VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

VISION:
As a safe, secure environment conducive to learning we prepare Medulla Elementary students with the academic skills, and character traits to achieve on or above grade level in middle school, high school and beyond.

MISSION: Medulla Elementary will prepare each child to meet life’s challenges by providing the best possible learning environment with the most effective methods and resources to insure that each child will develop academically, socially and aesthetically.










PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS


Brief History and Background of the School

Brief History and Background of the School
Medulla Elementary was established in 1905, and has evolved from a rural to a suburban school. Facilities include buildings from 1927 through 2007. Our student population is very diverse, with 16% Hispanic and 15% students with disabilities.


Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Medulla Elementary looks forward to continuing to raise student achievement in writing, having a significant increase in the 2008-2009 school year, by entering our second year with Write Reflections, a school-wide writing program.


Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Medulla Elementary received a grade of “C” for the second consecutive year, falling 4 points below a “B”. Are free and reduced rate is 60% but not high enough for Title One status.


Student Demographics

Medulla Elementary serves a diverse group of 738 students. 57 % are white, 16% Hispanic, and 20% black. 60 % of our students are economically disadvantaged and 15% have disabilities.


Student Attendance Rates

The attendance rate of our students improved last year from 94 % the previous 2 years, to 95.27%.


Student Mobility

Our school’s mobility rate is 25%.


Student Suspension Rates

In 2008-2009 Medulla Elementary had 17 out of school suspensions and 35 in-school suspensions.


Student Retention Rates

The retention rate for Kindergarten is 3.88 percent, First grade is 2.61% Second grade is .84 and Third grade is 7.94%. Zero retention rate in fourth and fifth.


Class Size

A point has been made to reduce class sizes in all subject areas and across grade levels to reduce discipline
problems and strengthen the one-on-one relationship between students and teachers.
The average class size in general education classrooms is: 14.66 in PreK-3 for 07-08 and 15.41 in 4-5 for 07-08.
The teacher to student ratio in general education classrooms is: 1 teacher to 18 students in K-3, and 1 teacher to 22 students in 4-5.


Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

NA


Partnerships and Grants

The school will continue its strong partnership with Starbucks, Publix and the rotary club which
provides a number of additional resources, including tutors, supplies, incentives and academic materials to enhance the curriculum.


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 Jill Cheatham

BS, Elementary Ed., MA, Ed. Leadership, 9 19 Principal of Medulla Elementary in
2008-2009:
Grade: C, Reading Mastery:
74%, Math mastery: 69%,
Science Mastery: 34%. AYP:
Economically disadvantage and SWD did not
make AYP in Reading. Our totally population did not make AYP in math. No subgroup made AYP in Math
Assis Principal Moe Hassler BA, Elementary Ed., MS, Ed. Leadership 4 4 Assistant Principal of Medulla Elementary in
2008-2009:
Grade: C, Reading Mastery:
74%, Math mastery: 69%,
Science Mastery: 34%. AYP:
Economically disadvantage and SWD did not
make AYP in Reading. Our totally population did not make AYP in math. No subgroup made AYP in 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 *
Reading Gale Macleod BA, Elementary Ed. ESOL endorsed. Enrolled in Competency 6. Reading endorsement complete in December 2009. Certification includes Tech 1, Tec 2, PD for PDers, Dynamic Indicators for Basic Early Learning Skills Trainer, and Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading Master Trainer. 3 O8-09 School Grade B, AYP No
07-08 School Grade A, AYP Yes
06-07 School Grade A, AYP Yes

* 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
2. Partnering new teachers with veteran staff

1. Regular meetings of new teachers
2. Partnering new teachers with veteran staff

Principal
Assistant Principal
On-going
On-going


Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

NameCertificationTeaching AssignmentProfessional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified
Robin Bohn Para Educator PMH Preparing for Para Pro Test
Nancy Brow Para Educator Media Preparing for Para Pro test
Lolli Burger Para Educator PE Preparing for Para Pro test
Maria Chaviano Para Educator ESOL Preparing for Para Pro test
Yolanda Goosby Para Educator PMH Preparing for Para Pro test
Karen Lovering Para Educator ESE Support Preparing for Para Pro test
Shelia McGhin Para Educator LPN Preparing for Para Pro test
Audra Montalbano Para Educator ESE/Class Specific Preparing for Para Pro test
Kathy Surrency Para Educator CDAT Preparing for Para Pro test
Susan White Para Educator CDAT Preparing for Para Pro test


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
540201344281000667


Teacher Mentoring Program

Mentor NameMentee AssignedRationale for PairingPlanned Mentoring Activities
NCBT Teachers No one needed at this time will be assigned when needed. No one needed at this time. NA
Academic Instructional Faciliator No one needed at this time will be assigned when needed. NA NA



ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration


Note: For Title I schools only

Title I, Part A


Title I, Part C- Migrant


Title I, Part D


Title II


Title III


Title X- Homeless


Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)


Violence Prevention Programs


Nutrition Programs


Housing Programs


Head Start


Adult Education


Career and Technical Education


Job Training


Other


Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)


School-based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.
Principal: Provides a common vision for the use of data-based decision-making, ensures that the school-based team is
implementing RtI, conducts assessment of RtI skills of school staff, ensures implementation of intervention support and
documentation, ensures adequate professional development to support RtI implementation, and communicates with parents
regarding school-based RtI plans and activities.
Assistant Principal: Provides support for the team and ensures implementation of intervention support and documentation.
Select General Education Teachers (Primary and Intermediate): Provides information about core instruction, participates
in student data collection, delivers Tier 1 instruction/intervention, collaborates with other staff to implement Tier 2
interventions, and integrates Tier 1 materials/instruction with Tier 2/3 activities.
Exceptional Student Education (ESE) Teachers: Participates in student data collection, integrates core instructional
activities/materials into Tier 3 instruction, and collaborates with general education teachers through such activities as coteaching.
Instructional Coach Reading/Math/Science:
Develops, leads, and evaluates school core content standards/ programs; identifies and analyzes existing literature on
scientifically based curriculum/behavior assessment and intervention approaches.
Identifies systematic patterns of student need while working with district personnel to identify appropriate, evidence-based
intervention strategies; assists with whole school screening programs that provide early intervening services for children to
be considered “at risk;” assists in the design and implementation for progress monitoring, data collection, and data analysis;
participates in the design and delivery of professional development; and provides support for assessment and
implementation monitoring.
School Psychologist: Participates in collection, interpretation, and analysis of data; facilitates development of intervention
plans; provides support for intervention fidelity and documentation; provides professional development and technical
assistance for problem-solving activities including data collection, data analysis, intervention planning, and program
evaluation; facilitates data-based decision making activities.
Guidance Counselor:
Participates in collection, interpretation, and analysis of data; facilitates development of intervention
plans; provides support for intervention fidelity and documentation; provides professional development and technical
assistance for problem-solving activities including data collection, data analysis, intervention planning, and program
evaluation; facilitates data-based decision making activities.
ESE facilitator: Participates in data collection, helps with interventions and supports the teachers. Provides information about the curriculum and provides behavior and curriculum support for students.
Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g. meeting processes and roles/functions).
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will focus meetings on how to improve school/teacher effectiveness and student achievement using the Problem Solving Model.
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will meet at least once per month (or more frequently as needed) to engage in the following activities:
o Review school-wide, grade level, and teacher data to problem solve needed interventions on a systemic level and identify students meeting/exceeding benchmarks as well as those at moderate or high risk for not meeting benchmarks. This will be done at least three times per year or more frequently if new data is available.
o Help referring teachers design feasible strategies and interventions for struggling students by collaborating regularly, problem solving, sharing effective practices, evaluating implementation, assist in making decisions for school, teacher, student improvement.
o Facilitate the process of building consensus, increasing infrastructure, and making decisions about implementation.
o Focus on improving student achievement outcomes with evidence based interventions implemented with fidelity and frequent progress monitoring.
o Intervention teams also foster a sense of collegiality and mutual support among educators, promote the use of evidence-based interventions, and support teachers in carrying out intervention plans.


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

The PS/RtI Leadership Team met with the School Advisory Council (SAC) and principal to help develop the SIP. The team provided data on: Tier 1, 2, and 3 targets; academic and social/emotional areas that needed to be addressed; helped set clear expectations for instruction (Rigor, Relevance, Relationship); facilitated the development of a systemic approach to teaching (Gradual Release, Essential Questions, Activating Strategies, Teaching Strategies, Extending, Refining, and Summarizing); and aligned processes and procedures.


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 met with the School Advisory Council (SAC) and principal to help develop the SIP. The team provided data on: Tier 1, 2, and 3 targets; academic and social/emotional areas that needed to be addressed; helped set clear expectations for instruction (Rigor, Relevance, Relationship); facilitated the development of a systemic approach to teaching (Gradual Release, Essential Questions, Activating Strategies, Teaching Strategies, Extending, Refining, and Summarizing); and aligned processes and procedures.




RtI Implementation

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Baseline data is gathered through 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. First and Second Grade instructional data is gathered from the previous year SAT 10. Third through Tenth Grade instructional data is gathered from the previous year’s FCAT scores.
Progress Monitoring data is gathered mid-year and toward the end of the year. FAIR data is processed twice more through the PMRN. Kindergarten and First Grade data is gathered for the SBAR every nine weeks. Other Progress Monitoring data is collected as needed for classroom or student progress. This information may be obtained by probes, Quick Reads, Fluency checks, etc.
Diagnostic Assessment data is gathered through the FAIR, ERDA, and DAR
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 five other mini-modules that will be provided throughout the year.
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will evaluate additional staff Professional Learning needs during the monthly PS/RtI Leadership Team meetings.



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?


Strengths:
74% of students are making high standards in Reading and 62% of our lowest 25% are making adequate process.
Weaknesses:
Only 69% of students are making high standards in Math and 34% of students are making high standards in science.
In grades 3-5, the lowest content area in reading is main idea and purpose. The average ratio of correct to incorrect decreases as students advance to 4th and 5th grade.
In grades 3-5, the lowest content areas in math are number sense and measurement. The average ratio of correct to incorrect also decreases as students advance to the upper grades.


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 the area of 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 also developed a timeline for Reading Comprehension Mini-Lessons which will serve as the school’s Reading Instructional Focus calendar. The implementation of the reading mini-lessons will be monitored by the AIF, school leadership team, and administration. Monthly PLC (grade level/department/team) meetings will be held to adjust the pacing of the mini-lessons.


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

Reading: Main Idea/Purpose was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus.
Writing: Organization was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus.
Mathematics: Number Sense was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus.
Science: Scientific Thinking was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus.


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 data PLCs (grade level/department/team) will use the data from FAIR and other progress monitoring tools to identify student needs and provide appropriated interventions.


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

A daily focus of the school is for teachers and students to ask each other, “why are we learning this?” to ensure
that instruction is always relevant. Teachers are also provided reading materials that are
based on current events.


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?

NA




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 the EATS model for planning and delivery of core curriculum which includes essential questions, activating strategies, high-yield teaching strategies, summarizing and then reteaching as necessary. 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 for all to use for core instruction. Collaborative PLCs will use the EATS model for creating additional acquisition lessons. Best practices, coaching and support for using Learning Focused Strategies will be provided by the principal, assistant principal, and leadership team. Reading comprehension mini-lessons have been written for grades 3 - 10. Each grade level/department/team will schedule the pacing of the mini lessons as well as the time of delivery during the monthly PLCs dealing with curriculum and instruction. The mini-lessons are organized by instructional day as well as strategy.


How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

Vertical teams and articulation centered on high quality student work and the results of mini-assessments will guide further revisions or refinements of the instructional focus lessons. Classroom walk-throughs will be used to monitor the quality and effectiveness of the lessons.




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, READ 180, FastForward, Harcourt Trophies, Voyager, 100 Book Challenge, Compass Odyssey, Reading Assistant, AR will be sources of ongoing formative assessments and data.


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 monitoring student progress, 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. Additional learning opportunities will be offered to struggling 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.

PLCs (grade level/department/team) will meet monthly to review the most current progress monitoring data and in turn make instructional recommendations to include both interventions as well as enrichment strategies for subgroups of students, as well as individual 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 administrators 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 regular basis.




ACT

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions


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


Harcourt reading and Scott Foresman math are our core instruction. Supplemental includes Kathy Robinson Math, BBY math, and Thinking Maps. Interventions include Kaplan Spell Read, SRA Reading Mastery and Scott Foresman interventions and Harcourt Interventions.


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

Multiple opportunities for researched based extended learning activities including: extended time for math and /or reading, extended day, 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 Learning Focused Implementation Tool will be administered at the start of the 2009 – 2010 school year to help identify areas of need for professional development.


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

Any student scoring a Level 1 or 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, mini-assessments, formative assessments, student data chats, and FAIR. (Individual schools may have other specific tools that can be listed here.)


Enrichment


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

Students who typically exceed mastery levels participate in the schools gifted program.


Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

FCAT results, in addition to student progress in the academic areas of reading and math, as well as assessment results that demonstrate consistent proficiency/mastery are used to determine placement in higher level courses and academic programs. Teacher recommendation is also taken into consideration.




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)
Grade level teachers Grade level Chairs Weekly Common Planning Times Data analysis and adjustments to instruction
Vertical Teams Team Selected Leaders Monthly Tuesday after school Curriculum articulation


NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only


Pre-School Transition

Our on-site Pre-K Early Learning program transitions our Pre-K students with an orientation to Kindergarten by visiting Kindergarten classrooms. In May, Kindergarten teachers have a Kindergarten Roundup for all entering Kindergartners. During the visit teachers provide information and packets for the parents to help in the transition. They also provide parents with information on what is expected during the school year for their Kindergarten child. Communication is provided via our marquee, Medulla website, and notes sent to preschool parents and parents of students presently attending Medulla.

Kindergarten teachers and resources teachers will assess students using FLKRS and FAIR to determine student readiness rate and their instructional strategies to differentiate instruction. The evaluation and effectiveness of the plan will be determined by the FLKRS results and FAIR assessment.


Postsecondary Transition

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



 

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

 

Other Goals

No Other Goals were submitted for this school

 

FINAL BUDGET



Differentiated Accountability


School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance



Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/10/2009 1:10:28 PM)



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


As legislated, the Medulla Elementary School Advisory Council is the sole body responsible for final decision making at the school relating to implementation of the provisions of Sections 1001.42(16) and 1008>345, F.S. The Medulla Elementary Council helps develop, monitor and evaluate the results of our School Improvement Plan. They also assist in preparing the school’s annual budget and determine how our Lottery Funds and any School Recognition Funds are disbursed. Our SAC meets eights times per year and operates within the policies of the School Board and the parameters established by the state legislature. The council is kept up-to-date on any new information that may affect our school. Our SAC reflects the ethnic, racial and economic community served by our school. Each member of the SAC is elected by their stakeholder group.
The School Advisory Council (SAC) has an important function for the success of Medulla Elementary School. Listed below are some of the functions of the SAC.
• Reach out to community to obtain more partners
• Organize FCAT Family Night Event
• Sponsor drives to increase parent involvement
• Assist the school to create and analyze school climate surveys for parents and students


SAC Members

Members
1)  Jill Cheatham,   Principal
2)  Lori Adams,   Parent
3)  Maryann Diggs ,   Parent
4)  Elsie Nwakakwa,   Parent
5)  Sara Meadows,   Parent
6)  Misty Medina,   Parent
7)  Latarsha Jennings,   Parent
8)  Tawanna Jones,   Parent
9)  Gary Pratt,   Community Member
10)  John Hatfield,   Community Member
11)  Minnie Kester,   School Support Personnel
12)  Jill Wolfersburger,   School Support Personnel
13)  Moe Hassler,   Assistant Principal
 

AYP DATA

No Data Found
No Data Found
No Data Found


SCHOOL GRADE DATA

Polk School District
MEDULLA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2008-2009
  Reading
  
Math
  
Writing
  
Science
  
Grade
Points
Earned
 
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 74%  69%  78%  34%  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 63%  54%      117  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? 62% (YES)  57% (YES)      119  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         491   
    Percent Tested = 100%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         C  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


    Polk School District
    MEDULLA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2007-2008
      Reading
      
    Math
      
    Writing
      
    Science
      
    Grade
    Points
    Earned
     
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 69%  74%  64%  51%  258   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 52%  69%      121  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? 32% (NO)  79% (YES)      111  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         490   
    Percent Tested = 97%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         C  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


    Polk School District
    MEDULLA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2006-2007
      Reading
      
    Math
      
    Writing
      
    Science
      
    Grade
    Points
    Earned
     
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 67%  63%  68%  46%  244   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 61%  69%      130  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? 52% (YES)  63% (YES)      115  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         489   
    Percent Tested = 100%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         C  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested