florida differentiated accountability …osi.dadeschools.net/sip/09-10/pdf/1761.pdfrelocation of...

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

School Name: DAVID FAIRCHILD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

District Name: Dade

Principal: Ms. Luch Varona Amengual

SAC Chair: Ms. Delia Kilcoyne

Superintendent: Mr. Alberto Carvalho

Date of School Board Approval: Pending

Last Modified on: 09-08-2009

Dr.Eric J.Smith, Commissioner

Florida Department of Education 325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Dr.Frances Haithcock, ChancellorK-12 Public Schools

Florida Department of Education325 West Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS

VISION: Every child to learn and become an active contributing member of the school and society.

MISSION: The David Fairchild Elementary staff, parents and community will nurture each child’s academic, social, physical and emotional growth in a safe environment that supports the development of lifelong learners and citizens who are prepared to be productive in a multicultural, technological world.

Brief History and Background of the School

Brief History and Background of the School

David Fairchild Elementary was built in 1955 and is located in the central Miami-Dade County bordered by Coral Gables, South Miami and unincorporated Miami-Dade County at 5757 Southwest 45 Street, Miami, Florida 33155 on approximately seven acres of land. In 1996 an addition was added to service Art, Music, a computer lab, prekindergarten classroom and resource classrooms.

In 2006 a new addition was constructed to expand the school to include twelve classrooms that accommodate grades three, four and five. The school has one portable which houses the Pre-K Special Education students.

The entire building has been wired to provide wireless computer Internet access to every classroom and building excluding the portables. Closed-circuit television service is available to every part of the school site. The school serves 577 students in pre-kindergarten through fifth grade from the surrounding area, as well as students from outside of the school attendance boundaries.

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Fairchild Elementary is in the unique position of having attained an ‘A’ rating for the past nine years and all current data indicates continuation of the trend into the future.

FCAT scores improved in Science, Writing, Fourth Grade Reading and Fifth Grade Reading in 2009 compared to the 2008 administration of the test. Students scoring Level 3 and above in Reading increase from 88% in 2005 to 95% in 2009; in Mathematics from 88% in 2005 to 94% in 2009; in writing students who scored 3.5 and above increase from 95% in 2005 to 100% in 2009; and in Science 3 and above percent has increased from 55% in 2007 to 79% in 2009.

Fairchild Elementary scores exceeded the District and State’s percentage achievement levels on all grades and subject areas. The schools initiatives for the upcoming school year is to continue to improved FCAT scores in grades 3 through 5 in all testing areas.

The teaching staff is very stable with very little turnover of staff members. It is a cohesive group at every grade level and has veterans that mentor newer members in their groups. The school has currently ten teachers who have received their National Board Teacher Certification in the past three years. The Kindergarten teacher Ms. Julie Casanova received a Proclamation from School Board member Dr. Marta Perez for saving a child’s life.

The school Parent Teacher Association (PTA) is very supportive both in their level of activity and ability to raise funds for the school. The PTA provides the school with funds that enable programs and functions to take place that would otherwise not be possible without their financial contributions.

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Following a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) Analysis the school deduced an external threat from the current District and State financial shortfalls, impacts the school in many financial ways. As a result, Programs, materials, supplies and personnel are being reduced because of budget deficits.

The school enrollment remains stable with a trend towards increases due to students coming as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) from other schools, a slight increase of Students with Disabilities needing additional services, and an influx of students from private schools.

Budget cuts have caused the necessity to surplus staff members for the upcoming year. At this time two key clerical positions have been cut for the upcoming year. In addition, the school PTA paid $24,000 to retain two hourly custodians as well as two other part time paraprofessionals in 2008-2009. This may not be possible in the upcoming year.

Student Demographics

Student Demographics

David Fairchild Elementary serves a total of 577 pre-kindergartens through grade five students from the surrounding area, as well as students from outside of the school attendance boundaries. Counting the Pre-Kindergarten and the ESE Pre-Kindergarten classes, the population of the school is 605. The ethnic/racial makeup of the student population is 11% Black, 63% Hispanic, 19% White Non-Hispanic, and 5% others. Ten percent of the student body participates in the SPED, 9% of the population participates in the English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) program and 14% participate in the Gifted program. Thirty-three percent of our students receive free or reduced lunch.

Student Attendance Rates

Student Attendance Rates

David Fairchild Elementary’s overall attendance for the 2008-2009 school year was 96.50%, a slight decrease compared to 2007-2008 attendance which was 97.01%. The average daily student attendance rate in 2006-2007 was 96.33%. For the past three years the school has remained above the district average. As compared to the Miami-Dade District attendance average 2008-2009: 95.51%, 2007-2008: 95.45% and 2006-2007: 94.96%. The Feeder Pattern attendance average by year was 05-06 95.52%, 06-07 96%, 07-08 96.26%, and 08-09 96.21%. David Fairchild also had the highest four year attendance average (96.37) of the all the feeder pattern elementary schools but slightly lower than MAST Academy’s four year attendance average of 97.02%.

Student Mobility

Student Mobility

The mobility rate of the school is 12%. One factor affecting the student mobility rate is the opening of a new charter school in South Miami which is competing for the same students as David Fairchild. Another factor affecting the mobility rate is the relocation of families moving into or outside of Florida due to parental employment changes. As a result of the economic impact of the recession, student mobility may rise and result in an increased need for extra student support services such as free and reduced lunches and after school services.

Student Suspension Rates

Student Suspension Rates

2006-2007: In-school suspension was 0, Out-of-school was 0; 2007-2008: In-school suspension was 0; Out-of-school suspension was 2; 2008-2009: In-school suspension was 0 and Out-of-school suspension was 1. The suspension rate has been maintained to a minimum mainly because issues are addressed with peer mediation and direct communication with parents.

Student Retention Rates

Student Retention Rates

The student retention rate in 2007-2008 was 2.5% of the total school population. In 2008-2009 the student retention rate was 1% which decreased by one and half percentage points in comparison to the 2007-2008 school year. The reason for the decrease is that students are tracked and monitored from the beginning of the school year and are addressed through in-house tutorial and School Support Team (SST). There have been no midyear promotions in the last three years.

Class Size

Class Size

The class size reduction has been implemented throughout the grade levels as well as in the Students with Disability (SWD) and Gifted program. One of the specific subject areas that the class size has been reduced to enable individualized or

differentiated instruction to assist students is during the Reading and Language Arts block. The schedule has been created to ensure that SWD and gifted students leave their general education class to attend their resource room for varying exceptionalities or gifted. The average class size in the primary grades is 19:1 and 23:1 in the intermediate grades in the general education classes. The teacher to student ratio in SWD education resource program is: Varying Exceptionalities: Kindergarten: 5:1, 1st grade: 4:1, 2nd grade: 8:1, 3rd grade: 8:1, 4th grade: 13:1 and 5th grade 5:1. In some cases grade levels are combined with no more than two consecutive grade levels in any class at a time. Inclusion is provided in fifth grade with an average class size of 23:1 with only 10% of SWD within the class. In the gifted resource program the average class size teacher to student ratio is: 2nd grade: 2:1, 3rd grade: 18:1, 4th grade: 22:1 and 5th grade: 22:1.

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

With the exception of one school in the feeder pattern (Coral Terrace Elementary with a grade of ‘C’), all of the elementary and middle schools that feed into South Miami Senior High School (Emerson Elementary, Sylvania Heights Elementary, Ludlam Elementary, David Fairchild Elementary, South Miami K-8 Center, South Miami Middle School, West Miami Middle School) improved or maintained their FCAT school grade of ‘A’. South Miami Senior High School improved their rating from a letter grade of ‘D’ to a ‘B’. Of these schools, only Flagami Elementary, Emerson and South Miami K-8 Center met all (100%) AYP targets, with the rest of the schools in the feeder pattern not making AYP with ranges of ‘Percent of Criteria Met’ from 74% to 97%. There was no consistent pattern in the data for subgroup results. David Fairchild, Flagami Elementary and South Miami K-8 Center are unclassified under Differentiated Accountability. Ludlam and Sylvania Heights Elementary are classified as Prevent I. Coral Terrace, Emerson and South Miami Middle are Correct I. West Miami Middle and South Miami Senior are Correct II. The feeder pattern schools meet and collaborate regularly to: analyze data trends, prioritize student needs, discuss issues of student school readiness, share best practice, and foster effective articulation. There is evidence from the data showing strategies to bring all NCLB subgroups into compliance is not working and needs to be more effective.

Partnerships and Grants

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

Partnerships and Grants

The school will continue to have a close relationship with the following neighborhood businesses: Winn Dixie, Milam’s, Orchid’s Only, Gator International and First National Bank of South Miami. Many additional informal partnerships are through parents who own businesses and provide donations throughout the school year for the different activities. Supplies and resources are provided to David Fairchild Elementary during the school year by the PTA fundraising activities.

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

AdministratorPrior Performance Record *

Principal Ms. Lucy Varona Amengual

Master of Science -Elementary Education and a minor in Educational Leadership; Endorsement in ESOL and Gifted.

Bachelor’s Degree -Elementary Education, Florida International University;

1 7

Assistant Principal at David Fairchild Elementary in 2008-2009: Grade: A: Reading Mastery: 86%, Math Mastery: 84%, Writing Mastery: 99%, Science Mastery: 70%. AYP: No, Students With Disabilities did not meet AYP in Reading and Mathematics. 2007-2008: Grade A: Reading Mastery 92%, Math Mastery: 93%, Writing Mastery: 100%, Science Mastery: 66%. AYP: Made AYP in all subgroups. 2006-2007: Grade A: Reading Mastery: 88%, Math Mastery: 87%, Writing Mastery: 96%, Science Mastery: 55%. AYP: Made AYP in all subgroups.

Assistant Principal at Eugenia B. Thomas Elementary. 2005-2006: Grade A: Reading Mastery: 86%, Math Mastery: 83%, Writing Mastery: 97%. AYP: Made AYP in all subgroups. 2004-2005: Grade A: Reading Mastery: 80%, Math Mastery: 82%, Writing Mastery: 88%. AYP: Made AYP in all subgroups.

Doctorate Human Resource Management

2008-2009: Curriculum Support Specialist North

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

Staff Demographics

Teacher Mentoring Program

Assis Principal Dr. Patricia O'Bannon

Florida International University; Educational Leadership Certification in K-12 and Adult Administration Florida International University; Masters Social Science Education 9-12 Florida International University; BS Psychology & Organizational Development University of Missouri; Teacher certifications in MO, TN, & CO

1

Central Regional Center: No school data available 2007-2008: Curriculum Support Specialist Regional Center IV: No school data available 2006-2007: Curriculum Support Specialist Regional Center IV: No schools data available 2005-2006: Robert Morgan Educational Center SACS Accreditation Chairperson: Grade B; Reading Mastery 49%; Mathematics Mastery 73% Writing 85%; AYP 87% of criteria met; SWD did not make AYP in reading and math and Black and ED did not make AYP in reading 2004-2005: Activities Director Robert Morgan Educational Center: Grade C: Reading Mastery 39%; Mathematics Mastery 69%; Writing 90%; AYP 83% of criteria met; Black, ELL, ED, SWD did not make AYP in reading; SWD did not make AYP in mathematics

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

Subject Area Name Degree(s)/ Certification(s)

# of Years at Current School

# of Years as a Coach

Prior Performance Record *

Reading Nancy Stuckert

MS Elementary Education 1 1

2008-2009: Grade: A: Reading Mastery: 86%, Writing Mastery: 99%. AYP: No, Students With Disabilities did not meet AYP in Reading and Mathematics. 2004-2008: Out of state

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

Description of StrategyPerson

Responsible

Projected Completion

Date

Not Applicable (If not, please explain why)

Use of Interview committeeMs. Lucy Varona Amengual

August 2009

Professional RecommendationsMs. Lucy Varona Amengual

August 2009

Professional Learning CommunitiesMs. Lucy Varona Amengual

ongoing

Name Certification Teaching Assignment

Professional Development/Support

to Become Highly Qualified

No data submitted

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

41 0 18 19 8 15 32 1 10 22

Mentor NameMentee

AssignedRationale

for PairingPlanned Mentoring

Activities

Ms. Perez has over twenty years of experience in

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Note: For Title I schools only

Ms. Julie Casanova-Perez Ms. Margarita Rodriguez

kindergarten. Her student success rate as measured by student progression averages 98%. She is well respected by her peers and parents.

Classroom visits with follow debriefings. Mentee will visit and observe other selected teachers and a variety of classes.

Title I, Part A

N/A

Title I, Part C- Migrant

N/A

Title I, Part D

N/A

Title II

N/A

Title III

N/A

Title X- Homeless

N/A

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

N/A

Violence Prevention Programs

N/A

Nutrition Programs

N/A

Housing Programs

N/A

Head Start

N/A

Adult Education

N/A

Career and Technical Education

N/A

Job Training

N/A

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

N/A

School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

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

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

School-based RtI Team

Principal: Provides common vision for the use of data-based decision making, ensures that the school-based team is implementing RTI. Counselor: Provides quality services and expertise on issues ranging from behavior modification, coping skills, and peer mediation to parent referrals to needed agencies. Grade Level Chairs: Assure quality of curriculum offered, mentors and coaches teachers at grade level using best practices. School Psychologist: Participates in collection, interpretation, and analysis of data; provides professional development and technical assistance for problem-solving activities. The team will meet bi-monthly to analyze data and prioritize and adjust strategies to meet individual student needs.

The school-based RTI Leadership Team will meet on a bimonthly basis. the team will disaggregate the most current data, conduct root cause analysis, prioritize strategies to meet changing student needs, communicate the strategy decisions, and monitor implementation of the team's decisions.

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

The Leadership Team meets several times in preparation of the School Improvement Plan (SIP). The group supplies data gleaned from meetings that are held in planning and preparing interventions for Level 1 and Level 2 students as well as any others deemed in need of additional support.

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

RtI Implementation

Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network (PMRN), Florida Assessments for Instruction in Reading (FAIR), STAR, and Accelerated Reader (AR) and Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) information/data are used to profile those students in need of interventions. Students are placed/grouped according to the data and team recommendations. Data is monitored at least two times during the nine week period and adjustments made using all information gathered.

Professional Development will be provided during teacher planning time at grade levels as well as during teacher work days throughout the year. Interpretation and use of data from A.R. and STAR will be presented during opening of school week. Information on using PMRN and FCAT data will be applied at grade level meetings.

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data

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

Plan

Strengths demonstrated in Reading when comparing the 2008 FCAT to the 2009 FCAT are: Grade 4 increased 82% to 91% Levels 3-5; Grade 5 increased 80% to 81% Levels 3-5. Grade four also demonstrated an increase of four percentage points of students scoring 4.0 or higher (78% to 91%) in Writing. All scores were above district and state levels for all academic areas tested. Grade five Science demonstrated an increase of ten percentage points over last year’s scores (60% to 70%) and fourth grade writing increased from 96% to 100% for students scoring Level 3 or higher.

Weaknesses are demonstrated by the % Level 3-5 decreases in Grades four (90% to 86%) and Grade five (79% to 75%) when comparing the 2008 and 2009 FCAT Mathematics scores. Grade 3 remained the same with 92% of the students scoring at Levels 3 and above. The data indicates a slight drop in the Measurement content cluster for Grades 3 and 4 and Data Analysis and Geometry clusters in Grade 5. Reading weakness are demonstrated by comparison of the 2008 FCAT results to the 2009 FCAT results: Grade 3 Levels 3-5 decreased from 90% to 88%; Grade 3 content clusters of main idea/purpose, comparisons, and reference/research decreased; Grade 4 main idea/purpose decreased; and Grade 5 content clusters words/phrases, main idea/ purpose and comparisons decreased. The SWD subgroup did met proficiency in reading 52% or math 45%.

Instructional Calendar Development

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

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

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

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?

The Leadership Team works during the summer to develop the Instructional Focus Calendar (IFC). They are implemented at the outset of the academic year with all staff members being provided Professional Development the week prior to opening of school. FCAT results are utilized to develop the IFCs. In addition, any students on Progress Monitoring Plans (PMP) or Individualized Educational Plans (IEP) were considered in the preparation in order to consider all students needs in the development of the IFCs. Teachers will be responsible for determining the instructional focus of whole group lessons, and small group instruction.

Benchmarks are selected as indicated by students’ strengths and weaknesses, which are measured by class work, assignments, STAR and AR data, as well as teacher made tests. The administration will assure the incorporation of the IFCs through classroom visits, walkthroughs and meetings with grade groups on a regular basis.

Mathematics: for Grade 3 and Grade 4 Measurement was the weakest Content Cluster and in Grade 5 Data Analysis showed a decrease of 9 percentage points. These strands will be given highest priority. Reading: Grade 3’s lowest cluster is Reference/research; Grade 4’s weakest cluster is Main Idea/Author’s Purpose and Grade 5’s weakest content clusters are words/phrases and reference/research. These areas will be given priority focus. Science: Earth/Space and Scientific Thinking were the areas where the number of students scoring levels 3-5 demonstrated a decrease. Writing: Convention was the area students did not demonstrate an increase; it will be the priority focus.

All teachers will provide differentiated instruction to assure that students of all levels have their needs met. Teachers have received training in the differentiation of student needs and appropriate instructional techniques and materials. Administrator walkthroughs and formal observations will assure that the teachers follow this protocol.

The teachers apply hands on activities, Science experiments, Twiglet Bank, manipulatives, The Fairchild Challenge, The Green Schools Challenge, current events, and technology as well as focus on relevant context to ensure the lessons students are learning are applicable to real life scenarios in the future.

The teacher will apply hands on activities, technology as well as focus on relevant context to ensure that the lessons students are learning are applicable to real life scenarios in the future. Also, during Career Day students will have an opportunity to observe a variety of careers by presenters.

Direct the Instructional Focus

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

How are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

DO

Grade level teachers meet weekly throughout the school year to determine the areas of students’ strengths and weaknesses as demonstrated by class work assignments and assessment results. The secondary benchmarks based on assessment item analysis will be infused into the District Pacing Guide and Instructional Focus Calendar. This process is an ongoing curriculum strategy adjustment and alignment based on student data analysis. Lesson plans will be created for differentiated instruction, which provides lessons for all level students. Teachers will meet weekly for grade level meetings and will meet monthly during Professional Learning Communities to share best practices.

Focus lessons are provided by the Reading Coach and by Grade Level Chairpersons in reading, mathematics and writing. The focus lessons selected by the instructional leaders are aligned to the benchmarks and standards for each subject area.

How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

Student mastery on the FAIR assessments AP 1, AP 2, & AP 3, Echoes, and school generated assessments will determine if the focus lessons must be adjusted or revised. Administrators and instructors will assure the effectiveness of the focus lessons by analyzing data results from focus lessons.

Assessment

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

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

Maintenance

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

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

Monitoring

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

CHECK

Assessments using ten questions per benchmark will be administered on a monthly basis.

Mastery will be set at 70% to assure that students acquire each necessary benchmark skill. Students scoring between 50% and 69% are in need of further assistance and students scoring below 50% are considered making insufficient progress on the tested benchmark.

Students at or above mastery level will receive opportunities to enhance current skills by participating in project activities, hands-on activities and other creative supplemental activities.

Teachers will meet weekly by grade level. Content level meeting will be held monthly to assure the relevance and the acquisition of skills by students.

The administrators will meet regularly with grade level teams. Lesson plans, data, and portfolios will be utilized to provide evidence of instruction and student acquisition of skills. Differentiated instruction will be monitored for each student group utilizing The Florida Continuous Improvement Model (FCIM). Any changes that are deemed necessary to curriculum or methods will be changed as deemed necessary.

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions

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

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

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

ACT

The teachers will be using Houghton Mifflin for reading and mathematics and Scott Foresman for science with the students for the core instruction. In addition, STAR, AR, Reading Plus and Voyager will be used intensely with struggling readers.

Students with reading deficiencies will attend 30 minutes (Tier 2) 60 minutes (Tier 3) of concentrated reading tutoring or use the Reading Plus computer program for at least 30 to 60 minutes daily.

Staff members are surveyed to determine which areas of instruction/curriculum they feel they could benefit from in order to enhance their classroom proficiency.

Professional Learning Communities

NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only

Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status No Attached Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification No Attached Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status No Attached Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification

Pre-School Transition

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

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

Enrichment

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

Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

All Level 1 and 2 FCAT students are targeted as well as any student scoring below 50 percentile on the grade 2 Stanford Achievement Test (SAT).

Student data is compiled and analyzed biweekly to determine rate of success in acquiring remedial skills, quarterly tests are administered to formalize the data.

Staff members use differentiated instruction in the classroom in order to meet the needs of all students. In addition, we provide an after school Math Club and Drama Club to provide enrichment activities in the areas of mathematics and reading/language arts.

Students are typically provided enrichment activities when they have shown mastery in their daily class work and formal tests. Identified students are provided in-class enrichment activities as well as the opportunity to attend the Math Club or Drama Club after school activities.

PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.) PLC Leader

Frequency of PLC Meetings Schedule (when)

Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis)

Seeking Master’s Degree

Stephanie Manfra Twice per month Wednesday 2:15

Share best practices, collegial sharing of information regarding current classes.

National Board Preparation Haydee Siru Monthly TBA

Mentor, share best practices, preparation of portfolios

Grade Level PLCs

Grade Level Chairperson Bi-monthly Tuesdays 3:00 p.m.

Share best practices, disaggregate data, conduct root cause analysis, brain storm solutions, collaborate on curriculum delivery adjustments, and assess effectiveness of instruction.

The school directs office stafff to distribute "Smooth Sailing" kindergarten preparation brochures and other documents to interested parents throughout the year. All incoming students are tested with Echoes (school readiness) and FAIR the first weeks of school to determine student academic, intellectual, psychomotor, and social abilities. Students are additionally given several teacher made tests that determine their levels of academic preparation. The combination of assessments assess the areas of Basic Skills/School Readiness, Oral Language/Syntax, Print/Letter Knowledge, and Phonological Awareness/Processing. Students that are academically prepared for the rigors of pre-reading and mathematics are recognized and given appropriate instruction according to their assessed abilities. Students needing a slower pace are participants in the standard curriculum with modifications for Kindergarten. Core Kindergarten academic and behavioral instruction will include daily explicit instruction, modeling, guided practice, and independent practice of all academic and/or social emotional skills identified by screening data. Social skills instruction will occur daily through the use of re-teaching, and positive reinforcement of pro-social behavior. Ongoing Progress Monitoring and other screening tools will be re-administered mid-year and at the end of the school year in order to determine student learning gains and adjustments and alignment of instruction, enrichment, and intervention.

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, 95% of the students scored Level 3 or above on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Reading Test. This represents an increase of 3 percentage points. 71% of the lowest 25% made reading learning gains which represents a 13 percentage point increase from 2008. 75% of the students made reading learning gains which represents an 8 percentage point increase from 2008. However, grade 3 scores decreased in the content clusters of Main Idea/Purposes, Comparisons, and Reference and Research. Grade 4 scores decreased in Main Idea/Purposes. Grade 5 decreased in Words/Phrases, Main Idea/Purposes and Comparisons.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 95% of students in grades 3-5 will achieve mastery in reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test.

Action StepPerson Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step

Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step

Evaluation Tool

1 The school will implement the new Florida Assessment for Instruction in Reading (FAIR ) Assessments to monitor student progress.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Reading Coach

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

Printout of FAIR assessment results

2 Develop an Instructional Focus Calendar (IFC) for Reading and Language Arts classes.

Principal,Assistant Principal

Administration will be aware of the IFC’s upcoming focus and monitor implementation through classroom walkthrough

Classroom walkthrough log and focused walkthroughs to determine content clusters are addressed

3 Use the district approved Houghton Mifflin reading series and the Comprehensive Research-Based Reading Plan to address in priority order 1) Main Idea/Purposes, 2) Comparisons, and 3) Reference and Research

Principal, Assistant Principal

Lesson Plans will be reviewed during classroom walkthroughs

Classroom walkthrough log and focused walkthroughs to determine content clusters are addressed



Based on the 2009 FCAT Reading data, 52% of Students With Disabilities in grades 3-5 scored at Level 3 or above. There was no data for 2008 for SWD because there were not enough students identified as SWD.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 72% of Students with Disabilities in grades 3-5 will score a level 3 or above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.



Evaluation Tool

1 Determine core instructional needs by reviewing FAIR assessment data for all SWDs. Plan differentiated instruction using evidence based instruction with 90 minute reading block.


Student progress is assessed using FAIR Ongoing Progress Monitoring (OPM) every 20 days.

Printout of FAIR assessment results

2 Provide grade three through Principal, Assistant Administrators will review FAIR Ongoing Progress

five students who scored Level 1 or 2 with daily tutoring in a small group setting using the Voyager Reading Program.

Principal log for Student Achievement Chats during walkthroughs.

Monitoring data will be used to determine progress.

3 Provide grade three through five students who scored Level 1 or 2 with daily tutoring utilizing the Reading Plus Program.


Administrators will review log for Student Achievement Chats during walkthroughs.

Printout of the Reading Plus Progress Monitoring data

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

For Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every

Teacher

Objective Addressed Content/Topic Facilitator Target Date

Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring

Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, the school will maintain 95% of students in grades 3-5 will achieve mastery for reading on the 2010 FCAT Reading Test.

Effective implementation of the FAIR Assessment

Reading Coach, Assistant Principal

August 2009

FAIR data driven Lesson Plans; Instruction driven and aligned to FAIR data results

Principal, Reading Coach

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 72% Students with Disabilities in grades 3-5 will score a level 3 or above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.

In-house daily tutoring utilizing the Voyager or Reading Plus.

Reading Coach, Assistant Principal

August 2009

Printout of Voyager Ongoing Progress Monitoring data


Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)

Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

Voyager District $2,475.00

Total: $2,475.00

Technology


Reading Plus District $3,050.00

Total: $3,050.00

Professional Development


Instructional Focus Calendar PTA $2,000.00

Total: $2,000.00

Other


Paraprofessional utilizing Voyager for in-house tutoring. PTA $8,000.00

Total: $8,000.00

Final Total: $15,525.00

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?



In grades 3-5, 94% of the students scored Level 3 or above on the 2009 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test. This represents an increase of 1 percentage point. However, grade 3 and 4 scores decreased in the content cluster of Measurements and Geometry. Grade 5 scores decreased in Data Analysis and Geometry.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, the school will maintain 94% of the students in grades 3-5 scoring a Level 3 or above on the 2010 administration of the mathematics FCAT.



Evaluation Tool

1 Assess mathematics levels utilizing weekly teacher made tests to instruct, remediate content clusters and enrich students at their appropriate level.


Lesson will be reviewed during classroom walkthroughs.

Classroom walkthrough log

2 Develop an Instructional Focus Calendar (IFC) for Mathematics classes to address specific weak content clusters by grade level.


Administrators will do classroom walkthrough to ensure activities are aligned to the focus calendar.

Increase in student math assessment scores

3 Utilize the approved Harcourt Core Mathematics Program to ensure all content clusters are addressed.


Lesson will be reviewed during classroom walkthrough

Classroom walkthrough log



Based on the 2009 FCAT Mathematics data, 45% of Students With Disabilities in grades 3-5 scored Level 3 or above. There was no data for 2008 for SWD because there were not enough students identified as SWD.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 74% of Students With Disabilities in grades 3-5 will achieve mastery on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.



Evaluation Tool

1 Identify and closely monitor the progress of the lowest 25 percentile, revise instruction, and remediate

. Principal, Assistant Principal

Grade-level teams will review results of common assessments data weekly to determine progress toward benchmark.

Common assessments tied to Next Generation Math Standards administered weekly

2 Increase the use of manipulative and hands-on activities to reinforce mathematics concepts.


Administrators will do classroom walkthrough to ensure activities are implemented.

Increase of student assessment scores



Strategy for Follow-

up/ Monitoring

Person Responsible

for Monitoring

In grades 3-5, 94% of students will score Level 3 and above on the 2010 FCAT Mathematics Test.

Effective implementation of the Instructional Focus Calendar

Assistant Principal

August 2009

Lesson Plans Classroom Visits


In grades 3-5, 74% of Students With Disabilities will score 3 and above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Mathematics Test.

Effective use of Manipulatives and Hands-On Activities

Assistant Principal

September 2009

Lesson Plans Classroom Visits


Budget:



No Data No Data $0.00

Total: $0.00

Technology



Total: $0.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $0.00

Final Total: $0.00

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 2009, FCAT Science data, 70% of students scored Level 3 and above. This represents an increase of 10 percentage points compared to 2008. However, there was a decreased in the content clusters of Earth/Science and Scientific Thinking.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 80% of students in grade 5 will score Level 3 and above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Science Test.



Evaluation Tool

1 Utilize hands-on laboratory experiments once per week to provide students the opportunity to analyze, draw appropriate conclusions, and apply key instructional concepts.

Principal , Assistant Principal, Teachers

Students will record the experiment process in a weekly science log.

Common assessments tied to Florida Science Standards administered weekly.

2 Provide opportunities for students to experience the scientific method by participating in the annual school Science Fair.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Teacher

Students will work in small groups and complete a science project to enter in the Science Fair.

Increase in the number of Science Projects entered in the Science Fair

3 Implement grade level time-lines following District Pacing Guide that include identification of skills to be taught based on the Sunshine State Standards emphasizing Earth/Science and Scientific Thinking strands.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Teacher

Grade-level teams will review results of common assessments data every six weeks to determine progress toward benchmarks.

Common assessments tied to Florida Science Standards administered weekly.




Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 80% of students in grade 5 will score Level 3 and above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Science Test.

Effective implementation of the District Pacing Guide

In-house Teacher

September 2009

Common planning minutes will be reviewed to ensure data trends are discussed and lesson plans are developed.

Assistant Principal

Budget:



Scott Foresman Science Series Workbooks District $1,327.50

Total: $1,327.50

Technology



Total: $0.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $0.00


End of Science Goal

Writing Goal

Needs Assessment: Based on School Grade Data:

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

What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?



On the 2009 administration of the FCAT Writing Test, 100% of the students in 4th grade scored Level 3.5 or above in writing.

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 92% of students in grade 4 will score Level 4.0 or above in writing.



Evaluation Tool

1 Students will use the Four Square Writing Process.

Principal, Assistant Principal, Teacher, Reading Coach

Students writing samples will be reviewed and scored bi-weekly by teacher.

Scored Writing samples will be used to determine progress between the Pre-test, Mid-year and Post Test.

2 Incorporate new Word Study Skills curriculum into 2-5 grade

Principal, Assistant Principal, Teacher, Reading Coach

Lesson plans will be reviewed during classroom walkthroughs

Classroom Walkthrough Log

3 All students will maintain a writing journal and/or writing folder with all entries dated

Princiapl, Assistant Principal, and Reading Coach

Verify implementation of writing journals and/or writing folders

Documentation such as writing folders and/or writing journals




Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 92% of students in grade 4 will score Level 4.0 or above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT writing.

Four Square Writing Reading Coach

September 2009

Monitor students writing folder


Budget:




Total: $0.00

Technology



Total: $0.00




Total: $0.00

Other



Total: $0.00

Final Total: $0.00

End of Science Goal

Parent Involvement Goal

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

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

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

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

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



Based on the parent 2009 School Climate Survey 60% of the parents attended four or more school activities. This represents a 9% increase compared to the 2008 School Climate Survey.

Given the school emphasis on parental involvement, a 5% increase of parents attending four or more school activities will be evident from the results of the 2010 School Climate Survey.



Evaluation Tool

1 Increase parental involvement by providing parents additional avenues to become more involved in school activities.

. Principal, Assistant Principal, Teachers

Maintain activity notebook with fliers and sign-in sheets

2010 School Climate Survey results

2 Utilize the Connect-ED system to inform parents of upcoming events.

Principal Review parent telephone logs

Parent Attendance sign-in sheets

3 Increase parent/teacher communication in all grades through use of student agenda books and the internet.

Assistant Principal Review Teacher communication log

Communication Log




Person Responsible

for Monitoring

Given the school emphasis on parental involvement, a 5% increase of parents attending four or more school activities will be evident from the results of the 2010 School Climate Survey.

Effective communication Principal August

2009 2010 School Climate Survey


Given instruction using the Sunshine State Standards, 72% of Students with Disabilities in grades 3-5 will score Level 3 or above on the 2010 administration of the FCAT Reading Test.

Reading Strategies for Parents

Assistant Principal, Reading Coach

September 2009

Printout of FAIR Ongoing Progress Monitoring data


Budget:




Total: $0.00

Technology



Total: $0.00



Instructional Focus Calendar PTA $2,000.00

Total: $2,000.00

Other



Total: $0.00


End of Parent Involvement Goal

Other GoalsNo Other Goals were submitted for this school

FINAL BUDGET

Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance

No Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance

School Advisory Council


Goal Description of Resources Funding Source Available Amount

Reading Voyager District $2,475.00

Science Scott Foresman Science Series Workbooks District $1,327.50

Total: $3,802.50

Technology


Reading Reading Plus District $3,050.00

Total: $3,050.00



Reading Instructional Focus Calendar PTA $2,000.00

Parental Involvement Instructional Focus Calendar PTA $2,000.00

Total: $4,000.00

Other


Reading Paraprofessional utilizing Voyager for in-house tutoring. PTA $8,000.00

Total: $8,000.00


Intervenenmlkj Correct IInmlkj Prevent IInmlkj Correct Inmlkj Prevent Inmlkj NAnmlkji

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

Media Center 3000

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

SAC Members

The EESAC conducts a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT) analysis and a root cause analysis to enable data driven decision making and to prioritize the needs of the school during this time of limited resources. The EESAC also reviews data to monitor school wide decisions which affect instruction and delivery of programs. EESAC monitors the SIP and assists in assuring all objectives and strategies are achieved in all areas. Also EESAC recruits new Dade Partners from the community, works to increase parental involvement, and communicates the need for all parents to become aware of and understand student assessment data.

Members

1) Lucy Varona Amengual , Principal

2) Delia Kilcoyne (ESSAC Chairperson), SAC Chair

3) Julia Fernandez, Student

4) Anthony Fernandez , Student

5) Patricia Altshuler, Teacher

6) Manfra Stephanie, Teacher

7) Jennifer Cohen, Teacher

8) Elizabeth Chang, Teacher

9) Cynthia Epstein, Alternate Teacher, Teacher

10) Gina Cabresa-Mesa, Business Member

11) Aimee Cibran, Parent

12) Loubna Noureddin, Parent

13) Annabella Gugliotta, Parent

14) Lisa Forero, Parent

15) Maria Nogues, Parent

16) Brigette Kinney-Winick, Parent

17) Magaly Alonso, Parent

18) Yajaira Fuentes, Alternate Parent, Parent

19) Irene Hodgetts, Alternate Educational Support, School Support Personnel

20) Julie Scholl, School Support Personnel

21) Mayra Tamargo, Union Steward

AYP DATA

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2 Dade DAVID FAIRCHILD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1761

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Click here to see Number of students in each groupRead: 280Math: 280

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.

GroupReadingTested 95% of the students?

MathTested 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

SafeHarborReading

Percent of Students below grade level in Math

SafeHarborMath

% 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 88 Y 86 Y Y NA 15 12 NA 13 14 NA 84 NA 78 NA

WHITE 99 Y 100 Y 91 Y 84 Y NA NA 9 9 NA 6 16 NA 88 NA 74 NA

BLACK 100 Y 100 Y NA NA NA NA NA NA

HISPANIC 100 Y 100 Y 91 Y 88 Y 93 Y NA 14 9 NA 13 12 NA 87 NA 81 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 71 Y 67 N NA NA 25 29 NA 27 33 N 71 NA 68 Y

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 99 Y 100 Y 52 N 45 N NA NA 48 NA 55 NA 60 N 43 N






YES










SafeHarborReading


SafeHarborMath




Growth model math


TOTAL4 100 Y 100 Y 85 Y 87 Y Y NA 20 15 NA 20 13 NA 79 NA 86 NA



HISPANIC 100 Y 100 Y 86 Y 87 Y 93 Y NA 19 14 NA 17 13 NA 81 NA 86 NA



ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 100 Y 100 Y 75 Y 73 Y NA NA 33 25 NA 37 27 NA 71 NA 74 NA


STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 100 Y 100 Y NA NA NA NA NA NA






YES










SafeHarborReading


SafeHarborMath




Growth model math


TOTAL4 100 Y 100 Y 80 Y 80 Y 94 Y NA 22 23 NA 20 20 NA 76 NA 77 NA



HISPANIC 100 Y 100 Y 81 Y 83 Y Y NA 18 22 NA 17 17 NA 80 NA 78 NA



ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED 100 Y 100 Y 67 Y 63 Y NA NA 36 37 NA 33 37 NA 65 NA 66 NA


STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 100 Y 100 Y 44 Y 47 Y NA NA 31 62 N 36 53 N 42 N 55 N

Dade School DistrictDAVID FAIRCHILD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL2008-2009

Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned

% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)

95% 94% 100% 79% 368

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

75% 65% 140

3 ways to make gains:● Improve FCAT Levels● Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5● Improve more than one year within Level

1 or 2Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?

71% (YES) 60% (YES) 131

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 639 Percent Tested = 100% Percent of eligible students tested

School Grade A Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested


Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned


92% 93% 100% 66% 351



67% 80% 147

3 ways to make gains:● Improve FCAT Levels● Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5● Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2

Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?

58% (YES) 75% (YES) 133





Reading

Math

Writing

Science

GradePointsEarned


88% 87% 96% 55% 326



70% 68% 138

3 ways to make gains:● Improve FCAT Levels● Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5● Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2

Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?

64% (YES) 76% (YES) 140




florida differentiated accountability …osi.dadeschools.net/sip/09-10/pdf/1761.pdfrelocation of...

Documents