VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

Vision:
The vision of Garner Elementary is to deliver a rigorous curriculum individualized for student’s unique needs designated to maximize student achievement, while striving to help every student accept responsibility for their own education and enhance their individual potential and ability to become self-sufficient.

Mission:
The mission of Garner Elementary is to provide all Garner Elementary students with tools and skills needed to realize their highest level of achievement and to motivate students to strive for academic, social, and physical excellence through a rigorous quality, and challenging curriculum. Especially targeting those subgroups not making adequate yearly progress (AYP). Racing to Excellence….. We will finish strong!


PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS


Brief History and Background of the School

Garner Elementary is located in the northeast section of Polk County and serves approximately 800 students from PK-5th grade. The school was originally built in 1955. It has been designated a Title 1 school as 91.9% of our students receive free or reduced lunch. Garner Elementary is composed of a diverse population with 31.4% white, 43% black, 18.7% Hispanic, 5.5% multiracial, and 1% other. Fourteen percent of our total student population is served by exceptional student education; nine units serve students with a wide range of exceptionalities. Approximately 31% of our students receive bus services. We have six regular buses and four ESE buses. One unique characteristic is our campus is very large and the buildings are spread out.

Garner Elementary is a large school with twelve separate buildings housing classrooms, a lunchroom, a media center, three computer labs and the office area. Part of facility is currently occupied by district office personnel. The district provided additional portables to provide the needed classroom space for our growing population. We now have four portables used as classrooms for ESE students.


Unique School Strengths for Next Year

On the 2009 FCAT, Garner Elementary 4th graders increased their writing proficiency by 1%, from 87% to 88%. When looking at the subgroup of Hispanic students, Garner increased from 83% to 89% in Writing. Also, our Hispanic students met the Safe Harbor requirement in Math.

Garner Elementary will be in the second year of Positive Behavior Support (PBS) implementation during the 2009-2010 school years. Besides PBS, we will also be in our second year of RTI (Response to Intervention) implementation. The 2009-2010 school year will also be our second full school year of inclusion with almost all 3rd-5th graders being included in the general education classroom and K-2 on a smaller scale. We have also began integrating separate class students into general education classes for non-academic class periods. We also have Head Start and School Readiness program that serves up to 54 students to prepare them for Kindergarten.

For the 2008-2009 school year, Garner Elementary was awarded a Parental Involvement award from the state of Florida for the Si Se Puede Con Lectura program. This program targeted limited English speaking families.


Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

On the 2009 FCAT, Garner did not make AYP in the area of Reading for all students or any of the following subgroups: White; Black; Hispanic; Economically Disadvantaged; English Language Learners. In the area of Math, Garner did not make AYP for all students or any of the following subgroups: White; Black; Economically Disadvantaged; English Language Learners. Also, our White and Economically Disadvantaged students did not make AYP in the area of Writing.

Garner Elementary continues to struggle with getting parents involved during and after the school day. This is vital in assisting the school with the student’s academic and behavioral progress.


Student Demographics

White 31.4%
Black 43%
Hispanic 18.7%
Other 1%
Multiracial 5.5%
Students with Disabilities 14.3%
English Language Learners 19.2%
Free/Reduced Lunch 92%


Student Attendance Rates

Garner had an attendance rate of 94.6% for the 2008-2009 school year, which was higher than the district average of 94.56%. During the 2007-2008 school year, Garner had an attendance rate of 93.38% and during the 2006-2007 school year, an attendance rate of 93.6%.


Student Mobility

Garner’s mobility percent for the 2008-2009 school year was 32.61%. This has decreased from 2007-2008 when the mobility rate was 37.85%.


Student Suspension Rates

This is the discipline data for the past three years:
2008-2009
OSS Days 476
OSS Actions 206
ISS Days 89
ISS Actions 66

2007-2008
OSS Days 353
OSS Actions 135
ISS Days 185
ISS Actions 95

2006-2007
OSS Days 328
OSS Actions 134
ISS Days 10
ISS Actions 2


Student Retention Rates

These are the retention rates for the past three years

2008-2009
First Grade 9.16%
Second Grade 2.61%
Third Grade 13.6%
Fourth Grade 0%
Fifth Grade 0%
Kindergarten 6.87%

2007-2008
First Grade 1.68%
Second Grade .74%
Third Grade 9.02%
Fourth Grade 0%
Fifth Grade 0%
Kindergarten 9.20%

2006-2007
First Grade 4.41%
Second Grade 4.17%
Third Grade 17.86%
Fourth Grade 0%
Fifth Grade 4.96%
Kindergarten 14.96%


Class Size

Here is our class size data for 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 school years

2006-2007
Pk-3 16.28
4-5 18.8

2007-2008
PK-3 16.93
4-5 17.15


Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Not applicable


Partnerships and Grants

We are working on building our list of community partners. Currently, we are partnered with Mid-Florida Federal Credit Union.


STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

Note: The following links will open in a separate browser window.

School Grades Trend Data

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data

HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS

PositionNameDegree(s)/ Certification(s)# of Years at Current School# of Years as an AdministratorPrior Performance Record *
Principal Dart Meyers Degrees: B.S. Marketing; M.A. in Educational Leadership Certification: ESE K-12; Educational Leadership 2.5 8 2009: School Grade-C;
Reading-55%
Math-52%
Writing-89%
Science 22%
AYP- No
-No subgroups made
AYP in Reading.
-Hispanic students
made AYP in Math.
2008: School Grade-C
Reading-59%
Math- 54%
Writing-71%
Science- 26%
AYP- No
-Only White students
made AYP in Reading.
-No subgroups made
AYP for Math.
2007: School Grade- C
Reading-62%
Math-54%
Writing-81%
Science-28%
AYP- No
-Black and ELL students
did not make AYP for
Reading.
-Black, Hispanic,
Economically
Disadvantaged, and
ELL students did not
make AYP for Math.
2006: School Grade- C
AYP- No (Dundee El)
2005: School Grade- A
AYP- Provisional
(Ben Hill Griffin Elem)
2004: School Grade- A
AYP- No
(Ben Hill Griffin Elem)
2003: School Grade- A
AYP- No
(Ben Hill Griffin Elem)
2002: School Grade- A
(Ben Hill Griffin Elem)

Assis Principal Kimberly Massey-Persaud Degrees: B.S. Elementary Education; M.S. Leadership/ Curriculum and Instruction grades K –12;
Ed. S Educational Leadership
Certification:
Elementary Education 1-6; ESOL Endorsement; Educational Leadership
3 5 2009: School Grade-C;
Reading-55%
Math-52%
Writing-89%
Science 22%
AYP- No
-No subgroups made
AYP in Reading.
-Hispanic students
made AYP in Math.
2008: School Grade-C
Reading-59%
Math- 54%
Writing-71%
Science- 26%
AYP- No
-Only White students
made AYP in Reading.
-No subgroups made
AYP for Math.
2007: School Grade- C
Reading-62%
Math-54%
Writing-81%
Science-28%
AYP- No
-Black and ELL students
did not make AYP for
Reading.
-Black, Hispanic,
Economically
Disadvantaged, and
ELL students did not
make AYP for Math.
2006: School Grade- C
AYP- No
2005: School Grade- C
AYP- No
Assis Principal Kimberly Massey Persaud Degrees: B.S. Elementary Education; M.S. Leadership/ Curriculum and Instruction grades K –12;
Ed. S Educational Leadership
Certification:
Elementary Education 1-6; ESOL Endorsement; Educational Leadership
3 5 2009: School Grade-C;
Reading-55%
Math-52%
Writing-89%
Science 22%
AYP- No
-No subgroups made
AYP in Reading.
-Hispanic students
made AYP in Math.
2008: School Grade-C
Reading-59%
Math- 54%
Writing-71%
Science- 26%
AYP- No
-Only White students
made AYP in Reading.
-No subgroups made
AYP for Math.
2007: School Grade- C
Reading-62%
Math-54%
Writing-81%
Science-28%
AYP- No
-Black and ELL students
did not make AYP for
Reading.
-Black, Hispanic,
Economically
Disadvantaged, and
ELL students did not
make AYP for Math.
2006: School Grade- C
AYP- No
2005: School Grade- C
AYP- No

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

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

Subject AreaNameDegree(s)/ Certification(s)# of Years at Current School# of Years as a CoachPrior Performance Record *
Math Keli Edwards Degrees:
B.S. Middle Childhood Education Concentration in Middle School Math and Science
Certification:
Elementary Education K-6; General Science 5-9; Mathematics 5-9
2009 (Padgett)
School Grade-B
AYP-No
2008 (Padgett)
School Grade- A
AYP- No
2007 (Padgett)
School Grade- A
AYP- Yes
Reading and Math Erin Rodgers Degrees:
B.S. Elementary Education; B.S. Specific Learning Disabilities; M.A. Reading
Certification:
Elementary Education K-6; Specific Learning Disabilities K-12; Varying Exceptionalities K-12; Reading K-12; ESOL endorsement
2 1 2009: School Grade-C;
Reading-55%
Math-52%
Writing-89%
Science 22%
AYP- No
-No subgroups made
AYP in Reading.
-Hispanic students
made AYP in Math
2008 (Garner)
School Grade- C
AYP- No
2007 (Eastside)
School Grade- A
AYP- Yes

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


HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Description of StrategyPerson ResponsibleProjected Completion DateNot Applicable (If not, please explain why)
Weekly and Monthly Professional Development Administration; Support Personnel June 9, 2010
Teacher recognition/incentives Administrators June 10, 2010
Pairing new teachers up with veteran staff members Administration Ongoing
Referrals for new staff members for new employees Administrators Ongoing


Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

NameCertificationTeaching AssignmentProfessional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified
none none none none


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
51051.9526.0621.9917.381004.264.1769.41


Teacher Mentoring Program

Mentor NameMentee AssignedRationale for PairingPlanned Mentoring Activities
2 Nationally Board Certified Teachers Teachers new to a grade level and teachers in need of assistance. To build teacher capacity to increase student achievement The mentor and mentee will meet throughout the school year, at least monthly. At these meeting they will discuss planning for learning, classroom management, scheduling, parent involvement, and any other concerns that arise



ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration


Note: For Title I schools only

Title I, Part A

Support personnel to provide interventions for low performing students, to purchase supplemental materials and technology, and to provide extended learning opportunities for low performing students.


Title I, Part C- Migrant

Migrant liaison provides services and support to students and parents. The liaison coordinates with Title I and other programs to ensure student needs are met.


Title I, Part D

District communicates with the administration and administration communicates with the guidance counselors for students transitioning back to schools from Department of Juvenile Justice.


Title II

The District professional development department will be purchasing Professional Development 360 to assist with the professional development of staff.


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.


Title X- Homeless

District Homeless Social Worker provides resources (Clothing, school supplies, social services referrals) for students identified as homeless under the McKinney-Vento Act to eliminate barriers for a free and appropriate education. This is coordinated through the school Guidance Counselors.


Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

SAI funds will be used for the Spell Read program for identified struggling readers in 3rd and 4th grade. These students are served in small groups and it serves approximately 20 students in all.


Violence Prevention Programs

Garner’s 5th grade students participate in the DARE program. All students and teachers have received information about bullying and how to prevent it. Bullying reporting forms are available in the office with a box to submit them anonymously. These are also available online to parents and students. The Mark Wilcox Center is a resource for programs like “Too Good For Violence”, which Garner has used.


Nutrition Programs

The Polk County Health Department came to Garner and found the Body Mass Index of our first graders. Our afternoon announcements encourage the students to participate in the breakfast program.


Housing Programs

Not applicable


Head Start

Garner currently has 4 Head Start units that serves a maximum of 36 students.


Adult Education

We have East Area Adult School literature available to parents at the school.


Career and Technical Education

Not applicable


Job Training

Not applicable


Other


Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)


School-based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Principal: Dart Meyers
Assistant Principal: Kimberly Massey Persaud
General Education Teachers: Rose Dolemon; Nancy Copeland; Cindy Veal; Gerri Roux
Exceptional Student Education Teachers: Melody Saporta; Ellen Dubanevich
Academic Intervention Facilitator: Keli Edwards
Support Personnel: Carrie Morgan; Erin Rodgers
School Psychologist: Kris Marone
Technology Specialist: Amy Kok
Speech Language Pathologist:Jodi Scobey
Student Services Personnel: Cindy Rodriguez; Kelly Hagan


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

We will monthly analyze data to evaluate the effectiveness of our instructional programs. We will guide high quality instruction and ensure the use of evidence based resources as well as review effective teaching characteristics. We will use the data to pinpoint areas of need for timely teacher professional development.

The School-based RtI Team will meet at least monthly.


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

The school-based RtI Leadership Team is integral in the development of the school improvement plan. The team will develop goals and strategies based on the 2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report to implement throughout the school year. During our monthly meetings, the team will review the implementation of the School Improvement Plan.




RtI Implementation

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Baseline data: Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN); IDEAS; Kaplan; DIBELS; Odyssey; Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT); STAR Math; STAR Reading

Progress Monitoring: PMRN; Title I Assessments; STAR Math; STAR Reading; FAIR

Diagnostic Assessment: ERDA; Harcourt Trophies; Fox in a Box; DAR

End of Year: FCAT; IDEAS; FAIR; Title I

District wide data day in September.
Frequency of Data Days: twice a month for data analysis


Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

The Leadership Team will train the instructional staff on the RtI model and process during pre-planning days. Monthly grade level meetings will be used to touch base on the RtI model and process.



School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Plan

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data


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


Strengths:
School Report Card: Of the students in the lowest 25% in our school, 63% made progress in Reading and 60% made progress in Math. Of all of our students, 57% made learning gains in Reading. In Writing, 89% of our students met high standards by scoring a 3.5 or above. In 4th grade, 68% of students met high standards in reading, the highest of all grades in the school. Also, 62% of 4th grade students made learning gains in reading, again, the highest in the school.
AYP Report: On the Writing Assessment, Total and Black students increased by at least 1%. Hispanic students made safe harbor in the area of math.
Weaknesses:
School Report Card: 55% of students met high standards in reading, 52% of students met high standards in math, and 22% of students met high standards in Science. Only 47% of students made learning gains in the area of math.
AYP Report: In the area of Reading, Garner did not make AYP for the following subgroups: Total; White; Black; Hispanic; Economically Disadvantaged; English Language Learners. In the area of Math, Garner did not make AYP for the following subgroups: Total; White; Black; Economically Disadvantaged; English Language Learners. In the area of Writing, Garner did not make AYP for White or Economically Disadvantaged students


Instructional Calendar Development


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

• When were the Instructional Focus Calendars (IFCs) created?
The IFCs were created in September 2009. Each grade levels curriculum map timelines for each subject were aligned into a single Excel document with the Focus Skills for Reading, Writing, Math, and Science listed as well. As other data is collected, the Instructional Focus Calendars will be revisited (mid-year, etc) to determine if the skills need to be re-sequenced, re-visited, etc.
• Was data used to develop the IFCs?
The results of the 2009 FCAT were used to develop the IFC’s. Title I and FAIR results will also be used throughout the year to review the IFCs.
• Were teachers included in the development of the IFCs?
Teachers will be responsible for determining the instructional focus of whole group lessons and small group/differentiated instruction.
• How were Benchmarks selected?
Benchmarks were selected based on the performance of students on the 2009 FCAT. Then, using the ongoing assessments throughout the school year.
• How was the duration of instruction selected for each Benchmark?
The duration of instruction for each Benchmark was determined by the amount of time allotted in the IFC to ensure that students are exposed to all Benchmarks prior to FCAT testing. Within the amount of time allotted in the IFC, teachers will provide instruction on each Benchmark, allow the students an opportunity to practice, assess the students’ knowledge, and then re-teach the Benchmark as indicated by student progress, either in whole group or small group setting.
• How will the administration ensure the IFCs are used by all teachers?
Administration will conduct classroom walk-throughs, evaluate lesson plans, monitor teacher data, and have meetings with teachers to ensure that the IFC is being utilized and implemented effectively. Support personnel and Academic Intervention Facilitators will be assigned to teachers who are demonstrating signs of struggling with IFC implementation.
• How will assistance be provided to teachers who struggle implementing the IFCs?
Teachers who are having difficulty implementing the IFCs will be assigned a mentor to assist them. Additional professional development will also be provided.


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

Reading: Main Idea/Purpose and the Benchmarks of the month on the Curriculum Maps
Math: All strands: Number Sense; Measurement; Geometry; Algebraic Thinking; Data Analysis


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

Teachers will analyze data (previous year and ongoing) to Tier students. They will then prescribe individual instruction for students to meet their specific individual needs.


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

Garner will be implementing CARSSS during the 2009-2010 school year. CARSSS is Content Area Reading, Science/Social Studies. Teachers will integrate Social Studies and Science into Reading grades K-5.


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

Students will meet individually with a member of the school’s Leadership team to set goals for ongoing assessments and FCAT.




DO

Direct the Instructional Focus


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


Teachers will follow the Curriculum Maps in all subject areas which are given by the District. The teachers will use these Curriculum Maps to write their lesson plans. The math and science acquisition lessons will be written in the learning focused format.


How are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

Each grade level, 3-5, will develop the instructional focus lessons based on the benchmarks. The grade levels will develop teacher directed lesson plans to use with the students. These lesson plans will use explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice, independent practice, and a mini-assessment. The lesson plans will be reviewed by the instructional coaches.


How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

Instructional focus lessons will be monitored using observations by the leadership team, lesson plan checks, and discussions at grade level meetings. They will be revised during grade level meetings when meeting with the grade levels intervention specialist.




CHECK

Assessment


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


Mini-assessments will be used to measure student progress in core, supplemental, and intensive instruction/intervention of the instructional focus lessons. These mini-assessments will be developed by the grade level at team meetings with the academic intervention facilitator for math and the LFS Coach. They will be given at the end of the teaching unit for the specific benchmark.


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

Students reaching 80% will be identified as reaching mastery. Teachers will look at all other students and determine where re-teaching needs to take place.


Maintenance


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

Teachers will conduct assessments at the end of each Benchmark period according to the Instructional Focus Calendar. Students who have not reached mastery will continue to work on previous benchmarks. Benchmarks will also be integrated into one another once they have been taught.


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

Teams will meet at least monthly to discuss the progress monitoring data with the leadership team and their intervention specialist. After discussing the data, the team will decide what instructional modifications need to be made to increase student achievement.


Monitoring


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

Leadership team members will each be assigned to a grade level to act as an intervention specialist. As an intervention specialist, the Leadership team plan with their grade level, analyze data, plan appropriate interventions for struggling students, etc. Leadership team members will also conduct walkthroughs of assigned grade levels weekly during specific time periods to look for the “look fors” of the week.

Administrators will conduct monthly meetings with the Leadership team to discuss what is happening around the school. Administrators will also meet monthly with the grade levels to discuss data/interventions/evaluation/teaching and learning process. They will conduct daily walkthroughs in the classroom as well.




ACT

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions


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


• What materials or instructional strategies will be used to re-teach non-mastered target areas?
Resources from the state adopted textbooks which are designed for intensive instruction will be utilized. Computerized programs (Odyssey) or instructional software (Reading Assistant), in addition to Internet instructional Web sites such as FCAT Explorer will also be utilized. Teachers will utilize instructional strategies or best practices discussed in Professional Learning Communities to provide different methods of providing instruction to students in non-mastered areas. Resources and strategies provided at professional development workshops will also be utilized. Students consistently demonstrating non-mastery in grades 3-5 will be invited to attend tutorial sessions before or after school. We also have Voyager, 100 Book Challenge (For 3rd grade only), and Spell Read (for selected struggling readers).


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

Some of the programs used are prescribed: Spell Read, 100 Book Challenge, Voyager. All supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions are done in small groups of 5 or less and sometimes individually


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

Using the Florida Educator Accomplished Practices, Administration will use observations and student performance data to determine the areas of need for professional development.


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

Students who have not demonstrated mastery according to the 2009 FCAT in grades 4 and 5 and students in grades 1-3 will be based on DIBELS and SAT 10. These students will be pulled into small groups in the classroom. Students in grades 3-5 will be offered after school tutoring and the ability to use the computer lab (Odyssey) before school. Supplemental Education Services are available to all students.


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

We will use ongoing assessments to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions. If interventions are not effective, they will be discontinued and other options will be discussed with grade level teams and then implemented.


Enrichment


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

Students who qualify will participate in the gifted program. Individual classroom teachers will use technology programs to enhance student learning.


Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

Students are identified based on FCAT, SAT10, and DIBELS results. Once the year has begun, Kaplan and FAIR will also be used.




Professional Learning Communities

PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.)PLC LeaderFrequency of PLC MeetingsSchedule (when)Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis)
Each grade level team Dart Meyers, Principal Kimberly Massey-Persaud, Assistant Principal Monthly Thursdays Data Analysis; IFC; LFS strategies; RtI
RtI Leadership Team Principal Monthly Mondays RtI model and process; individual student growth/progress
RtI: B Team Eric Hutchinson Twice a Month Tuesdays PBS process; discipline; data; rewards;
Core Leadership Team Dart Meyers, Principal Weekly Mondays Data analysis; IFC; RtI; PBS; school improvement
Committees Various Once a quarter Tuesdays Various topics depending on committee topic all relating back to school improvement


NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only


Pre-School Transition

Garner Elementary offers an Early Intervention Pre-K program and two Head Start programs. These can accommodate up to 54 students. Each year the Spring before school starts, Garner has a Kindergarten Round-Up. Parents bring their students and the Kindergarten teachers do a mini-assessment with the students to see what readiness skills they possess. The Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener (FLKRS) will be administered by the kindergarten teachers to all kindergarten students as an initial diagnostic and a final assessment tool as they prepare to transition to kindergarten. Low-performing students will be targeted early. Once identified, certified teachers will work with low-performing students using iii strategies and developmentally appropriate academics. The staff will provide parents with packets of kindergarten activities, registration materials, and offer workshops to train parents to assist their children at home. The district provides a summer Pre-K program during June and July. The program enables the majority of lower performing students to make a smooth transition to kindergarten. The district will evaluate the effectiveness of the preschool program by comparing FLKRS scores of Pre-K students versus students who have never been in Pre-K. The district provides the necessary resources and funds to support the Pre-K program


Postsecondary Transition

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

Not applicable



 

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

 

Other Goals

No Other Goals were submitted for this school

 

FINAL BUDGET



Differentiated Accountability


School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance



Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/14/2009 8:23:32 AM)



School Advisory Council



School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

The majority of the SAC members are not employed by the school district. The SAC is composed of the principal and an appropriately balanced number of teachers, education support employees, students (for middle and high school only), parents, and other business and community citizens who are representative of the ethnic, racial, and economic community served by the school.

Yes. Agree with the above statement.



Projected use of SAC FundsAmount
No data submitted



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


The School Advisory Council is going to monitor the implementation of the School Improvement Plan and analyze student achievement data. They will determine the expenditure of allocated Lottery Funds if applicable. The committee will also discuss concerns and solicit feedback in order to improve the school.


SAC Members

Members
1)  Dart Meyers,   Principal
2)  Chris David,   SAC Chair
3)  Keli Edwards,   Teacher
4)  Kimberly Massey-Persaud,   Assistant Principal
 

AYP DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk FRED G. GARNER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0601
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
 Read: 351
Math: 351   		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  51  N  49  N  87   88  Y      NA  48  49  N 52  51  N 55  N  47  N 
WHITE  100  Y  100  Y  58  N  60  N  91   83  N      NA  37  42  N 42  40  N 56  N  52  N 
BLACK  100  Y  100  Y  45  N  40  N  83   89  Y      NA  59  55  N 62  60  N 51  N  40  N 
HISPANIC  100  Y  100  Y  48  N  48  N      NA      NA  52  52  N 60  52  Y 62  N  53  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  50  N  49  N  87   87  N      NA  52  50  N 55  51  N 55  N  48  N 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS  100  Y  100  Y  36  N  36  N      NA      NA  55  64  N 60  64  N 49  N  42  N 
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES  99  Y  99  Y    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        

2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk FRED G. GARNER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0601
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
 Read: 324
Math: 324   		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  52  N  48  N  90   87  N      NA  45  48  NA 51  52  NA 53  NA  52  NA 
WHITE  100  Y  100  Y  63  Y  58  N  92   91  Y      NA  37  37  NA 37  42  NA 65  NA  54  NA 
BLACK  99  Y  99  Y  41  N  38  N      NA      NA  59  59  NA 65  62  NA 43  NA  48  NA 
HISPANIC  100  Y  100  Y  48  N  40  N      NA      NA  40  52  NA 56  60  NA 46  NA  49  NA 
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  48  N  45  N  87   87  N      NA  48  52  NA 56  55  NA 51  NA  51  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS  99  Y  98  Y  45  N  40  N      NA      NA  50  55  NA 65  60  NA 48  NA  48  NA 
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES  100  Y  100  Y  20  N  22  N      NA      NA    80  NA   78  NA 45  NA  23  NA 

2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk FRED G. GARNER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0601
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
 Read: 352
Math: 352   		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  98  Y  99  Y  55  Y  49  N  87   90  Y      NA  46  42  NA 42  51  NA 53  NA  55  NA 
WHITE  98  Y  99  Y  63  Y  63  Y  90   92  Y      NA  40  29  NA 38  37  NA 56  NA  62  NA 
BLACK  98  Y  98  Y  41  N  35  N  83     NA      NA  55  59  NA 49  65  NA 43  NA  46  NA 
HISPANIC  100  Y  100  Y  60  Y  44  N      NA      NA  42  45  NA 42  56  NA 59  NA  54  NA 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  98  Y  99  Y  52  Y  44  N  86   87  Y      NA  48  45  NA 44  56  NA 51  NA  52  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS  100  Y  100  Y  50  N  35  N      NA      NA    56  NA 59  65  NA 50  NA  55  NA 
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES  93  N  95  Y    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        


SCHOOL GRADE DATA

Polk School District
FRED G. GARNER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2008-2009
  Reading
  		 Math
  		 Writing
  		 Science
  		 Grade
Points
Earned		  
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 55%  52%  89%  22%  218   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 57%  47%      104  3 ways to make gains:
  • Improve FCAT Levels
  • Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5
  • Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
    		•
    Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? 63% (YES)  60% (YES)      123  Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
    Points Earned         445   
    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
    FRED G. GARNER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2007-2008
      Reading
          		 Math
          		 Writing
          		 Science
          		 Grade
    Points
    Earned    		  
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 59%  54%  71%  26%  210   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 60%  56%      116  3 ways to make gains:
  • Improve FCAT Levels
  • Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5
  • Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
    		•
    Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? 65% (YES)  79% (YES)      144  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         470   
    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
    FRED G. GARNER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2006-2007
      Reading
          		 Math
          		 Writing
          		 Science
          		 Grade
    Points
    Earned    		  
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 62%  54%  81%  28%  225   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 68%  55%      123  3 ways to make gains:
  • Improve FCAT Levels
  • Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5
  • Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
    		•
    Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? 65% (YES)  67% (YES)      132  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         480   
    Percent Tested = 99%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         C  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested