VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS
Vision:
The Alta Vista Elementary School Vision is that all our students, parents, staff and community members will be involved and accountable to prepare our students for a life time of learning. An environment will exist that promotes student achievement, high teacher expectations, and effective communication between home and school. In partnership with all stakeholders, we will work together to instill responsibility, self-esteem, and self respect in all our students. A challenging curriculum will be taught through real-world situations to ensure and prepare our students for academic success. In addition, our parents and staff will be responsible for being positive role models to all students, including all sub groups.
Mission:
We, the Alta Vista family, commit to working together to increase student achievement and make reflective decisions, thus creating an environment where all children love to learn and all teachers love to teach.
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
Brief History and Background of the School
Brief History and Background of the School
Alta Vista Elementary school opened in 1962 serving grades 1-7. By the early 1970’s, Alta Vista became a K-3 school serving all 3rd graders in the Haines City area. During the late 1980’s, Alta Vista returned to a traditional elementary school serving K-5. The school went from a large majority middle class population to a lower income population with a majority of Hispanic families. What once was an agricultural economy is now focused mainly on the service industry surrounding the Orlando resort area.
Our students are zoned to us from 4 different communities Lake Hamilton to the south, NE Winter Haven, and Haines City. Feeder schools are Boone Middle, Dundee Ridge, and Haines City High School. Alta Vista is 45 years old and includes 4 suites with over 42 classrooms. 19 portables are present on campus along with 750 plus students.
Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Out of 60 teachers, only 7 will be new.
Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year
The staff is a relatively inexperienced, 74% of the teachers have 5 years of experience or less.
Student Demographics
Alta Vista is a Title 1 school with 94% of our students on free or reduced lunch. Our student population is 15% White, 24% African American and 57% Hispanic and 3% Multiracial. Alta Vista Elementary has a population of 85% minority. Due to 94% of the students qualifying for Free or Reduced lunch, Alta Vista Elementary is a school-wide Title I school. Additionally, 9% of students are Students with Disabilities (SWD), 42% are classified as English Language Learners (ELL)
Student Attendance Rates
Alta Vista Elementary’s attendance rate for 2006-07 and 2007-08 were slightly better than district averages while the attendance rate for 2008-09 was .13% less than the district average.
The attendance rate for Alta Vista Elementary is as follows:
2006-2007: 94.63%; 2007-2008: 94.7%; 2008-2009: 94.43%;
Polk District
2006-2007: 94.10%; 2007-2008: 94.32%; 2008-2009: 94.56%.
Student Mobility
The mobility rate for 2008-09 was 26% and for 2007-08 it was 30%. This mobility comes predominantly from our migrant population
Student Suspension Rates
2006-2007: In-school, 18 Days, 4 Actions Out-of-school 158 Days, 85 Actions
2007-2008: In-school, 61 Days, 24 Actions Out-of-school 148 Days 79 Actions
2008-2009: In-school 246 Days, 117 Actions Out-of-school 328 Days, 121 Actions
The suspension rates have increased over the past three years.
Student Retention Rates
Alta Vista Elementary retained 2.04 % of Kindergarteners, 5.7% of 1st graders, 4.8% of 2nd graders, 24.7% of 3rd graders, 1.3% of 4th graders, and 0% of 5th graders the 2006-07 school year.
Alta Vista Elementary retained 2.3% of Kindergarteners, 0% of 1st graders, 1.2% of 2nd graders, 17.9% of 3rd graders, 0% of 4th graders, and 0% of 5th graders the 2007-08 school year.
Alta Vista Elementary retained 1.3% of Kindergarteners, 6.77% of 1st graders, 4.4% of 2nd graders, 19.64% of 3rd graders, 0% of 4th graders, and .92% of 5th graders the 2008-09 school year.
The retention rate for Kindergarten decreased 1 percentage points from 2.3 percent during the previous year. The retention rate for 1st grade increased 6.7 percentage points from 0 percent during the previous year. The retention rate for 2nd grade increased 3.2 percentage points from 1.2 percent during the previous year. The retention rate for 3rd grade increased 1.7 percentage points from 17.9 percent during the previous year. The retention rate for 4th grade remained 0. The retention rate for fifth grade increased .9 percentage points from 0 percent during the previous year.
The District’s retention rate is currently 1 student in grades 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Class Size
K-3 = 17.94 4-5 = 20.37
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
Not Applicable
Partnerships and Grants
The school is a Title 1 school due to the poverty of the attending population. This year the school will receive $135,900 to be used for personnel, training, supplies, equipment, and other necessities. Additional funds for extended learning are used to provide after school tutoring to academically struggling students.
The school has a Parent Outreach Facilitator and Academic Facilitators that are paid for by District funds.
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
|
Victor Duncan
|
M. Ed Leadership University of South Florida, M.B.A. University of South Florida, B.A., Science Florida Atlantic University.
Certifications include:
Biology 6-12, Middle Grades General Science, School Principal (All Levels)
|
2.25
|
9.5
|
Alta Vista Elementary:
2008-09 Grade C
Reading Mastery:
50%, Math mastery: 55%,
Science Mastery: 11%. AYP:
95% met, did not
make AYP in white both reading and math.
2007-08 Grade D
Reading Mastery:
39%, Math mastery: 50%,
Science Mastery: 11%. AYP:
72% met, did not
make AYP in Total, Black, Hispanic, Econ Disadv, ELL both reading and math.
2006-07 Grade: B
Reading Mastery: 50%, Math mastery: 63%,
Science Mastery: 21%. AYP: 85% met, did not
make AYP in black, hispanic, economically disadvantaged, english language learners for reading. english language learners for math.
Wahneta Elementary:
2005-06 Grade A
Reading Mastery:
56%, Math mastery: 50%.
AYP: 85% met, did not
make AYP in. Hispanic, ELL in reading. Hispanic, Econ Disadv, and ELL in math.
2004-05 Grade D
Reading Mastery: 59%, Math mastery: 50 %. AYP: 77% met, did not make AYP in ELL, SWD in reading. Hispanic, Econ Disadv, ELL and SWD.
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Deneece Dudeck
|
Masters Educational Leadership
BS Elementary Education
Certifications Include:
1-6 Elementary Education
ESOL Certified
Elementary Education Leadership
|
4
|
4
|
Alta Vista Elementary:
2008-09 Grade C
Reading Mastery:
50%, Math mastery: 55%,
Science Mastery: 11%. AYP:
95% met, did not
make AYP in white both reading and math.
2007-08 Grade D
Reading Mastery:
39%, Math mastery: 50%,
Science Mastery: 11%. AYP:
72% met, did not
make AYP in Total, Black, Hispanic, Econ Disadv, ELL both reading and math.
2006-07 Grade: B
Reading Mastery: 50%, Math mastery: 63%,
Science Mastery: 21%. AYP: 85% met, did not
make AYP in black, hispanic, economically disadvantaged, english language learners for reading. english language learners for math.
2005-06 Grade: C
Reading Mastery: 51%, Math mastery: 48%. AYP: 77% met, did not make AYP in hispanic, economically disadvantaged, english language learners for reading. Black, hispanic, economically disadvantaged, english language learners for math.
|
* 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 * |
|
LFS Facilitator
|
Sandra Gamez
|
BS Accounting
Certification:
K-6
|
4
|
1
|
2008-09 Grade C
55% of students at or above
grade level in math
63% of students making a
year's worth of progress in
math
56% of struggling students
making a year's worth of
progress in math
All subgroups, with the exception of white, made AYP in math.
|
|
Math
|
Jeannafer Rogers
|
Masters Educational Leadership
Certifications:
Elementary Education 1-6 English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL)
Educational Leadership K-12
|
5
|
1
|
2008-09 Grade C
55% of students at or above
grade level in math
63% of students making a
year's worth of progress in
math
56% of struggling students
making a year's worth of
progress in math
All subgroups, with the exception
of white, made AYP in math.
|
|
Writing
|
Wanda Breithaupt
|
Masters Personnel Mangement
Certifications:
Elementary Education K-6
Middle Grades Integrated Curriculum
Science 6-9
ESE K-12
Business Ed K-12
|
2
|
1
|
2008-09 Grade C
79% of students are meeting state standards in writing.
|
|
Academic Facilitator -Reading
|
Linda Carter
|
BS Elementary Education Masters Reading
Certification:
K-6
|
1
|
1
|
2008-09 Grade C
50% of students reading at or
above grade level
61% of students making a year's
worth of progress in reading
73% of struggling students
making a year's worth of
progress in reading
All subgroups, with the exception
of white, made AYP in reading.
|
* 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. Professional Learning Communities
|
Assistant Principal
|
On Going
|
|
|
2. Common planning time for grade levels.
|
Assistant Principal
|
On Going
|
|
|
3. Book studies to build knowledge and morale.
|
Assistant Principal
|
On Going
|
|
|
4. Vertical teaming to facilitate collaboration among grade levels
|
Assistant Principal
|
On Going
|
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
| No data submitted |
|
Staff Demographics
| Total Number of Instructional Staff | % of First-Year Teachers | % of Teachers with 1-5 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 6-14 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 15+ Years of Experience | % of Teachers with Advanced Degrees | % Highly Qualified | % Reading Endorsed Teachers | % National Board Certified Teachers | % ESOL Endorsed |
| 60 | 0 | 74 | 23 | 3 | 22 | 100 | 3 | 3 | 35 |
Teacher Mentoring Program
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
Diane Hill
Jill Egan
Marie Morse
|
New Teachers
|
Experience
|
Assistance with:
Curriculum Development
Classroom Management
Parent/Teacher conferences
Elegrade/Progress Monitoring
|
|
Resource Team
|
Struggling Teachers
|
Experience
|
Assistance with:
Curriculum Development
Classroom Management
Parent/Teacher conferences
Elegrade/Progress Monitoring
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Title I, Part A
Title I, Part A, funds school-wide services to Alta Vista Elementary. The Title I funds provide supplemental instructional resources and interventions for students with academic achievement needs. Title I, Part A, support provides after-school and summer instructional programs, supplemental instructional materials, resource teachers, technology for students, professional development for the staff, and resources for parents.
Title I, Part C- Migrant
Migrant students enrolled in Alta Vista Elementary will be assisted by the school and by the District Migrant Education Program (MEP). Students will be prioritized by the MEP for supplemental services based on need and migrant status. MEP Teacher Advocates, assigned to schools with high percentages of migrant students, monitor the progress of these high need students and provide or coordinate supplemental academic support. Migrant Home-School Liaisons identify and recruit migrant students and their families for the MEP. They provide support to both students and parents in locating services necessary to ensure the academic success of these students whose education has been interrupted by numerous moves.
Title I, Part D
Not Applicable
Title II
Not Available
Title III
Not Applicable
Title X- Homeless
Not Applicable
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
SAI unit(s) provided to Alta Vista Elementary enhance student achievement by providing intensive intervention instruction to struggling students in a small group setting.
Violence Prevention Programs
Not Applicable
Nutrition Programs
Not Applicable
Housing Programs
Not Applicable
Head Start
Head Start is not located on our campus.
Adult Education
Not applicable
Career and Technical Education
Not Applicable
Job Training
Not appli.
.....
Not Applicable
Other
Not Applicable
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) |
|
Grouped by Grade Level
|
Grade Chairs and Administrators
|
Weekly
|
Once a week according to the schedule
|
Data Analysis
|
|
Grouped by Grade Level
|
Grade Chairs and Administrators
|
Weekly
|
Once a week according to the schedule
|
Curriculum
|
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: For Title I schools only
Pre-School Transition
Alta Vista houses 3 pre-school sites with one 8x8, one ESE unit, and one Hearing Impaired. Pre K students are continuously progress monitored and work within each one of the Individual Educational Plans (IEP). All Preschool teachers complete a data analysis sheet, on each student, to administration to describe specific skills and knowledge as well as the ability to form meaningful relationships. Those with low readiness receive intensive intervention with Speech and Language program plus assistance from local programs such as Head Start. In April, Pre K parents are encouraged to attend a Kindergarten Round-Up. Parents with their children are able to tour Kindergarten classrooms and meet teachers. Pre K parents are also given an orientation to assist in the transition by going over state mandates, district expectations, and Sunshine State Standards. Within the first 20 days of Kindergarten, students receive FLKRS, IDEL, and On-Going Assessments to measure academic and physical capabilities. After receiving data PreK and Kindergarten teachers meet to discuss strengths and weaknesses of the students. These results assist PreK teachers in a needs assessment of last year’s outcomes. It also gives Kindergarten teachers a foundation of the student’s academic knowledge. Funding for the Pre-K program comes entirely from the District budget.
Postsecondary Transition
Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.
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 3-5, 46% of
students achieved
mastery on the 2009
administration of the
FCAT Reading Test.
|
In grades 3-5 ,
72% of the
students will
score a Level 3 or higher on the
2010 FCAT
Reading Test. as evidenced by the AYP.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1.The school will implement the new FAIR assessments
to monitor student
progress.
2. Include higher order
questions in
lesson plans.
3. Develop an
Instructional Focus
Calendar for
Reading.
|
1. Principal and
the Reading
Academic Facilitator,
LFS Facilitator
2. Principal and
the Reading
Academic Facilitator, LFS Facilitator
3. Principal and
the Reading
Academic Facilitator, LFS Facilitator
|
1. Review FAIR data
reports to ensure
teachers are assessing
students according to
the created schedule.
2. Lesson plans will be
reviewed during
classroom
walkthroughs and will
be submitted weekly to
Assistant Principal.
3. Administration will
be aware of the IFC’s
upcoming focus and
monitor implementation
through classroom
walkthroughs.
|
1. Printout of FAIR
assessments.
2. Classroom
walkthrough log and
focused walkthroughs
to determine
frequency of higher
order questions.
3. Effectiveness will
be determined through
FAIR assessments.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
In grades 3-5, 61% of
students achieved
learning gains on the
2009 administration of
the FCAT Reading
Test.
|
In grades 3-5,
62% of students
will achieve
learning gains on
the 2010
administration of
the FCAT Reading
Test as evidenced by the School Grade Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Student
Achievement Meetings
will be conducted
with all students
following FAIR
assessments.
|
1. Principal, Assistant Principal,
Reading Academic Facilitator
|
1. Administrators will review log for Student Achievement Meetings
during walkthroughs.
|
1. Administrators will randomly ask students
how they performed
on their most recent
assessment to
determine if data
chats are successful.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Based on the 2009
FCAT Reading data,
54% of white students scored at or
above Level 3.
|
Increase the
percent of white students scoring
at or above a
Level 3 from 54%
to 72% on the
2010 FCAT
Reading 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 |
1. Tier 1:
Determine core
instructional needs
by reviewing FAIR
(Florida
Assessment for
Instruction in
Reading)
assessment data
for all white students. Plan
differentiated
instruction using
evidence-based
instruction/
interventions within
90-minute reading
block.
2. Tier 2: Plan
supplemental
instruction/
intervention for
students not
responding to core
instruction. Focus
of instruction is
determined by
review of FAIR data
and will include
explicit instruction,
modeled instruction,
guided practice and
independent
practice.
3. Tier 3: Plan
targeted
intervention for
students not
responding to core
plus supplemental
instruction using
problem-solving
process.
Interventions will be
matched to
individual student
needs, be
evidence-based,
and provided in
addition to core.
|
1. Reading
Academic Facilitator
3. RtI
Team/Case
Manager
|
1. Student progress is
assessed using FAIR
Ongoing Progress
Monitoring (OPM)
every 20 days.
Percent of students
making adequate
progress toward
benchmark is
calculated.
2. Student progress is
assessed using FAIR
OPM every 20 days for
all students receiving
Tier 2 supplemental
instruction. Percent of
students making
adequate progress
toward benchmark is
calculated.
3. Student progress is
assessed using FAIR
OPM every 20 days
for all students
receiving Tier 3
targeted intervention.
Adequate progress is
determined by
comparing student’s
trendline to aimline.
|
1. FAIR OPM data
will be used to
determine progress
from Benchmark 1
towards Benchmark 2
and from Benchmark
2 towards Benchmark
3.
2. FAIR OPM data
will be used to
determine progress
from Benchmark 1
towards Benchmark 2
and from Benchmark
2 towards Benchmark
3.
3. FAIR OPM data
will be used to determine
progress from
Benchmark 1 towards
Benchmark 2 and
from Benchmark 2
towards Benchmark 3.
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
In grades 3-5 ,
72% of the
students will
score a Level 3 or higher on the
2010 FCAT
Reading Test. as evidenced by the AYP.
|
LFS Version 7 –Assessment Prompts
|
Sandra Gamez
Deneece Dudeck
|
Throughout the year, beginning in October
|
Classroom Walk Throughs
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, LFS Facilitator
|
Increase the
percent of white students scoring
at or above a
Level 3 from 54%
to 72% on the
2010 FCAT
Reading as evidenced by the AYP report.
|
LFS Extended Thinking
|
Sandra Gamez
Deneece Dudeck
|
Throughout the year, beginning in November
|
Classroom Walk Throughs
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, LFS Facilitator
|
In grades 3-5 ,
72% of the
students will
score a Level 3 or higher on the
2010 FCAT
Reading Test. as evidenced by the AYP.
And
Increase the
percent of white students scoring
at or above a
Level 3 from 54%
to 72% on the
2010 FCAT
Reading as evidenced by the AYP report.
|
Differentiated Instruction
|
Sandra Gamez
Deneece Dudeck
|
Throughout the year
|
Classroom Walk Throughs
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, LFS Facilitator
|
For Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every Teacher
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Leveled Tests |
District |
$2,500.00 |
| Total: $2,500.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Odyessy |
District |
$0.00 |
| Soliloquy |
Title 1 |
$2,500.00 |
| Total: $2,500.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading Academic Facilitator |
Title 1 |
$67,550.00 |
| LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Total: $79,643.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $84,643.00 |
|
| 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 |
In grades 3-5, 52% of
students achieved
mastery on the 2009
administration of the
FCAT Mathematics
Test.
|
In grade 3-5,
74% of students
will achieve
a Level 3 or higher
2010 administration of
the FCAT
Mathematics Test 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 classroom teachers implement a daily, minimal, uninterrupted, 60 minutes of math instruction in grades K-5, using research-based math strategies to ensure mastery at all levels. Class instruction includes purpose, review, explanation, demonstration, guided feedback, correction, and evaluation.
2. Utilize State provided test scores
to identify students
in the core
curriculum needing
intervention and
enrichment.
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, Math Resource
2. Principal, Assistant Principal,
Math Resource
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom Walkthroughs
2. Review student
grouping charts
frequently and ensure
groups are redesigned
to target the need of
students based on
assessment.
|
Reports generated from review of plans or walkthroughs
2. On Going Assessments
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Based on the 2009 FCAT
Mathematics data, 56% of the bottom quartile showed learning gains.
|
57% or more of the bottom quartile of students in grades 3-5 will make learning gains
on the 2010
Mathematics FCAT as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Student
Achievement Meetings
will be conducted
with all students
following State provided test
assessments
|
1. Principal, Assistant Principal,
Math Resource
|
1. Administrators will review log for Student Achievement Meetings
during walkthroughs.
|
1. Administrators will randomly ask students
how they performed
on their most recent
assessment to
determine if data
chats are successful.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
Based on the 2009
FCAT Math data,
58% of white students scored at or
above Level 3.
|
Increase the
percent of white students in grades 3-5 scoring
at or above a
Level 3 from 58%
to 74% on the
2010 FCAT
Math 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 |
1. Tier 1: Determine
core instructional
needs by reviewing
common
assessment data for all students within bottom quartile.
Plan differentiated
instruction using
evidence-based
instruction/intervent ions within the
mathematics blocks.
2. Tier 2: Plan
supplemental
instruction/
intervention for
students not
responding to core
instruction. Focus
of instruction is
determined by
review of common
assessment data
and will include
explicit instruction,
modeled instruction,
guided practice and
independent
practice.
Supplemental
instruction is
provided in addition
to core instruction.
3. Tier 3: Plan
targeted intervention
for students not
responding to core
plus supplemental
instruction using
problem-solving
process.
Interventions will be
matched to
individual student74
needs, be evidence based,
and provided
in addition to core
instruction.
|
1. Principal and Assistant Principal
2. Principal and Assistant Principal
3. RTI Team
|
1. Grade-level teams, teachers will review common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark
(80% on common
assessment).
2. Grade-level teams
will review results of
common assessment
data every 4 weeks to
determine progress
toward benchmark
(80% on common
assessment).
3. Grade-level teams
will review results of
common assessment
data bi-weekly to
determine progress
toward benchmark
(80% on common
assessment).
|
1. Common
assessments tied to
Math Standards
administered as classroom progress indicates.
2. Common
assessments tied to
Math Standards
administered as classroom progress indicates.
3. Common
assessments tied to
Math Standards
administered as classroom progress indicates.
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
In grade 3-5,
74% of students
will achieve
a Level 3 or higher
2010 administration of
the FCAT
Mathematics Test as evidenced by the AYP report.
|
Shape Bait and What's My Place, What's My Value?
|
Libbey Pollet
|
August 2009
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom Visits
|
Math Resource, Principal, Assistant Principal
|
Increase the
percent of white students in grades 3-5 scoring
at or above a
Level 3 from 58%
to 74% on the
2010 FCAT
Math as evidenced by the AYP report.
|
Acaletics
|
Mike Bell
|
4 times during the year
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom Visits
|
Math Resource, Principal, Assistant Principal
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Acaletics |
Title 1 |
$43,000.00 |
| Scott Foresman Text |
District |
$5,000.00 |
| What's My Place, What's My Value |
Title 1 |
$5,000.00 |
| Total: $53,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Training for What's My Place, What's My Value |
Title 1 |
$3,200.00 |
| Math Resource Teacher |
Title 1 |
$52,570.00 |
| LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Total: $67,863.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $120,863.00 |
|
| 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 |
|
Based on 2009, FCAT Science data, 11% of students achieved level three and above.
|
By Spring of 2010, 46% of 5th grade students will be at Achievement Level three or above in Science as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Classroom teachers provide quality science instruction using scientific vocabulary, hands-on activities and FCAT format lessons for at least 90 minutes per week, school-wide throughout the year.
|
1. Principal, Assistant Principal
|
1. Lesson plans will be
reviewed during
classroom
walkthroughs and will
be submitted weekly to
Assistant Principal.
|
1. Classroom
walkthrough log
|
|
| |
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, 46% of 5th grade students will be at Achievement Level three or above in Science as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
LFS Version 7 –Assessment Prompts
|
Sandra Gamez
Deneece Dudeck
|
Throughout the year, beginning in October
|
Classroom Walk Throughs
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, LFS Facilitator
|
|
By Spring of 2010, 46% of 5th grade students will be at Achievement Level three or above in Science as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
LFS Extended Thinking
|
Sandra Gamez
Deneece Dudeck
|
Throughout the year, beginning in November
|
Classroom Walk Throughs
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, LFS Facilitator
|
|
By Spring of 2010, 46% of 5th grade students will be at Achievement Level three or above in Science as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
Differentiated Instruction
|
Sandra Gamez
Deneece Dudeck
|
Throughout the year
|
Classroom Walk Throughs
|
Principal, Assistant Principal, LFS Facilitator
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Science Text |
District |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Total: $12,093.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $12,093.00 |
|
| 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 |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Writing data, 93% of 4th grade students scored at a Level 3 or above.
|
By Spring, of 2010, 94% of 4th Grade students will be at an Essay score of 4.0 or above in Writing as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Classroom teachers provide a daily writing block of 30 minutes for grades K-3 and 45 minutes for 4th and 5th grade using Write Math Inc materials.
2. Classroom teachers use Write Math Inc. materials to improve the use of standard writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, structure, etc.) in student work throughout the year.
|
1. Writing Resource teacher, Principal
and Assistant Principal
2. Writing Resource, Principal
and Assistant Principal
|
1. Lesson plans will be
reviewed during
classroom
walkthroughs and will
be submitted weekly to
Assistant Principal.
2. Lesson plans will be
reviewed during
classroom
walkthroughs and will
be submitted weekly to
Assistant Principal.
|
1. Walk through log reports
2. Walk through log reports
|
|
| |
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, 94% of 4th Grade students will be at an Essay score of 4.0 or above in Writing as evidenced by the School Grade report.
|
Teaching Effective Writing Techniques
|
Kathy Robinson
|
On going
|
Classroom observation
|
Writing Resource Teacher, Principal, Assistant Principal
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Write Math, Inc |
Title 1 |
$10,000.00 |
| Writing Resource |
Title 1 |
$47,894.00 |
| LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Total: $69,987.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $69,987.00 |
|
| 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 review of contact logs indicated that only 30% of the the parent's were contacted each month.
|
Increase teacher
communication with
parents to 60% of their
student’s parents, at
least once per month.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Teachers will be informed of the requirement, provide phone logs to be used for documentation.
|
Title 1 Facilitator
|
1. Review phone call logs
|
Phone call logs
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
Increase teacher
communication with parents to 60% of their student’s parents, at least once per month.
|
All teachers will attend the Title I Annual Family Meeting that explains the importance of family involvement in relation to student success.
|
Title 1 Facilitator
|
September 2009
|
Review Contact Logs
|
Title 1 Facilitator
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Alta Vista Web Site |
District |
$0.00 |
| Connect Ed |
District |
$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 |
| Student Agenda |
Title 1 |
$5,000.00 |
| Family Involvement Para |
Title 1 |
$22,269.00 |
| Total: $27,269.00 |
| Final Total: $27,269.00 |
|
| End of Parent Involvement Goal |
|
Other Goals
No Other Goals were submitted for this school
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Leveled Tests |
District |
$2,500.00 |
| Mathematics |
Acaletics |
Title 1 |
$43,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Scott Foresman Text |
District |
$5,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
What's My Place, What's My Value |
Title 1 |
$5,000.00 |
| Science |
Science Text |
District |
$0.00 |
| Total: $55,500.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Odyessy |
District |
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Soliloquy |
Title 1 |
$2,500.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Alta Vista Web Site |
District |
$0.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Connect Ed |
District |
$0.00 |
| Total: $2,500.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Reading Academic Facilitator |
Title 1 |
$67,550.00 |
| Reading |
LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Mathematics |
Training for What's My Place, What's My Value |
Title 1 |
$3,200.00 |
| Mathematics |
Math Resource Teacher |
Title 1 |
$52,570.00 |
| Mathematics |
LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Writing |
Write Math, Inc |
Title 1 |
$10,000.00 |
| Writing |
Writing Resource |
Title 1 |
$47,894.00 |
| Writing |
LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Science |
LFS Coach |
Title 1 |
$12,093.00 |
| Total: $229,586.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Parental Involvement |
Student Agenda |
Title 1 |
$5,000.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Family Involvement Para |
Title 1 |
$22,269.00 |
| Total: $27,269.00 |
| Final Total: $314,855.00 |
Differentiated Accountability
School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance
Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/9/2009 3:21:09 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 |
|
Cafeteria Sound System
|
2200
|
Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year
School Advisory Councils assist in the preparation, implementation, and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. The Council makes recommendations and assists the school administration in all areas of school improvement. These functions are performed through participatory decision-making by parents, educators, school staff, business people, and other community members who are stakeholders in the school.
The SAC Council is in effect for the duration of each school year. 51% of the School Advisory Council membership will be composed of parents are elected to the School Advisory Council by parents, and in the event that the elections do not constitute a membership that is balanced by ethnicity, race, socioeconomic, status of the student population, the principal may appoint member.
Community members are appointed by the principal with input from the School Advisory Council membership. All new members joining the Council will receive training prior to or during the first meeting in September. Any member who accumulates 2 consecutive unexplained absences from noticed meetings will be replaced by the principal with School Advisory Council approval. Meeting times and places will be agreed upon by all members of the School Advisory Council at the first meeting. Each meeting shall be held in the media center at 12:00 noon. Each year the time, date, and place of any meeting may be modified based upon the consensus vote of the members present at any meeting. Notice of each meeting will be given 2 weeks prior to each scheduled meeting by email, mail, phone call. The notice will include any votes that will be presented for a vote to the membership. The operation of the School Advisory Council is governed by Florida Statute 229.58 the policies of the Polk County School District and the Government in the Sunshine Law. Decisions made by the School Advisory Council must be made within the boundaries of Polk County School Board policy. School Board members may review School Advisory Council By-Laws. School Board members approve School Advisory Membership and the School Improvement Plan.
The School Advisory Council at Alta Vista Elementary functions using all perimeters above and assures the continuous progress of Florida's eight education goals in the school. The SAC operates within the policies of the School Board and the parameters established by the state legislature. Our school advisory council is composed of teachers, parents, the principal, support staff, business and community representatives that reflect the ethnic, racial and socio-economic background of our community. They also participate in the decision-making process regarding school improvement at the school level. The SAC also helps to develop and monitors the activities and progress of the School Improvement Plan (SIP) as well as the school's annual budget. This includes but not limited to lottery allocations and school recognition funds. The SAC assists in the development of the budget and SIP plan by meeting and reviewing data. After reviewing data recommendations are given to assists in the area of student achievement and progress.
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
Victor Duncan,
Principal
|
|
2)
Thomas Broadaway,
SAC Chair
|
|
3)
Ana Arrietta,
Teacher
|
|
4)
Sandra Gamez,
Teacher
|
|
5)
Rosita Genera,
Parent
|
|
6)
Shirley Cox,
Parent
|
|
7)
Maria del Carmen,
Parent
|
|
8)
Jamelith Alvarez,
Parent
|
|
9)
Willis Bradley,
Community Member
|
|
10)
Josephine Howard,
Community Member
|
AYP DATA
| 2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0331 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 372 Math: 372
|
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 |
46 |
N |
52 |
N |
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
65 |
54 |
Y |
55 |
48 |
Y |
56 |
NA |
56 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
54 |
N |
58 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
46 |
NA |
|
42 |
NA |
62 |
N |
|
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
43 |
N |
45 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
67 |
57 |
Y |
62 |
55 |
Y |
53 |
NA |
56 |
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
45 |
N |
53 |
N |
|
94 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
68 |
55 |
Y |
54 |
47 |
Y |
56 |
NA |
55 |
NA |
| 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 |
46 |
N |
53 |
N |
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
67 |
54 |
Y |
56 |
47 |
Y |
57 |
NA |
56 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
38 |
N |
53 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
82 |
62 |
Y |
62 |
47 |
Y |
47 |
NA |
53 |
NA |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0331 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 434 Math: 434
|
2007-2008 School Grade1: |
D
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
58% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
62% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
35 |
N |
45 |
N |
93
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
57 |
65 |
NA |
44 |
55 |
NA |
41 |
NA |
48 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
33 |
N |
38 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
59 |
67 |
NA |
49 |
62 |
NA |
43 |
NA |
45 |
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
32 |
N |
46 |
N |
92
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
59 |
68 |
NA |
43 |
54 |
NA |
37 |
NA |
47 |
NA |
| 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 |
33 |
N |
44 |
N |
93
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
57 |
67 |
NA |
44 |
56 |
NA |
40 |
NA |
48 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
18 |
N |
38 |
N |
87
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
71 |
82 |
NA |
50 |
62 |
NA |
34 |
NA |
47 |
NA |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0331 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 435 Math: 435
|
2006-2007 School Grade1: |
B
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
56% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
43 |
N |
56 |
Y |
89
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
58 |
56 |
N |
58 |
44 |
NA |
43 |
N |
68 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
41 |
N |
51 |
N |
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
60 |
55 |
N |
71 |
49 |
Y |
36 |
N |
61 |
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
41 |
N |
57 |
Y |
87
|
92 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
64 |
63 |
N |
59 |
43 |
NA |
43 |
N |
70 |
NA |
| 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 |
43 |
N |
56 |
Y |
88
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
61 |
57 |
N |
60 |
44 |
NA |
42 |
N |
68 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
99 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
29 |
N |
50 |
N |
89
|
87 |
N |
|
|
NA |
80 |
75 |
N |
73 |
50 |
N |
33 |
N |
64 |
N |
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Polk School District ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2008-2009
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
50%
|
55%
|
79%
|
11%
|
195
|
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% |
63% |
|
|
124 |
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? |
73% (YES) |
56% (YES) |
|
|
129
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
448 |
|
| 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 ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2007-2008
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
39%
|
50%
|
87%
|
11%
|
187
|
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 |
55% |
47% |
|
|
102 |
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) |
64% (YES) |
|
|
133
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
422 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
D |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Polk School District ALTA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2006-2007
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
50%
|
63%
|
88%
|
21%
|
222
|
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 |
64% |
81% |
|
|
145 |
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? |
71% (YES) |
84% (YES) |
|
|
155
|
Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
|
| Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
522 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |