VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS
Vision Statement
We believe each child is unique. We strive to instill in each student the ability to think critically, work cooperatively, pursue knowledge, respect others, and make healthy choices.
Mission Statement
Chain of Lakes Elementary is a family partnership committed to excellence.
We expect everyone to cooperatively acquire the skills and knowledge necessary to become successful lifelong learners and productive citizens with respect for themselves, others and the world around them.
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
Brief History and Background of the School
Chain of Lakes Elementary was built in 2005. This is our fifth year of operation. The school was built in the middle of an orange grove in a remote area of Winter Haven. Neighborhoods have developed rapidly around our school.
Our school was designed for 650 students and we currently have 844 enrolled. We began adding portables in
January, 2006. We now have 18 portable classrooms. Our school serves a very diverse population of students.
Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Chain of Lakes staff is committed and dedicated to meet adequate yearly progress for all students.
Learning Focused Strategies
District curriculum maps
Flexible grouping
Intensive Immediate Intervention strategies school-wide
Accelerated Reader
Technology – Odyssey, Fast Forward, Smartboards, FAIR
Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year
Due to the large number of students served, the transitional time from area to area reduces our instructional time. For the eighteen classrooms in portables. The classrooms designed for Art, Music and Media are not adequate for our large number of students. Our PE activity area has been greatly reduced and a baseball playing field has been eliminated in order for portable classrooms to be installed.
Our facility also presents other areas of concern such as inadequate parking for families and faculty. There is no facility large enough to host a meeting for parents of students in all grades.
Student Demographics
CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY is a pre-K–5 school in Winter Haven, Florida. It is a traditional curriculum school of 811 students. Our student population is 52% white, 12% black and 26% Hispanic. Ninety students are served in the Limited English Proficient (LEP) program; this represents approximately 11% of the total student body. Our school serves a large geographic area with many diverse students. Nine buses serve our school. The average teacher to student ratio is 1:17. Also during the 2009-2010 school year 56% of students were on free/reduced lunch. The retention rate for 2009-2010 was 4%. While our curriculum is built around reading, writing, and mathematics, reading is our focus. Harcourt Trophies is our reading curriculum which is based on researched based strategies and is used within a 90 minute Reading Block. Technology, Music, Media, Art, and Physical Education are provided for enrichment.
Chain of Lakes serves a growing ESE population. Currently we have two pre-kindergarten, one self-contained EMH/TMH, one intermediate self-contained VE, one primary self-contained VE, two Resource VE, Speech/Language, and Alpha. Chain of Lakes serves one regular pre-kindergarten. We have one Kaplan Spell Read teacher who serves regular and ESE students.
Student Attendance Rates
School year Attendance Rate
0607 0933 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 94.37
0708 0933 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 94.96
0809 0933 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 94.80
Student Mobility
Students Students
enrolled/ enrolled
withdrawn on or
after day after
15 day 16 %
School Year School Name
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 248 914 27.13
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 256 942 27.18
Student Suspension Rates
School OSS OSS ISS ISS
Number Year School Name Days Actions Days Actions
0933 2006-07 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 180 52 0 0
0933 2007-08 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 96 24 0 1
Student Retention Rates
Retentions from Survey 5 Year UNOFFICIAL RETENTION DATA UNVERIFIED FOR USE IN SCHOOL SIP PLAN ONLY Grade Retained (UNOFFICIAL) Enrollment Percent Retained (UNOFFICIAL)
0933 0607 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 01 5 153 3.27
0933 0607 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 02 4 123 3.25
0933 0607 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 03 11 158 6.96
0933 0607 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 04 0 139 0.00
0933 0607 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 05 0 109 0.00
0933 0607 Chain Of Lakes Elementary KG 5 141 3.55
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 01 0 122 0.00
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 02 0 140 0.00
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 03 8 111 7.21
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 04 0 138 0.00
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 05 0 127 0.00
0933 0708 Chain Of Lakes Elementary KG 0 127 0.00
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 01 1 120 0.83
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 02 3 132 2.27
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 03 26 141 18.44
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 04 0 115 0.00
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary 05 0 135 0.00
0933 0809 Chain Of Lakes Elementary KG 0 134 0.00
Class Size
The average class size for grades Pre-k through Third for the year 2006-07 was 17. The average class size for grades Pre-k through Third for the year 2007-08 was 16.
The average class size for grades 4-8 for the year 2006-07 was 19. The average class size for grades
4-8 for the year 2007-0 was 19.
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
Not Applicable
Partnerships and Grants
We currently have approximately 16 community partners actively involved in our school. Our Partners are as follows:
Publix; Lake Ashton Golf Community; State Farm; Wal-mart; Ralph White Company; Lauer Lawn Service; Community Bank; Evergreen Recycling Company; Mid-Florida Credit Union; Jahna Industries; Boland Production Supply; Horace Mann Insurance; Red Hoagland Hyundai; Bartow Ford; Polk County Fire Department; CE Power Company.
We received grants from the following: Polk Education Foundation – Matching Grant;; Wal-Mart; and Lake Ashton Golf Community.
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
|
Lynn W. Boland
|
Degrees:
Specialist Educational Leadership
Masters in Counseling
BS Early Childhood
PreK-6
Certifications:
Elementary Education
Early Childhood
Guidance
ESOL Endorsement
|
4
|
13
|
Chain of Lakes Elementary
2008 2009 Grade A; % meeting high standards in reading 75; % meeting high standards in math 70%; % meeting high standards in writing 90; % meeting high standards in science 56. AYP 92% of criteria was met. Did not make AYP in Math in both Hispanic and Economically Disadvantaged cells.
2007 2008 Grade B; % meeting high standards in reading 72; % meeting high standards in math 71%; % meeting high standards in writing 67; % meeting high standards in science 40. AYP 82% of criteria was met. Did not make AYP in Reading and Math in black, Hispanic and Economically Disadvantaged cells.
2006 2007 Grade C % meeting high standards in reading 71 ; % meeting high standards in math 67%; % meeting high standards in writing 80; % meeting high standards in science 42. AYP 95% of criteria was met. Did not make AYP in Reading and Math in Hispanic cell.
2005 2006 Grade A % meeting high standards in reading 74; % meeting high standards in math 69%; % meeting high standards in writing 82; Did not make AYP in Reading and Math in Black cell. AYP status Provisional
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Joyce K. McCollum
|
Degrees:
Masters Educational Leadership
BS Elementary Education
Certifications:
Educational Leadership All Levels; Elementary Education Grades 1-6; Primary Education Grades K-3; ESOL Endorsement
|
4
|
7
|
Chain of Lakes Elementary
2008 2009 Grade A; % meeting high standards in reading 75; % meeting high standards in math 70%; % meeting high standards in writing 90; % meeting high standards in science 56. AYP 92% of criteria was met. Did not make AYP in Math in both Hispanic and Economically Disadvantaged cells.
2007 2008 Grade B; % meeting high standards in reading 72; % meeting high standards in math 71%; % meeting high standards in writing 67; % meeting high standards in science 40. AYP 82% of criteria was met. Did not make AYP in Reading and Math in black, Hispanic and Economically Disadvantaged cells.
2006 2007 Grade C % meeting high standards in reading 71 ; % meeting high standards in math 67%; % meeting high standards in writing 80; % meeting high standards in science 42. AYP 95% of criteria was met. Did not make AYP in Reading and Math in Hispanic cell.
2005 2006 Grade A % meeting high standards in reading 74; % meeting high standards in math 69%; % meeting high standards in writing 82; Did not make AYP in Reading and Math in Black cell. AYP status Provisional
|
* 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 * |
| No data submitted |
|
* 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) |
|
Clear new hires with district office to check highly qualified status
|
Lynn W. Boland
|
On-going
|
|
|
Provide mentors and administrative support for all beginning teachers
|
Lynn W. Boland
|
On-going
|
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
|
Scott Ousley
|
PE K-12
|
Physical Education
|
Attending classes at Polk State College
|
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 | 60 | 16 | 8 | 7 | 96 | 96 | 3 | 100 |
Teacher Mentoring Program
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
| No data submitted |
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Title I, Part A
Title I, Part C- Migrant
Title I, Part D
Title II
Title III
Title X- Homeless
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
Violence Prevention Programs
Nutrition Programs
Housing Programs
Head Start
Adult Education
Career and Technical Education
Job Training
Other
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)
School 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) |
|
K-5, ESE
|
Grade Chairs and Administration
|
Weekly
|
During common planning time
|
DATA ANALYSIS
|
|
K-5, ESE
|
Grade Chairs and Administration
|
Weekly
|
During common planning time
|
Curriculum
|
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: For Title I schools only
Pre-School Transition
Chain of Lakes provides 3 pre-school sites: 2 ESE Pre-K and 1 regular Pre-K
Pre-K students are continuously monitored and ESE Pre-K classrooms work within each one of the Individual Educational Plans (IEP) toward goals.
Students with low readiness skills receive intensive intervention with Speech and Language program, as well as Occupational Therapists and Physical Therapists, as needed.
In April, Pre-K parents are encouraged to attend a Kindergarten Round Up. Parents with their children tour Kindergarten classrooms and meet teachers. Local private pre-k programs are invited to bring pre-k students to our campus for lunch and to tour the school.
Within the first 30 days of Kindergarten, students receive FLKRS, FAIR, and ongoing assessments to measure academic and physical capabilities.
Administration meets with pre-k students to motivate students about our programs and activities.
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, 75% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading test
|
By Spring of 2010, 76% of students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in 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.The school will implement the new FAIR assessments to monitor student progress.
2.Include higher-order questions in lesson plans.
3.Implement District created Curriculum Maps/Timeline and Reading Comprehension Focus calendar.
|
Administration
|
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 curriculum maps/timeline and reading comprehension focus and monitor implementation through classroom walk-throughs.
|
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 economically disadvantaged students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading test.
Safe Harbor
|
By Spring of 2010, 72% of economically-disadvantaged students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by the AYP Report. Increase from 55% to 72%
|
| |
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.Implement District created Curriculum Maps/Timeline and Reading Comprehension Focus calendar.
|
Administration
|
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 curriculum maps/timeline and reading comprehension 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, 55 % of Hispanic students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading test.
Safe Harbor
|
By Spring of 2010, 72% of Hispanic students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by the AYP Report. Increase from 56% to 72%
|
| |
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. Implement District created Curriculum Maps/Timeline and Reading Comprehension Focus calendar.
4. Utilize FastForward program provided by District.
|
Administration
|
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 curriculum maps/timeline and reading comprehension focus and monitor implementation through classroom walkthroughs.
4. Monitor FastForward program for learning gains.
|
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.
4. FastForward progress monitoring.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 71% of students achieved learning gains on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading
|
By Spring of 2010, 80% of all students per grade level will make Reading learning gains as evidenced by:
1st Grade – SAT10 at or above 45%ile in Reading
2nd Grade – SAT10 increase in NCE from prior year in Reading
3rd Grade – Attainment of Achievement Level 3 or higher (Not necessarily Learning Gains but movement towards proficiency)
4th – 5th Grade – FCAT Learning Gains 3 ways: increase Achievement Level, maintain Achievement Levels 3, 4 & 5, DSS increase for Achievement Level 1 & 2
|
| |
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. Implement District created Curriculum Maps/Timeline and Reading Comprehension Focus calendar.
|
Administration
|
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 curriculum maps/timeline and reading comprehension 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.
|
|
| |
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, 76% of students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by the AYP Report.
By Spring of 2010, 72% of Hispanic students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by the AYP Report. Increase from 56% to 72%
By Spring of 2010, 72% of economically-disadvantaged students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Reading as evidenced by the AYP Report. Increase from 55% to 72%
By Spring of 2010, 80% of all students per grade level will make Reading learning gains as evidenced by:
1st Grade – SAT10 at or above 45%ile in Reading
2nd Grade – SAT10 increase in NCE from prior year in Reading
3rd Grade – Attainment of Achievement Level 3 or higher (Not necessarily Learning Gains but movement towards proficiency)
4th – 5th Grade – FCAT Learning Gains 3 ways: increase Achievement Level, maintain Achievement Levels 3, 4 & 5, DSS increase for Achievement Level 1 & 2
|
Effective implementation of curriculum maps/timeline and reading comprehension focus calendar
|
Administration
|
August 2009
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom walkthroughs
|
Administration
|
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 |
| Compass/Odyssey
Fast Forward
District Curriculum Maps
Harcourt Trophies
|
District Funds |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Eiki Projectors
Smartboards
|
District Funds
Chain of Lakes PTO
|
$7,000.00 |
| Total: $7,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Learning Focused Strategies – Eleven teachers were trained by District
Smartboard training
|
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $11,000.00 |
|
| End of Reading Goal |
|
Mathematics Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?
What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 70% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Math test.
|
By Spring of 2010, 74% of total students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in 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. Learning Focused Strategies/Lesson Plans
2. District Curriculum maps/timeline
3. Utilize the FCIM to identify students in the core curriculum needing intervention and enrichment.
|
Administration
|
1.Focused walkthroughs by Administration
2. Focused walkthroughs by Administration
3. Review student grouping charts frequently and ensure groups are redesigned to target the needs of students based on assessment.
|
1. Reports generated from Walkthroughs
2. Reports generated from Walkthroughs
3. Progress of all students on assessment.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 56 % of Hispanic students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Math test.
|
By Spring of 2010, 74% of Hispanic students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in 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. Increase use of manipulatives and hands on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts.
2. Continue implementation of Write Math Centers.
3. Continue differentiated instruction and grouping in math
|
Administration
|
1. Administration will ensure activities are implemented through focused walkthroughs.
Lesson plan monitoring.
2. Administration will ensure math centers are utilized through focused walkthroughs. Lesson plan monitoring.
3. Administration will ensure differentiated instruction and grouping in math through focused walkthroughs. Lesson plan monitoring.
|
1. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs.
2. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs.
3. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs.
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 55% of economically disadvantaged students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Math test.
|
By Spring of 2010, 74% of economically disadvantaged students will be at Achievement Level or above in 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. Increase use of manipulatives and hands on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts.
2. Continue implementation of Write Math Centers
3. Continue differentiated instruction and grouping in math
|
Administration
|
1. Administration will ensure activities are implemented through focused walkthroughs.
Lesson plan monitoring
2. Administration will ensure math centers are utilized through focused walkthroughs. Lesson plan monitoring.
3. Administration will ensure differentiated instruction and grouping in math through focused walkthroughs. Lesson plan monitoring
|
1. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs
2. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs.
3. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 58% of students achieved learning gains on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Math test.
|
By Spring of 2010, 80% of all students per grade level will make Math learning gains as evidenced by:
1st Grade – SAT10 at or above 45% in Math
2nd Grade – SAT10 increase in NCE from prior year
3rd Grade – Attainment of Achievement Level 3 or higher (Not necessarily Learning Gains but movement towards proficiency)
4th – 5th Grade – FCAT Learning Gains (3 ways: increase Achievement Level, maintain Achievement Levels 3, 4 & 5, DSS increase for Achievement Level 1 & 2 )
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Increase use of manipulatives and hands on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts.
2. Continue implementation of Write Math Centers
3. Continue differentiated instruction and grouping in math
|
Administration
|
1. Administration will ensure activities are implemented through focused walkthroughs.
Lesson plan monitoring
2. Administration will ensure activities are implemented through focused walkthroughs.
Lesson plan monitoring
3. Administration will ensure activities are implemented through focused walkthroughs.
Lesson plan monitoring
|
1. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs
2. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs
3. Progress of students on assessments. Reports generated from walkthroughs
|
|
| |
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, 74% of total students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Math as evidenced by the AYP Report.
By Spring of 2010, 74% of Hispanic students will be at Achievement Level 3 or above in Math as evidenced by the AYP Report.
By Spring of 2010, 74% of economically disadvantaged students will be at Achievement Level or above in Math as evidenced by the AYP report.
By Spring of 2010, 80% of all students per grade level will make Math learning gains as evidenced by:
1st Grade – SAT10 at or above 45% in Math
2nd Grade – SAT10 increase in NCE from prior year
3rd Grade – Attainment of Achievement Level 3 or higher (Not necessarily Learning Gains but movement towards proficiency)
4th – 5th Grade – FCAT Learning Gains (3 ways: increase Achievement Level, maintain Achievement Levels 3, 4 & 5, DSS increase for Achievement Level 1 & 2 )
|
Write Math Centers
Math Series
|
Classroom teachers – Schellenberger,
Mize, and Mount
Professional Learning Communities in grade level meetings
|
August 2009-June 2010
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom walkthroughs
|
Administration
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Scott Foresman Series
Manipulatives
Various Math Supplies
|
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Compass/Odyssey |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $4,000.00 |
|
| End of Mathematics Goal |
|
Science Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grade 5, 56% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Science test.
|
By Spring of 2010 57 % 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. Utilize hands-on laboratory experiments
2. Provide real world science experiences and engaging activities
|
Administration
|
1. Lesson plan monitoring; classroom walkthroughs
2. Lesson plan monitoring; classroom walkthroughs
|
1. Improvement on science mini-assessments
2. Improvement on science mini-assessments
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grade 5, 56% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Science test.
|
By Spring of 2010, the mean scale score will match or exceed the district as evidenced by the FCAT Summary Report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Utilize hands-on laboratory experiments
2. Provide real world science experiences and engaging activities
|
. Administration
|
1. Lesson plan monitoring; classroom walkthroughs
2. Lesson plan monitoring; classroom walkthroughs
|
1. Improvement on science mini-assessments
2. Improvement on science mini-assessments
|
|
| |
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 57% of 5th grade students will be at Achievement Level three or above in Science as evidenced by the School Grade report.
By Spring of 2010, the mean scale score will match or exceed the district as evidenced by the FCAT Summary Report.
|
Science series
|
Professional Learning Communities in grade level meetings
|
August 2009 – June 2010
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom walkthroughs
|
Administration
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Laboratory experiment supplies and materials |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Smartboard used for instruction |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $4,000.00 |
|
| End of Science Goal |
|
Writing Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grade 4, 90% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Writing test.
|
By Spring of 2010, 91% of 4th Grade students will score 3.5 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. Continue implementation of Write Reflections
2. Develop and implement beginning of the year; mid-year and end of year writing prompts.
3. Integrate writing throughout all core subject areas.
|
Administration
|
1. Lesson Plans
Classroom walkthroughs
2. Lesson Plans
Classroom walkthroughs
3. Lesson Plans
Classroom walkthroughs
|
1. Increase in Writing proficiency on all assessments and prompts
2. Increase in Writing proficiency on all assessments and prompts
3. Increase in Writing proficiency on all assessments and prompts
|
|
| |
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, 91% of 4th Grade students will score 4.0 or above in Writing as evidenced by the School Grade report
|
Writing
|
Mr. Terry Stanley of Write Reflections
|
August 2009 June 2010
|
Lesson Plans
Classroom Walkthroughs
Sign in sheets for scheduled training with Mr. Stanley
|
Administration
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Write Reflections materials and supplies |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $2,000.00 |
|
| End of 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?
|
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
| No data submitted |
|
|
| |
| 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 |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $0.00 |
|
| 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 |
Compass/Odyssey
Fast Forward
District Curriculum Maps
Harcourt Trophies
|
District Funds |
$2,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Scott Foresman Series
Manipulatives
Various Math Supplies
|
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Writing |
Write Reflections materials and supplies |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Science |
Laboratory experiment supplies and materials |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $8,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Eiki Projectors
Smartboards
|
District Funds
Chain of Lakes PTO
|
$7,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
Compass/Odyssey |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Science |
Smartboard used for instruction |
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $11,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Learning Focused Strategies – Eleven teachers were trained by District
Smartboard training
|
District |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $21,000.00 |
Differentiated Accountability
School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance
Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/10/2009 1:59:23 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 |
|
Classroom materials and supplies
|
500
|
Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year
Analyze test data and AYP status to assist in development of School Improvement Plan in September
Monitor Progress of School Improvement Plan October, January, March, May
Reach out to community to obtain more partners
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
Lynn W. Boland,
Principal
|
|
2)
Melissa Drehmer,
Teacher
|
|
3)
Tracy Wallace,
Parent
|
|
4)
Nguy Diem Nguyen,
Parent
|
|
5)
Juan Torres,
Parent
|
|
6)
Duane Hunt,
Community Member
|
|
7)
Steve Negley,
Community Member
|
|
8)
Kelly W. Cole,
School Support Personnel
|
|
9)
Joyce K. McCollum,
Assistant Principal
|
AYP DATA
| 2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0933 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 391
Math: 391
|
2008-2009
School Grade1: |
A
|
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 |
71 |
Y |
67 |
N |
87
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
35 |
29 |
NA |
36 |
33 |
N |
75 |
NA |
65 |
N |
| WHITE
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
81 |
Y |
76 |
Y |
91
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
25 |
19 |
NA |
27 |
24 |
NA |
82 |
NA |
72 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
55 |
N |
56 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
50 |
45 |
Y |
41 |
44 |
N |
62 |
NA |
54 |
N |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
61 |
N |
55 |
N |
83
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
45 |
39 |
Y |
45 |
45 |
N |
68 |
NA |
56 |
N |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0933 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 387
Math: 387
|
2007-2008
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? |
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 |
65 |
Y |
64 |
Y |
93
|
87 |
N |
|
|
NA |
36 |
35 |
NA |
38 |
36 |
NA |
68 |
NA |
67 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
75 |
Y |
73 |
Y |
91
|
91 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
27 |
25 |
NA |
30 |
27 |
NA |
71 |
NA |
75 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
53 |
N |
40 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
49 |
47 |
NA |
46 |
60 |
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
50 |
N |
59 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
52 |
50 |
NA |
58 |
41 |
NA |
58 |
NA |
60 |
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 |
55 |
N |
55 |
N |
92
|
83 |
N |
|
|
NA |
45 |
45 |
NA |
50 |
45 |
NA |
62 |
NA |
58 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0933 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 394
Math: 394
|
2006-2007
School Grade1: |
C
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading
Tested 95% of the students? |
Math
Tested 95% of the students? |
51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
56% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe
Harbor
Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe
Harbor
Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
64 |
Y |
62 |
Y |
88
|
93 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
35 |
39 |
NA |
38 |
38 |
NA |
61 |
NA |
64 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
73 |
Y |
70 |
Y |
93
|
91 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
23 |
27 |
NA |
31 |
30 |
NA |
68 |
NA |
66 |
NA |
| BLACK
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
51 |
Y |
54 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
54 |
NA |
59 |
46 |
Y |
46 |
NA |
67 |
NA |
| HISPANIC
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
48 |
N |
42 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
39 |
58 |
N |
47 |
58 |
N |
49 |
N |
54 |
N |
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
55 |
Y |
50 |
N |
86
|
92 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
42 |
51 |
NA |
45 |
50 |
N |
52 |
NA |
59 |
Y |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Polk School District
CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2008-2009
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
75%
|
70%
|
90%
|
56%
|
291
|
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 |
71% |
58% |
|
|
129 |
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? |
63% (YES) |
53% (YES) |
|
|
116
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
536 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Polk School District
CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2007-2008
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
72%
|
71%
|
67%
|
40%
|
250
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
63% |
67% |
|
|
130 |
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? |
60% (YES) |
57% (YES) |
|
|
117
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
497 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
B |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Polk School District
CHAIN OF LAKES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2006-2007
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
71%
|
67%
|
80%
|
42%
|
260
|
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 |
73% |
55% |
|
|
128 |
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? |
41% (NO) |
53% (YES) |
|
|
94
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
482 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
C |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |