FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM
2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

School Name: EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

District Name: Polk

Principal: Jodie Bailey

SAC Chair:

Superintendent: Dr. Gail McKinzie

Date of School Board Approval:

Last Modified on: 09-15-2009

Dr.Eric J.Smith, Commissioner
Florida Department of Education
325 West Gaines Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Dr.Frances Haithcock, Chancellor
K-12 Public Schools
Florida Department of Education
325 West Gaines Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399

VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

Vision:
The vision of Eagle Lake Elementary is to provide an environment of excellence that enables all stakeholders to work cooperatively together to build lifelong learners and instill the value of education

Mission:
We, at Eagle Lake Elementary, supported by family and community, are committed to promoting rigorous, relevant learning experiences in a safe, positive learning environment where students will be respectful, productive and responsible citizens.

Our motto exemplifies our belief that all students can learn.

Motto:
I am an Eagle:

Eagles are
Accountable
Good citizens
Learning
Everyday

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS

Brief History and Background of the School

Eagle Lake Elementary, established in 1905, is located in Eagle Lake, Florida, within the heart of Polk County. Eagle Lake is a small, bedroom community that lies between the larger cities of Winter Haven and Bartow. While it hosts no significant industry, Eagle Lake is surrounded by the citrus industry. It is also close to several phosphate industry locations. Students from Eagle Lake Elementary generally attend Westwood Middle School and Lake Region High School.

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Only one subgroup met the goal of 65% scoring at or above grade level in reading and none of the subgroups achieved the goal in math. In addition, the percent scoring at 3 or above decreased in writing and the science scores were lower than both the state and district. So, student achievement is a weakness.

The number of discipline referrals increased.

The guidance counselor and Academic Instructional Facilitator are both in their first year in this position. (However, their enthusiasm and desire to succeed may make this a strength.).

Student Demographics

Eagle Lake Elementary serves a multi-ethnic school population that consists of 601 students from a predominantly economically disadvantaged community. 22.63% of students are Hispanic, 14.83% are Black, 55.66% are White, 1.68% are American Indian, and 5.20% are multi-racial. Economically disadvantaged students account for 71.41% of the population. Additionally, 9.48% of students are Students with Disabilities (SWD), 11.47% are classified as English Language Learners (ELL), and more than 2% of students are in the gifted program with an additional 5% Able Learners (those students who were recommended and tested for the gifted program, but missed the required score by a small margin).

Student Attendance Rates

The Attendance Rate for Eagle Lake Elementary was 93.97% for the 2008-2009 school year. The district average was 94.10%. In 2007-2008 the school attendance rate was 94.52% while the district average was 93.32% and the school attendance rate in 2006-2007 was 93.97 while the district average was 94.10%.

Student Mobility

Polk County Schools defines mobility rate as the number of students enrolled after day 15, or withdrawn after day 15 and before the end of the year divided by the number of students enrolled on or after day 16. The mobility rate of Eagle Lake Elementary for the year 2007-2008 was 27.25%. The mobility rate in the year 2008-2009 was 25.71%. a decrease of 1.54% from the previous year.

Student Suspension Rates

2006-2007: In-school 157, Out-of-school 25; 2007-2008: In-school 87, Out-of-school 45; 2008-2009: In-school 92, Out-of-school 77. While In-school suspensions have generally decreased, Out-of=school suspensions have increased.

Student Retention Rates

The retention rate increased 2.45 percentage points from 1.87% during the previous year.

Class Size

Eagle Lake Elementary has been in compliance with the class size requirements. Grades PreK-3 had a class size of 17.77 in 2006-2007 and 15.62 in 2007-2008 while Grades 4-5 had a class size of 18.7 in 2006-2007 and 20.9 in 2007-2008.

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Eagle Lake Elementary does not have feeder schools.

Partnerships and Grants

Several teachers have received grants for their classrooms. These provide additional funds for materials and field trips.

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	Jodie Bailey	Master of Education in Administration and Supervision	8	28	Eagle Lake Elementary Year – 2001-2002 School Grade – B Year – 2002-2003 School Grade – B Year – 2003-2004 School Grade – C AYP – No(87%) Year – 2004-2005 School Grade – B AYP – Yes (100%) Year – 2005-2006 School Grade – C AYP – No (92%) Year – 2006-2007 School Grade – C AYP – Yes (100%) Year – 2007-2008 School Grade – C AYP – No (92%) Year – 2008-2009 School Grade – C AYP - No (77%)
Assis Principal	Stacy Nelson	Doctorial Degree in Organizational Leadership	4	6	Eastside Elementary Year – 2004-2005 School Grade – C AYP – No Eagle Lake Elementary Year – 2005-2006 School Grade – C AYP – No (92%) Year – 2006-2007 School Grade – C AYP – Yes (100%) Year – 2007-2008 School Grade – C AYP – No (92%) Year – 2008-2009 School Grade – C AYP - No (77%)

* 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 *
Reading	Toronda Branch	Masters			This is her first year at our school and her first year as a coach.

* 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
Partner new teachers with veteran staff	Principal, Assistant Principal	Ongoing
Welcome and encourage Level 2 and Level 3 Interns from local colleges and universities	Principal	Ongoing
Participate in job fairs sponsored by the District/State	Principal	As scheduled by District/State
Provide common planning times to build teams	Principal, Assistant Principal	Ongoing

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

Name	Certification	Teaching Assignment	Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified
NA - All instrctors are highly qualified.	-	-	-

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
48	0	29	25	46	43	100	8.5	4.3	91.5

Teacher Mentoring Program

Mentor Name	Mentee Assigned	Rationale for Pairing	Planned Mentoring Activities
Grade Chairs	First Year Teachers	Grade Chairs are in a unique position to mentor First Year teachers because they are successful, experienced teachers who can share specific information about the curriculum, teaching strategies, and routines for the particular grade level.	Review Curriculum Maps and teaching strategies Introduce Oncouse, the online lesson plan program used at Eagle Lake Elementary Introduce EleGrade, the online grade records book used in Polk County Discuss classroom management
Leadership Team	Teachers New to Eagle Lake Elementary	The Leadership Team consists of experienced teachers as well as the administration and other specialized teachers ( guidance, AIF, etc.). This group of individuals will be able to help these experienced teachers be successful in this school	Introduce Oncourse, the online lesson plan program used at Eagle Lake Elementary Introduce the various resources available *Share insights into the Eagle Lake Elementary community, the students, parents, community leaders, and other supporters of the school
Leadership Team	Struggling Teachers	Lead by the administration, the Leadership Team will be able to share a variety of experiences and provide guidance for teachers who are struggling to have their students achieve in their classrooms.	Review the Curriculum Maps and successful teaching strategies Observations and reflections to help the teacher be successful in the classroom *Model lessons, use of technology, classroom management, etc.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Note: For Title I schools only

Title I, Part A

Services are provided to ensure students requiring additional remediation are assisted through after-school
programs or summer school. The district coordinates with Title II and Title III in ensuring staff development
needs are provided.

Title I, Part C- Migrant

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

Title I, Part D

District receives funds to support the Educational Alternative Outreach program. Services are coordinated with district Drop-out Prevention programs.

Title II

Title III

Services are provided through the district for education materials and ELL district support services to improve
the education of immigrant and English Language Learners.

Title X- Homeless

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

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

SAI provides funds for a program titled Spell Pat which addresses the needs of 3rd grade students who scored Level 2 and some Level 1 on FCAT Reading.

Violence Prevention Programs

Nutrition Programs

Housing Programs

Head Start

Four units of Head Start are housed on campus and managed by Polk County Schools.

Adult Education

Career and Technical Education

Job Training

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

School-based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Jodie Bailey, 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.
Stacy Nelson, 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.
Sarah Musick, Primary, and MaryBeth Gray, Intermediate, 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.
Sean Hogarty, Exceptional Student Education (ESE) Teachers: Participates in student data collection, integrates core instructional activities/materials/ instruction in tiered interventions; collaborates with general education teachers.
Toronda Branch, 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.
Gretchen Cabranes, 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.
Debbie LoCicero Social Worker: Participates in collection, interpretation, and analysis of data concerning attendance and home situations; facilitates development of intervention plans; provides support for intervention fidelity and documentation; provides professional development; assists in facilitation data-based decision making activities.
Jennifer Blanton, 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.
Laurie Fletcher, 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.
Leslie Belcher, 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.
Peggy Koren, 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).

The PS/RtI Leadership Team will focus meetings on how to improve school/teacher effectiveness and student achievement using the Problem Solving Model.
The PS/RtI Leadership Team will meet at least once per month (or more frequently as needed) 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

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.

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 Tenth 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.

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?

Strengths:
Reading: The White subgroup met the goal in Reading. The Fourth grade students exceeded goal of 65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading. The Third grade, Fourth grade and Fifth grade students equaled the average for the State and District in Reference/Research. The Third and Fourth grade students equaled the State and District in Words/Phrases. The Third grade students also equaled the State and District average in Comparisons.

Mathematics: The Third grade students equaled the State and District averages in Measurement, Algebraic Thinking and Data Analysis. The Fourth grade students equaled the State and District averages in Measurement and Geometry. They also meet the District average in Algebraic Thinking. The Fifth Graders equaled the District average in Algebraic Thinking and Data Analysis.

Science: The students scored the same average as the District average in Scientific Thinking.

Weaknesses:
Reading: The Black, Hispanic and Economically Disadvantaged did not meet the goal of 65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading. The Third and Fifth grade students scored well below the goal of 65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading. All grade levels scored below the State and District averages in Main Idea/Purpose.

Mathematics: All of the subgroups scored below the goal of 68% scoring at or above grade level in Math. All grade levels scored below the goal of 68% scoring at or above grade level in Math.

Writing: The percent of students scoring 3.5 or above in Writing decreased by 8%. The narrative writing scores were much lower than the expository writing.

Science: The percent of student scoring 3 or above in Science was 14% below the District and 20% below the State. The students scored below the District and the State in Physical and Chemical, Earth and Space, and Life and Environment.

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)?

Reading: Main Idea/Purpose and Comparisons were the least proficient strands and will be given priority focus.

Writing: Narrative writing was the least proficient writing and will be given priority focus.

Mathematics: Number Sense was the least proficient strand and will be given priority focus.

Science: Physical and Chemical, Earth and Space, and Life and Environment were the least proficient strands and will be given priority focus.

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

While there are blocks of time for each subject area are part of the Master Schedule instruction will be dependent upon ongoing assessments in each subject area. Teachers will gather, organize and analysis the data from these assessments each month and address the needs of the students based on the data.

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

The Curriculum Maps are focused by Unit and Lesson Essential Questions that address the relevance of the lessons. Each student is expected to be able to answer the questions at the end of the lesson/unit.

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?

Direct the Instructional Focus

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

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 are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

Reading: 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?

Student mastery on mini-assessments based on the focus lessons will determine if the focus lessons need to be
revised and/or re-taught.

Teachers and administrators will ensure the effectiveness of the focus lessons by analyzing data results from
focus lessons as they are re-assessed intermittently throughout the year. Proficiency of skills and benchmarks
should also be evident in skills and Benchmarks that are taught as part of the whole group instruction.

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.

The District adopted series is used in each of the subject areas. The faculty is collecting information about supplemental materials for each area. This information will be organized into a searchable database to help teachers select materials as interventions. The District Curriculum Maps and Learning Focused Strategies are the guides for instruction.

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, summer school, 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.

Students who qualify take part in the gifted program. Also, teachers use extended lessons according to the LFS strategies.

Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

Parents and/or teachers may recommend students to be tested for the gifted program. Those who meet the requirements are placed in the program. Students who are tested for the gifted program, but do not meet the requires by a small margin are placed in an "Able Learners" program to provide enrichment.

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)
School Leadership Team (Paula Armstrong, Leslie Belcher, Toronda Branch, Peggy Koren, Stacy Nelson, and Vicki Van Steenburg)	Jodie Bailey, Principal	Weekly	Each Monday	The Team will assist the administration as representatives to both the Grade Level and Vertical Planning Communities. The Principal will attend the community meetings on a rotating basis. The focus of the School Leadership Team will be the collection, organization and analysis of school-wide data as well as concerns of the communities. The Team will determine the agenda for each of the community meetings to ensure consistent focus. Results of the meetings will be discussed during the next weekly meeting.
Grade Level Teams	Kindergarten – Victoria Van Steenburg, School Leadership Team Member 1st Grade – Paula Armstrong, School Leadership Team Member 2nd Grade – Leslie Belcher, School Leadership Team Member 3rd Grade – Toronda Branch, School Leadership Team Member 4th Grade – Stacy Nelson, School Leadership Team Member 5th Grade – Peggy Koren, School Leadership Team Member	Weekly	Common Planning	Analyze the effectiveness of the Reading FCIM calendars, mini-lessons, mini-assessments, maintenance, tutorials, and enrichments to determine any necessary revisions. The Teams will analysis the results of common assessments and FCIM mini-assessment results. This will allow the teams to determine the effectiveness of the instruction of lessons. The members will share best practices thus helping each other improve instruction methods. The Teams will collect information about supplemental materials in Reading, Math, Science, and Writing available at Eagle Lake Elementary. The information will be organized into a searchable database for each of the subject areas. Teachers will be able to search the databases and select supplemental materials to use with students according to their needs.
Vertical Planning Teams (at least one representative from each grade level plus ESE teachers and Special area teachers and a member of the School Leadership Team)	Six Teams lead by a member of the Leadership Team	Monthly	2nd Tuesday of each month, after school	The Vertical Planning Teams will collect and analyze data. The representation of the grade levels will allow the articulation across the grades. The discussion should aid in ensuring the linear planning and continuous growth for the students. Each Vertical Planning will study two of the LFS strategies. The members of the team will lead in sharing the information with their respective Grade Level Team according to a schedule created by the Leadership Team. By the end of the school year all members of the faculty will have studied each of the LFS strategies.

NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only

Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status
Show Attached Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status (Uploaded on 9/9/2009 3:08:22 PM)
Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification
Show Attached Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification (Uploaded on 9/9/2009 3:08:54 PM)
Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status
Show Attached Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification (Uploaded on 9/9/2009 3:05:21 PM)

Pre-School Transition

Kindergarten Round-up:
During the meeting last spring the Kindergarten teachers presented information concerning expectations, the Kindergarten curriculum and the SBAR grade report. The attendees visited the classrooms.

Other Informational Meetings were held several times for those who could not attend the Round-up

Boo Hoo Breakfast:
The Breakfast is held each year on the first day of classes. Parents are given information about how to help with reading readiness activities at home and about ways to work with their students to develop fine motor skills such as practice tying shoes. Parents were also given detailed information about writing instruction in Kindergarten.

ESE PreK:
Plans are being made to meet with parents of students who will exit the ESE PreK program at the end of this year. They will receive information concerning the expectations, curriculum and the role of the Florida SSS in Kindergarten.

Headstart:
Several Informational Meetings were held for parents of students who would be attending Headstart on our campus. Some of these were conducted on a one-to-one basis.

Day Care Programs:
The local Day Care Centers are given information notices to be distributed to the parents of students who will attend Eagle Lake Elementary so they can chose to attend any of the meetings/activities on campus.

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, 67% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.			In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1. The school will
implement the new
FAIR assessments
to monitor student
progress.

1. Principal and AIF

1. Review FAIR data reports to ensure teachers are assessing
students according to the created schedule.

1. Printout of FAIR
assessments

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In grades 3-5, 56% of students achieved learning gains on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.			In grades 3-5, 68% of students will achieve learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1.Tier 1 Classroom teachers will use the Reading Mini Lessons developed by Polk County as well as the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series employing the use of direct instruction, guided reading, small group work, etc.	1.Principal and AIF	1. Teachers will administer mini lesson assessments and Harcourt Trophies assessments.	1. Data from mini lesson assessments and other ongoing assessments as well as reports from Fast ForWord.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/ intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Reading Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series and other materials obtained from other programs (Title I, Reading First, etc) as well as other materials.	2.Principal and AIF	2. Harcourt Trophies has progress monitoring tools that can be used with the supplemental materials. Compass Odyssey also has assessments that may be used with that resource. Other assessments will be developed for the materials used.	2. Review the data gathered from the various assessments.

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 41% of Black students in grades 3-5 scored at or above Level 3.			Increase the percent of Black students in grades 3-5 scoring at or above a Level 3 from 41% to 72% on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1.Tier 1 Classroom teachers will use the Reading Mini Lessons developed by Polk County as well as the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series employing the use of direct instruction, guided reading, small group work, etc.	1.Principal and AIF	1. Teachers will administer mini lesson assessments and Harcourt Trophies assessments.	1. Data from mini lesson assessments and other ongoing assessments.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/ intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Reading Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series and other materials obtained from other programs (Title I, Reading First, etc) as well as other materials.	2.Principal and AIF	2. Harcourt Trophies has progress monitoring tools that can be used with the supplemental materials. Compass Odyssey also has assessments that may be used with that resource. Other assessments will be developed for the materials used.	2. Review the data gathered from the various assessments.

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 63% of Hispanic students in grades 3-5 scored at or above Level 3.			Increase the percent of Hispanic students in grades 3-5 scoring at or above a Level 3 from 63% to 72% on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1.Tier 1 Classroom teachers will use the Reading Mini Lessons developed by Polk County as well as the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series employing the use of direct instruction, guided reading, small group work, etc.	1.Principal and AIF	1. Teachers will administer mini lesson assessments and Harcourt Trophies assessments.	1. Data from mini lesson assessments and other ongoing assessments.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/ intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Reading Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series and other materials obtained from other programs (Title I, Reading First, etc) as well as other materials.	2.Principal and AIF	2. Harcourt Trophies has progress monitoring tools that can be used with the supplemental materials. Compass Odyssey also has assessments that may be used with that resource. Other assessments will be developed for the materials used.	2. Review the data gathered from the various assessments.
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction. Implement Fast ForWord, a computer program targeting students with reading difficulties.	3.Principal and AIF	3. Printout of data generated through Fast Forward and other assessments.	3.Review the results of data from Fast ForWord and other assessments

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 56% of Students With Disabilities (SWD) in grades 3-5 scored at or above Level 3.			Increase the percent of SWD in grades 3-5 scoring at or above a Level 3 from 56% to 72% on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1.Tier 1 Classroom teachers will use the Reading Mini Lessons developed by Polk County as well as the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series employing the use of direct instruction, guided reading, small group work, etc.	1.Principal and AIF	1. Teachers will administer mini lesson assessments and Harcourt Trophies assessments.	1. Data from mini lesson assessments and other ongoing assessments.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/ intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Reading Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the Harcourt Trophies Reading Series and other materials obtained from other programs (Title I, Reading First, etc) as well as other materials.	2.Principal and AIF	2. Harcourt Trophies has progress monitoring tools that can be used with the supplemental materials. Compass Odyssey also has assessments that may be used with that resource. Other assessments will be developed for the materials used.	2. Review the data gathered from the various assessments.
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction. Implement Fast ForWord, a computer program targeting students with reading difficulties.	3.Principal and AIF	3. Printout of data generated through Fast ForWord and other assessments.	3.Review the results of data from Fast ForWord and other assessments

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	LFS Strategies- What Moves You Series	Each Vertical Team will complete the study of at least two of the LFS strategies during the year. The members of the Team will share the information with the other members of their grade level according to a calendar developed by the Leadership Team. All of the topics will be shared by May 2010.	September 2009 – May 2010	Evidence will be seen during walk throughs as the information is shared. Individual classroom teachers will make an appointment with the Leadership Team member assigned to the grade level for a more in depth observation of the use of the LFS strategy during the 3rd week after each topics is shared.	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	Accelerated Reader (2 one hour sessions in the form of a webinar)	AR Representative	August 2009 and January 2010	Classroom teachers will collect/record data from AR reports each month.	Victoria Van Steenburg, Media Specialist
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	PD 360 – Various topics such as High Yield Strategies, LFS Strategies, Action Research	Leadership Team members will discuss the topics in either the Grade Level or Vertical Planning Team Professional Learning Communities	Ongoing	Reports in the program	Jodie Bailey, Principal
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	LFS School-wide Expectations (including lesson plans)	School LFS Coaches	September-October 2009	Results will be in the lesson plans and be evident in the classroom walk-throughs	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	Oregon Trail, simulation software (grades 3-5)	Patti Katsoulis, one of the school’s 3 Tech Coaches	November 19, 2010	The software encourages cooperation and higher level thinking skills (two of the LFS strategies); therefore, these strategies should be evident in the classroom	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	Kid Pix software (Comparing, sorting, etc. for grades PreK-2)	Robin Rogers, one of the school’s 3 Tech Coaches	December 3, 2009	Student products from the software	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	Data Reports: Odyssey FAIR	Robin Rogers AIF	October 1, 2009 October 22, 2009	Teachers will use Odyssey reports to group students Teachers will use FAIR reports to analyze student needs	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5 , 72% of the students will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test	Online Resouces (Polk County Schools Media Services Subscriptions)	Peggy Koren, Network Manager	October 22, 2009	Lesson Plans and classroom walk-throughs	Leadership Team

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
Cars and Stars	Operational Budget	$607.00
Workbooks to accompany Trophies	Operational Budget	$4,849.00
Accelerated Reader	Media Internal Account	$900.00
LFS - What Moves You Series	Title I	$1,300.00
Books for the Library Media Center	Media Budget	$3,000.00
Total: $10,656.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
4 Desktop Computers	Technology Funds	$2,100.00
Oncourse Online Lesson Plans/Teacher Websites	Title I	$1,800.00
Total: $3,900.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
LFS School-Wide Expectations Training	Title I	$1,580.00
Data (Odyssey and FAIR Reports)	Title I	$782.00
Oregon Trail Software Training (grades 3-5)	Title I	$289.00
Oregon Trail (95) Licenses	Title I	$1,900.00
Kid Pix Software Training (grades PreK-2)	Title I	$356.00
Kid Pix (124) Licenses	title I	$2,480.00
Online Resources (PCSB Media Services Subscriptions)	Title I	$459.00
Supplies	Title I	$500.00
Total: $8,346.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Title I Facilitator Salary	Title I	$57,000.00
Total: $57,000.00
Final Total: $79,902.00

End of Reading Goal

Mathematics Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In grades 3-5, 64% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test			In grade 3-5, 74% of students will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Common board configuration including objectives, essential questions, date, agenda, and homework assignment.	1. Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	1. .Focused walkthroughs by administration will be used to ensure all math teachers are using common board configurations.	1. Reports generated from walkthroughs
2	2. Use assessments such as M.A.T.H. to identify students in the core curriculum needing intervention and enrichment.	2. Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	2. Review student grouping charts frequently and ensure groups are redesigned to target the need of students based on assessment.	2. 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, 54% of students made learning gains on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.			In grades 3-5, 70% of students will make learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1 Increase the use of manipulatives and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts. Determine core instructional needs by reviewing common assessment data for all students within bottom quartile. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/interventions within the mathematics blocks.	1. School Leadership Team members	1. Grade Level and Vertical Planning Learning Communities will work together in the creation of centers and stations, and administration will ensure activities are implemented. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment)..	1. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Math Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the math series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. School Leadership Team members	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction.	3. School Leadership Team members	3. Grade Level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics data, 54% of the bottom quartile showed learning gains.			70% or more of the bottom quartile will make learning gains on the 2010 Mathematics FCAT Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1 Increase the use of manipulatives and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts. Determine core instructional needs by reviewing common assessment data for all students within bottom quartile. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/interventions within the mathematics blocks.	1. School Leadership Team members	1. Grade Level and Vertical Planning Learning Communities will work together in the creation of centers and stations, and administration will ensure activities are implemented. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment)..	1. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Math Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the math series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. School Leadership Team members	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction.	3. School Leadership Team members	3. Grade Level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In grades 3-5, 61% of White students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.			In grades 3-5, 74% of White students will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1 Increase the use of manipulatives and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts. Determine core instructional needs by reviewing common assessment data for all students within bottom quartile. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/interventions within the mathematics blocks.	1. School Leadership Team members	1. Grade Level and Vertical Planning Learning Communities will work together in the creation of centers and stations, and administration will ensure activities are implemented. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment)..	1. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Math Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the math series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. School Leadership Team members	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction.	3. School Leadership Team members	3. Grade Level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In grades 3-5, 61% of Black students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.			In grades 3-5, 74% of Black students will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1 Increase the use of manipulatives and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts. Determine core instructional needs by reviewing common assessment data for all students within bottom quartile. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/interventions within the mathematics blocks.	1. School Leadership Team members	1. Grade Level and Vertical Planning Learning Communities will work together in the creation of centers and stations, and administration will ensure activities are implemented. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment)..	1. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Math Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the math series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. School Leadership Team members	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction.	3. School Leadership Team members	3. Grade Level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In grades 3-5, 60% of Hispanic students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.			In grades 3-5, 74% of Hispanic students will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1 Increase the use of manipulatives and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts. Determine core instructional needs by reviewing common assessment data for all students within bottom quartile. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/interventions within the mathematics blocks.	1. School Leadership Team members	1. Grade Level and Vertical Planning Learning Communities will work together in the creation of centers and stations, and administration will ensure activities are implemented. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment)..	1. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Math Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the math series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. School Leadership Team members	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction.	3. School Leadership Team members	3. Grade Level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In grades 3-5, 60% of Economically Disadvantaged students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.			In grades 3-5, 74% of Economically Disadvantaged students will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1 Increase the use of manipulatives and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts. Determine core instructional needs by reviewing common assessment data for all students within bottom quartile. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/interventions within the mathematics blocks.	1. School Leadership Team members	1. Grade Level and Vertical Planning Learning Communities will work together in the creation of centers and stations, and administration will ensure activities are implemented. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment)..	1. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly.
2	2. Tier 2 Plan supplemental instruction/intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of common assessment data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice. Supplemental instruction is provided in addition to core instruction by consulting the Math Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the math series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. School Leadership Team members	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 4 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly
3	3. Tier 3 Plan targeted intervention for students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction using problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence based, and provided in addition to core instruction.	3. School Leadership Team members	3. Grade Level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
In grades 3-5, 70% of students will make learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test	PD 360 – various topics such as RtI, High Yield Strategies, Teaching Mathematics to Increase Achievement (Primary and Intermediate)	Leadership Team members with Grade Level and/or Vertical Planning Teams Professional Learning Communities	Ongoing	Reports from Program	Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal
In grades 3-5, 70% of students will make learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test	Effective Use of Manipulatives	Classroom Teachers will share Best Practices in Grade Level and/or Vertical Planning Team PLC	September 2009 – October 2009	Lesson Plans and Classroom Observations	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5, 70% of students will make learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test	BBY Baits (Number Sense, etc.)	Experienced Classroom Teachers	October 2009 – January 2010	Lesson Plans and Classroom Observations	Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal
In grades 3-5, 70% of students will make learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test	Math Facts In a Flash Software Training	Patti Katsoulis, one of the school’s 3 Tech Coaches	October 1, 2009	Review Reports from the software	Leadership Team
In grades 3-5, 70% of students will make learning gains on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test	The Graph Club Software Training (PreK-2)	Kathi Decker, one of the school’s 3 Tech Coaches	November 19, 2009	Student products from the software	Leadership Team

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Workbooks to accompany the math series	Operational Budget	$8,433.00
BBY Baits (Number Sense, etc.)	Title I	$400.00
Total: $8,833.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
2 Document Cameras	Technology Funds	$800.00
Total: $800.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Math Facts in a Flash Software Training	Title I	$816.00
The Graph Club Software Training (grades PreK-2)	Title I	$357.00
The Graph Club (124) Software Licenses	Title I	$1,300.00
Supplies	Title I	$100.00
Total: $2,573.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Computer Lab Paraeducator Salary	Title I	$13,953.00
Supplies	Title I	$400.00
Total: $14,353.00
Final Total: $26,559.00

End of Mathematics Goal

Science Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on School Grade Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?

What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on 2009, FCAT Science data, 30% of students achieved level three and above.			Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, 45% of students will score at level three or above on the 2010 FCAT Science Assessment.
	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 three times per week using the 5E model, science stations.	1. Jodie Bailey, Principal Leadership Team	1. The created lab schedule will be implemented with fidelity and monitored by the Principal.	1. Improvement on the science ongoing assessments
2	2. Provide real world science experiences and engaging activities.	2. Leadership Team	2 Teachers will require students to read a science article each week for homework. Homework log will be reviewed consistently by Leadership Team members. (These articales may be from magazines in the classrooms, Media Center or from the online subscriptions provided by Media Services.)	2. Improvement on the science ongoing assessments

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on the 2009 FCAT Science data, 5th grade students scored below the state in each of the strands and below the District on each of the strands except Scientific Thinking.			Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, 5th grade students will score at least 10% higher in each of the strands on the 2010 FCAT Science Assessment.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1: All students will complete hands-on lab activities weekly and use a common lab report format to document hands-on investigations.	1. Classroom Teachers	1. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	1 Common assessments tied to Florida Science Standards administered weekly
2	2. Tier 2: Students not responding adequately to core instruction will be provided supplemental, small group science instruction. Teachers will consult the Science Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from the science series and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2 Grade Level Teams	2. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every quarterly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	2. Common assessments tied to Florida Science Standards administered quarterly
3	3. Tier 3: Students not responding to core plus supplemental instruction will receive targeted intervention developed through the use of the problem-solving process. Interventions will be matched to individual student needs, be evidence-based, and provided in addition to core.	3. RtI Team/Case Manager	3. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data bi-weekly to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).	3. Common assessments tied to Florida Science Standards administered weekly

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, 45% of students will score at level three or above on the 2010 FCAT Science Assessment.	5E Model (Engagement, Exploration, Explanation, Elaboration, Evaluation)	District Science Personnel	October 2009 – January 2010	Lesson plans and classroom observations	Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal
Given instruction based on the Sunshine State Standards, 45% of students will score at level three or above on the 2010 FCAT Science Assessment.	Timeliner Software (transforming information into meaning for grades 3-5)	Peggy Koren, Network Manager	November 19, 2009	Student presentations using software	Leadership Team

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Florida Homework and Support Science Workbook	Operational Budget	$329.00
5E Materials	Title I	$200.00
Total: $529.00
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
5E Training	Title I	$782.00
Timeliner Software Training (grades 3-5)	Title I	$340.00
Timeliner Software Unlimited Licenses	Title I	$2,200.00
Supplies	Title I	$200.00
Total: $3,522.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $4,051.00

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
On the 2009 administration of the FCAT Writing Test, 70% of the students in 4th grade scored level 3.5 or above in writing.			On the 2010 administration of the FCAT Writing Test, 71% of the 4th grade students will achieve a 3.5 or above.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Students will use the writing process daily; all writing will be dated, and recorded in a journal, notebook, or work folder for monitoring of growth across time.	1.Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	1. A school wide consistent method of saving student work will be established. During the class, students will place their writing notebooks, open to their last entry, on top of their desks for the principal to walk through to monitor.	1. Progress between the Pretest Prompt and Mid-year Prompt
2	2. The revision and editing process will be explicitly taught and seen in student writing drafts.	2. Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	2. Administration will monitor revision and editing process by reviewing student drafts.	2. Progress between the Pretest Prompt and Mid-year Prompt
3	3. All classrooms will use the Write From the Beginning writing program.	3. Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	3. Administration will monitor lesson plans and classroom observations to determine the program is being used.	3. Progress between the Pretest Prompt and Mid-year Prompt

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Based on the 2009 FCAT Writes data, 70% of students scored at or above proficiency.			On the 2010 administration of the FCAT Writing Test, 71% of the 4th grade students will achieve a 3.5 or above.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Tier 1: Students use the writing process daily; all writing will be dated, and recorded in a journal, notebook, or work folder for monitoring of growth across time	1. Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	1. Student writing samples will be reviewed and scored bi-weekly by teacher. Percent of students making adequate progress toward goal will be determined monthly by comparing writing trend data to expected rate of growth.	1. Scored writing samples will be used to determine progress between the Pre-test Prompt and Mid-year Prompt
2	2. Tier 2 The revision and editing process is explicitly taught and seen in student writing drafts. Teachers will consult the Writing Supplemental Materials database created by the Eagle Lake Elementary faculty to select materials to use as intervention materials with students according to their needs. This database includes supplemental materials from Right from the Beginning and other materials obtained from other programs such as Title I as well as other materials.	2. Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal	Student writing samples will be reviewed and scored bi-weekly by teacher. Percent of students making adequate progress toward goal will be determined monthly by comparing writing trend data to expected rate of growth.	2. Scored writing samples will be used to determine progress between the Pre-test Prompt and Mid-year Prompt

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
On the 2010 administration of the FCAT Writing Test, 71% of the 4th grade students will achieve a 3.5 or above.	Write From the Beginning	Stacy Nelson, Principal	September - October 2009	Lesson Plans, Classroom Observations, and Student Sample Writing	Jodie Bailey, Principal Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Write From the Beginning	Title I	$300.00
Melissa Forney Supplemental Writing Materials	Title I	$100.00
My First Journal (1st Grade)	Title I	$159.00
Total: $559.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
2 document cameras	Technology Funds	$800.00
Total: $800.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Melissa Forney Supplemental Writing Training Registration	Title I	$325.00
Total: $325.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Supplies	Title I	$300.00
Total: $300.00
Final Total: $1,984.00

End of Science Goal

Parent Involvement Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on information from School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:

Were parent involvement activities and strategies targeted to areas of academic need?

Based on information from surveys, evaluations, agendas, or sign-ins:

Was the percent of parent participation in school activities maintained or increased from the prior year?

Generally, what strategies or activities can be employed to increase parent involvement?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
In the 2008-2009 school year the percent of parent participation was 60%.			In the 2009-2010 school year the percent of parent participation will increase by 20%.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Place the Parent Involvement materials and the Student/Parent/Teacher Compact in the Student Agendas	1. Paula Armstrong, Title I	1. Teachers will review the information in the agenda with students during the first week of school. Also, the teachers will have parents sign the Student/Parent/Teacher Compact, also in the agenda, during conferences	1. Review the agendas for parent signatures and parent feedback
2	2. Use the LISTserve established by the district to send the newspaper to parents via email.	2. Paula Armstrong, Title I Jodie Bailey, Principal	2. Parent email addresses will be entered in Genesis, the district student data system.	2. Monitor the number of returned messages and Parent feedback
3	3. “Title I Tuesday” will be regular communication days. ConnectEd will also be used to notify parents of meetings and other activities.	3. Paula Armstrong, Title I Jodie Bailey, Principal	3. Informational materials and notices of meetings and activities will be sent home with students each Tuesday. (Parents requested a specific day of the week for Title I messages to be sent home with students.)	3. A part of each of the “Title I Tuesday” communications will be a parent feedback form to be completed and returned with the students.

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
The data collect in the 2009 Parent Survey indicated that 74% of parents knew how to use materials to help work with their child.			The data collected in the 2010 Parent Survey will indicate that 85% of parents knew how to use materials to help work with their child.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

1	1. Conduct Title I activities, Info Fairs, in conjunction with all other events at the school, i.e. PTO meetings, concerts, Open House.	1. Paula Armstrong, Title I	1. Short, specific activities will be planned, advertised and conducted before or after other events.	1. Sign-in sheets and parent feedback after the activities
2	2. Conduct Informational meetings about reading. The meetings will take scheduled multiple times to accommodate parents’ availability. One of the major topics of these meetings will be how the parent can use materials to help their child. Also, some of the sessions will be conducted in Spanish through the cooperation of the school psychologist, who is fluent in Spanish. (Most of these meetings will target reading, but others will target math and writing.)	2. Paula Armstrong, Title I Gretchen Cabranes, School Psychologist	2. Review parent feedback after the meetings.	2. Sign-in sheets and parent feedback forms.
3	3. ESOL Backpack Nights will be conducted and will target 2nd and 3rd grade reading.	3. Gretchen Cabarnes, School Psychologist, Jennifer Santana, ESOL Paraeducator	3. ESOL paraeducator meets with the students weekly to work with the materials. Parents are invited to attend a follow-up meeting.	3. Sign-in sheets and parent feedback.

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
Student Agendas	Title I	$5,083.00
Total: $5,083.00
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
Parent Involvement Paraeducator Salary	Title I	$12,393.00
Supplies	Title I	$500.00
Total: $12,893.00
Final Total: $17,976.00

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	Cars and Stars	Operational Budget	$607.00
Reading	Workbooks to accompany Trophies	Operational Budget	$4,849.00
Reading	Accelerated Reader	Media Internal Account	$900.00
Reading	LFS - What Moves You Series	Title I	$1,300.00
Reading	Books for the Library Media Center	Media Budget	$3,000.00
Mathematics	Workbooks to accompany the math series	Operational Budget	$8,433.00
Mathematics	BBY Baits (Number Sense, etc.)	Title I	$400.00
Writing	Write From the Beginning	Title I	$300.00
Writing	Melissa Forney Supplemental Writing Materials	Title I	$100.00
Writing	My First Journal (1st Grade)	Title I	$159.00
Science	Florida Homework and Support Science Workbook	Operational Budget	$329.00
Science	5E Materials	Title I	$200.00
Parental Involvement	Student Agendas	Title I	$5,083.00
Total: $25,660.00
Technology
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Reading	4 Desktop Computers	Technology Funds	$2,100.00
Reading	Oncourse Online Lesson Plans/Teacher Websites	Title I	$1,800.00
Mathematics	2 Document Cameras	Technology Funds	$800.00
Writing	2 document cameras	Technology Funds	$800.00
Total: $5,500.00
Professional Development
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Reading	LFS School-Wide Expectations Training	Title I	$1,580.00
Reading	Data (Odyssey and FAIR Reports)	Title I	$782.00
Reading	Oregon Trail Software Training (grades 3-5)	Title I	$289.00
Reading	Oregon Trail (95) Licenses	Title I	$1,900.00
Reading	Kid Pix Software Training (grades PreK-2)	Title I	$356.00
Reading	Kid Pix (124) Licenses	title I	$2,480.00
Reading	Online Resources (PCSB Media Services Subscriptions)	Title I	$459.00
Reading	Supplies	Title I	$500.00
Mathematics	Math Facts in a Flash Software Training	Title I	$816.00
Mathematics	The Graph Club Software Training (grades PreK-2)	Title I	$357.00
Mathematics	The Graph Club (124) Software Licenses	Title I	$1,300.00
Mathematics	Supplies	Title I	$100.00
Writing	Melissa Forney Supplemental Writing Training Registration	Title I	$325.00
Science	5E Training	Title I	$782.00
Science	Timeliner Software Training (grades 3-5)	Title I	$340.00
Science	Timeliner Software Unlimited Licenses	Title I	$2,200.00
Science	Supplies	Title I	$200.00
Total: $14,766.00
Other
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Reading	Title I Facilitator Salary	Title I	$57,000.00
Mathematics	Computer Lab Paraeducator Salary	Title I	$13,953.00
Mathematics	Supplies	Title I	$400.00
Writing	Supplies	Title I	$300.00
Parental Involvement	Parent Involvement Paraeducator Salary	Title I	$12,393.00
Parental Involvement	Supplies	Title I	$500.00
Total: $84,546.00
Final Total: $130,472.00

Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance

Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 9/10/2009 9:21:44 PM)

School Advisory Council

School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

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

Yes. Agree with the above statement.

Projected use of SAC Funds	Amount
No data submitted

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

The School Advisory Council was invited to help write the School Improvement Plan.
The School Improvement Plan will be reviewed at the 1st meeting and revisited at each of the other meetings.
The Council will review data collected at each meeting and give feedback concerning any areas of concern.

SAC Members

Members
1) Jodie Bailey, Principal
2) Stacy Nelson, Assistant Principal

AYP DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2

Polk EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1701

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Read: 285
Math: 285

2008-2009
School Grade¹:

Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

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

WHITE

100

BLACK

100

HISPANIC

100

ASIAN

AMERICAN INDIAN

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

100

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

100

2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2

Polk EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1701

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Read: 271
Math: 271

2007-2008
School Grade¹:

Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

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

WHITE

BLACK

100

HISPANIC

100

ASIAN

AMERICAN INDIAN

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2

Polk EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1701

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Read: 256
Math: 256

2006-2007
School Grade¹:

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

WHITE

BLACK

100

HISPANIC

100

ASIAN

AMERICAN INDIAN

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

Polk School District EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2008-2009
	Reading	Math	Writing	Science	Grade Points Earned
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)	67%	64%	70%	30%	231	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	56%	54%			110	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?	54% (YES)	56% (YES)			110	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					451
Percent Tested = 99%						Percent of eligible students tested
School Grade					C	Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

Polk School District EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2007-2008
	Reading	Math	Writing	Science	Grade Points Earned
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)	68%	64%	72%	38%	242	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	67%	57%			124	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?	58% (YES)	51% (YES)			109	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					475
Percent Tested = 99%						Percent of eligible students tested
School Grade					C	Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

Polk School District EAGLE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2006-2007
	Reading	Math	Writing	Science	Grade Points Earned
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)	72%	62%	88%	28%	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	65%	54%			119	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?	50% (YES)	58% (YES)			108	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					477
Percent Tested = 99%						Percent of eligible students tested
School Grade					C	Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS

Brief History and Background of the School

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Student Demographics

Student Attendance Rates

Student Mobility

Student Suspension Rates

Student Retention Rates

Class Size

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Partnerships and Grants

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

Staff Demographics

Teacher Mentoring Program

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

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

NCLB Public School Choice

Pre-School Transition

Postsecondary Transition

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

Reading Goal

Mathematics Goal

Science Goal

Writing Goal

Parent Involvement Goal

Other Goals

FINAL BUDGET

Differentiated Accountability

School Advisory Council

School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

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

SAC Members

AYP DATA

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM
2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN