VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS
Vision: The Boone Middle School team joins the parents and community in delivering rigorous and relevant curriculum and assisting all students regardless of background to achieve success in middle school, high school, post-secondary options and throughout their life.
Mission: Boone Middle School believes learning is for ALL and ALL students can learn. We are responsible for doing whatever it takes to help our students perform at or above grade level and learn the social and academic skills needed to succeed in our ever-changing society.
This mission statement states the belief that every stakeholder(student, parent, teacher, administrator, support staff member, and community member) will do their best for the success of the student to reach their highest potential both academically and socially.
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
Brief History and Background of the School
Boone Middle School is a culturally diverse middle school located in the "Heart of Florida" in Haines City in the northeast section of Polk County. Haines City is a rural area but the population is expanding rapidly due to the increase in the housing market in the greater Haines City area, particularly around Interstate 4 and U.S. Highway 27. Many of the parents of our students work in Kissimmee and Orlando in the retail, hotel and tourism industries but choose to live in Haines City because of the availability of low cost housing and the small town atmosphere. The campus was constructed in 1958 and was originally known as Haines City Junior High. In 1986 the school became a middle school and was named after a prominent citizen who was a member of the Polk County School Board named Shelley S. Boone. The brick buildings will be joined by new brick construction this year as a new administration building, Media Center, classrooms, and new agriculture building will be built along with many remodeling projects to modernize the school and create a better learning environment. Portable classrooms will not be used this year for students which will be much safer due to the inclement weather experienced in Central Florida from time to time. The landscaping at the front of the school has been upgraded with the addition of many new plants and trees creating a very nice first impression. The school's Beautification Committee which includes students, staff, and community members will continue throughout the year to help maintain the grounds and add new plants for the enjoyment of all.
Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Under the leadership of the new principal and the assistant principals the Professional Learning Communities of Boone Middle have renewed confidence that AYP will be achieved this year. A school grade of B was narrowly missed last year by only 34 points. Boone Middle is the only middle school in Polk County to implement the Pre-Advanced Placement (Pre-AP) Program. Partnering with Ridge Community High School and the College Board, this program includes 150 students who are thriving in a rigorous, innovative program to prepare them for high school and college. Taught by highly qualified teachers in all content areas, the students apply for entry and must meet established criteria to ensure their success with the advanced curriculum. To aid in behavioral modification, The Positive Behavior Support system, now referred to as Response to Instruction/Intervention, was put in place and the students and staff responded well to the encouragement and praise for good behavior. All staff is focused on increasing achievement and becoming an exemplary school.
Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year
Many of our students come from economically disadvantaged families. Many of our students come from a home where English is not their first language. Our student population dropped by about 150 causing the loss of teaching units and funding. The layout of Boone’s campus poses challenges to maintain a safe and orderly environment.
Student Demographics
Student Demographics
Our student population is 24.42% white, 20.42% black, 52.4% Hispanic, 0.21% Asian, 0.32% American Indian and other multi-racial students are 2.2%. We have approximately 50 students who have been identified as migrant. Our student population numbers 765 as of August 11, 2009 and consists of 14.74% with disabilities, 20.11% LEP students and 90.63% of our students receive free or reduced lunch.
Student Attendance Rates
Boone Middle School had an increase in attendance in the 2006-2007 school year from 88.77% to 92.65% attendance in 2007-2008. In 2008-2009 the attendance held steady at 92.36% and we hope to increase that number this year by at least 3% or 95.36% which will in turn impact and increase learning gains.
Student Mobility
The mobility rate of the school was 34.16% for 2008-2009 which was a significant drop from the previous year. In 2007-2008 the mobility rate was 39.79 which comes predominantly from our migrant population. The District mobility rate is 39.1% compared 31.2% for the state of Florida. As the years progress it seems that fewer of our families work the migrant farm schedules and instead secure employment with government agencies, retail, hospitality industries, and other industries in Polk, Orange, and Osceola County.
Student Suspension Rates
2006-2007: In-school 626, Out-of-school 537
2007-2008: In-school 2, Out-of-school 1013
2008-2009: In-school 20, Out-of-school 1130
Student Retention Rates
2006-2007: 6th grade-2.45%, 7th grade-6.60%, and 8th grade-4.01%
2007-2008: 6th grade-0.28%, 7th grade-0.61%, and 8th grade- 0.00%
2008-2009: 6th grade-0.94%, 7th grade- 0.62%, and 8th grade- 1.30%
We are below the retention rate of many of the area middle schools.
Class Size
Class size has been reduced 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 was reduced from 20.3 to 19.48 last year in general education classrooms. Some had no more than 15 in a class. In Varying Exceptionalities there was a 1 teacher to 3 student ratio. In the Mentally Handicapped class there was 1 teacher to 8 student ratio and in the Emotional Behavior Disorders classroom there was 1 teacher to 5 student ratio according to our student population. These were multi-grade classes with a paraprofessional to assist in each class.
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
The elementary schools that feed into Boone Middle School were all A schools or improved a letter grade in the last year. Alta Vista Elementary improved from a D to a C and met 95% of their AYP requirement. Bethune Academy retained their A and met 97% of AYP. Davenport School of the Arts remained an A school and met 85% of AYP. Eastside Elementary improved from a B to an A and made AYP with 100%. Loughman Oaks improved from a C to a B and made 90% of AYP. Ridgeview Global Academy remained and A school and met AYP. Sandhill Elementary remained an A school and made AYP. Our students matriculate to two high schools. Haines City High School received a school grade of D for 2009 and did not meet AYP with a 74%. The other high school is Ridge Community High School which received a school grade of D and met 77% of AYP. With our feeder schools doing so well Boone Middle should be able to achieve AYP with Safe Harbor this year.
Partnerships and Grants
Boone Middle will continue the strong partnership with many businesses in the community including Steven Wilder Law, Inc., McDonald's Restaurants, Progress Energy, Lowe's, Target, WalMart, State Farm Insurance, Wachovia Bank, and CenterState Bank. All of the community partners participate in Career Day and help with providing funding and speakers for our students. During the 2008-2009 school year, Boone was awarded numerous grants: Two $1000 Polk Education Foundation (PEF) School-to-School Grants. One was awarded for Writing Workshops and the other for implementing the Math and Science Rally at any grade level. These grants are awarded by the PEF for their innovative approach to teaching, presented at an EXPO fair in the fall, and published for instructional use in the district of Polk, Hardee, and Highlands. For the third year Progress Energy has awarded a $1,500 grant to secure supplies for the campus Math/Science Rally for FCAT Enhancement which allows all students on campus to participate and increase real world knowledge about difficult math and science concepts. Lowe's awarded a $5,000 grant for Science. A $500 Disney Teacherrific mini grant was also awarded to be used for Social Studies as well as a Service Learning grant of $1,000 to enhance reading comprehension for 6th grade students.
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
|
Martha Santiago
|
Ed.D - Educational Leadership
|
1
|
13
|
DRMS 2001-C 69% lowest 25% made learning gains in Reading; 77% met high standards in Writing 2003 AYP C
Sandhill-New School 2000 - No Data
ESOL Director for District
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Angela Wilder
|
M.S. Educational Leadership
|
3
|
5
|
C
Reading Mastery 45%-Math 39%-Writing 87%-Science 22%
AYP-64%
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Dwight Frazier
|
M.S. Ed Leadership
|
3
|
4
|
C
Reading Mastery 45%-Math 39%-Writing 87%-Science 22%
AYP-64%
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Samantha Sitek
|
M.Ed Educational Leadership
|
1
|
4
|
2008-2009 Grade: F, Reading Mastery:51%, Math Mastery:42%, Science Mastery 21%, Writing Mastery 92% AYP:67%,ELL,SWD,Economically Disadvantaged, White, Black and Hispanic did not make AYP in Math, Reading,Science and Writing. 2007-2008 Grade: B, Reading Mastery: 71%, Math Mastery 68%, Science Mastery:17%, Writing Mastery 89%. AYP: 74%, Black, Hispanic, Economically Disadvantaged and SWD did not make AYP in Reading, Math and Science
|
* 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 * |
|
Science
|
Christy Aycock
|
AS Dental Hygiene, BA Psychology and Gerontology, M.ED. Educational Leadership/K-6 Elem., Science 5-9, Educational Leadership K-12
|
9
|
1
|
C
Reading Mastery 45%-Math 39%-Writing 87%-Science 22%
AYP-64%
|
|
Reading
|
Mrs. Deborah Widner
|
Masters Degree/Reading Endorsement/National Board Certification/ESOL
|
|
|
A
AYP-N
Reading 78%, Math 79%, Writing 74%, Science 49%
|
|
Math
|
Dr. Cynthia Weller
|
Master of Arts in Education/Doctorate in Education
|
|
|
B in Virginia
Reading 87%, Math 81%, Science 95%, 56% Minority, 44% LSES, AYP Yes
|
* 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) |
|
1. To recruit and retain all teachers will participate in: PEC, New teacher training, AIF facilitators coaching, Learning Focused Professional Development, RtI training, PLC, T.A.R.G.E.T.
|
Administration, Reading AIF, Math AIF, Title I Science Resource Coach, Title I Program Facilitator
|
May 2010
|
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
|
None
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
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 |
| 49 | 6 | 50 | 29 | 22 | 18 | 100 | 2 | 0 | 45 |
Teacher Mentoring Program
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
|
Mary Pat Boggs
|
Dean Hannah
ESE teacher
|
Mrs. Boggs is the ESE Facilitator and very knowledgeable.
|
The mentor and mentee are having weekly meetings in a professional learning community to discuss evidence-based strategies for each domain. The mentor is given release time to observe the mentee. Time is given for the feedback, coaching and planning.
|
Cheryce Harris
Band Director
|
Mr. Brodwin- Orchestra
Mr. Ridgley- Chorus
|
Cheryce is the band director with 24 years of experience.
|
Weekly meetings with the mentee and mentor in a professional learning community provide support for the new orchestra director.
|
Deborah Widner
Reading AIF
|
Deborah Widner
Reading AIF
|
Mrs. Widner is a 24 year experienced National Board Certified teacher with a Masters Degree in Reading and the Reading AIF.
|
Weekly mentor and mentee are being held. The mentor is visiting the classroom, observing, and giving feedback, coaching, and helping with planning.
|
Deborah Widner
Reading AIF
|
Radile Benton-Flores
Language Arts
|
Mrs. Widner is a 24 year experienced National Board Certified teacher with a Masters Degree in Reading and the Reading AIF.
|
Weekly mentor and mentee are being held. The mentor is visiting the classroom, observing, and giving feedback, coaching, and helping with planning.
|
Dr. Cynthia Weller
Math AIF
|
Angela Lopez- Math
Robbie Arceneuax-ESE
|
Dr. Weller has a Master of Arts in Education, a Doctorate in Education, 32
|
Weekly mentor and mentee meetings are being held. The mentor is visiting the classroom.
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Title I, Part A
Title 1, Part A, funds school-wide services in Boone Middle School to provide supplemental instructional resources and interventions for students with academic achievement needs. Title 1, 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 Boone Middle 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 (Lydia Daniels- Boone Middle) 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 and locating services necessary to ensure the academic success of these students whose education has been interrupted by numerous moves.
Title I, Part D
Title 1, 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
District receives supplemental funds for our Title 1 school for professional development to improve teaching strategies for teachers working with at risk students, create Professional Learning Communities, and coordinates with Boone to provide continuous learning support for all staff. Teacher Support Teams (TST) were formed to promote cohesiveness and positive school culture. All teachers attend small learning communities during the weekly professional development opportunities. These small learning communities guided by Dr. Block and Mrs. Milburn provide avenues of support as teachers meet weekly to discuss and strategize the best ways to increase student achievement. In addition, School Technology Services provide technical support, technology training, and licenses for software programs and web-based access via Title II-D funds.
Title III
Services are provided through the district for education materials and ELL district support services to improve the education of immigrant and English Language Learners. The Boone ESOL Department provides support to the students and families by encouraging them to attend Family Nights on Tuesdays to increase their technology skills and knowledge of the English language for success.
Title X- Homeless
Each year a survey is taken through the Hearth program, funded through Title X, provides support for identified homeless students. Title 1, Part C provides for this program to identify the homeless children at Boone. Teachers at Boone build relationships with their students which is the key to student success and are aware of the difficulties that many experience. The Migrant Liaison gathers the data and provides help and support to the students and their families. Staff at Boone frequently help out in these situations, also.
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
SAI funds will be coordinated with the Title I funds to provide after school math and reading support for all level 1 students who are able to participate. The summer Credit Retrieval program makes it possible for students to succeed and gain credit when it may not have been achieved in their regular classes during the school year. SES (Supplemental Educational Services) provides additional academic instruction for economically disadvantaged students for enhancement in Reading, Math, and Science.
Violence Prevention Programs
Title IV provides violence and drug prevention programs. Through these programs, Boone offered the Anti-Bullying Program (Too Good for Violence), Gang Awareness, and Consequences of Crime classes with graduation and a celebration at the end of the lessons. Many speakers are scheduled throughout the year to support making the right choices in life for our students. School safety is a major concern.
Nutrition Programs
Boone offers the Free and Reduced Lunch plan as well as Free and Reduced Breakfasts each day to the 92.6% of students who qualify. For many of the students these are the only two meals they may receive each day.
Housing Programs
N/A
Head Start
N/A
Adult Education
Parents are encouraged to attend technology classes on our campus weekly which includes the use of Microsoft Word and English language classes on Tuesday Family Nights. Childcare is provided.
Career and Technical Education
Ridge Technical Career Center holds tours and sends representatives from different vocations to Boone Middle to showcase the many careers available for our students who many not be college bound. On campus classes in Technology, Agri-Science, Family Consumer Science, Art, Band, Chorus, and Strings are offered to help students achieve personal goals.
Job Training
N/A
Other
N/A
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) |
|
6th, 7th, and 8th grade reading teachers, Reading AIF, ESE teachers, and ESOL teacher
|
Alicia Nunez-Duran, Reading Department Chair and Mrs. Deborah Widner, Reading AIF
|
Weekly
|
Odd Day, 3rd period
|
Analyze the effectiveness of the Reading FCIM calendars according to the District Curriculum Map guides, mini-lessons, mini-assessments, FAIR test data, tutorials, and enrichments to determine any necessary revisions.
|
|
6th, 7th, and 8th grade Math teachers, Math AIF and technology specialist
|
Dr. Cynthia Weller, Math AIF and Gary Robertson, Math Chair
|
Weekly
|
Odd days during 7th period
|
Analyze the effectiveness of the Math FCIM calendars according to the District Curriculum Maps, mini-lessons, mini-assessments, maintenance, tutorials, and enrichments to determine any necessary revisions.
|
|
6th, 7th, and 8th grade Science Teachers, Title 1 Science Resource Coach
|
Dr. Paul Blackburn, Science Chair and Christy Aycock, Science Resource Coach
|
Weekly
|
Even days, period 6
|
Analyze the effective of the Science FCIM calendars according to the District Curriculum Map, focus lessons, mini-assessments, maintenance, tutorials, and enrichments to determine any necessary revisions.
|
|
Each content area team
|
Principal, Dr. Martha Santiago and APC Angie Wilder
|
Monthly
|
During the common planning period
|
Lesson Study centered on planning with and utilizing the research-based lesson delivery model in LFS with fidelity
|
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: For Title I schools only
Pre-School Transition
N/A
Postsecondary Transition
Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.
N/A
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 |
|
In grades 6-8, 40% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.
|
By Spring 2010, 45% of Total students will be at AL 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by Safe Harbor of the AYP report. Percentages in each subgroup will increase as follows:
White-57% to 65%
Black-36% to 42%
Hisp.-34% to 40%
ED-39% to 46%
ELL-21% to 25%
SWD-23% to 29%
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
The school will implement the new FAIR assessments to monitor student progress.
|
Principal and Reading AIF
|
1.Review FAIR data reports to ensure teachers are assessing students according to the created schedule
|
1.Printout of FAIR assessments
|
| 2 |
Include higher-order questions in lesson plans.
|
Principal and Reading AIF
|
2. Lesson plans will be reviewed during classroom administrative walkthroughs and will be submitted weekly to Assistant Principal.
|
2. Administrative classroom walkthrough log and focused walkthroughs to determine frequency of higher order questions.
|
| 3 |
All teachers will use the established Polk County Curriculum Reading Maps
|
Principal and Reading AIF
|
3. Lesson plans will be reviewed during administrative classroom walkthroughs
|
3. Administrative classroom walkthrough logs. AIF visits
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 6-8, 61% of students achieved learning gains on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.
|
By Spring 2010, 67% of students will make Learning Gains in Reading as evidenced by the Safe Harbor AYP Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. All teaching staff will develop lesson plans using the FCIM/LFS Model with fidelity.
|
1. Principal and Reading AIF
|
1. Lesson plans will be reviewed during administrative classroom walkthroughs and will be submitted weekly to Assistant Principal.
|
1. Administrative classroom walkthrough log and focused walkthroughs to determine use of the FCIM/LFS model. AIF visits
|
| 2 |
2. All students in all subgroups will be provided strategies to master tested clusters of the FCAT.
|
2. Principal and Reading AIF
|
2. Administration will monitor lesson plans.
|
2. Weekly progress checks of tested clusters.
|
| 3 |
3. All students in all subgroups will participate in the Accelerated Reader program to improve reading comprehension and improve lexiles.
|
3. Principal, language arts teachers, media specialist
|
3. Accelerated reading data, reading logs
|
3. STAR Testing
|
| 4 |
4. All students in all subgroups will use the district core K-12 Reading plan and SSS/New Generation Standards for daily reading.
|
4. Principal and Reading AIF
|
4. Administrators will monitor lesson plans during walkthroughs and plans will be submitted weekly to Assistant Principal.
|
4. Administrative walkthrough logs and lesson plans. AIF visits
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 6-8, 75% of the lowest quartile made learning gains.
|
By Spring 2010, 83% of the Lowest Quartile will make Learning Gains in Reading as evidenced by the Safe Harbor AYP Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Students in the lowest quartile will be enrolled in a class providing curriculum such as READ 180 and SRA Corrective Reading to monitor student progress and make interventions as necessary.
|
1. Principal and Reading AIF
|
1. Administration and Reading AIF will monitor progress checks.
|
1. Reading progress checks.
|
| 2 |
2. All students in the lowest quartile may attend our Extended Learning Program that will provide tutoring in Reading.
|
2. Principal and Reading AIF
|
2. Administration and Reading AIF will monitor attendance and student progress.
|
2. Pre - Post testing
|
| 3 |
3. All level 1 and 2 students will have 90 minutes of reading instruction daily.
|
3. Principal and Reading AIF
|
3. Administration, Guidance Counselors and Reading AIF will monitor scheduling to assure placement of lowest quartile students.
|
3. Monitor schedule
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By Spring 2010, 45% of Total students will be at AL 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by the Safe Harbor AYP Report
|
Effective implementation of county curriculum maps
|
Reading AIF
|
September 2009
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom Visits
|
Principal, Reading AIF
|
|
By Spring 2010, 67% of students will make Learning Gains in Reading as evidenced by the Safe Harbor AYP report.
|
Effective use of the Reading AIF's time
|
Reading AIF
|
September 2009
|
AIF's weekly log will be shared with the Principal
|
Principal, Reading AIF
|
|
By Spring 2010, 83% of the Lowest Quartile will make Learning Gains in Reading as evidenced by the Safe Harbor AYP Report.
|
FCIM/LFS strategies
|
Reading AIF
|
September 2009
|
Focused walkthroughs with Principal and Reading AIF to observe the frequency and effectiveness of LFS strategies
|
Principal, Reading AIF
|
For Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every Teacher
Every teacher is responsible for teaching reading and supporting literacy goals for the entire school. Each teacher must include a reading goal in their Individual Professional Growth Plan and elective teachers support vocabulary instruction and comprehension skills. Our Reading AIF, Deborah Widner, provides teacher support and professional development for our new teachers to ensure the inclusion of reading standards in their LFS lesson plans. In addition, students are to always have their AR book in their possession during the school day. Teachers are encouraged to include reading time into their lesson plans, reward students with extra reading time, and use the AR books as a teaching tool. Content area teachers also have book studies related to their subject matter in an effort to contribute to every student’s reading improvement and improve learning gains for every child.
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Fast Forward, Read 180, Voyager, Accelerated Reader, SRA Corrective Reading, Compass Lab, Cuyler Strategies with fidelity |
Title I |
$40,000.00 |
| Total: $40,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Staff Development on IFC, LFS/FCIM, and Cuyler Strategies
Development of Instructional Materials
Stipends for Summer Training, AR and coverage for Professional Development if needed, ESOL thinking maps, and Data Analysis Review
|
Title I |
$3,000.00 |
| Total: $3,000.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $43,000.00 |
|
| 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 |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics data, 39% of all students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Math
|
By Spring 1010, 43% of Total students will be at AL 3 or above in Math as evidenced by the Safe Harbor Report.
Percentages in each subgroup will increase as follows:
White-46%l to 53%
Black-46% to 53%
Hisp.-34% to 40%
ED-35% to 41%
ELL-26% to 31%
SWD-21% to 25%
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
All teachers will attend weekly departmental meetings to address specific needs for teaching, reteaching and enriching the learning experience for all students.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Departmental teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress.
|
Content area generated progress checks.
|
| 2 |
2. All students will use the district curriculum K-12 Math plan and SSS/New Generation Math Standards
|
2. Principal and Math AIF
|
2. Lesson plans will be reviewed during administrative classroom walkthroughs and AIF visits log will be submitted weekly to Assistant Principal.
|
Administrative classroom walkthrough log and focused AIF visits
|
| 3 |
3. All teaching staff will develop lesson plans using the FCIM/LFS Model with fidelity.
|
3. Principal and Math AIF
|
3. Lesson plans will be reviewed during administrative classroom walkthroughs and AIF visits
|
3. Administrative classroom log and focused AIF visits to determine use of the FCIM/LFS model/AIF visits
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics data, 39% of all students made Learning Gains on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
|
By Spring 2010, 43% of all students will make Learning Gains in Math as evidenced by the the Safe Harbor AYP Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
All students will be assessed weekly with team generated progress checks.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Interventions will be applied to assure mastery of specific student needs.
|
Progress checks.
|
| 2 |
All students will be provided strategies to master content strands of the FCAT test.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Lesson plans will be reviewed during classroom administrative walkthroughs, AIF visits
|
Administrative classroom walkthrough log with focus on strategies. AIF visits
|
| 3 |
Students failing to show progress in the weekly team generated progress checks will be given additional instruction by resource personnel to ensure mastery of the concept taught.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Students receiving additional instruction will be given pre and post tests.
|
Pre and post test scores.
|
| 4 |
All teaching staff will develop lesson plans using the FCIM/LFS Model with fidelity.
|
Principal, Math AIF, and Assistant Principal.
|
Lesson plans will be reviewed during classroom administrative walkthroughs and AIF visits
|
Administrative classroom walkthrough log and focused AIF visits to determine use of the FCIM/LFS model.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics data, 71% of the lowest quartile made learning gains.
|
By Spring 2010 79% of the Lowest Quartile will make Learning Gains in Math as evidenced by the Safe Harbor Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
All Level 1 and Level 2 students will have 90 minutes of Intensive mathematics instruction
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Schedules will be monitored to ensure that all Level 1 and 2 students are scheduled in 90 minute classes.
|
Progress of students on assessments.
|
| 2 |
In addition to the FCIM/LFS Model, teachers are encouraged to use Kagan strategies to provide differentiated instructional approaches to teaching and will address the learning styles of all students.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Lesson plans will be reviewed during classroom walkthroughs by administrators and visits by AIF
|
Classroom walkthrough logs/AIF visits
|
| 3 |
Level 1 and 2 students will receive at least 45 minutes a week of intensive intervention in the Compass lab designed to target specific skills.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Records of attendance and progress will be created.
|
Attendance logs and progress checks
|
| 4 |
The Extended Learning Program will provide tutoring in math for at-risk students.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Records of attendance and progress will be created.
|
Attendance logs and progress checks
|
| 5 |
All teaching staff will develop lesson plans using the FCIM/LFS Model with fidelity.
|
Principal,Assistant Principal and Reading AIF
|
Lesson plans will be reviewed during classroom walkthroughs and visits by Math AIF will be submitted weekly to Assistant Principal.
|
Administrative classroom walkthrough log and focused AIF visits to determine use of the FCIM/LFS model
|
| 6 |
Identify and closely monitor the progress of the lowest 25 percentile consistently; revise instruction and intervention groups as indicated by student progress.
|
Principal and Math AIF
|
Maintain a record of strategies and interventions utilized with the lowest 25 percentile.
|
Increased achievement between assessments.
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By Spring 2010, 43% of Total students will be at AL 3 or above in Math as evidenced by the Safe Harbor Report.
|
Effective implementation of county curriculum maps
|
Math AIF
|
September 2009
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom Visits
|
Principal, Math AIF
|
|
By Spring 2010, 43% of all students will make Learning Gains in Math as evidenced by the Safe Harbor Report.
|
FCIM/LFS strategies
|
Math AIF
|
September 2009
|
Common planning minutes will be reviewed to ensure data trends are discussed and lesson plans are developed
|
Principal, Math AIF
|
|
By Spring 2010 79% of the Lowest Quartile will make Learning Gains in Math as evidenced by the Safe Harbor Report.
|
Effective use of Manipulatives and Hands-On Activities
|
Math AIF
|
September 2009
|
Classroom walkthroughs and lesson plans
|
Principal, Math AIF
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Manipulatives, Math Supplies, LFS Math Workbooks |
Title I |
$2,000.00 |
| Manipulatives, Math Supplies, LFS Math Workbooks |
District |
$5,000.00 |
| Total: $7,000.00 |
| 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 |
| LFS Training and coverage for Professional Development |
Title 1 |
$3,000.00 |
| Total: $3,000.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $10,000.00 |
|
| 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 |
|
22% of all students reached an Achievement Level of 3 or higher.
|
By Spring 2010, 25% of all students will be at AL 3 or above in Science as evidenced by Safe Harbor of the AYP Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
All students in all subgroups will use the district core K-12 Science SSS/New Generation standards for daily reading and science
|
Principal
|
Administrators, APC, and Science Coach will monitor lesson plans during walkthroughs by the administrators and visits by the Science Coach
|
Walkthrough logs and lesson plans, and assessment results.
|
| 2 |
2.All students will be required to complete a research project based on the scientific method
|
2. Principal, APC, and Science Coach
|
2. Administrators and APC will monitor lesson plans during walkthroughs. Science Coach will observe during visits.
|
2. Walkthrough logs, lesson plans,and assessment results
|
| 3 |
3. A school wide Science Fair will be held to showcase the best projects from each Science classroom. Winners will go on to the District level and possibly state.
|
3. Principal, APC, and Science Coach/Science Fair contact
|
3. Administrators and APC will monitor progress of projects. Science Coach will monitor during visits.
|
3. Rubric for Scientific Method procedures, judging by qualified teachers/staff/community members
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By Spring 2010, 25% of all students will be at AL 3 or above in Science as evidenced by Safe Harbor of the AYP Report.
|
Effective implementation of curriculum maps
|
Science Coach
|
September 2009
|
Walkthroughs by administrators. Visits by Science Coach.
|
Principal, Science Coach
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Content Based Books for age/grade appropriateness for Earth Science, Life Science and Physical Science. Science equipment for Lab/Science projects |
Title I |
$8,000.00 |
| Content Based Books, science equipment for lab/science projects |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $10,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Staff Development in Scientific Process, Teachers Action Researchers, Reading in the Content Area |
Title I |
$3,500.00 |
| Total: $3,500.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $13,500.00 |
|
| 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 |
|
In 2009, 87% of our students scored 3.5 or higher representing no change from the year before.
|
By Spring of 2010, 91% of 8th Grade students will be at an Essay score of 3.5 or above in Writing as evidenced by the AYP report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
All students will use the district core K-12 Writing Process and Procedure and SSS/New Generation Language Arts Standards.
|
Principal
|
Students will write in all content areas using FCAT format and rubric.
|
Essays using FCAT format and rubric.
|
| 2 |
Language Arts teachers will use the LFS model and provide students with a minimum of 60 minutes of weekly instruction time teaching effective writing skills.
|
Principal
|
Lesson plans will reflect direct teaching of writing skills.
|
Classroom walkthrough log focused on teaching of writing skills.
|
| 3 |
All teachers will attend weekly team meetings to address specific needs for teaching, reteaching and enriching writing skills.
|
Principal
|
Teachers will keep minutes of meeting focused on teaching of writing skills.
|
Minutes of meetings will track progress of student writing skills.
|
| 4 |
Teachers will attend professional development training one day per week where general and school specific needs will be discussed with professional teacher coaches provided by the county.
|
Principal
|
Teachers will reflect on trainings in their professional development notebook
|
Teacher reflections in notebook
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In 2009, 87% of our students scored 3.5 or higher.
|
By Spring of 2010, 92% of the 8th Grade students will be proficient in Writing as evidenced by Safe Harbor according to the AYP report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Students will be advised of their score and teachers will use these essays as a teaching tool to teach correct writing procedures.
|
Principal
|
Student-teacher conferences relating to scored esssays.
|
Conference logs
|
| 2 |
Students will receive correct writing skills and standards across all content areas.
|
Principal
|
Students will write essays using a prompt every Friday in one of their content classes and essays will be scored by administration and support staff using the FCAT rubric.
|
Essays scored with FCAT rubric
|
| 3 |
Teachers will notify parents in conferences or by phone of student writing strengths as well as student writing weaknesses
|
Principal
|
Teachers will document conferences and phone calls
|
Conference logs and telephone logs
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By Spring of 2010, 90% of 8th Grade students will be at an Essay score of 3.5 or above in Writing as evidenced by the AYP report.
|
Language Arts teachers will use the LFS model and provide students with a minimum of 60 minutes of weekly instruction time teaching effective writing skills
|
Language Arts Teachers
|
September 2009
|
Monitor students writing portfolios, notebooks or journals. The students will use red pens to make revisions and edit so that their self-correcting behavior can be easily monitored.
|
Principal, APC, and LA Grade Chair
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Writing Program |
Title I |
$10,000.00 |
| Total: $10,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Writing |
Title I |
$3,500.00 |
| Total: $3,500.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $13,500.00 |
|
| 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 |
|
A low number of parent responses to our Successful Schools Survey
|
By Spring 2010, Boone Middle School will show a 10% increase in parental involvement as evidenced by written documentation of scheduled events and participation.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Teachers call parents to discuss student's performance in class.
|
Parent Involvement Facilitator
|
Administration will review parent calling logs
|
100% compliance indicated on calling logs.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 6-8 57% of ESOL students achieved mastery on the 2009 FCAT Reading Test
|
80% of ESOL students will achieve mastery on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Encourage ESOL families to participate in Tuesday evening Family Nights and offer monthly Reading Nights with bilingual books and teachers
|
ESOL teacher and Reading AIF
|
Collect participation data and survey families
|
Parent Attendance Sign-In sheets
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 6-8, 48% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test
|
In grades 6-8, 80% of students will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Every math teacher calls parents within the first two weeks of school to discuss student's performance in class
|
Math AIF
|
Administration will review parent calling logs.
|
100% compliance indicated on calling logs and improvement on the mini-assessments
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
School staff survey indicated teachers communicated with only 20% of the parents once a month.
|
Increase teacher communication with parents to 80% of their student's parents at least once a month.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Evaluate school's communication rating.
|
Principal and Parent Liaison
|
Collect feedback from parents and teachers.
|
Parent and teacher surveys
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
80% of ESOL students will achieve mastery on the Reading FCAT Test
|
Non-Spanish speakers communicating with ESOL parents
|
ESOL teacher and Principal
|
First month of school
|
Satisfaction survey for ESOL parents
|
ESOL teacher and Principal
|
|
80% of ESOL students will achieve mastery on the 2010 Math FCAT Test
|
MAPPS Training
|
Math AIF
|
Second month of school
|
Monitor MAPPS events and monitor student work
|
AIF and Math Department Chair
|
|
Increase teacher communication with parents to 80% of their student's parents, at least once per month
|
Effective communication by using agendas, telephone logs, parent conferences, PTO meetings
|
Parent Involvement Facilitator, migrant liaison
|
Begin prior to start of school at orientation and follow throughout the year
|
Parent liaison will participate in common planning to provide follow-up
|
Parent Liaison, APC, and Principal
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Supplies, postage, printing |
Title I |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| 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 |
| 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: $2,000.00 |
|
| End of Parent Involvement Goal |
|
Other Goals
Reduce Suspension Rates for African American Male Students Goal: |
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
During the 2008-2009 school year, 63% of the out of school suspensions were male students for a total of 597 days.
|
By January 2010, reduce suspension days for male students by 25% which will reduce absenteeism, create a safer school environment and raise scores.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Tier 1: Implement "Positive Behavior Support" PBS program. Ensure males are represented on school leadership teams and focus groups when choosing reinforcers determining behavior plans.
Tier 2: Implement bi-weekly "Check and Connect" mentoring program with at-risk students.
Tier 3: Implement daily "Check-In/Check-Out" mentoring program. Implement daily "Check-In/Check-Out" mentoring program. Increase communication with home via weekly behavior report cards and positive calls to praise improvement. Enroll students in anger management, conflict resolution, or stress management programs as needed.
|
1. Guidance Counselor for the appropriate and Dean of Students and APA
|
1. Collect and analyze suspension data weekly for individual students receiving Tier 3 intervention. Determine frequency of suspensions among males receiving Tier 3 intervention
|
1. Frequency count of suspension days for males receiving Tier 3 intervention.
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
After a review of the disaggregated disciplinary actions report and a review of our office referrals the need to reduce the number of referrals for male students was established.
|
School Safety and Discipline
Anger management and conflict resolution
|
Guidance Counselors, Dean
RtI Team
|
October
2009
|
Monitor discipline records, continue to counsel students with multiple discipline referrals
|
Administration
|
|
| |
| Budget:
|
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Professional Development RtI |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| 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 |
| Supplies |
Title I |
$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: $4,000.00 |
|
| End of Reduce Suspension Rates for African American Male Students Goal |
|
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Fast Forward, Read 180, Voyager, Accelerated Reader, SRA Corrective Reading, Compass Lab, Cuyler Strategies with fidelity |
Title I |
$40,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Manipulatives, Math Supplies, LFS Math Workbooks |
Title I |
$2,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Manipulatives, Math Supplies, LFS Math Workbooks |
District |
$5,000.00 |
| Writing |
Writing Program |
Title I |
$10,000.00 |
| Science |
Content Based Books for age/grade appropriateness for Earth Science, Life Science and Physical Science. Science equipment for Lab/Science projects |
Title I |
$8,000.00 |
| Science |
Content Based Books, science equipment for lab/science projects |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Supplies, postage, printing |
Title I |
$2,000.00 |
| Reduce Suspension Rates for African American Male Students |
Professional Development RtI |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $71,000.00 |
| 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 |
Staff Development on IFC, LFS/FCIM, and Cuyler Strategies
Development of Instructional Materials
Stipends for Summer Training, AR and coverage for Professional Development if needed, ESOL thinking maps, and Data Analysis Review
|
Title I |
$3,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
LFS Training and coverage for Professional Development |
Title 1 |
$3,000.00 |
| Writing |
Writing |
Title I |
$3,500.00 |
| Science |
Staff Development in Scientific Process, Teachers Action Researchers, Reading in the Content Area |
Title I |
$3,500.00 |
| Reduce Suspension Rates for African American Male Students |
Supplies |
Title I |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $15,000.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $86,000.00 |
Differentiated Accountability
School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance
Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/11/2009 12:52:51 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 Funds | Amount |
| 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 Boone Middle School. Listed below are some of the functions of the SAC:
1. Reach out to community to obtain more partners
2. Give input to improve relations and school climate with students, teachers, administration and the community
3. Sponsor drives to increase parent involvement
4. Become ambassadors to spread the good news that great things are happening at Boone Middle School.
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
Dr. Martha Santiago,
Principal
|
|
2)
James MacMeekin,
SAC Chair
|
|
3)
Diego Mosquera,
Student
|
|
4)
Galib Khalek,
Student
|
|
5)
Dominique Davis,
Student
|
|
6)
Cristian Cueventes,
Student
|
|
7)
Mariela Tena,
Student
|
|
8)
Joann Ephraim,
Teacher
|
|
9)
Les Snider,
Teacher
|
|
10)
Gaspar E. Jaen,
Parent
|
|
11)
Rosa Pollard,
Parent
|
|
12)
Belinda Blanco,
Parent
|
|
13)
Doris Colon,
Parent
|
|
14)
Martha Raya,
Parent
|
|
15)
Tracy Jordan,
Parent
|
|
16)
Marin Hernandez,
Parent
|
|
17)
Lucille Newbold,
Community Member
|
|
18)
Charles Newbold,
Community Member
|
|
19)
Thomas Broadaway,
Community Member
|
|
20)
Joseph Hamilton,
Community Member
|
|
21)
Sonia Cedeno,
School Support Personnel
|
|
22)
Lesbia Feliciano,
School Support Personnel
|
|
23)
Dwight Frazier,
Assistant Principal
|
AYP DATA
| 2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk SHELLEY S. BOONE MIDDLE SCHOOL 0321 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 939 Math: 939
|
2008-2009 School Grade1: |
C
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
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 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
40 |
N |
36 |
N |
91
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
60 |
60 |
N |
66 |
64 |
N |
43 |
N |
39 |
N |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
57 |
N |
46 |
N |
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
47 |
43 |
N |
51 |
54 |
N |
53 |
N |
50 |
N |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
36 |
N |
27 |
N |
88
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
65 |
64 |
N |
77 |
73 |
N |
39 |
N |
30 |
N |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
34 |
N |
34 |
N |
91
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
65 |
66 |
N |
68 |
66 |
N |
39 |
N |
37 |
N |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
39 |
N |
35 |
N |
90
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
62 |
61 |
N |
68 |
65 |
N |
42 |
N |
38 |
N |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
21 |
N |
26 |
N |
78
|
80 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
77 |
79 |
N |
78 |
74 |
N |
33 |
N |
30 |
N |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
23 |
N |
21 |
N |
68
|
92 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
83 |
77 |
N |
87 |
79 |
N |
30 |
N |
25 |
N |
| 2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk SHELLEY S. BOONE MIDDLE SCHOOL 0321 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 1026 Math: 1026
|
2007-2008 School Grade1: |
C
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
58% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
62% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
40 |
N |
34 |
N |
|
91 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
64 |
60 |
N |
67 |
66 |
N |
44 |
N |
49 |
N |
| WHITE
|
98 |
Y |
98 |
Y |
53 |
N |
49 |
N |
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
47 |
47 |
N |
51 |
51 |
N |
51 |
N |
56 |
N |
| BLACK
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
35 |
N |
23 |
N |
89
|
88 |
N |
|
|
NA |
67 |
65 |
N |
81 |
77 |
N |
39 |
N |
38 |
N |
| HISPANIC
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
35 |
N |
32 |
N |
|
91 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
72 |
65 |
N |
70 |
68 |
N |
43 |
N |
50 |
N |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
38 |
N |
32 |
N |
93
|
90 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
68 |
62 |
N |
70 |
68 |
N |
44 |
N |
47 |
N |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
99 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
23 |
N |
22 |
N |
83
|
78 |
N |
|
|
NA |
87 |
77 |
N |
85 |
78 |
N |
38 |
N |
47 |
N |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
17 |
N |
13 |
N |
79
|
68 |
N |
|
|
NA |
81 |
83 |
N |
85 |
87 |
N |
29 |
N |
25 |
N |
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk SHELLEY S. BOONE MIDDLE SCHOOL 0321 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 936 Math: 936
|
2006-2007 School Grade1: |
C
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
56% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
36 |
N |
33 |
N |
91
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
67 |
64 |
N |
72 |
67 |
N |
44 |
N |
53 |
N |
| WHITE
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
53 |
Y |
49 |
N |
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
51 |
47 |
NA |
56 |
51 |
N |
48 |
NA |
59 |
Y |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
33 |
N |
19 |
N |
93
|
89 |
N |
|
|
NA |
74 |
67 |
N |
84 |
81 |
N |
43 |
N |
58 |
N |
| HISPANIC
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
28 |
N |
30 |
N |
88
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
72 |
72 |
N |
75 |
70 |
N |
42 |
N |
49 |
N |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
32 |
N |
30 |
N |
91
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
69 |
68 |
N |
76 |
70 |
N |
43 |
N |
51 |
N |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
13 |
N |
15 |
N |
61
|
83 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
90 |
87 |
N |
90 |
85 |
N |
38 |
N |
50 |
N |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
98 |
Y |
98 |
Y |
19 |
N |
15 |
N |
81
|
79 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
81 |
N |
93 |
85 |
N |
|
NA |
|
NA |
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Polk School District SHELLEY S. BOONE MIDDLE SCHOOL 2008-2009
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
45%
|
39%
|
87%
|
22%
|
193
|
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% |
61% |
|
|
122 |
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? |
75% (YES) |
71% (YES) |
|
|
146
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
461 |
|
| 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 SHELLEY S. BOONE MIDDLE SCHOOL 2007-2008
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
46%
|
40%
|
87%
|
18%
|
191
|
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% |
62% |
|
|
123 |
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? |
69% (YES) |
67% (YES) |
|
|
136
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
450 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
C |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Polk School District SHELLEY S. BOONE MIDDLE SCHOOL 2006-2007
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
41%
|
37%
|
90%
|
17%
|
185
|
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 |
59% |
63% |
|
|
122 |
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? |
70% (YES) |
69% (YES) |
|
|
139
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
446 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
C |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |