VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS
Vision:
“We nurture and expose children to the love of learning, facilitate a desire to continue their education, and maintain a successful level of achievement at each grade level.”
Mission:
We are “COMMITTED TO SUCCESS for students, teachers, staff, and our school system”.
PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS
Brief History and Background of the School
Brief History and Background of the School PROFILE DEMOGRAPHICS
In the 2008-2009 SY, the enrollment for Medart Elementary School was 593 students based on the February 09 FTE report.
Medart Elementary has always been proud of having a faculty that works together in a cohesive manner. We exhibit this through actions, consideration, and respect towards each other with the focus being on the welfare of the school and its’ students. We take pride in our team spirit.
Medart Elementary boasts several National Board Certified Teachers - Beth Brown, Belinda McElroy, Brooke Mohr, Diane Perez, and Virginia Tillman. Michelle Lawhon, second grade teacher, was selected by her co-workers as Medart’s Teacher of the Year. Medart Elementary recognized Russell Herron as Teacher of the Month in January, and Kay Floyd in July. The Wakulla County School Board gave these teachers special recognition during their monthly meetings. Medart’s faculty and staff attended many workshops during the 2008-2009 SY. All of our teachers and paraprofessionals are highly qualified with all teachers in field.
The faculty and staff continue to create student incentive programs to increase interest in reading and encourage good behavior. Within the school, we have a Terrific Kids program, which recognizes and rewards those students who excel in citizenship and work habits. Students are nominated by their teachers and receive recognition and rewards during a televised program via the school’s closed circuit TV system. Students read books checked out from the media center and earn points in the Accelerated Reader Program by correctly responding to questions on AR quizzes taken on our Internet hosted Renaissance Place. We also recognize students who achieve honor roll status, excellent citizenship, and perfect attendance each nine-week term by presenting ribbons with their report cards. At the end of the school year, we have a special assembly for these students where their parents are invited. Trophies, pins, and certificates are awarded for citizenship, academics, the arts, and physical fitness.
This year there were several academic programs offered to Medart Elementary students. These included Title I, which encompasses the entire school population, and Camp TEAM, which is an after school remediation and enrichment program for third, fourth, and fifth grades. These programs were funded with SAC, Title I, and School Recognition funds.
Student assessment is an on-going process in every school district. In Wakulla County this was accomplished through the administration of SAT 10 in second grades in the 2008-2009 SY. Third, fourth, and fifth graders took FCAT SSS in Math and Reading. In addition, fourth graders took FCAT Writing and fifth graders took FCAT Science. Test scores by Wakulla County Schools show that our students excel. Medart continues to do its part in helping our district to achieve high rankings. For the 2007-2008 SY, Medart Elementary made its seventh A in a row with our highest score ever – 594. For the 2008-2009 SY Medart Elementary can boast their eighth ‘A’. We are proud of the accomplishments our student have achieved.
This year Medart Elementary School worked closely with several Flagler College students through internships and practicum activities. Their fresh knowledge was absorbed by some of our veteran teachers, which generated a positive experience for teachers and students alike.
Medart has an exciting and active volunteer program. Many parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and community members provide our faculty, staff, and students with help and assistance in enriching activities and educational opportunities. These volunteers have willingly given 5,259 hours of their time to help Medart in its drive to succeed. Our hard working volunteer coordinator, Cindy Russell is coordinating a successful Volunteer Program.
Medart is also proud of its outstanding P.T.O. and the projects undertaken by this group. A landscaping project, which began in the fall of 2002, has continued with the planting of many more trees and shrubs around the school campus. This has helped provide new environmental experiences for our students. Another big project, the annual Carnival, rose over $18,000 gross. Each year, the P.T.O. gives money to teachers for purchasing additional classroom materials. For the 2009-2010 SY, each teacher will receive $100.00 to be spent in the 209-2010 SY for consumable supplies. The faculty and staff are treated several times a year to lunches and breakfasts as a ‘Welcome Back’ or ‘Thank You’ from this wonderful parent group. We are supportive and appreciative of our P.T.O. and look forward to another dynamic year.
In 2008-2009 SY the SAC members voted to adopt the District Mission statement as their own. The prior Mission statement was as follows: The mission of Medart Elementary is to provide a child-centered atmosphere where students are given the opportunity to excel. Our commitment is to provide experiences for personal growth and achievement for all members of the learning community through an enjoyment of learning. We encourage a lasting enthusiasm for learning while stressing moral standards, responsibility, and respect toward others. The school’s Mission and Beliefs were assessed by all stakeholders in the school setting in the 2007-2008 SY. The 2007-2008 SAC and faculty agreed that the Beliefs and Vision needed to be updated to match our high expectations for students to perform at a higher level. Just as the Missions and Beliefs were reestablished for the SACS Report for the Peer Review Team in October 2002, the Mission and Belief statements were updated in the spring of 2008. We feel our Mission and Beliefs are well defined within the focus and boundaries of our expectations.
Unique School Strengths for Next Year
Medart Elementary has a common instructional framework, which guides curriculum, teaching, assessment, and learning climate. The vision statement and mission have assimilated into our culture, and this is proven by the manner in which they are demonstrated in the programs, practices, and working conditions at our school. Staff members worked in cross curricular multi grade level groups during a faculty meeting to reassess our mission statement, consider whether each statement shared our movement in the direction of achieving our school’s vision, and to determine if changes were needed. Each group was asked to write down any examples that they could think of to demonstrate how our school supports our beliefs through allocation of resources, instructional strategies, materials, actions, and programs.
Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year
Based on our 2008-2009 SY results for 3rd-5th grades, the math scores from FCAT were lower. We are going to strive to improve our score through After-School and In-School small groups with the lowest quartile. As result of these test scores, we did not make AYP. With the focus being on student performance, we believe we can improve the test scores.
Student Demographics
Group Female Male School %
White 233 271 84.7
Black 28 33 10.3
Hispanic 2 2 .7
Asian 0 2 .3
Am. Indian 1 1 .3
Multiracial 9 13 3.7
Disabled 34 73 16.3
Economically Disadvantaged 159 171 55.5
ELL
Migrant
Female 275 46.2
Male 320 53.8
Total 595 100.0
Student Attendance Rates
Our attendance rate for 2008-2009 SY was 94.23 compared to the districts rate which was 93.73.
Student Mobility
The student mobility rate was 1% with the stability rate 99%.
Student Suspension Rates
In the 2008-2009 SY three students were suspended. Based on the enrollment of 608 students, the percentage was .4%.
Student Retention Rates
The retention rate for the 2008-09 school year was 6% (37 students)based on enrollment of 608 students.
Class Size
In the 2008-2009 SY class size for K-3 was 17.06, and the class size for 4-5 grades was 20.43.
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
The majority of our school's incoming Kindergarten students come from Wakulla Educational Center, Sopchoppy Educational Center, and Trinity Luteran Preschool. All first time kindergarten students during the first 45 days of the 2008-2009 SY were observed and rated using ECHOS with 91% showing scorings of Consistently Demonstrating or Emerging and 9% not yet ready.
Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern
Students at Medart Elementary are scheduled to go to Wakulla Middle School. Wakulla Middle School for the 2008-2009 SY made an ‘A’ grade and made AYP. Writing scores improved by 1%. The number of students below grade level in Reading and Math was less than the prior year. 73% of the students were proficient in Reading and Math.
Partnerships and Grants
We partner with several businesses throughout the year to help the school with services provided to our stakeholders with much emphasis from businesses in helping with our Holiday Festival.
Grants are awarded throughout the year from groups such as: PBS (Positive Behavior Support), PLT (Project Learning Tree), Title I School Improvement, Service Learning, Nutrition Program from University of Florida, and the Wakulla County Extension Office.
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
|
RobertPearce
|
BS degree in
Physical Education in 1987 from Florida State University; MS degree in
Educational Leadership from Florida State University in 1997.
|
10
|
8
|
8 “A’s”
|
|
Assis Principal
|
Sharon Kemp
|
BS degree in
Elementary Education in 1976 from Florida State University; MS degree in
Educational Leadership from Florida State University in 1997
|
30
|
6
|
6 "A's"
|
* 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 Coach
|
Cynthia Shrestha
|
MS in Adminstration
BS Elementary Ed.
|
4
|
4
|
3 "A's"
|
* 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) |
1. Our administration strives to select new teachers that fit our vision, philosophy, and mission of the school.
This encourages a climate conducive to our personal culture.
|
Robert Pearce
|
On-going (continual)
|
Only one new teacher will be hired this year based on a retirement in kindergarten. The transfer was within the District, Cary Gerrill.
|
|
2. Teachers are encourged to participate in staff development, including Group Study such as: Book Study and Tuesday Teacher Training. The final result is teachers share at faculty meetings new strategies to teach and improve student performance.
|
Sharon Kemp
|
On-going (continual)
|
Group sharing provides teachers a time to collaborate.
|
|
3. Teachers are recognized at faculty meeting by their peers through the 'Golden Apple Award'.
|
Teachers
|
On-going
(continual)
|
Weekly faculty meetings awards are presented.
|
|
4. Our 'Open Door Policy' is an contagious spirit.
|
Robert Pearce
|
On-going (continual)
|
All stakeholders feel the consistent positive atmosphere daily.
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
| No data submitted |
|
Staff Demographics
| Total Number of Instructional Staff | % of First-Year Teachers | % of Teachers with 1-5 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 6-14 Years of Experience | % of Teachers with 15+ Years of Experience | % of Teachers with Advanced Degrees | % Highly Qualified | % Reading Endorsed Teachers | % National Board Certified Teachers | % ESOL Endorsed |
| 43 | 0 | 6 | 11 | 26 | 12 | 100 | 2 | 5 | 11 |
Teacher Mentoring Program
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
|
Connie Worrill
|
Cary Gerrell
|
new teacher
|
As needed
|
|
Laura Lawhon
|
Tammy McIntyre
|
new teacher
|
As needed
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Title I, Part A
Title 1 funds provide for supplemental materials, equipment, smaller teacher pupil ratio, staff development, remediation, and parent involvement activities.
Title I, Part C- Migrant
Migrant PAEC coordinates services for migrant students. Currently we do not have any migrant students.
Title I, Part D
The district does not receive Title 1, Part D funds.
Title II
Title II, Part A funds are used to fund an elementary Reading/Intervention Coach, and professional development for teachers from all schools based on needs determined by analyzing assessment data. Title II, Part D funds provide staff development addressing incorporating technology into instruction.
Title III
The district does not receive Title III funds. However, services for English Language Learner services are provided by the district student services department.
Title X- Homeless
ARRA Title X funds will support a part-time Homeless Liaison to assist in providing resources (clothing, school supplies, and social services referrals) for students identified as homeless under the McKinney-Vento Act to eliminate barriers from a free and appropriate education.
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
After school remediation
Violence Prevention Programs
Schools offer violence prevention programs and anti-drug programs which are supported by Title IV funds, the community and the Sheriffs Department.
Nutrition Programs
NA
Housing Programs
NA
Head Start
NA
Adult Education
NA
Career and Technical Education
NA
Job Training
NA
Other
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)
School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model
Professional Learning Communities
| PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.) | PLC Leader | Frequency of PLC Meetings | Schedule (when) | Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis) |
|
1. PBS Level 2 Training - All Teachers
|
PBS Chair
|
8
|
Monthly, and as needed
|
X SIP Goal
X Sharing of Best Practices
|
|
2. Elementary K-2 Math Training
|
Mrs. Walker
|
18
|
July 21-23, 2009
|
X District Strategic Plan
X Written Reflection
|
|
3. Fourth Grade Writing Training,
|
Assistant Principal
|
5
|
August 5, 2009
|
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
X Written Reflection
X Participant Product
|
|
4. Improving Student Achievement through Data and Assessment (FAIR Training included)k-5
|
Reading Coach
|
42
|
August 7, 2009
|
X IPDP
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
X IPDP
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
|
|
5. Crisis Prevention Intervention Refresher - All Teachers
|
District Office
|
2
|
August 7, 2009
|
X District Strategic Plan
X State Mandate
X Participant Product
|
|
6. FAIR/PMRN Training with Grade Level Teacher Groups
|
Assistant Principle
|
31
|
40 minute sessions twice a month
|
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
X State Mandate
X Participant Product
X Sharing of Best Practices
|
|
7. Fourth Grade Writing with Dr. Oropallo
|
District Office
|
5
|
Sept. 10, 2009
|
X SIP Goal
X Sharing of Best Practices
|
8. Six Traits of Writing-Elementary
k-5
|
District Office
|
2
|
September 22, 2009
|
X District Strategic Plan
X Written Reflection
|
|
9. Technology Training – including but not limited to RM Easiteach Software, Audio Enhancement System, Discovery Education Streaming, Brain POP, GradeQuick, Pearson SuccessMaker - All Teachers
|
Assistant Principal
|
42
|
August,2009 - May, 2010
|
X Sharing of Best Practices
X SIP Goal
|
|
10. FAME Conference
|
Assistant Principal
|
1
|
September 30 – Oct. 2, 2009
|
X IPDP
X Sharing of Best Practices
|
11. Book Study Groups – Making the Most of Small Groups; Scientific Reading Assessment; Teaching Grammar with Playful Poems; Good-Bye Round Robin; Second Grade Writers
|
Assistant Principal
|
30
|
Sept – Dec, 2009
|
X SIP Goal
X Sharing of Best Practices
X Written Reflection
|
|
12. Office 2007 Training - All Staff
|
Assistant Principal
|
51
|
August, 2009 - May, 2010
|
X SIP Goal
X Participant Product
|
|
13. NGSSS Math Training for 3rd – 5th Grade Teachers
|
Assistant Principal
|
16
|
Spring 2010
|
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
X Written Reflection
|
|
14. FAIR/PMRN Training k-5
|
Reading Coach
|
42
|
August 2009 – May 2010
|
X IPDP
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
X Participant Product
|
|
15. RtI Training - All Teachers
|
District Office
|
42
|
August 2009 – May 2010
|
X IPDP
X SIP Goal
X District Strategic Plan
X Participant Product
|
NCLB Public School Choice
Note: For Title I schools only
Pre-School Transition
Medart Elementary Assistant Principal, Sharon Kemp attended PTA at Wakulla Educational Center (WEC) with Sopchoppy Educational Center (SEC) parents. In the spring meeting the parents and students of Wakulla Educational Center (WEC) with Sopchoppy Educational Center (SEC) were explained registration requirements. In the spring, Pre-K students from WEC, SEC, and Trinity Lutheran Preschool, come to Medart Elementary for a Kindergarten Orientation. Children visit the kindergarten classrooms and tour the school with the Principal or Assistant Principal. Coordination of services and discussions between administrators and teachers from WEC, SEC, and MES make for a smooth transition to kindergarten for the Pre-K students. At Open House, Kindergarten Orientation is provided for students and parents. On the first day of school, Medart encourages parents to come to the Boo-Hoo Breakfast after they take their child to class. This gives parents the opportunity to express their feelings and to be comforted.
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, 85% of students achieved mastery on the 2009 administration of FCAT Reading.
|
By June 2010, 53% or higher of second, third, fourth and fifth grade students, including SWD students, will make a minimum of one year’s growth (.9), or score at or above grade level in reading as evidenced by an appropriate skills lab report.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. The school will implement the new FAIR assessments to monitor student progress.
|
1. Principal and Reading Coach
|
1. Review FAIR data reports to ensure teachers are assessing students according to the created schedule.
|
1. Printout of FAIR assessments
|
| 2 |
2. DAR (Diagnostic Assessments of Reading), Harcourt Reading Inventory, ERDA (Early Reading Diagnostic Assessment), and FLKRS (Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screening) (Echos + FAIR), are used for early identification of student needs. See Wakulla County’s Comprehensive Researched-Based Reading Plan.
|
2. Assistant Principal and Classroom Teachers
|
2. Review data reports to ensure teachers are assessing students according to the created schedule.
|
2. Printout of assessments
|
| 3 |
3. FCAT Explorer (third and fourth grade).
|
3. Classroom Teachers
|
3. Review data reports to ensure teachers are assessing students according to the created schedule.
|
3. Printout of assessments
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grade second, 17% percent of the students were in the lower 25%. In grades 3-5, the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains was 69%.
|
By June 2010, 68% or more of all students in second through fifth grade will have an average score of 53% or above in reading as measured by the Stanford 10 for second grade, and scoring at level 3 or above as measured by the FCAT SSS for third, fourth, and fifth grades.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. After-school remediation and enrichment academic programs will continue with funding provided by SAI, Title I, School Recognition, and other sources.
|
1. After school coordinator and Assistant Principal
|
1. After school coordinator and teachers will review student progress through materials tested.
|
1. Dasboard printouts
|
| 2 |
2. In-school remediation will continue to provide support for second - fifth grade students
|
2. Classroom teachers and Special Area Teachers
|
2. After school coordinator and teachers will review student progress through materials tested.
|
2. Dasboard printouts
|
| 3 |
3. Students participating will include, but not limited to, those subgroups with an IEP (Individual Educational Plan), ESOL students, and those subgroups not meeting 10% improvement in reading and math from the 2008-2009 SY.
|
3. Classroom teachers and ESE teachers
|
3. After school coordinator and teachers will review student progress through materials tested.
|
3. Dasboard printouts
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, based on % of students Reading on Track proficient – there was a 9% increase from previous year.
|
By June 2010, 68% or more of all students in second through fifth grade will have an average score of 53% or above in reading as measured by the Stanford 10 for second grade, and scoring at level 3 or above as measured by the FCAT SSS for third, fourth, and fifth grades.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. All database software programs including, Renaissance Place (Accelerated Reader and STAR) and Pearson SuccessMaker, will enable students in grades first through fifth to track their reading progress. In addition, FCAT Explorer will enable students in grades third and fourth to track their reading progress.
|
1. Media Specialist and Classroom Teachers
|
1. Adminstrators will review data.
|
1. Computer logs
|
| 2 |
2. Training will be provided for parents and teachers highlighting basic reading techniques using appropriate Title I materials, as provided by the Wakulla County Title I Parent Involvement Plan. /
Professional Development on reading strategies will continue to be provided for teachers.
|
2. Assistant Principal and Title I District Coordinator
|
2. Review Parent Logs/Assess teacher participation
|
2. Parent Logs/Workshop and Conference Logs
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 31% of Students With Disabilities (SWD) in 3rd-5th grades scored below Level 3.
|
Increase the percent of SWD in 3rd-5th grades scoring at or above a Level 3 from 69% to 72% on the 2010 FCAT Reading.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Tier 1: Determine core instructional needs by reviewing FAIR (Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading) assessment data for all SWDs. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence-based instruction/
Interventions within 90-minute reading block.
|
1. Reading Coach
|
1. Student progress is assessed using FAIR Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM) three times a year. Percent of students making adequate progress toward benchmark is calculated.
|
1. FAIR OPM data will be used to determine progress from Benchmark 1 towards Benchmark 2 and from Benchmark 2 towards Benchmark 3.
|
| 2 |
2. Tier 2: Plan supplemental instruction/
Intervention for students not responding to core instruction. Focus of instruction is determined by review of FAIR data and will include explicit instruction, modeled instruction, guided practice and independent practice.
|
2. Reading Coach
|
2. Student progress is assessed using FAIR OPM 3 times a year for all students receiving Tier 2 supplemental instruction. Percent of students making adequate progress toward benchmark is calculated.
|
2. FAIR OPM data will be used to determine progress from Benchmark 1 towards Benchmark 2 and from Benchmark 2 towards Benchmark 3.
|
| 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.
|
3. RtI Team/Case Manager
|
3. Student progress is assessed using FAIR OPM 3 times a year for all students receiving Tier 3 targeted intervention. Adequate progress is determined by comparing student’s trendline to aimline.
|
3. FAIR OPM data when appropriate will be used to determine progress from Benchmark 1 towards Benchmark 2 and from Benchmark 2 towards Benchmark 3.
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By June 2010, 68% or more of all students in second through fifth grade will have an average score of 53% or above in reading as measured by the Stanford 10 for second grade, and scoring at level 3 or above as measured by the FCAT SSS for third, fourth, and fifth grades.
|
Effective Implementation of FAIR Assessments to improve student performance.
|
Reading Coach
|
August 2009
|
Review Fair Assessments including all supplementary resources.
|
Principal and Reading Coach
|
|
Increase the percent of SWD in 3rd-5th grades scoring at or above a Level 3 from 69% to 72% on the 2010 FCAT Reading.
|
Implement all database experiences for parents.
After-school Remediation
In School Remediation
programs to help assess student performance, including 90-minute Reading Block.
Provide learning
|
After-School Coordinator
Principal
|
November 2009
August 2009
|
Review Student Performance
Review student Scores/Dashboard
|
Assistant Principal and After-School Coordinator
Principal, All Teachers
|
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 |
| FCAT Practice |
General Revenue, District Funds |
$3,000.00 |
| FAIR |
|
$0.00 |
| Total: $3,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Software and Equipment |
General Revenue, Title I School Improvement Funds |
$90,000.00 |
| Dash~Board |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Renaissance |
Book Fair |
$3,000.00 |
| Total: $93,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| FAIR Training |
General Revenue |
$400.00 |
| Total: $400.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| PBS (Positive Behavior Support) |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Camp TEAM |
School Recognition Funds, Title I |
$60,000.00 |
| Total: $60,000.00 |
| Final Total: $156,400.00 |
|
| End of Reading Goal |
|
Mathematics Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?
What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?
Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?
Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?
Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 63% of the lowest 25% made learning gains.
|
By June 2010, 53% or higher of second, third, fourth and fifth grade students, including SWD students, will make a minimum of one year’s growth (.9), or score at or above grade level in math as evidenced by an appropriate skills lab report, STAR Math. This is the first year using STAR Math. (A baseline will be determined next year.)
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Mathematics progress will be periodically assessed utilizing the FCAT Explorer reports, Pearson SuccessMaker math programs, and Harcourt Chapter and Unit tests. Extra support will be given to Tier 2 & 3 students as designated.
|
1. Assistant Principal and Classroom Teacher
|
1. Review of Math Assessments will be provided to teachers
|
1. Progress Monitoring and GMade
|
| 2 |
2. Software programs will be implemented including, but not limited to, Harcourt Math Supplemental Software as an ongoing process to continue to excel as an ‘A’ school. (Title I)
|
2. Assistant Principal and Classroom Teacher
|
2. Review of Math Assessments will be provided to teachers
|
2. Progress Monitoring and GMade
|
| 3 |
3. Technological equipment, both hardware and software, will be expanded for student use. (See Technology Plan) (Title I)
|
3. Assistant Principal and Classroom Teacher
|
3. As funds are allocated, software will be purchased
|
3. Purchase orders
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grades 3-5, 76% of the students made mastery on FCAT.
|
By June 2010, at least 70% or more of third through fifth grade students will score a Level 3 or above in math as measured by FCAT SSS.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. FCAT links will be added to the school web site for parents and students to explore. After school remedial and enrichment academic programs will continue with funding provided by Title I, School Recognition and other sources. Students participating will include, but not limited to, subgroups with an IEP (Individual Educational Plan), and subgroups not meeting 10% improvement in math from the 2007-08 SY.
|
1. Principal, Assistant Principal, After-School Coordinator
|
1. Maintain a record of strategies and interventions utilized with the lowest percentile.
|
1.RtI
|
| 2 |
2. Special Area teachers (Art, Music, Physical Education, and Media) will enhance thematic lessons instructing students in problem solving skills across the curriculum during special area time. (Title I)
|
2.Special Area Teachers
|
2. Within class and the last block of the day, Special Area teachers will provide instruction.
|
2.Teacher Planning Book
|
| 3 |
3. Parent involvement in the instruction of math skills will be provided using appropriate Title I materials.
|
3. Assistant Principal
|
3. Website will provide instructional strategies and tools for parents to help their child.
|
3. Website Counter
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics data, 63% of the bottom quartile showed learning gains
|
70% or more of the bottom quartile will make learning gains on the 2010 Mathematics FCAT.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Tier 1: 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. Assistant Principal
|
1. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).
|
1. Grade-level teams will review results of common assessment data every 6 weeks to determine progress toward benchmark (75% on common assessment).
|
| 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.
|
2. Assistant Principal
|
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. RtI Team
|
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 |
|
By June 2010, 53% or higher of second, third, fourth and fifth grade students, including SWD students, will make a minimum of one year’s growth (.9), or score at or above grade level in reading as evidenced by an appropriate skills lab report.
|
Effective Implementation of GMade
|
Principal
Classroom Teachers
|
August 2009
|
Classroom Visits
Computer Lab Diagnostic Results Reviewed
|
Principal
|
|
By June 2010, at least 70% or more of third through fifth grade students will score a Level 3 or above in math as measured by FCAT SSS.
|
Website links added
|
Web site Committee
|
August 2009
|
Continual Updating of Website
|
Website Committee Chair
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Harcourt Math |
General Revenue |
$3,000.00 |
| Total: $3,000.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| United Streaming |
General Revenue, Title I |
$1,500.00 |
| Pearson SuccessMaker |
General Revenue |
$3,500.00 |
| FCAT Explorer |
State Funds |
$0.00 |
| Dash~Board |
General Revenue |
$0.00 |
| STAR Math |
District Funds |
$2,000.00 |
| Total: $7,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| K-2 New Generation Math Standards |
Title I |
$7,000.00 |
| Total: $7,000.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| PBS (Positive Behavior Support) |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $17,000.00 |
|
| End of Mathematics Goal |
|
Science Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In 2009, 5th grade mean score was 328, District -317, and State-314.
|
The 5th grade FCAT Science SSS average will be at or above the 2009 state mean.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Continue delivery of inquiry-based instruction through the adopted science textbook aligned with the Sunshine State Standards and Benchmarks.
|
1. Classroom Teachers
|
1. Teacher Lesson Planner
|
1. Student Science Grades
|
| 2 |
2. Continue delivery of science instruction through the Scientific Method displayed with Science Fair Presentations.
|
2. Classroom Teachers
|
2.Science Fair Projects
|
2. Judging of Science Fair Projects
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In grade 5th, 57% show mastery on FCAT Science.
|
In June 2010, 5th grade will score 58% on FCAT Science.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Encourage greater utilization of science oriented software and websites
|
1.Classroom Teachers
|
1. Sharing of science strategies and websites.
|
1. Links on website to Science Links.
|
| 2 |
2. Participate in Project Learning Tree Week lessons and activities for primary and intermediate students with additional PLT Training.
|
2.PLT Committee
|
2. PLT Program provide with student activities.
|
2. Student evaluation of PLT Program
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
The 5th grade FCAT Science SSS average will be at or above the 2009 state mean.
|
Scientific Inquiry techniques/strategies
|
Science Chair
|
August 2009
|
Observation of Science being taught in classroom.
|
Principal
|
|
In June 2010, 5th grade will score 58% on FCAT Science.
|
Additional science activities provided for students
|
PLT Co-Chairs
|
March 2010
|
Overview PLT activities
|
PLT Co-Chairs
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Science Fair |
General Revenue, Title I |
$200.00 |
| Total: $200.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| United Streaming |
General Revenue, Title I |
$0.00 |
| Websites |
District Funds |
$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 |
| GEMS, Project Learning Tree |
General Revenue |
$200.00 |
| Total: $200.00 |
| Final Total: $400.00 |
|
| End of Science Goal |
|
Writing Goal
|
| Needs Assessment: |
Based on School Grade Data:
Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?
What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In 2009, 81% of fourth grade students show mastery of FCAT Writing
|
By June 2009, 70% or more of the fourth grade students will score in Levels 3.5 or above on the Fourth Grade Writing Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test Prompt (FCAT Writing).
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Camp TEAM, an after-school remediation and enrichment program will continue as funds are available. Students participating will include, but not be limited to, those subgroups with IEP (Individual Educational Plan), or those subgroups not meeting 10% improvement in reading, writing, or math from the 2008-09 SY.
|
1. After-School Coordinator
|
1. After-School program will be implemented.
|
1. Student performance on Wakulla Writes!
|
| 2 |
2. Parent training in the instruction of writing skills will be provided using appropriate Title I materials.
|
2. Assistant Principal and district Level Title I Coordinator.
|
2. Parent night will provide including website with links to help prepare parents.
|
2. Parent Participation Log and Website Counter
|
| 3 |
3. Opportunities will be provided for students to share their writing through public speaking and other avenues in order to build reader awareness and self-esteem including a portfolio of two selections of their writings will be passed on to their next years teacher.
|
3. Opportunities will be provided for students to share their writing through public speaking and other avenues in order to build reader awareness and self-esteem including a portfolio of two selections of their writings will be passed on to their next years teacher.
|
3. Students will be able to share their writings and speeches via the Morning Broadcast
|
3. Observation of Morning Broadcasts
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
Based on the 2009 FCAT Writes data, 81% of students scored at or above proficiency.
|
By June 2009, 70% or more of the fourth grade students will score in Levels 3.5 or above on the
|
| |
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. Principal and Reading Coach
|
1. Student writing samples will be reviewed and scored bi-weekly by teacher. Percent of students making adequate progress toward goal will be determined once every 6 weeks by comparing writing trend data to expected rate of growth (aimline).
|
1. Scored writing samples will be used to determine progress between the Pre-test Prompt and Mid-year Prompt.
|
| 2 |
2. Tier 1: The revision and editing process is explicitly taught and seen in student writing drafts.
|
2. Principal and Reading Coach
|
2. Student writing samples will be reviewed and scored bi-weekly by teacher. Percent of students making adequate progress toward goal will be determined once every 6 weeks by comparing writing trend data to expected rate of growth (aimline).
|
2. Scored writing samples will be used to determine progress between the Pre-test Prompt and Mid-year Prompt.
|
| 3 |
3. 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.
|
3. Assistant Principal and District Level Coordinator
|
3. Student writing samples will be reviewed and scored bi-weekly by teacher. Percent of students making adequate progress toward goal will be determined once every 6 weeks by comparing writing trend data to expected rate of growth (aimline).
|
3. 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 |
|
By June 2009, 70% or more of the fourth grade students will score in Levels 3.5 or above on the Fourth Grade Writing Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test Prompt (FCAT Writing).
|
Teaching writing through student and teacher modeling
|
Classroom Teachers
|
September 2009
|
Reviewing writing sample from scored Wakulla Writes!
|
Assistant Principal and District Level Coordinator
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Kathy Orapallo, Writing Consultant |
District Funds, Title I |
$1,500.00 |
| Total: $1,500.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| United Streaming |
General Revenue, Title I |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Kathy Orapallo, Writing Consultant |
General Revenue, District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Wakulla Writes! |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Final Total: $1,500.00 |
|
| 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 2009, % of parents participated in school activities
|
By June 2010, 13% or more of our students’ parents will participate in training opportunities and other activities involving their child provided by the school.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. The school will hold afternoon/evening meetings to provide parents with information regarding FCAT, Sunshine State Standards, and strategies to use in helping their child academically.
|
1. Assistant Principal
|
1. Website will provide parents with all upcoming activities to help with their child.
|
1. Website Counter
|
| 2 |
2. The Science Committee will hold meetings in order to provide third through fifth grade parents with ideas, criteria, and strategies concerning projects for the Annual Science Fair.
|
2. Science Committee Chair
|
2. Parents will be notified of meetings
|
2. Parent Participation Sign-in
|
| 3 |
3. Classroom teachers will send home supplemental materials provided through the adopted textbook companies, such as, Harcourt Math Family Involvement Activities, Harcourt Reading School-Home Connections, and Additional Homework Ideas.
|
3. Classroom Teachers
|
3. Parent resources will be available online.
|
3. Website Counter
|
| 4 |
4. Parents will continue to be provided with written and Internet accessible publications, e.g. Edline, Home School Connection newsletters, School Board Adopted Code of Student Conduct, monthly calendars, lunch menus, and other pertinent information.
|
4. Assistant Principal
|
4. Parents will be able to access the information through the online link from Parent Information
|
4. Website Counter/District Climate Surveys
|
| 5 |
5. Information will be made accessible to parents concerning student physical fitness and indoor environmental air quality.
|
5. Principal, District Office
|
5. Information will be provide upon request
|
5. District Climate Surveys
|
| 6 |
6. The teachers will be available during school hours (8:10-3:40) for meetings to provide parents with ideas regarding their child’s education. (Title I)
|
6. Classroom Teachers
|
6. At Open House, parents can make an appointment with teachers to discuss child’s academics.
|
6. Sign-in Sheets
|
| 7 |
7. Monthly publications in a community newspaper/magazine.
|
7. Guidance Counselor
|
7. Articles about the school will be published in local newspaper and magazine
|
7. Articles
|
| 8 |
8. Parents are invited and encouraged to actively participate in our volunteer program.
|
8. Volunteer Coordinator, District Level Coordinator
|
8. Volunteer information will be on the District and School Homepage.
|
8. Volunteer Sign-ins
|
| 9 |
9. Parents will be involved in determining how Title I funds are spent through involvement in the SAC and development of the SIP and the Title I Plan.
|
9. SAC (School Advisory Council) Chair and School Title I Coordinator
|
9. SAC (School Advisory Council) will participate in the allocations of Title I Funds.
|
9. Agendas and minutes
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By June 2010, 13% or more of our students’ parents will participate in training opportunities and other activities involving their child provided by the school.
|
Advertise all options available to parents to participate in their child’s education.
|
Classroom Teachers
|
August 2009
|
Continual data will be collected to count parent participation.
|
SAC Chair
|
|
| |
| Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| PTO |
General Revenue |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Website |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Connect-ED |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Ed-line |
District Funds |
$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 |
| Title I Parental Involvement Workshops |
Title I |
$3,000.00 |
| District Climate Surveys |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $3,000.00 |
| Final Total: $3,000.00 |
|
| End of Parent Involvement Goal |
|
Other Goals
School Safety and Discipline Strategies Goal: |
|
|
| Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement |
Objective Linked to Area of Improvement |
|
In 2009, 96.7% of all stakeholders feel our school is safe.
|
By June 2010, 96% of our students, parents, and teachers will agree Medart Elementary has a safe environment.
|
| |
Action Step |
Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step |
Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
1. Principal will encourage students to be respectful of others on morning and afternoon announcements.
|
1. Principal
|
1. On the morning broadcast, Principal will encourage student behavior.
|
1. Observation of student behavior.
|
| 2 |
2. Incidents of bullying will be addressed according to the Discipline Policy with Zero Tolerance.
|
2. Principal
|
2. Principal will keep track of Student Referrals
|
2. Student Referrals
|
| 3 |
3. Mentors are assigned to students with special needs by the Guidance Counselor.
|
3. Guidance Counselor
|
3. Teachers will refer students to guidance counselor with special needs.
|
3. Student Referrals
|
| 4 |
4. Discipline Committee consists of Grade Level Chairs (including Special Area, ESE, Positive Behavior Support Committee, and SAC Member
|
4. Discipline Committee Chair
|
4. Discipline Committee meets to discuss the safety of the students.
|
4. Committee findings
|
| 5 |
5. The PBS Committee meets monthly to discuss the needs/concerns of our students, parents, faculty, and paraprofessionals, including lunchroom behavior and safety concerns.
|
5. PBS Chair
|
5. Committee takes an active role in behavior decisions.
|
5. Student Referrals
|
| 6 |
6. As our enrollment changes, we continually update our policies to provide the safest environment.
|
6. Principal
|
6. Policies are updated to meet our student population.
|
6. Student Handbook
|
| 7 |
7. Our Discipline Policy is provided to students and parents in the MES Student/Parent Handbook, and the Wakulla County Code of Student Conduct and Elementary School Attendance Policy
|
7. Principal, District Liaison
|
7. Student/parent Handbook is made available to all stakeholders.
|
7. Parent Requests
|
| 8 |
8. The faculty, paraprofessionals, and staff are provided with this information in the Wakulla County School District Personnel Handbook and MES Faculty Handbook.
|
8. District Office
|
8. Handbooks are distributed with a sign-in sheet acknowledging receiving document.
|
8. Sign-in Sheet
|
| 9 |
9. Medart and its stakeholders provide an environment that is drug free and protects the health, safety, and civil rights of everyone at the school.
|
9. Principal, District Safety Officer
|
9. Medart will continually monitor the environment.
|
9. Student Referral and police reports
|
| 10 |
10. Ribbons are awarded for excellent citizenship at the end of each nine-week grading period.
|
10. Awards coordinator
|
10. Teachers will hand in a 9-week citizenship report.
|
10. Awards Assembly
|
| 11 |
11. A Student of the Week from each class is announced on Friday afternoon during the Terrific Kids televised announcements.
|
11. Guidance Counselor
|
11. Teachers will report their student of the week Friday morning
|
11. Student of the Week Broadcast
|
| 12 |
12. Positive Behavior Support Project (PBS) will continually be our behavior modification model.
|
12. PBS Coordinator
|
12. PBS will continually provide staff and faculty with PBS tools.
|
12. Teacher feedback
|
|
| |
Professional Development Aligned with Objective:
|
| Objective Addressed | Content/Topic | Facilitator | Target Date | Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring | Person Responsible for Monitoring |
|
By June 2010, 96% of our students, parents, and teachers will agree Medart Elementary has a safe environment.
|
PBS Training
|
PBS Chair
|
August 2009
|
Student Referrals will be overviewed and compared to last year.
|
Principal
|
|
| |
| Budget:
|
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| PBS |
General Revenue, District Funds |
$1,500.00 |
| Total: $1,500.00 |
| 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 |
| PBS |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Student Recognition (ribbons and certificates |
General Revenue |
$300.00 |
| Total: $300.00 |
| Final Total: $1,800.00 |
|
| End of School Safety and Discipline Strategies Goal |
|
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
FCAT Practice |
General Revenue, District Funds |
$3,000.00 |
| Reading |
FAIR |
|
$0.00 |
| Mathematics |
Harcourt Math |
General Revenue |
$3,000.00 |
| Writing |
Kathy Orapallo, Writing Consultant |
District Funds, Title I |
$1,500.00 |
| Science |
Science Fair |
General Revenue, Title I |
$200.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
PTO |
General Revenue |
$0.00 |
| School Safety and Discipline Strategies |
PBS |
General Revenue, District Funds |
$1,500.00 |
| Total: $9,200.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
Software and Equipment |
General Revenue, Title I School Improvement Funds |
$90,000.00 |
| Reading |
Dash~Board |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Renaissance |
Book Fair |
$3,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
United Streaming |
General Revenue, Title I |
$1,500.00 |
| Mathematics |
Pearson SuccessMaker |
General Revenue |
$3,500.00 |
| Mathematics |
FCAT Explorer |
State Funds |
$0.00 |
| Mathematics |
Dash~Board |
General Revenue |
$0.00 |
| Mathematics |
STAR Math |
District Funds |
$2,000.00 |
| Writing |
United Streaming |
General Revenue, Title I |
$0.00 |
| Science |
United Streaming |
General Revenue, Title I |
$0.00 |
| Science |
Websites |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Website |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Connect-ED |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Ed-line |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $100,000.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
FAIR Training |
General Revenue |
$400.00 |
| Mathematics |
K-2 New Generation Math Standards |
Title I |
$7,000.00 |
| Writing |
Kathy Orapallo, Writing Consultant |
General Revenue, District Funds |
$0.00 |
| School Safety and Discipline Strategies |
PBS |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Total: $7,400.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| Reading |
PBS (Positive Behavior Support) |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Reading |
Camp TEAM |
School Recognition Funds, Title I |
$60,000.00 |
| Mathematics |
PBS (Positive Behavior Support) |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Writing |
Wakulla Writes! |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| Science |
GEMS, Project Learning Tree |
General Revenue |
$200.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
Title I Parental Involvement Workshops |
Title I |
$3,000.00 |
| Parental Involvement |
District Climate Surveys |
District Funds |
$0.00 |
| School Safety and Discipline Strategies |
Student Recognition (ribbons and certificates |
General Revenue |
$300.00 |
| Total: $63,500.00 |
| Final Total: $180,100.00 |
Differentiated Accountability
School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance
Show Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance (Uploaded on 8/26/2009 1:45:06 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
1. By-Laws will be discussed and ratified at the September 4, 2009 SAC Team Meeting.
2. The dates and topics for the year will be discussed and planned for 2009-2010 SY.
3. On September 4, 2009, Mr. Pearce will discuss money with the SAC Team.
4. The School Advisory Council, faculty, and staff will look at the current expectations produced in the School Improvement Plan for 2009-2010 SY. The expectations will be discussed at Faculty Meetings to decide the Goals, Objectives, and Strategies for the School Improvement Plan 2010-2011 SY. The Goals will be in direct relationship to the District and State mandates; and the Objectives and Strategies, with minor revisions, will help the students at Medart Elementary improve their academic performance. The SAC, faculty, and staff will agree upon all revisions and strategies in May 2010.
5. The school’s SAC will routinely collect data about the school’s instructional and organizational effectiveness as it prepares to develop the School Improvement Plan. This will included a consistent review of student performance data using test data available in Dash~Board, STAR Math, FAIR, Wakulla Writes data, and the instructional practices occurring in the school. This process will be completed in May 2010 with consensus from all stakeholders.
6. The SAC will meet monthly and more as needed starting in September 2009 to formulate the School Improvement Plan for 2010-2011 SY. The SAC will review the progress of the School Improvement Plan for 2009-2010 SY mid-year and at the end of the year.
7. The SAC and the faculty will agree that the Goals are in alignment with the District’s Comprehensive Research-Based Reading Plan and District Accreditation. The faculty and staff will meet several times to improve the plan for the school year 2010-2011.
SAC Members
| Members |
|
1)
Robert Pearce,
Principal
|
|
2)
Diane Perez,
SAC Chair
|
|
3)
Amy Anderson,
Teacher
|
|
4)
Mary Green,
Teacher
|
|
5)
Russell Herron,
Teacher
|
|
6)
Charlotte Hoover,
Teacher
|
|
7)
Belinda McElroy,
Teacher
|
|
8)
Beth Brown,
Teacher
|
|
9)
Jay Westmark,
Business Member
|
|
10)
Mary Katherine Westmark,
Parent
|
|
11)
Sue Bruce,
Parent
|
|
12)
Amy Geiger,
Parent
|
|
13)
Bhaveshri Patel,
Parent
|
|
14)
Karen Perkins,
Parent
|
|
15)
Jackie Lawhon,
Parent
|
|
16)
Ray Johnson,
Parent
|
|
17)
Tammie Barfield,
Parent
|
|
18)
Shelley Swenson,
Community Member
|
|
19)
Kristi Thomas,
School Support Personnel
|
AYP DATA
| 2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Wakulla MEDART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0011 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 296 Math: 296
|
2008-2009 School Grade1: |
A
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
68% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2009 |
Y/N |
2009 |
Y/N |
2009 |
Y/N |
2009 |
Y/N |
2008 |
2009 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
2009 |
Y/N |
2008 |
2009 |
Y/N |
2009 |
Y/N |
2009 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
85 |
Y |
76 |
Y |
82
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
16 |
15 |
NA |
19 |
24 |
NA |
83 |
NA |
74 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
86 |
Y |
77 |
Y |
82
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
15 |
14 |
NA |
18 |
23 |
NA |
84 |
NA |
76 |
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 |
82 |
Y |
71 |
Y |
79
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
20 |
18 |
NA |
23 |
29 |
NA |
79 |
NA |
69 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
69 |
Y |
63 |
N |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
31 |
NA |
|
37 |
NA |
74 |
NA |
57 |
N |
| 2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Wakulla MEDART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0011 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 329 Math: 329
|
2007-2008 School Grade1: |
A
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
NO |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
58% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
62% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2007 |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
2008 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
84 |
Y |
81 |
Y |
|
82 |
N |
|
|
NA |
17 |
16 |
NA |
23 |
19 |
NA |
74 |
NA |
79 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
85 |
Y |
82 |
Y |
|
82 |
N |
|
|
NA |
15 |
15 |
NA |
21 |
18 |
NA |
74 |
NA |
78 |
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 |
80 |
Y |
77 |
Y |
|
79 |
N |
|
|
NA |
24 |
20 |
NA |
27 |
23 |
NA |
73 |
NA |
75 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
100 |
Y |
100 |
Y |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| 2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 |
Wakulla MEDART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 0011 |
Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:
|
Read: 296 Math: 296
|
2006-2007 School Grade1: |
A
|
Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress? |
YES |
|
| This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c2). |
This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b2). |
This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model. |
| Group |
Reading Tested 95% of the students? |
Math Tested 95% of the students? |
51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading? |
56% scoring at or above grade level in Math? |
Improved performance in Writing by 1%? |
Increased Graduation Rate3by 1%? |
Percent of Students below grade level in Reading |
Safe Harbor Reading |
Percent of Students below grade level in Math |
Safe Harbor Math |
% of students on track to be proficient in reading |
Growth model reading |
% of students on track to be proficient in math |
Growth model math |
| |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2005 |
2006 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2006 |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
2007 |
Y/N |
| TOTAL4
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
83 |
Y |
77 |
Y |
87
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
24 |
19 |
NA |
19 |
23 |
NA |
81 |
NA |
67 |
NA |
| WHITE
|
99 |
Y |
99 |
Y |
85 |
Y |
79 |
Y |
88
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
19 |
17 |
NA |
16 |
21 |
NA |
82 |
NA |
71 |
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
|
99 |
Y |
98 |
Y |
76 |
Y |
73 |
Y |
87
|
|
Y |
|
|
NA |
34 |
26 |
NA |
26 |
27 |
NA |
76 |
NA |
69 |
NA |
| ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
|
|
|
|
| STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
|
98 |
Y |
97 |
Y |
62 |
Y |
66 |
Y |
|
|
NA |
|
|
NA |
50 |
41 |
NA |
37 |
34 |
NA |
65 |
NA |
62 |
NA |
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Wakulla School District MEDART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2008-2009
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
89%
|
79%
|
82%
|
58%
|
308
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
73% |
58% |
|
|
131 |
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? |
78% (YES) |
51% (YES) |
|
|
129
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
568 |
|
| Percent Tested = 99% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Wakulla School District MEDART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2007-2008
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
87%
|
83%
|
66%
|
59%
|
295
|
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 |
70% |
74% |
|
|
144 |
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? |
67% (YES) |
88% (YES) |
|
|
155
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
594 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Wakulla School District MEDART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2006-2007
|
| |
Reading |
Math |
Writing |
Science |
Grade Points Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
88%
|
79%
|
84%
|
52%
|
303
|
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 |
82% |
58% |
|
|
140 |
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? |
75% (YES) |
53% (YES) |
|
|
128
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
571 |
|
| Percent Tested = 98% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |