided for enrichment. Math enrichment will be provided for students scoring a Level 4 or 5 in math.


Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

Students scoring a Level 4 or 5 in math and/or reading.




Professional Learning Communities

PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.)PLC LeaderFrequency of PLC MeetingsSchedule (when)Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis)
Targets and Data Principal Monthly First Tuesday of every month Charts and graphs for data analysis for OPM for all students.
Reading Assignments AIF Every three weeks Sept. Oct. Nov. Jan. Making appropriate reading assignments and lesson plans reviewed through Lesson Plan Study
Higher Level Thinking Assistant Principal Every three weeks Sept. Oct. Nov. Jan. Lesson Plan Study to include evidence of higher level thinking questions during instruction.


NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only


Pre-School Transition

Dixieland currently has one preschool on campus, a blended unit with ESE students and general education students. The unit is supported by one teacher, one certified assistant (CDAT), and one paraprofessional. The program focuses on preschool standards and socialization skills. The school offers the following activities to facilitate a smooth transition for children coming from local preschools and daycares:
•Provide local daycares with Polk County’s curriculum guide for kindergarten.
•Provide community notification and information concerning pre-registration requirements and an
invitation to an orientation/workshop.
•Provide a preschool orientation (Kindergarten Round-Up) in April that includes school
information, grade level expectations, learning activities, and school readiness information. A
tour of Dixieland’s facility is also offered.
•The Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener (FLKRS) is given by the classroom teacher to all students enrolling in Kindergarten to assess learning readiness.


Postsecondary Transition

Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.

NA



 

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

 

Other Goals

No Other Goals were submitted for this school

 

FINAL BUDGET



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 FundsAmount
No data submitted



Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year


The School Advisory Council (SAC) has an important function for the success of Dixieland Elementary School. Listed below are some of the functions of the SAC.
• Reach out to community to obtain more partners
• Review and advise on final review of School Improvement Plan
• Sponsor drives to increase parent involvement
• Assist the school to create and analyze school climate surveys for parents and students
• Review student performance data
• Visit classrooms to review instructional programs and technology


SAC Members

Members
1)  Debbie Henderson,   Principal
2)  Janiene Bambridge,   SAC Chair
3)  Patty Houk,   Teacher
4)  Colleen Hiers,   Teacher
5)  Jagie Zamot,   Parent
6)  Susan Holmes,   Parent
7)  Y. Luaces,   Parent
8)  Melinda Bizzell,   Parent
9)  Benita White,   Parent
10)  Nadia Salazar,   Parent
11)  Johnny Jackson,   Parent
12)  S. Jones,   Parent
13)  Crystle Feran,   Parent
14)  Kendall Morris,   Parent
15)  Connie Lattimer,   Parent
16)  A. Fernandez,   Parent
17)  Manny Delgado,   Community Member
18)  Jay Croteau,   Community Member
19)  Rita Selvage,   School Support Personnel
20)  Arvilla Stokes,   School Support Personnel
21)  Kay Llewellyn,   School Support Personnel
22)  Shauna Solomon,   School Support Personnel
23)  Eugenia Bendana,   School Support Personnel
24)  Mary Dwight,   Assistant Principal
 

AYP DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk DIXIELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0131
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
Read: 187
Math: 187  
2008-2009
School Grade1:
A   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?
65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? 68% 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
  2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2008 2009 Y/N 2007 2008 Y/N 2008 2009 Y/N 2008 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N 2009 Y/N
TOTAL4  100  100  72  81          NA  40  28  NA 32  19  NA 76  NA  81  NA 
WHITE  100  100  82  94      NA      NA  28  18  NA 22  NA 82  NA  93  NA 
BLACK  100  100  54  58      NA      NA  53  46  Y 49  42  Y 62  NA  66  NA 
HISPANIC  100  100  66  85      NA      NA  48  34  NA 31  15  NA 76  NA  78  NA 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  100  100  70  80          NA  45  30  NA 36  20  NA 75  NA  80  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        

2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk DIXIELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0131
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
Read: 195
Math: 195  
2007-2008
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?
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  99  60  68          NA  34  40  NA 34  32  NA 67  NA  74  NA 
WHITE  99  99  72  78      NA      NA  27  28  NA 24  22  NA 76  NA  72  NA 
BLACK  100  100  47  51      NA      NA  43  53  N 47  49  N 60  69 
HISPANIC  100  100  52  69      NA      NA  41  48  N 42  31  NA 62  81  NA 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  100  99  55  64          NA  37  45  N 41  36  NA 64  72  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        

2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk DIXIELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0131
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
Read: 217
Math: 217  
2006-2007
School Grade1:
A   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  100  66  66          NA  51  34  NA 47  34  NA 67  NA  78  NA 
WHITE  100  100  73  76      NA      NA  47  33  NA 42  24  NA 73  NA  85  NA 
BLACK  100  100  57  53      NA      NA  56  36  NA 61  47  Y 57  NA  67  NA 
HISPANIC  100  99  59  58      NA      NA    34  NA 54  42  NA 63  NA  78  NA 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  100  99  63  59  92         NA  58  35  NA 53  41  NA 64  NA  77  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        


SCHOOL GRADE DATA

Polk School District
DIXIELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2008-2009
  Reading
  
Math
  
Writing
  
Science
  
Grade
Points
Earned
 
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 75%  81%  95%  53%  304   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 69%  79%      148  3 ways to make gains:
  • Improve FCAT Levels
  • Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5
  • Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
  • Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? 67% (YES)  83% (YES)      150  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         602   
    Percent Tested = 100%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         A  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


    Polk School District
    DIXIELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2007-2008
      Reading
      
    Math
      
    Writing
      
    Science
      
    Grade
    Points
    Earned
     
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 65%  71%  92%  33%  261   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 67%  71%      138  3 ways to make gains:
  • Improve FCAT Levels
  • Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5
  • Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
  • Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? 67% (YES)  57% (YES)      124  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         523   
    Percent Tested = 99%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         B  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


    Polk School District
    DIXIELAND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2006-2007
      Reading
      
    Math
      
    Writing
      
    Science
      
    Grade
    Points
    Earned
     
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 74%  75%  96%  44%  289   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 81%  83%      164  3 ways to make gains:
  • Improve FCAT Levels
  • Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5
  • Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
  • Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? 73% (YES)  90% (YES)      163  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         616   
    Percent Tested = 100%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         A  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested