PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA
Note: The following links will open in a separate browser window.
School Grades Trend Data
(Use this data to complete Sections 1-4 of the reading and mathematics goals and Section 1 of the writing and science goals.)
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data
(Use this data to complete Section 5 of the reading and mathematics goals and Section 3 of the writing goals.)
Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data
(Use this data to inform the problem solving process when writing goals.)
HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS
List your school’s highly qualified administrators and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an administrator, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of school grades, FCAT performance (Percentage data for Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).
| Position | Name | Degree(s)/ Certification(s) | # of Years at Current School | # of Years as an Administrator | Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT (High Standards, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AYP information along with the associated school year) |
| No data submitted |
|
HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES
List your school’s highly qualified instructional coaches and briefly describe their certification(s), number of years at the current school, number of years as an instructional coach, and their prior performance record with increasing student achievement at each school. Include history of school grades, FCAT performance (Percentage data for Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Instructional coaches described in this section are only those who are fully released or part-time teachers in reading, mathematics, or science and work only at the school site.
| Subject Area | Name | Degree(s)/ Certification(s) | # of Years at Current School | # of Years as an Instructional Coach | Prior Performance Record (include prior School Grades, FCAT (Proficiency, Learning Gains, Lowest 25%), and AYP information along with the associated school year) |
| No data submitted |
|
HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS
Describe the school-based strategies that will be used to recruit and retain high quality, highly qualified teachers to the school.
| Description of Strategy | Person Responsible | Projected Completion Date | Not Applicable (If not, please explain why) |
| No data submitted |
|
Non-Highly Qualified Instructors
List all instructional staff and paraprofessionals who are teaching out-of-field and/or who are NOT highly qualified.
| Name | Certification | Teaching Assignment | Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified |
| No data submitted |
|
Staff Demographics
Please complete the following demographic information about the instructional staff in the school who are teaching at least one academic course.
*When using percentages, include the number of teachers the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
| 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 Teachers | % Reading Endorsed Teachers | % National Board Certified Teachers | % ESOL Endorsed Teachers |
| 23 | 13.0%(3) | 43.5%(10) | 39.1%(9) | 17.4%(4) | 21.7%(5) | 91.3%(21) | 13.0%(3) | 4.3%(1) | 34.8%(8) |
Teacher Mentoring Program
Please describe the school’s teacher mentoring program by including the names of mentors, the name(s) of mentees, rationale for the pairing, and the planned mentoring activities.
| Mentor Name | Mentee Assigned | Rationale for Pairing | Planned Mentoring Activities |
| No data submitted |
|
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Coordination and Integration
Note: For Title I schools only
Please describe how federal, state, and local services and programs will be coordinated and integrated in the school. Include other Title programs, Migrant and Homeless, Supplemental Academic Instruction funds, as well as violence prevention programs, nutrition programs, housing programs, Head Start, adult education, career and technical education, and/or job training, as applicable.
Title I, Part A
Title I, Part C- Migrant
Title I, Part D
Title II
Title III
Title X- Homeless
Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)
Violence Prevention Programs
Nutrition Programs
Housing Programs
Head Start
Adult Education
Career and Technical Education
Job Training
Other
Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)
Literacy Leadership Team (LLT)
NCLB Public School Choice
*Elementary Title I Schools Only: Pre-School Transition
Describe plans for assisting preschool children in transition from early childhood programs to local elementary school programs as applicable.
*Grades 6-12 Only
Sec. 1003.413(b) F.S.
For schools with Grades 6-12, describe the plan to ensure that teaching reading strategies is the responsibility of every teacher.
*High Schools Only
Note: Required for High School - Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S., Sec. 1003.413(g)(j) F.S.
How does the school incorporate applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between subjects and relevance to their future?
How does the school incorporate students’ academic and career planning, as well as promote student course selections, so that students’ course of study is personally meaningful?
Postsecondary Transition
Note: Required for High School - Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.
Describe strategies for improving student readiness for the public postsecondary level based on annual analysis of the School Feedback Report
PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS
Reading Goals
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in reading
Reading Goal #1:
|
6th -8th grade students will show an increase of 2% or more in making an AL3 on the 2011 FCAT in Reading as compared to 2010 FCAT Reading Data. This is evidenced by the FCAT Summary Trend Report.
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
6th grade-39%/7th grade-38%/8th grade-42%
|
6th grade-41%/7th grade-40%/8th grade-44%
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| | Anticipated Barrier | Strategy | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring | Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy | Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Lack of parent involvement and support.
|
Provide parents with academic workshops throughout the school year to help them help their student at home.
|
Parent Involvement Facilitator, Assistant Principal, Principal
|
The use of sign-in sheets.
|
Evaluation survey collected from each workshop.
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Students achieving above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 and 5) in reading
Reading Goal #2:
|
6th -8th grade students will show an increase of 2% or more in making an AL4 or AL5 on the 2011 FCAT in Reading as compared to 2010 FCAT Reading Data. This is evidenced by the FCAT Summary Trend Report.
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
6th grade-32%/7th grade-40%/8th grade-20%
|
6th grade-34%/7th grade-42%/8th grade-22%
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| | Anticipated Barrier | Strategy | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring | Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy | Evaluation Tool |
| 1 |
Lack of motivation.
|
Provide students with incentives for continued success in reading.
|
All instructional staff/Principal/A. Principal
|
Discovery Learning Mid-Year Reading Assessment
|
Discovery Learning Assessment Data
|
| 2 |
Lack of parent involvement and support.
|
Provide parents with academic workshops throughout the school year to help them help their student at home.
|
Parent Involvement Facilitator, Assistant Principal, Principal
|
The use of sign-in sheets.
|
Evaluation survey collected from each workshop.
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
3. Percentage of students making Learning Gains in reading
Reading Goal #3:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
4. Percentage of students in Lowest 25% making learning gains in reading
Reading Goal #4:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the applicable subgroup(s):
|
|
5A. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in reading
Reading Goal #5A:
|
|
Reading Goal #5A: Ethnicity
(White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:
|
|
5B. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in reading
Reading Goal #5B:
|
|
Reading Goal #5B: English Language Learners (ELL)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:
|
|
5C. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in reading
Reading Goal #5C:
|
|
Reading Goal #5C: Students with Disabilities (SWD)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:
|
|
5D. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in reading
Reading Goal #5D:
|
|
Writing Goal #5D: Economically Disadvantaged
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Reading Budget:
|
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Reading Goals |
|
Mathematics Goals
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #1:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Students achieving above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 and 5) in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #2:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
3. Percentage of students making Learning Gains in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #3:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
4. Percentage of students in Lowest 25% making learning gains in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #4:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the applicable subgroup(s):
|
|
5A. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #5A:
|
|
Mathematics Goal #5A: Ethnicity
(White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:
|
|
5B. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #5B:
|
|
Mathematics Goal #5B: English Language Learners (ELL)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:
|
|
5C. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #5C:
|
|
Mathematics Goal #5C: Students with Disabilities (SWD)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following subgroup:
|
|
5D. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in mathematics
Mathematics Goal #5D:
|
|
Writing Goal #5D: Economically Disadvantaged
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Mathematics Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Mathematics Goals |
|
Science Goals
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in science
Science Goal #1:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Students achieving above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 and 5) in science
Science Goal #2:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Science Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Science Goals |
|
Writing Goals
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
1. Students achieving Adequate Yearly Progress (FCAT Level 3.0 and higher) in writing
Writing Goal #1:
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in writing
Writing Goal #2A:
|
|
Writing Goal #2A: Ethnicity
(White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in writing
Writing Goal #2B:
|
|
Writing Goal #2B: English Language Learners (ELL)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in writing
Writing Goal #2C:
|
|
Writing Goal #2C: Students with Disabilities (SWD)
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:
|
|
2. Student subgroups not making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in writing
Writing Goal #2D:
|
|
Writing Goal #2D: Economically Disadvantaged
|
|
2010 Current Level of Performance:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Performance:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Writing Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Writing Goals |
|
Attendance Goal(s)
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of attendance data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:
|
|
1. Attendance
Attendance Goal #1:
|
|
|
2010 Current Attendance Rate:*
|
2011 Expected Attendance Rate:*
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Current Number of Students with Excessive Absences (10 or more)
|
2011 Expected Number of Students with Excessive Absences (10 or more)
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Current Number of Students with Excessive Tardies (10 or more)
|
2011 Expected Number of Students with Excessive Tardies (10 or more)
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Attendance Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Attendance Goal(s) |
|
Suspension Goal(s)
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of suspension data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:
|
|
1. Suspension
Suspension Goal #1:
|
|
|
2010 Total Number of In –School Suspensions
|
2011 Expected Number of In- School Suspensions
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Total Number of Students Suspended In School
|
2011 Expected Number of Students Suspended In School
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Number of Out-of-School Suspensions
|
2011 Expected Number of Out-of-School Suspensions
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Total Number of Students Suspended Out of School
|
2011 Expected Number of Students Suspended Out of School
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Suspension Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Suspension Goal(s) |
|
Dropout Prevention Goal(s)
Note: Required for High School - F.S., Sec. 1003.53
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:
|
|
1. Dropout Prevention
Dropout Prevention Goal #1:
*Please refer to the percentage of students who dropped out during the 2009-2010 school year.
|
|
|
2010 Current Dropout Rate:*
|
2011 Expected Dropout Rate:*
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Current Graduation Rate:*
|
2011 Expected Graduation Rate:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Dropout Prevention Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Dropout Prevention Goal(s) |
|
Parent Involvement Goal(s)
Online Parent Involvement Policy (PIP) PDF doc
|
|
* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g., 70% (35)).
|
Based on the analysis of parent involvement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement:
|
|
1. Parent Involvement
Parent Involvement Goal #1:
*Please refer to the percentage of parents who participated in school activities, duplicated or unduplicated.
|
|
|
2010 Current Level of Parent Involvement:*
|
2011 Expected Level of Parent Involvement:*
|
|
|
|
|
Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
|
| Anticipated Barrier |
Strategy |
Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy |
Evaluation Tool |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
|
Professional Development (PD) aligned with Strategies through Professional Learning Community (PLC) or PD Activity
Please note that each Strategy does not require a professional development or PLC activity.
|
| PD Content /Topic and/or PLC Focus | Grade Level/Subject | PD Facilitator and/or PLC Leader | PD Participants (e.g. , PLC,subject, grade level, or school-wide) | Target Dates and Schedules(e.g. , Early Release) and Schedules (e.g., frequency of meetings) | Strategy for Follow-up/Monitoring | Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring |
|
No Data Submitted
|
|
|
| |
| Parent Involvement Budget: |
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
|
| End of Parent Involvement Goal(s) |
|
Additional Goal(s)
No Additional Goal was submitted for this school
FINAL BUDGET
| Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s) |
| Goal |
Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Technology |
| Goal |
Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Professional Development |
| Goal |
Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Other |
| Goal |
Strategy |
Description of Resources |
Funding Source |
Available Amount |
| No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
No Data |
$0.00 |
| Subtotal: $0.00 |
| Grand Total: $0.00 |
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
| Projected use of SAC Funds | Amount |
| No data submitted |
|
Describe the activities of the School Advisory Council for the upcoming year
AYP DATA
No Data Found
No Data Found
No Data Found
SCHOOL GRADE DATA
Polk School District
DANIEL JENKINS ACADEMY OF TECHNOLOGY MIDDLE SCHOOL
2008-2009
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
79%
|
72%
|
98%
|
49%
|
298
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 4.0 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% |
68% |
|
|
141 |
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? |
72% (YES) |
69% (YES) |
|
|
141
|
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.
|
| FCAT Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
580 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade* |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Polk School District
DANIEL JENKINS ACADEMY OF TECHNOLOGY MIDDLE SCHOOL
2007-2008
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
75%
|
76%
|
100%
|
54%
|
305
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 4.0 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
68% |
76% |
|
|
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? |
69% (YES) |
72% (YES) |
|
|
141
|
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.
|
| FCAT Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
590 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade* |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |
Polk School District
DANIEL JENKINS ACADEMY OF TECHNOLOGY MIDDLE SCHOOL
2006-2007
|
| |
Reading
|
Math
|
Writing
|
Science
|
Grade
Points
Earned |
|
| % Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above) |
70%
|
70%
|
100%
|
51%
|
291
|
Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 4.0 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
|
| % of Students Making Learning Gains |
71% |
75% |
|
|
146 |
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? |
69% (YES) |
75% (YES) |
|
|
144
|
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.
|
| FCAT Points Earned |
|
|
|
|
581 |
|
| Percent Tested = 100% |
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of eligible students tested |
| School Grade* |
|
|
|
|
A |
Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested |