VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

Vision:
The vision of our school is that our students, parents, staff and community will be involved and accountable to prepare our students for the future. We will all work together to instill a positive attitude toward life-long learning and a vision for the future that ensures all children, including all sub groups, will increase their academic success.

Mission:
Learning for all, whatever it takes!

Belief Statements:
We believe our purpose is to ensure that all children build a strong academic foundation, develop the desire to learn, and grow in self-confidence and compassion through a challenging curriculum which nurtures each student's abilities and aspirations in partnership with parents and family. An environment will exist that promotes self-discipline and active learning with application of skills taught to real-world situations. Self-esteem, self-respect and respect for others will be developed in our children as they are given opportunities to enhance their individual talents. In partnership with parents and family, our staff will assure that each child establishes a strong academic foundation, develops a desire to learn, and grows in self confidence and respect for others by providing a challenging curriculum that nurtures the abilities and desires of all our children, including all sub groups. In addition, our parents and staff will recognize their responsibility as a positive role model in the success of our children.


PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS


Brief History and Background of the School

Brief History and Background of the School
Kathleen Elementary School is located in the Northwest corner of the district and is in a rural area. This school year marks the 60th anniversary. We are a Pre-Kindergarten through 5th grade school with all of our children leaving 5th grade and entering Kathleen Middle School or Sleepy Hill Middle School. Kathleen Elementary is working diligently to maintain the class size ratio of 18:1 in primary grades and 22:1 in intermediate according to state guidelines. Numerous improvements have been made to the campus including a new building which opened in 2006. Technology improvements continue to be made and KES is currently a wireless campus. Many classrooms are equipped with audio systems, interactive whiteboards, and projection machines. Due to parents, staff and community members our playground was improved last year. We continue to have support from our families and community to improve our school so that our students will achieve to their highest potential.


Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Due to the collaboration and implementation of our school improvement plan, our student achievement increased in many areas as documented on our school grade and AYP report. We earned 591 points receiving an A. This is an increase from 513 points last year. Our team is proud that we made AYP in twenty of the twenty-two areas on our AYP report and especially proud that we made AYP in the three areas we targeted on last year’s SIP. We are excited about our 60th Anniversary Celebration this year and will work collaboratively school wide to publish a book with our school’s history. Our school advisory council in conjunction with our leadership committee has carefully mapped out the school year producing a school calendar that is printed in our student agenda with our parent compact. Daily planning is built into the master schedule and our committees are responsible for planning and carrying out the events that have been mapped out on our school calendar. With the need for careful data analysis to track each of our subgroups’ progress and RtI, mandatory data meetings with AIF personnel and administration is built into the schedules of the teachers each week.
Due to the number of new teachers to our school, we have hired an additional resource teacher. This teacher will also work with teachers to incorporate Science with more fidelity into the daily schedules of all grade levels.
We will continue to implement Learning Focused Strategies school-wide. We are going to increase our LFS academic focus to include Writing and Reading in conjunction with the curriculum areas already utilizing the strategies in science and math. Going along with the LFS philosophies, we are going to continue to utilize our vertical teams for professional learning communities to support and sustain new implementations.


Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Unique School Challenges for Next Year
Due to declining enrollment and budget constraints we were allocated two less teaching units during last school year and an additional two teaching units allocated to our school this upcoming year. There are two areas our school did not make AYP in. These are two areas that in prior years we did not have enough students in that subgroup to count for AYP. This year we will plan for increasing the achievement of our African American students in both reading and math. The challenge we are facing is that a large number of our African American students do not have transportation to participate in our after school tutoring program. Last year we surveyed students asking if transportation were provided would they attend. Only three students indicated that they would attend our after school tutoring program if transportation were provided. Our plan for addressing these challenges will be addressed further later in this plan.

Another challenge is the high mobility rate of our students. We have large fluctuations beginning in October lasting through our second FTE in February. This makes it challenging to track and monitor the growth of the targeted students.

With new staff members and staff members with less than three years experience, a new resource position is being created to support and sustain their growth at our school. Historically, when a new teacher is not provided adequate scaffolding, we are unable to retain them and they seek employment elsewhere.


Student Demographics

Student Demographics
Our student membership is 556 students with a staff of seventy-nine. 78.4% percent of our students are on free or reduced lunch. We have a 20% black student population, 18% Hispanic population, 60% White population, 1% Asian, and .5% Multiracial. Most of the minority students are bussed in from the inner city area of Lakeland. Our Limited English Proficient students make up 10.1% of our population. Kathleen Elementary is a full inclusion school with an ESE population of 9.7%.


Student Attendance Rates

Student Attendance Rates
Kathleen Elementary school monitored attendance more closely this past year improving from 90.4% in 2007-2008 to 94.11% in 2008-2009 compared to the district average of 94.56%.


Student Mobility

Student Mobility
Since DOE has not provided a definition of Mobility, we will define it as the enrollment or withdrawal of a student at any time during the school year not including the first 15 days of school divided by the total number of students who attended the school during that year after the 15th day. The mobility rate is 29.77 a decrease from the 0708 school year of 33.82. This mobility comes predominantly from our low socio-economic population based on analysis of student withdrawals.


Student Suspension Rates

Student Suspension Rates
2006-2007: In-school 19, Out-of-school 46; 2007-2008: In-school 14, Out-of-school 54; 2008-2009: In-school
14, Out-of-school 65. The in school suspension rates have decreased over the past three years.


Student Retention Rates

Student Retention Rates
The retention rate in 2006-2007 was 7%; the rate in 2007-2008 was 2%; and the rate in 2008-2009 was 4%. The retention rate decreased five percentage points from 2006-2007 to 2007-2008 and increased two percentage points in the last year.


Class Size

Class Size
A point has been made to reduce class sizes in all subject areas and across grade levels to maximize student learning, reduce discipline problems and strengthen the one-on-one relationship between students and teachers. The average class size in our preK-3 classrooms was 17.59 and 18.77 in 4th and 5th grades this past year.


Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

N/A


Partnerships and Grants

Partnerships and Grants
The school will continue its strong partnership with partnership with Florida Southern College, Southeastern University and the University of South Florida. Through this partnership, we have interns for field studies as well as interns on campus for final internships.

For nine years, we have been designated a Title I school. We have seen significant gains in test scores through good practices, additional support, and effective, on-going professional development. We continue to work on increasing parent participation.

Over the past several years, we have earned district recognition for high volunteer hours.

Seven years ago, we were awarded a Reading First grant and continue to implement best practices in reading instruction. During the past year our school received a matching grant for $4,000 from the Polk Education Foundation supported by our PTO. We received a Shining Star grant through our technology department for $5,000 to support the Cougar News Network. A team created and was awarded a developer grant to further support technology and innovative ideas, their work will be showcased at the IDEA Expo. We have been honored with silver school status and have been recognized as a model school for our Positive Behavior Support.

Community Business Partners include Mimi's Cafe who provide the school with student of the month recognition as well as support other efforts such as the walk-a-thon. In addition Mid-Florida Bank does a yearly reading event and provides books to all kindergarten students, funds are given back to the school each time families or staff use their Mid-Florida debit card. Monthly family nights at Chuck E. Cheese and Cici’s Pizza provide additional community support to our school. We have nominated the First Methodist Church for the food baskets program they have provided to our families and for their membership on our SAC committee. The North Lakeland Rotary Club provides us with belts, underwear, socks and shoes for our students that need it.


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 Lana Tatom Educational Specialist, NOVA Southeastern University
Curriculum, Instruction, Management, and Administration; Masters of Arts ~ Eastern Michigan University
Elementary Education/Computer Applications in the Classroom; Bachelor of Science ~ Eastern Michigan University
Major: Math Minor: Science Group; Florida Certification
Educational Leadership All Levels
Elementary Education K-6
Mathematics 5-9
School Principal All Levels; Michigan Certification
K-5 all subjects
K-8 self contained
6-8 Math and Science
2 5 Principal of KES in
2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
70%, Math mastery: 79%,
Science Mastery: 56%. AYP:
95% of the criteria met, this was the first year that there were enough African American students to count as a subgroup and they did not make AYP in reading or math.
2007-2008: Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 68%, Math Mastery
67%, Science Mastery 26%.
AYP 92% of the criteria met, Hispanic students did not make AYP in reading or math. Economically disadvantaged students did not make AYP in math.
Assis Principal Sheila Gregory Educational Leadership from University of South Florida; Bachelor’s Degree in Science for Elementary Education
CERTIFICATIONS: Currently certified in Educational Leadership; Elementary Education, 1-6; ESOL; Reading Endorsement
2 4 Assistant Principal of KES in
2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
70%, Math mastery: 79%,
Science Mastery: 56%. AYP:
95% of the criteria met, this was the first year that there were enough African American students to count as a subgroup and they did not make AYP in reading or math.
2007-2008: Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 68%, Math Mastery
67%, Science Mastery 26%.
AYP 92% of the criteria met, Hispanic students did not make AYP in reading or math. Economically disadvantaged students did not make AYP in math.

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

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

Subject AreaNameDegree(s)/ Certification(s)# of Years at Current School# of Years as a CoachPrior Performance Record *
Writing & Title I Program Facilitator Ellen Jones Master of Elementary Education, University of South Florida

Bachelor of Arts in Early Childhood Education, University of South Florida
38 2 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
70%, Math mastery: 79%,
Science Mastery: 56%. AYP:
95% of the criteria met, this was the first year that there were enough African American students to count as a subgroup and they did not make AYP in reading or math.

2007-2008:
Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 68%, Math Mastery
67%, Science Mastery 26%.
AYP 92% of the criteria met, Hispanic students did not make AYP in reading or math. Economically disadvantaged students did not make AYP in math.
Reading Jennifer Rouse Master of Education Degree in Collaborative Teaching and Learning – Florida Southern College; National Board Certification – Middle Childhood Generalist; Bachelor of Science Degree in Elementary Education – University of South Florida; ESOL Certification; Elementary Education Grades K-6 Certification; Technology Level I & Level II Certification 10 4 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
70%, Math mastery: 79%,
Science Mastery: 56%. AYP:
95% of the criteria met, this was the first year that there were enough African American students to count as a subgroup and they did not make AYP in reading or math.

2007-2008:
Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 68%, Math Mastery
67%, Science Mastery 26%.
AYP 92% of the criteria met, Hispanic students did not make AYP in reading or math. Economically disadvantaged students did not make AYP in math.
Teacher Trainer Amy Weingarth Master of Education Degree in Educational Leadership from the University of South Florida National Board Certification – Middle Childhood Generalist; Bachelor of Science Degree in Elementary Education – University of South Florida; ESOL Certification; Elementary Education Grades K-6 Certification; Technology Level I & Level II Certification 5 1 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
70%, Math mastery: 79%,
Science Mastery: 56%. AYP:
95% of the criteria met, this was the first year that there were enough African American students to count as a subgroup and they did not make AYP in reading or math.

2007-2008:
Grade: B, Reading
Mastery 68%, Math Mastery
67%, Science Mastery 26%.
AYP 92% of the criteria met, Hispanic students did not make AYP in reading or math. Economically disadvantaged students did not make AYP in math.
Spell Read Pat Intensive Instruction Brent Cronin Master of Education Degree in Educational Leadership – University of South Florida; Bachelor of Science Degree in Elementary Education – University of Western Kentucky; ESOL Certification; Elementary Education Grades K-6 Certification; Technology Level I & Level II Certification 1 2008-2009:
Grade: A, Reading Mastery:
70%, Math mastery: 79%,
Science Mastery: 56%. AYP:
95% of the criteria met, this was the first year that there were enough African American students to count as a subgroup and they did not make AYP in reading or math.
Math Jacquelyn Caruthers Bachelor of Arts in Exceptional Child Education from the University of South Florida
Certification in Exceptional Child Education K-12
Certification in Elementary Education 1-6
ESOL Certification Level I & II
Technology Ceritfication
2 1.5 Bachelor of Arts in Exceptional Child Education from the University of South Florida
Certification in Exceptional Child Education K-12
Certification in Elementary Education 1-6
ESOL Certification Level I & II
Technology Ceritfication

* 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)
Recruiting & retaining high quality, highly qualified teachers: applicants are screened to ensure that they meet the HQ CQ criteria and placed on a list of approved candidates for hire District Office Human Resource Department On-going throughout the year
Selection of staff: administration puts together an interview team representing classroom teachers and support teachers; selects candidates to be interviewed; creates appropriate questions; and facilitates the interview & selection process. Lana Tatom & Sheila Gregory On-going throughout the year
Coaching Support: individual teacher mentoring from experienced, successful teachers; need based classroom modeling and team teaching provided; continuous instructional feedback provided; assistance by experienced teachers in lesson planning & maintaining a positive classroom learning environment; assistance in locating teaching resources, communicating with parents, establishing an organizational system for teacher paperwork, etc. Jennifer Rouse, Amy Weingarth, & Ellen Jones On-going throughout school year
Bi-weekly reflection meetings with beginning teachers. Teacher coaches will meet with beginning teachers to talk about successes they are having in the classroom with their students and their teaching. Discussions will also take place regarding teacher questions and concerns. Teacher needs will be assessed through these meetings and coaching will be targeted on such needs to address each area of concern. Jennifer Rouse, Amy Weingarth May 2010
Daily grade level planning meetings: Each grade level team will meet together for 30 minutes daily to plan lessons collaboratively. Each day of the week has a set content focus for planning. Through these consistent team planning sessions, beginning teachers will receive assistance in designing & implementing effective lessons. Each grade level of teachers; Sheila Gregory June 2010
Differentiated professional development: teachers will receive small group, intensive professional development throughout the year based upon their instructional needs. Lana Tatom, Sheila Gregory, Jennifer Rouse, Amy Weingarth, & Ellen Jones June 2010


Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

NameCertificationTeaching AssignmentProfessional 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
3915333315251002766


Teacher Mentoring Program

Mentor NameMentee AssignedRationale for PairingPlanned Mentoring Activities
New Teachers Jennifer Rouse & Amy Weingarth Academic Intervention Facilitator & Resource Teacher are both National Board teachers Coaching support, biweekly reflection meetings, daily grade level planning, differentiated professional development



ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration


Note: For Title I schools only

Title I, Part A

Title I, Part A
Title I, Part A, funds school-wide services to Kathleen 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

N/A


Title I, Part D

N/A


Title II

Title II
Professional development resources are available to Title I schools through Title II funds. In addition, School Technology Services provide technical support, technology training, and licenses for software programs and web-based access via Title II-D funds. Funds available to Kathleen Elementary are used to purchase training. This past year five staff members attended a three day training at the Ron Clark Academy in Atlanta, GA bringing new ideas to implement in the SIP.


Title III

Title III
Title III provides supplemental resources for English Language Learners (ELL) and their teachers in Title I schools, as well as professional learning opportunities for school staff. Services are provided through the district for one ESOL paraprofessional to support ELL students at our school


Title X- Homeless

Title X- Homeless
The Hearth program, funded through Title X, provides support for identified homeless students. Title I provides support for this program, and many activities implemented by the Hearth program are carried out in cooperation with the Migrant Education Program (MEP) funded through Title I, Part C.


Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
SAI unit(s) provided to MY SCHOOL enhance student achievement by paying for one Spell Read teacher who works with third and fourth grade students who are struggling in reading.


Violence Prevention Programs

Violence Prevention Programs
Title IV provides violence and drug prevention programs in schools in order to promote a safe school environment. Examples of violence prevention programs include anti-bullying, gang awareness, gun awareness, etc.


Nutrition Programs

N/A


Housing Programs

N/A


Head Start

Head Start is not located on our campus.


Adult Education

N/A


Career and Technical Education

N/A


Job Training

N/A


Other

N/A


Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)


School-based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.
1. School Based PS/RtI Team
ALL MEMBERS WILL MAINTAIN THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE INFORMATION SHARED IN PS/RtI LEADERSHIP TEAM MEETINGS Meetings are scheduled to occur every Friday at 9.
Principal: The Principal provides a common vision for the use of data-based decision –making, models the Problem Solving Process; supervises the development of a strong infrastructure for implementation of PS/RtI; ensures that the school-based team is implementing PS/RtI; conducts assessment of PS/RtI skills of school staff; ensures implementation of intervention support and documentation; ensures and participates in adequate professional learning to support PS/RtI implementation; develops a culture of expectation with the school staff for the implementation of PS/RtI schoolwide; ensures resources are assigned to those areas in most need; and communicates with parents regarding school-based PS/RtI plans and activities.
Assistant Principal: Assists Principal in providing a common vision for the use of data-based decision-making, assists in the development of a strong infrastructure of resources for the implementation of PS/RtI, further assists the principal in the assessment of PS/RtI skills, implementation of intervention support and documentation, professional learning, and communication with parents concerning PS/RtI plans and activities.
Selected General Education Teachers: Provides information about core instruction; participates in student data collection; delivers Tier 1 instruction/intervention; collaborates with other staff to implement Tier 2/3 interventions; and integrates Tier 1 materials/instruction with Tier 2/3 activities.
Exceptional Student Education (ESE) Teachers: Participates in student data collection, integrates core instructional activities/materials/ instruction in tiered interventions; collaborates with general education teachers.
Academic Intervention Facilitator: Develops, leads, and evaluates school core content standards/programs; identifies and analyzes existing literature on scientifically based curriculum/behavior assessment and intervention approaches. Identifies systematic patterns of student need while working with district personnel to identify appropriate, evidence-based intervention strategies; assists with whole school screening programs that provide early intervening services for children to be considered “at risk,” assists in the design and implementation for progress monitoring, data collection, and data analysis, participates in the design and delivery of professional development; and provides support for assessment and implementation monitoring.
School Psychologist: Participates in collection, interpretation, and analysis of data; facilitates development of intervention plans; provides support for intervention fidelity and documentation; provides professional development and technical evaluation; assists in facilitation data-based decision making activities.
PS/RtI Behavior Representative (PBS): Participates in collection, interpretation, and analysis of data; facilitates development of intervention plans; provides support for intervention fidelity and documentation; assists with professional development for behavior concerns; assists in facilitation data-based decision making activities.
Speech Language Pathologist: Educates the team in the role language plays in curriculum assessment, and instruction, as a basis for appropriate program design; assists in the selection of screening measures; and helps identify systematic patterns of student need with respect to language skills.
Guidance Counselor: Provides quality services and expertise on issues ranging from program design to assessment and intervention with individual students. Communicates with child-serving community agencies to support the students’ academic, emotional, behavioral, and social success.
Technology Specialist: Develops or brokers technology necessary to manage and display data, provides professional development and technical support to teachers and staff regarding data management and graphic display.


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

Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g. meeting processes and roles/functions).
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will focus meetings on how to improve school/teacher effectiveness and student achievement using the Problem Solving Model. Meetings will occur every Friday at 9.
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will to engage in the following activities:
o Review school-wide, grade level, and teacher data to problem solve needed interventions on a systemic level and identify students meeting/exceeding benchmarks as well as those at moderate or high risk for not meeting benchmarks. This will be done at least three times per year or more frequently if new data is available.
o Help referring teachers design feasible strategies and interventions for struggling students by collaborating regularly, problem solving, sharing effective practices, evaluating implementation, assist in making decisions for school, teacher, student improvement.
o Facilitate the process of building consensus, increasing infrastructure, and making decisions about implementation.
o Focus on improving student achievement outcomes with evidence based interventions implemented with fidelity and frequent progress monitoring.
o Intervention teams also foster a sense of collegiality and mutual support among educators, promote the use of evidence-based interventions, and support teachers in carrying out intervention plans.


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

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




RtI Implementation

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.
Baseline data is gathered through August and September. FAIR data is processed through the Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN). Kindergarten and First Grade data is gathered for the SBAR. First and Second Grade instructional data is gathered from the previous year SAT 10. Third through Fifth Grade instructional data is gathered from the previous year’s FCAT scores.
Progress Monitoring data is gathered mid-year and toward the end of the year. FAIR data is processed twice more through the PMRN. Kindergarten and First Grade data is gathered for the SBAR every nine weeks. Other Progress Monitoring data is collected as needed for classroom or student progress. This information may be obtained by probes, Quick Reads, Fluency checks, etc.
Diagnostic Assessment data is gathered through the FAIR, ERDA, and DAR
End of Year data is gathered through FAIR, SAT 10, FCAT, and SBAR.
Data is discussed and analyzed at least monthly at the PS/RtI Leadership Team Meetings.


Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.
Professional learning will be provided during the teachers’ common planning time and sessions will occur throughout the year. The PS/RtI Overview will be provided in mid-August/September. The District has five other mini-modules that will be provided throughout the year.
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will evaluate additional staff Professional Learning needs during the monthly PS/RtI Leadership Team meetings.



School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Plan

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data


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


Due to the collaboration an implementation of our school improvement plan, our student achievement increased in many areas as documented on our school grade and AYP report. The achievement levels of our students improved in the areas of reading, math, and science. In science this past year was a record high for KES with 56% receiving AL 3+. We earned 591 points receiving an A. This is an increase from 513 points last year. Our team is proud that we made AYP in the three areas we targeted on last year’s SIP which were Hispanic students in reading and math, as well as economically disadvantaged students in math. There are two areas our school did not make AYP in. These are two areas that in prior years we did not have enough students in that subgroup to count for AYP. This year we will plan for increasing the achievement of our African American students in both reading and math.


Instructional Calendar Development


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

As an initial step towards implementing FCIM the school will focus on the area of reading. The district has created reading curriculum maps that are accompanied by a course timeline. The course timeline is the starting point for each school’s Instructional Focus Calendar. The district has also developed a timeline for Reading Comprehension Mini-Lessons which will serve as the school’s Reading Instructional Focus calendar. The implementation of the reading mini-lessons will be monitored by the AIF, school leadership team, and administration. Monthly PLC (grade level/department/team) meetings will be held to adjust the pacing of the mini-lessons.


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

Main idea and author’s purpose with be the benchmarks focused on this year.


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

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


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

Kathleen Elementary incorporates comprehension strategies in all curriculum areas.


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?

Based on students’ levels, students are placed in groups that provide differentiated instruction using appropriate text based student interest surveys.




DO

Direct the Instructional Focus


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


Aligned and prioritized curriculum maps and time lines are used in all core areas. Teachers implement the EATS model for planning and delivery of core curriculum which includes essential questions, activating strategies, high-yield teaching strategies, summarizing and then reteaching as necessary. The district-wide Monthly Reading Comprehension Focus will be used as the basis of the reading mini-lessons.


How are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

Model instructional focus lessons were developed by master teachers and are posted within the district curriculum maps for all to use for core instruction. Collaborative PLCs will use the EATS model for creating additional acquisition lessons. Best practices, coaching and support for using Learning Focused Strategies will be provided by the principal, assistant principal, and leadership team. Reading comprehension mini-lessons have been written for grades 3 - 10. Each grade level/department/team will schedule the pacing of the mini lessons as well as the time of delivery during the monthly PLCs dealing with curriculum and instruction. The mini-lessons are organized by instructional day as well as strategy.


How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

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




CHECK

Assessment


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


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


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

Achievement thresholds will be set for each grade level and subject area. Students not reaching the threshold will be targeted for additional support as well as monitoring. Formative benchmark assessments are consistently used: school-wide and in all core areas. They are given frequently and used for monitoring student progress, as well as for planning and instruction.


Maintenance


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

Dates for ongoing assessments and spiraled review are built into the instructional focus calendar at the conclusion of each month’s comprehension focus. Additional learning opportunities will be offered to struggling students.


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

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


Monitoring


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

The administrators and the leadership team facilitate PLCs with staff members/teams which address data, student work, instruction and curriculum. The administrators and the leadership team schedule coaching and monitoring visits to classrooms on a regular basis.




ACT

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions


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


Core: Harcourt Trophies; Leveled readers are used for supplemental and intensive instructions; Read Spell Pat for interventions; Reading First research based strategies will also be utilized; Acceleration Clinics are being developed for struggling students to frontload important vocabulary


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

Multiple opportunities for researched based extended learning activities including: extended time for math and /or reading, extended day, accelerating and previewing, as well as re-teaching.


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

The Learning Focused Implementation Tool will be administered at the start of the 2009 – 2010 school year to help identify areas of need for professional development.


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

Any student scoring a Level 1 or 2; a student with an ASP; or a student who is struggling with the Core instruction.


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

Ongoing progress monitoring, mini-assessments, formative assessments, student data chats, and FAIR.


Enrichment


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

Acceleration Clinics are being implemented this year. At risk students are being targeted for the clinics will receive instruction for key vocabulary terms using advance organizers.


Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

Students will be identified using data from FCAT and previous year’s Kaplan administrations. Teacher input will also play a role in the determination.




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)
Instructional Staff Jennifer Rouse, Lana Tatom, Sheila Gregory monthly First Wednesday of each month LFS Extended Thinking in curriculum areas
Instructional Staff Lana Tatom monthly First Wednesday of each month Book studies to increase collegiality
Instructional Staff Jennifer Rouse, Lana Tatom, Sheila Gregory weekly Friday of each week To go over data from FCIM


NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only


Pre-School Transition

Kathleen Elementary has several programs to assist preschool children in transition from early childhood programs to elementary programs. Every spring, there is a Kindergarten Round-Up at our school which allows parents and children to register for school, visit kindergarten classrooms, and receive information about things that parents can do to prepare their children for kindergarten. During the Round-Up, children are also assessed in their readiness for kindergarten using school created assessments which include recognizing shapes, colors, and simple objects as well as making a detailed drawing of themselves. This information allows us to determine readiness and appropriate placement. Another program is an informational evening program held every April, where kindergarten teachers invite parents of the students entering kindergarten in the fall. At this time, teachers share their expectations to give the parents an idea of what will be expected of their child and what each child should know prior to enrolling in kindergarten. These two transitional programs precede the August orientation prior to the start of the school year. At the August orientation, parents meet the teacher, tour the school and receive supply lists and other information. Parents are notified about the transitional programs by notices sent home with all elementary school students and flyers are put in all daycares. Additionally, the District Office provides notices to newspapers and radio stations. Kathleen Elementary also has a Pre-Kindergarten program where we are teaching and preparing our students to be ready for Kindergarten. Using data collected and observation made, our Title One Program Facilitator and administration determine the effectiveness and any changes needed to our program.


Postsecondary Transition

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

N/A



 

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 9/9/2009 2:30:40 PM)



School Advisory Council



School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

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

Yes. Agree with the above statement.



Projected use of SAC FundsAmount
Student Agendas & Wednesday Folders for Parent Involvement 2800
Ink for Newsletters / Communication to Parents 1000



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


The KES School Advisory Council reviews and determines if the School Improvement Model is being effectively implemented. This group is composed of twenty members consisting of the principal, teachers, support staff, parents, community members, and students. This group represents the population of the students that attend KES. The members determine school improvement priorities as well as support and evaluate the implementation of the plan. In addition this council, assists in the decision making process and approval of expenditures of district lottery funds, school recognition funds when received, and reviews the School Budget. Meetings are held monthly and are posted on our school calendar, school newsletter, and website. During the meetings teachers from each grade share student achievement data, monthly events are discussed and input is given by community members.


SAC Members

Members
1)  Lana Tatom,   Principal
2)  Kathy Brown,   SAC Chair
3)  Alex Cruz,   Student
4)  Kristopher Scott,   Student
5)  Sabrina Reyna,   Student
6)  Melanie Smith,   Teacher
7)  Shannon Lima-Jones,   Teacher
8)  Jennifer Campbell,   Teacher
9)  Rebecca Fitzgerald,   Teacher
10)  Joy Hall,   Teacher
11)  Priscilla Sosby,   Teacher
12)  Veronica Dunn,   Parent
13)  Margaret Cox,   Parent
14)  Myriam Reyna,   Parent
15)  Katherine Colon,   Parent
16)  Gwendolyn Wright,   Parent
17)  Thomas Hanna,   Community Member
18)  Cherie Kercher,   Community Member
19)  Arturo Bobet,   Community Member
20)  Amy Weingarth,   School Support Personnel
21)  Brent Cronin,   School Support Personnel
22)  Silvia Deleon,   School Support Personnel
23)  Ellen Jones,   School Support Personnel
 

AYP DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk KATHLEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1221
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
Read: 263
Math: 263  
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  100  64  73          NA  37  36  N 37  27  NA 70  73  NA 
WHITE  100  100  69  80    94      NA  30  31  NA 31  20  NA 72  NA  76  NA 
BLACK  100  100  43  50      NA      NA    57  NA   50  NA 56  47 
HISPANIC  100  100  67  71      NA      NA  52  33  NA 44  29  NA 75  NA  80  NA 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  100  100  60  67          NA  41  40  N 42  33  Y 67  68  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS  100  100    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        

2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk KATHLEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1221
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
Read: 255
Math: 255  
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  100  63  63          NA  28  37  NA 33  37  NA 63  NA  61  NA 
WHITE  100  100  70  69          NA  22  30  NA 30  31  NA 65  NA  67  NA 
BLACK  100  100    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
HISPANIC  100  100  48  56      NA      NA  35  52  N 37  44  N 54  50 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  100  100  59  58          NA  30  41  NA 36  42  N 59  NA  58 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        

2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Polk KATHLEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1221
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
Read: 261
Math: 261  
2006-2007
School Grade1:
A   Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? YES   
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  100  72  67          NA  29  27  NA 40  33  NA 69  NA  72  NA 
WHITE  100  100  78  70          NA  25  22  NA 38  30  NA 75  NA  75  NA 
BLACK  100  100    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
HISPANIC  100  100  65  63      NA      NA  43  35  NA 40  37  NA 65  NA  73  NA 
ASIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
AMERICAN INDIAN    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED  100  100  70  64          NA  34  30  NA 43  36  NA 65  NA  72  NA 
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES    NA    NA    NA    NA      NA      NA      NA     NA        


SCHOOL GRADE DATA

Polk School District
KATHLEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
2008-2009
  Reading
  
Math
  
Writing
  
Science
  
Grade
Points
Earned
 
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 70%  79%  83%  56%  288   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 65%  78%      143  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? 77% (YES)  83% (YES)      160  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         591   
    Percent Tested = 100%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         A  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


    Polk School District
    KATHLEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2007-2008
      Reading
      
    Math
      
    Writing
      
    Science
      
    Grade
    Points
    Earned
     
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 68%  67%  95%  26%  256   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%  63%      127  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)  65% (YES)      130  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         513   
    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
    KATHLEEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    2006-2007
      Reading
      
    Math
      
    Writing
      
    Science
      
    Grade
    Points
    Earned
     
    % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) 77%  71%  100%  45%  293   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%  66%      134  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? 82% (YES)  74% (YES)      156  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         583   
    Percent Tested = 100%           Percent of eligible students tested
    School Grade         A  Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested