VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS
The BEST Program provides a program that incorporates response to instruction/intervention-behavior for students from kindergarten through fifth grade which serves as the basis for correcting the problem behavior. Teachers and staff create an environment which reduces the occurrences of targeted behaviors and enhances academic progress through diagnostic and prescriptive teaching strategies, social skills training and behavior management plans. Program procedures and activities are based on beliefs that all students can learn, all students have value, and all students have a responsibility to conform to the legitimate rules of school and society.
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
Brief History and Background of the School
BEST is a behavioral and academic program for students in grades K-5. Students are assigned to BEST as a result of an expulsion or as a Tier 3 RtI intervention. There are 6 teachers assigned to the campus, and 1 lead teacher. Students are assigned to BEST at various times during the year. The number of students attending ranges from 20-75 during the school year. Students utilize the district's core curriculum in all subject areas with supplemental instruction in needed areas and the use of daily access to computers to practice reading and math skills.
Polk County School District used to enforce zero tolerance for all grade levels. As a result any student in grades K-5 who brought a weapon to school would be expelled and assigned to BEST. With the new zero tolerance language which allows the circumstances behind the act to be considered, there will be more flexibility given in the assignment of students in grades K-5.
Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Small class sizes consisting of 12 students to two adults.
Paraeducator support for each classroom.
Mental health counselor to provide individual and small group counseling to students and parents.
Daily computer access to New Century for math and reading supplemental instruction and practice.
Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year
Students are assigned to BEST and transition back to their zoned school at various times during the school year.
New teachers to the county, through they have had prior teaching experience in other states.
Student Demographics
We serve a diverse population of male, female, white, black, hispanic, multi-racial, and asian. The majority of students served are in grades 3-5.
Student Attendance Rates
Attendance averages 90% on a daily basis. Absent students receive a phone call from school staff on the morning of the absence as follow up.
Student Mobility
There is not a true mobility rate as students are assigned to the BEST program and are transitioned back as determined by the length of expulsion or the amount of time it takes the student to respond to the interventions.
Student Suspension Rates
Students are not suspended from the BEST program.
Student Retention Rates
No retentions at BEST.
Class Size
Average is 12:1 teacher and paraeducator
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
Students are assigned to the BEST program from all the elementary schools in the district.
Partnerships and Grants
Partnerships with Winter Haven Behavioral Health and Peace River to provide services to families.
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
|
Nancy Woolcock, Assistant Superintenent
|
Educational Leadership
Masters in Exceptional Student Education
|
1
|
2
|
As BEST is an alternative education site, the scores for the students are reported through their zoned school.
|
* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)
HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES
| Subject Area | Name | Degree(s)/ Certification(s) | # of Years at Current School | # of Years as a Coach | Prior Performance Record * |
|
No coaches are assigned to the BEST program
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
None
|
* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)
HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS
| Description of Strategy | Person Responsible | Projected Completion Date | Not Applicable (If not, please explain why) |
|
District only allows teachers who are certified and HQ to be hired. A quality counts survey is completed on line along with employment. Panel interviews are held with the requirement of proof of certified/HQ to ensure compliance
|
Nancy Woolcock
|
September 2009
|
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
|
None
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
None
|
Staff Demographics
| Total Number of Instructional Staff | % of First-Year Teachers | % of Teachers with 1-5 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 6-14 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 15+ Years of Experience | % of Teachers with Advanced Degrees | % Highly Qualified | % Reading Endorsed Teachers | % National Board Certified Teachers | % ESOL Endorsed |
| 7 | 0 | 57 | 0 | 43 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
Teacher Mentoring Program
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
|
Donna Grant
|
Jeremy Fowler
Sue Montgomery
Larry Plapinger
|
Lead teacher of the site
|
Direct towards required professional learning activities. Serve as a person to answer questions and direct resources
|
|
Linda Newman
|
All teachers
|
Trainer from district for FAIR, Learning Focused Strategies, and curriculum maps
|
FAIR training
LFS training
Curriculum maps training
Professional learning communities on LFS/curriculum maps
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Title I, Part A
N/A
Title I, Part C- Migrant
N/A
Title I, Part D
N/A
Title II
N/A
Title III
N/A
Title X- Homeless
N/A
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
N/A
Violence Prevention Programs
N/A
Nutrition Programs
N/A
Housing Programs
N/A
Head Start
N/A
Adult Education
N/A
Career and Technical Education
N/A
Job Training
N/A
Other
N/A
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)
School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model
Professional Learning Communities
| PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.) | PLC Leader | Frequency of PLC Meetings | Schedule (when) | Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis) |
|
All Staff
|
Nancy Woolcock
Linda Newman
Donna Grant
|
Weekly
|
End of the day after the students leave on the buses
|
What is a PLC?
RtI and RtI-Behavior
Data and its use
Curriculum Maps
|
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: For Title I schools only
Pre-School Transition
Not applicable to BEST. Students that are assigned to BEST are in grades K-5.
Postsecondary Transition
Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.
BEST services students in grades K-5.
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 |
|
BEST is an alternative education site that does not receive a school grade or awarded AYP. Students are provided with 45 minutes of daily supplement instruction on the computer utilizing New Century to provide supplemental instruction in addtion to the core.
|
N/A
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Schedule students into computer lab daily.
|
Donna Grant
|
Increase in students mastery of benchmarks
|
New Century Progress Monitoring
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
Supplemental Reading Instruction
|
New Century
|
District Reading Coach
|
9/09
|
Incorporate weekly progress monitoring results into planning sessions
|
Lead Teacher
|
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 |
| New Century |
Local Dollars |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $2,000.00 |
|
| End of Reading Goal |
|
Mathematics Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?
What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
BEST is an alternative education site that does not receive a school grade or awarded AYP. Students are provided with 45 minutes of daily supplemental instruction on the computer utilizing New Century to provide supplemental instruction to the core.
|
N/A
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Schedule students daily into the lab.
|
Donna Grant
|
Student mastery of benchmarks
|
New Century Progress Monitoring
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
Supplemental math instruction
|
New Century
|
Nancy Woolcock
|
9/09
|
Incorporates weekly progress monitoring results into planning sessions
|
Lead Teacher
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| New Century Supplemental math program |
Local dollars |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $2,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $2,000.00 |
|
| End of 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?
|
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
| No data submitted |
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of 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?
|
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
| No data submitted |
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of 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 |
BEST is an alternative education site that does not receive a school grade or AYP. BEST services students from all the elementary schools. Parents are required to bring their child on the first day so that they can receive a tour, meet the staff, and receive an overview of the RtI-Behavior system.
Point sheets are sent home on a daily basis with parent signature required. Phone calls or notes also occur on a weekly basis informing parents of progress.
Parents are invited to visit at anytime, but due to many of them being over an hour away from the school site this can be very difficult.
|
N/A
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
| No data submitted |
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Parent Involvement Goal |
|
Other Goals
Transition Goal: |
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Upon review of the data of students that have attended BEST in the past 3 years, there is a pattern of students that have been returned to BEST after being unsuccessful behaviorally at their zone schools.
|
Provide a seamless transition back to the zone school with the necessary behavior tools to demonstrate success.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Become a positive behavior support school so that common language, expectations, and rules will occur at BEST and the zone school.
|
PBS school team
|
PBS implementation checklist
|
District/Project evaluation checklist for fidelity of implmentation
|
| 2 |
Develop a level system that provides reduced reinforcement so that when students return to their zone school they are not on an intensive reward schedule
|
All Staff
|
Level System
Point Sheets
|
Successful Transition Plan
|
| 3 |
Communicate with zone school about their schoolwide expectations/rules so that student is prepared upon return.
|
Lead Teacher
Mental Health Counselor
Psychologist
|
Communication log
Counseling logs
|
Percent of students returned to their home schools and demonstrated success by remaining at zone school for remainder of school year
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
RtI-Behavior/PBS
|
PBS
|
District PBS Coach
School Psychologist
|
8/09 - 11/09
|
PBS fidelity checklist
|
District PBS trainer
|
|
Level System
|
PBS
|
Lead Teacher
School Psychologist
|
8/09 - 9/09
|
Schoolwide expectations
Schoolwide behavior system using diminishing levels
|
Assistant Superintendent
Lead Teacher
|
|
| |
| Budget:
|
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| RtI-Behavior/PBS Training |
Local dollars |
$500.00 |
| Total: $500.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $500.00 |
|
| End of Transition Goal |
|
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
New Century |
Local Dollars |
$2,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
New Century Supplemental math program |
Local dollars |
$2,000.00 |
| Transition |
RtI-Behavior/PBS Training |
Local dollars |
$500.00 |
| Total: $4,500.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $4,500.00 |
Differentiated Accountability
School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance
No Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance
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.
No. Disagree with the above statement.
Measures Being Taken to Comply with SAC Requirement
BEST does not have a SAC and does not receive any SAC funds.
| Projected use of SAC Funds | Amount |
| No data submitted |
|
Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year
N/A
SAC Members
AYP DATA
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Polk LAKE ALFRED B.E.S.T PROGRAM 9231 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 42 Math: 42
|
2006-2007 School Grade1: |
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
56% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
8 |
N |
18 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
87 |
NA |
73 |
82 |
N |
18 |
N |
|
NA |
| WHITE
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| BLACK
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| HISPANIC
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ASIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| AMERICAN INDIAN
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
School District 2008-2009
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
0%
|
0%
|
%
|
%
|
|
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 |
0% |
0% |
|
|
|
3 ways to make gains:Improve FCAT LevelsMaintain Level 3, 4, or 5Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2 |
| Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? |
% (0) |
% (0) |
|
|
0
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
| Percent Tested = 0% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
|
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
School District 2007-2008
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
0%
|
0%
|
%
|
%
|
|
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 |
0% |
0% |
|
|
|
3 ways to make gains:Improve FCAT LevelsMaintain Level 3, 4, or 5Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2 |
| Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? |
% (0) |
% (0) |
|
|
0
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
| Percent Tested = 0% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
|
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
School District 2006-2007
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
0%
|
0%
|
%
|
%
|
|
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 |
0% |
0% |
|
|
|
3 ways to make gains:Improve FCAT LevelsMaintain Level 3, 4, or 5Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2 |
| Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School? |
% (0) |
% (0) |
|
|
0
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
| Percent Tested = 0% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
|
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |