Highlandtown Elementary/Middle School (#215) - Baltimore City

School Performance Plan for Highlandtown Elementary/Middle School 1 of 74

SY 2012-2013

School Performance PlanElementary/Middle Schools

215Highlandtown Elementary/Middle School

Nancy A. Fagan, PrincipalAndrea Hancock, Executive Director

Tyauna Bruce, Network Facilitator

PLEASE REFER TO THE SCHOOL PERFORMANCE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE FORSTEP-BY-STEP INSTRUCTIONS, ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE, AND ITEM DEFINITIONS.


Your School’s Instructional Leadership Team

Name Position

Nancy A. Fagan Principal

Dr. James Perkins RIS

Alison Moore IST

Amber Clemmons MS English Teacher

Molly Bolek Elementary Teacher

Iris Lewis Special Educator Teacher

Joan Goodson ESOL Teacher

Robin Banks Literacy Coach

Wendy Harris Alternative Teacher

Key Points of Contact at Your School

Position Name Email Contact

Professional Development Point of Contact/Monitor Robin Banks [email protected]

New Teacher Mentor Coordinator Alison Moore [email protected]

School Family Council Representative Iris Lewis [email protected]

Family and Community Engagement Representative Wendy Harris [email protected]


Reflect on SY 2011-2012 School Performance Plan

Guidance: Complete these questions by reflecting with your Instructional Leadership Team, Executive Director and Network Facilitator prior to Step 1. Record your answers below.

1. What progress did you make toward meeting your SPP SY 2011-12 goals?Our progress is improving based on individual performance on placement test (Scholastic, 100 Book Challenge and math diagnostic) in most grade levels as well as class movement in reading and mathematics. At mid-point of the year all data points we have identified and showed student performance increasing in grades Pre-K-8. Based on the implementation of sound research based practices the intent is to go deeper with explicit instruction, small group instruction and differentiated practices.

2. Were your strategies fully implemented, partially implemented, not implemented at all? Why?Strategies are fully implemented in the use of a balanced literacy approach as shown through growth based on Wireless, RISE and benchmark assessments. Professional development foci were determined based on student data and teacher need. We continue to work to enhance those practices as well as incorporate common core standards in what we already do. In math, we use a variety of resources such as Math Works, Scott Foresman, and TAI. Students learn two skills, a review and a new skill has helped with students mastery of skills.

3. What evidence of actual impact did you see on instructional practice and/or student learning?Instructional goals and use of instructional materials based on data is one example of actualy impact. Identifying students instructional levels and selecting materials that support that level has helped teacher track and monitor student performance. Attention on the primary levels to sight words and the driling of sight words attainment has helped many primary students read sooner than later. More students in grades PreK - 2 know their sight words (complete list) and thier 100 Book Challenge levels and Wireless levels are increasing. Increases in guided reading levels and math diagonistic test are also evident that focusing on the instrutional level while implementing the grade level curriculum is working.

4. What practices are in place that we are unable to link to increased student achievement?None! All practices that we focused on have a direct link to increased performance. Our practices (small group instruction, differentiation, guided reading with leveled text, process writing and increased problem solving open-ended questions in math) were focused on improved practices in reading, math, and science. Our attendance efforts have also benefited our school community because attendance rates have increased. Teacher experience (new educations as well as new educators to a balance literacy approach) struggled to implement all components of balanced literacy effectively as well as the Math Works process. Teachers were motivated to teach, but limited abilities made some of the practices ineffective.

5. If your school participated in the 2011-12 School Effectiveness Review (SER) process, how will that feedback influence your strategic planning for 2012-13?N/A


Step 1: Collect and Chart Data

Effect Data: Outcomes or Results

• State Test Data (MSA, HSA)• Stanford 10• District Benchmarks and End of Course Assessments• Formative Assessments (teacher developed assessments)• Diagnostic Assessments (RISE, STEP, DIBBELS, NWEA)• Attendance• Discipline/Suspension Data• Student Work (i.e. writing samples)• Grades & GPA• School Effectiveness Review (if applicable)• Climate Survey

ACCESS DATA LINK & THE RAPID RESPONSE TOOL DIRECTLY BY VISITING: https://ebs.bcps.k12.md.us/bcpss.html


School Demographics

08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

Total Enrollment 366 324 333

% of Students by Subgroup

• African-American 52 55 93 48.5

• American Indian/Alaskan Native 011 006 * 0.3

• Asian/Pacific Islander 020 022 * 2.6

• Hispanic 035 034 95 41.2

• White 097 085 94 7.0

• Free and Reduced Meals (FARM) E89/M90 E91/M86 E94/M94 98.5

• English Language Learners (ELL) E28/M17 E30/M20 E95/M* 30.7

• Students with Disabilities (SWD) E8/M17 E12/M14 E93/M94 11.7

% Mobility E51/M41 E51/M41 E51/M50

% of Highly Qualified Teachers 84 69.6 66

% of Teachers with Less than Five Years of Experience 72.7 48 65.38

Principal’s Years of Experience 23 24 25

Principal’s Tenure at the School 4 5 6

School Improvement Status RI RI RI

Attendance Data

08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

All 61.6 93.8 94.0 94

% habitually truant > 20 days 19.48 E14/M20 E19/M22

% chronically absent < 5 days 21.3 E33/M23 E 29/M33


Reading and Mathematics Stanford 10

Grade 1 Grade 2

08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

Total Reading 38 40 72 69 38 44 33 56

• Word Study Skills 49 45 84 76 57 57 49 72

• Word Reading (Grade 1 only) 37 49 65 70

• Reading Vocabulary (Grade 2) 38 40 30 52

• Sentence Reading 32 33 54 54 N/A

• Reading Comprehension 43 39 69 67 33 41 33 48

Total Mathematics 59 47 79 72 58 55 45 69

• Problem Solving 46 39 65 62 51 50 33 66

• Procedures 73 58 88 80 70 61 66 70


MSA Reading (% Proficient and Advanced)

Grade Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5

Year 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

All 50 90 70.6 53.3 75.6 73.7 71.4 68.8 73.3 80 55.6 69.2

Subgroups

Asian/Pacific Islander 100 100 100

African-American 44 88.9 52.9 46.2 81.8 69.6 71.4 57.1 66.7 85 54.2 78.6

American Indian/Alaskan Native

White 80 100 100 * 50 100 * 50 40 66.7 *

Hispanic 50 88.9 84.6 * 71.4 72.7 72.7 76.9 100 90 55.6 *

FARM 48.8 89.3 71.9 53.6 77.5 73.0 69.2 68.8 71.4 81.8 55.6 69.2

ELL 45.5 80.0 77.8 66.7 57.1 72.7 57.1 * 100.0 75.0 50.0 *

SWD 42.9 75.0 16.7 25.0 44.4 20.0 75.0 75.0 10.0



Year 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

All 73.3 79.2 74.2 52.8 57.1 83.3 62.5 75 55.6 77.8 69.2 70.6

Subgroups


African-American 70 70.6 75 56 66.7 73.3 64.7 71.4 52.4 92.9 66.7 72.7


White 50 100 40 * 50 100 66.7 * 87.5 100 50 *

Hispanic 83.3 100 90 * 28.6 100 50 85.7 46.7 44.4 71.4 *

FARM 73.3 78.3 73.3 54.3 57.6 81.8 65.2 75 53.5 76.0 63.6 70.6

ELL 50.0 66.7 50.0 * 25.0 100.0 * 16.7 16.7 50.0 *

SWD 57.1 60.0 60.0 80.0 50.0 30.0 100.0 33.3


MSA Math (% Proficient and Advanced)


Year 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

All 78.6 83.9 80.0 74.2 90.2 73.7 67.9 93.8 66.7 80 50 73.1

Subgroups


African-American 76 84.2 76.5 61.5 86.4 73.9 71.4 100 61.1 80 45.8 71.4


White 100 100 100 * 100 75 * 50 40 100 *

Hispanic 75 77.8 84.6 90 92.9 72.7 63.6 84.6 87.5 100 44.4 *

FARM 78.0 82.8 81.3 72.4 90.0 73.0 65.4 93.8 67.9 78.8 50.0 73.1

ELL 72.7 60.0 77.8 92.3 85.7 72.7 42.9 * 100.0 100.0 33.3 *

SWD 28.6 60.0 16.7 25.0 22.2 20.0 50.0 20.0



Year 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

All 80 70.8 75.8 69.4 52.8 70.8 58.3 58.1 51.1 63 50 66.7

Subgroups


African-American 75 64.7 75 72 54.2 66.7 52.9 61.5 54.5 64.3 40 63.6


White 50 50 60 * 50 33.3 100 * 62.5 75 *

Hispanic 100 100 90 * 50 100 50 64.3 43.8 55.6 71.4 *

FARM 80.0 69.6 76.7 71.4 52.9 72.7 60.9 58.1 51.1 60.0 50.0 64.7

ELL 100.0 66.7 50.0 * 44.4 100.0 * 28.6 50.0 50.0 *

SWD 57.1 20.0 40.0 60.0 33.3 33.3 30.0 50.0 16.7


MSA Science (% Proficient and Advanced)

Grade Grade 5 Grade 8

Year 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 08-09 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13

All 53.3 41.7 23.5 29.6 35.6 28.6 50 60

Subgroups

Asian/Pacific Islander 100

African-American 41.2 40 17.4 21.4 23.8 28.6 28.6 54.5


White 60 20 66.7 62.5 25 66.7

Hispanic 75 54.5 25 40 40 30 71.4

FARM 53.6 45.5 23.5 28 34.1 26.9 43.5 60

ELL 40 16.7 50


Charting Additional Effect Data Points

Guidance: Additional Effect Data should be charted in the Charting Additional Effect Data table below.

Gather and organize data in order to gain insights about teaching, learning, and leadership practices. Consider charting data that is disaggregated and triangulated.

Data PointWhat do the data tell you about trends in student achievement

and other aspects of your school performance?

100 Book Challenge Program (Grades PreK-5)

GRADE # Of Students who showed # Of Students who showedgrowth between Sept. and Jan. growth between Jan. and JuneK 19 (38% increase) 28 (59% increase)1 26 (70% increase) 30 (73% increase)2 17 (44% increase) 34 (89% increase)3 19 (73% increase) 24 (75% increase)4 22 (73% increase) 18 (53% decrease)5 20 (74% increase) 16 (62% decrease)

----------

The data is a frequent formative assessment of kindergarten through 5th grade students' reading levels. It tells if growth has occurred between quarterly benchmark testsand allows for instructional decisions to be made based on reading levels.

Collecting data in September and again in January, for the number of students in each grade above, on, and below grade level, according to the guidelines for book levels/grade level correspondance, we determined that there was an increase in the number of students above grade level in all grades. Grades 2, 4, and 5 showed an increase in the numbers of students below grade level in January. This could possibly be due to new teachers, the new coteaching model, and a mid-year plateau with the increasing text complexity. All other grades showed a decrease in number of below grade level. The largest growth percentage was in 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th grades (70% or more of the students showed growth in independent reading levels). There was an increase in just right levels at grades K-3 and a decrease at grades 4 and 5. The data shows that students are increasing their reading levels and moving to higher book levels.




Scholastic Guided Reading Program (Grades 1-5)

GRADE # Of Students who showed # Of Students who showedgrowth between Sept. and Jan. growth between Jan. and June1 28 (82% increase) 22 (70% decrease)2 33 (92% increase) 18 (47% decrease)3 17 (61% increase) 20 (63% increase)4 16 (59% increase) 18 (55% decrease)5 17 (65% increase) 18 (67% increase)

----------

The Scholastic Guided Reading Assessment uses one consistent outside support teacher to give an objective placement test to back up and use as a comparison to other data and assessments performed by classroom teachers. It offers a comparison between students in all grade levels across the school, using the same assessmen tool. The Scholastic test allowed for additonal information on reading behaviors, in addition to the Wireless test. The Scholastic assessment provided data for those students in 4th and 5th grades who are not part of the Wireless testing program/funding. Testing is completed three times a year: September, January, and May.

Highest percentages of students showing growth in reading levels between September and January were in the primary grades. 82% of first graders showed growth between September and January and 92% of second graders showed growth. 61% of third graders, 59% of fourth graders, and 65% of fifth graders showed growth. End of year data shows that at some grade levels (1, 2 and 4) the number of student growing decreased. Grades 3 and 5 increase the number of students showing growth.




Wireless

TRC PROFICIENCY LEVEL *School's Focus

Percentage of students at proficient or above proficientGRADE BOY MOY BOY - MOY EOY BOY - EOYK 100% 100% =0% 45% -55%1 24% 44% +19% 58% +34%2 26% 35% +9% 37% +11%3 12% 25% +13% 38% +26%

----------

Wireless testing is a research-based, computer generated assessment tool that offers data across grade levels( K-3rd) and schools within Baltimore City. The assessment is complete with diagnosis, break-down of reading components, and even intervention activities. This data allows for frequent retesting, or Progress Monitoring, for frequent tracking of student progress.

From the Wireless Beginning and Middle of the Year Benchmark assessments we were able to determine the students with far below grade level proficency in reading (high risk) in need of intervention services. We then designed a pull-out program for kindergarten through 3rd grade with assigned intervention teachers to work with those students.

From the Beginning of the Year to the Middle of the Year Benchmark, all students tested in grades K through 3rd, increased in Total Reading Comprehension proficiency by 11%. From Middle of the Year to End of the Year, there was an overall decrease by 10%. The only grade to decrease was the kindergarten. The kindergarten classes are at least 98% ELL this year, with most at the lowest ESL English proficency level. The rest of the grade levels did increase with first grade increasing by 34%, second grade increasing 11%. and third grade increasing by 26%.




RISE

GRADE EFFICIENCY OF BASIC READING COMPREHENSION *School's focusRED YELLOW GREEN(lowest level) (middle level) (highest level)6 (34) 10 / 28% 23 / 64% 3 / 08%7 (32) 4 /13 % 23 /72 % 5 / 16%8 (21) 6 / 29% 8 / 38% 3 / 14%TOTAL MIDDLE SCHOOL (GRADES 6, 7, AND 8)89 20 / 22% 54 / 61% 11 / 12%

GRADE READING COMPRENHENSION *School's FocusRED YELLOW GREEN(lowest level) (middle level) (highest level)6 11 / 31% 12 / 33% 11 / 32%7 7 / 22% 19 / 59% 6 / 19%8 2 / 09% 9 / 43% 10 / 48%TOTAL MIDDLE SCHOOL (GRADES 6, 7, AND 8)89 20 / 22% 40 / 45% 27 / 30%

----------

RISE assessments supply much-needed reading information on adolescent students. With such few diagnostic reading opportunities in the middle school, RISE supplies information on reading skills for better understanding of students' needs. We learned where our middle school students are performing in a breakdown of six reading components: Word Recognition, Vocabulary, Morphological Awareness, Sentence Processing, Efficiency of Basic Reading Comprehension, and Reading Comprehension.

The majority of the students are performing in the area of "Needs Improvement", in all six components. For basic reading comprehension, the component most important to us in assessing students, 22% of the middle school students scored in the" Warning" range. 45% of the students scored in the "Needs Improvement" range, and 30% of the students scored in the "Proficient" range. Eighth grade had the highest percentage of students in the proficient range and the lowest percentage in the warning range. Interestingly, this trend was not consistent in the other domains.




Math Diagonistic Assessment

MATH*Math Placement AssessmentGRADE ABOVE ON BELOWSEP. JAN. SEP. JAN. SEP. JAN.1 0 8 23 26 12 42 1 5 9 17 31 173 0 1 4 10 24 204 2 5 5 11 21 185 2 3 1 6 23 176 0 1 3 5 29 267 0 2 3 4 27 258 0 2 2 0 16 16

----------

The math diagnostic assessment supplies percentiles on grade-level skills, as well as above- and below-grade level skills. Data from this assessment supplies the information needed to remediate or accelerate work. Placement tests are given to all students from first through eighth in September, January, and May. Having more than just reading levels provides a more complete picture of each student and of our complete instructional program and needs.

In September, data showed that in grades second through eighth, more students perfomed below grade level than on and above. First grade was the only grade in which there were more students on level than below. In January, the number of students below grade level decreased in every grade, except eighth grade, which stayed the same.




District Benchmark*see attached Quarterly Benchmark Assessment Chart----------

The benchmarks assess growth and mastery towards quarterly unit standards of learning. The data helps determine focus on future and past skills and measures the school against other schools in the district. Most importantly, the data supplies a comparison of student performance, four times a year, and serves as a measure of whole-grade performance, teacher performance, and guides leadership decisions.

For reading, kindergarten and first grades were the grades that met the target % in the first quarter. In the second quarter, first grade again met the target %. In the third quarter, there was an increase of grade levels that met the target % for reading: first, second, seventh, and eighth. All but two grades (4th, 5th) showed increases from A to B. All but one grade (4th) showed an increase from B to C.

For mathematics, first and second grades met the target % for quarter one, first, second, and fourth grades met the target% for second quarter, and pre-k, kindergarten, and second met the target % for third quarter. All but three grades (2nd, 3rd, 5th) showed increases in % at target from A to B. All but four grades (1st, 4th, 7th, 8th) showed increases in % at target from B to C.

For science, fifth and eighth grades did not meet the target % for Test A and Test B, but stayed the same or increased the % at target between A and B.




Curriculum Associate Reading Placement Test

The number of students who made gains from the Middle of the year and the End of the year assessments. (no assessment was given at the beginning of the year becasue of RISE)GRADE TOTAL ABOVE ON BELOWMOY EOY MOY EOY MOY EOY MOY EOY6 34 33 2 4 (+) 7 9 (+) 25 20 (-)7 33 31 3 9 (+) 4 6 (+) 26 16 (-)8 18 16 4 5 (+) 2 0 (-) 12 11 (-)

GRADE # Of Students who showed growth between Sept. and JuneSept.-Jan. Jan.-June Difference6 9 (26%) 13 (39%) +13 increase7 7 (21%) 15 (48%) +27% increase8 6 (33%) 5 (31%) -2% decrease

----------

In September the middle school students were given the Curriculum Associates Placement Tests. In 6th grade 26% of students made gains in reading in Sept.-Jan. and from Jan.-June 39% showed growth.. There was a difference of 13% increase in the number of students who scored better during the second semester. In 7th grade 21% made gains in Sept.-Jan. and between Jan.-June 48% showed growth with a difference of 27% increase in the number of students who scored better during the second semester. In 8th grade 33% of the students made gains in Sept.-Jan. and between Jan.-June only 31% showed growth. There was a 2% decrease in the number of students who made improvements during the second semester. The 8th grade decrease could be attributed to a decrease in the number of students enrolled in class.

The middle school students will continue to use the Plugged Into Reading novel study program for literature circles, independent reading, and word study/vocabulary developement. For intervention teachers will continue to use the Bridges to Literature program to help those students who have deficits in identified areas.

----------

----------

----------


Annual Measurable Objectives

Objective #1:

Grade 3Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Reading portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 53.3% to 63.3%; African-American students from 46.2% to 56.2%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from *% to %; LEP students from 66.7% to 76.7%; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 53.6% to 63.6%.

Grade 4Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Reading portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 68.8% to 78.8%; African-American students from 57.1% to 67.1%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from 76.9% to 86.9%; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 68.8% to 78.8%.

Grade 5Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Reading portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 69.2% to 79.2%; African-American students from 78.6% to 88.6%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from *% to %; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 69.2% to 79.2%.

Grade 6Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Reading portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 52.8% to 62.8%; African-American students from 56% to 66%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from *% to %; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 54.3% to 64.3%.

Grade 7Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Reading portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 75% to 85%; African-American students from 71.4% to 81.4%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from 85.7% to 95.7%; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 75% to 85%.



Objective #2:

Grade 3Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Mathematics portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 74.2% to 84.2%; African-American students from 61.5% to 71.5%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from 90% to 100%; LEP students from 92.3% to 100%; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 72.4% to 82.4%.

Grade 4Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Mathematics portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 93.8% to 100%; African-American students from 100% to 100%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from 84.6% to 94.6%; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 93.8% to 100%.

Grade 5Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Mathematics portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 73.1% to 83.1%; African-American students from 71.4% to 81.4%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from *% to %; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 73.1% to 83.1%.

Grade 6Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Mathematics portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 69.4% to 79.4%; African-American students from 72% to 82%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from *% to %; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 71.4% to 81.4%.

Grade 7Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Mathematics portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 58.1% to 68.1%; African-American students from 61.5% to 71.5%; White students from *% to %; Hispanic students from 64.3% to 74.3%; LEP students from *% to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 58.1% to 68.1%.


Objective #3:

Grade 5Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Science portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 29.6% to %; African-American students from 21.4% to %; White students from % to %; Hispanic students from 40% to %; LEP students from % to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 28% to %.


Grade 8Between June 2012 and June 2013, the proficient rate on the Science portion of the Maryland School Assessment will increase a minimum of 10 percentage points for all students from the previous year from 60% to %; African-American students from 54.5% to %; White students from % to %; Hispanic students from % to %; LEP students from % to %; Special Education students from % to % and FARM students from 60% to %.

Objective #4:Between June 2012 and June 2013, 80%of the students scoring at proficient or advanced in the Reading portion of the Alt MSA will increase a minimum of 15 percentage points from the previous year from % to %. (Only applies to schools administering the Alt MSA.)

Objective #5:Between June 2012 and June 2013, 80%of the students scoring at proficient or advanced in the Mathematics portion of the Alt MSA will increase a minimum of 15 percentage points from the previous year from % to %; (Only applies to schools administering the Alt MSA.)

Objective #6:Between June 2012 and 2013 the student attendance will increase from 94% to 95% to meet the annual measurable objective.


Step 2: Analyze Data to Prioritize Needs

Guidance: Complete these questions by meeting with your Instructional Leadership Team, School Family Council, Executive Director, and Network Facilitator to begin the development of your school’s 2012-13 School Performance Plan. Record your answers below.

1. What do your data tell you about students’ overall performance?The use of Balanced Literacy initiatives has helped to increase the number of students who read at grade level. All grade levles posted at least a 15% increase in reading as measured on the 100 Book Challenge Program and the Scholastic Guided Reading Program. Moving to teaching two skills a day , using TAI, and increasing the number of teachers attending the Math Works workshops has increased the number of students who are performing at grade level in math. The Math Diagonistic Placement test showed that at all grade levels there was an increase in math performance and a decrease in the number of students who are not on grade level.

2. How are subgroups of students performing, e.g. particular grade levels; content areas; accelerated learners; SWD, FARMS? Please discuss those groups with the largest achievement gaps.The strongest performing subgroup is our Hispanic students followed by the African-American students. White and Asian students generally do well, but the group size is very small (less than 10 students each.) More than 60% of the FARMS and LEP students are making proficient or higher. Special education continue to fluctuate in performance throughout the years.

3. How did my teachers perform (test results by grade level, teacher/class, subject area/and subgroup. e.g. SWD)?Teachers at the primary grade levels did well. At the middle of the year more students were proficient or better in the TRC. We have an 11% overall increase in reading (TRC) on Wireless. All grade levels posted gains between BOY and MOY. Kindergarten team posted increases as measured by wireless testing; Ms. Baer and Ms. Strautin both maintained 100% performance. At grade 1 Ms. Downes has a significant increase of 31% and Ms. Savage had a slight increase 6%. At the second grade level Ms. Kelly (17% increase) outscored Ms. Clark who class posted no difference in performance during that time frame. In grade 3 the higher performing class made 46% gains in reading and the lower class had a slight decrease of 6%. Both classes were taught by Ms. Hendrickson. The Benchmark data shows that all grade levels increased between benchmark B and C. Ms. Hendrickson's 4 graders had a slight decrease between benchmark B and C. Ms. Clemmons middle school students improved with double digit gains in 7th (34%) and 8th grade (24%), 6th grade improved by 7% . SWD are making inconsistent progress. Most of the students are making very slow but steady progress. In math students are making inconsistent progress between benchmark B and C. Grades 2, 3, 5, and 6 made gains and grades 1, 4, 7, and 8 had decreases in performance. PreK and K posted very strong gains 100% and 86% resoectfully.

Guidance: Based on the answers to the questions above, generate a list of school strengths and needs, and record them below. Consider the contributing factors and identify the sources of data that demonstrate these trends, and record them below.

Limit your Strengths and Needs to the three most important.

Examples of Cause Data (Contributing Factors): Professional Practices that Create Effects or Results


• Use of teacher collaborative planning time• Implementation of effective professional development strategies• Research-based classroom instructional strategies• Classroom visits • Teacher feedback• Professional Learning Communities• Other:

Strengths Contributing Factors Data Source

Strong Literacy Coach who onced worked for Acheivement First was hired to support teachers in their professional growth around best practices in balance literacy for all grades. Coach supports all literacy teachers in grades PreK-8. Open and effective dialogue among staff regarding integration of the Common Core and the MSC. Also teacher feedback shows that this Literacy Coach is a position teachers want and elect to include in the budget.

----------

Coach is well liked and teachers respect this person's knowledge based. They seek her support out and often. She si the first person they solicit advice and insight in to what works best for children.

SANE from team meetings and professional development sessionsTeacher feedbackWireless, RISE, Benchmark

School resources around authentic literature and leveled text. The addition and use of leveled text for guided reading program is a research based school decision to use level text.----------

Teachers have a plethora of leveled texts and authentic books. Most resources are in small sets to address small groups of students. Teachers can choose materials for students performing below or above grade level.

Scholastic Reading Assessment data100 Book Challenge ProgramGuided Reading Book LevelWireless, RISE, Benchmark

Collaborative planning among all grade levels. We use collaborative plannning time so that different grade levels (i.e. grades 1 and 2 work together to support primary instruction) can plan and discuss together.----------

Common team meetings for both literacy and math are scheduled consistently every week and various groups of teachers are able to collaborate.

SANE from team meetings

Needs Contributing Factors Data Source



Increased reading performance in grades K-8 and all subgroups as measured by Benchmark C through small group/guided reading and differentiated instruction. Also professional learning cycles around the high-yield strategy of summarizing and note-taking.----------

Addition of novice teachers, teachers new to a balanced literacy approach, significant increase of students with an IEP, influx of students new to the school

Scholastic Reading AssessmentBenchmark AssessmentWireless AssessmentMSA; Stanford 10Unit Test

Increased mathematics performance in grades K-8 and all subgroups as measured by Benchmark C throught small group instrruction, differentiated instruction and increase use of manipulatives. Also professional learning cycles around the high-yields strategy of summarizing and note-taking.----------

Addition of novice teachers, significant increase of students with an IEP, influx of students new to the school, teachers new to the process of teaching two skills a day

Benchmark AssessmentMath Diagonistic AssessmentMSA; Stanford 10Unit Test

----------


Step 3: Establish SMART Goals and Step 4: Select Strategies

Guidance: Identify your three most critical goals for student achievement based on needs that were identified through the inquiry process. Be sure your goals are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Timely (SMART).

Then, for each goal, identify specific strategies that support: Highly Effective Instruction or Climate; Professional Development; and Engaged Family and Community. Strategies should be action-oriented, measurable, and research-based. Your school should focus on two Highly Effective Instruction strategies and one Climate strategy. There may be multiple components of a strategy noted within each category. More than one Professional Development strategy may be selected by the dropdown menu.

Please refer to the SPP Implementation Guide for additional guidance on completing this section.

School-Level Goal #1There will be a school-wide increase from 66% to 76% by June 2013 in students reading at proficient or above in response to Becnhmark C for grades Pre-K through 8.

School-Level Strategies Funding Resources

High Yield Instructional Strategy:Summarizing and note-taking in reading and across all grade levels

General Funds

Cycle of Professional Learning (REQUIRED): Please attach the Cycle of Professional learning that will support this goal.Robert Marzano's Nine High Yield Strategies

Professional Development Strategy:

Professional Learning Community;Continued use of small group instruction (guided reading); differentiation; and leveled textEngaged Family and Community Strategy:Continue to provide families with books from the school's lending libraries.


School-Level Goal #2There will be a school-wide increase from 58% to 68% by June 2013 in students mathematics at proficient or above in response to Becnhmark C for grades Pre-K through 8.


High Yield Instructional Strategy:Summarizing and note-taking in mathematics and across all grade levels

General Funds

Cycle of Professional Learning (REQUIRED): Please attach the Cycle of Professional learning that will support this goal. Robert Marzano's Nine High Yield Strategies


Collaborative Planning;Continued use of small group instruction; differentiation; real world problems and applicaitonsEngaged Family and Community Strategy:Provide families with flash cards, bags of manipulatives and practice activites for home use.


School-Level Goal #3The Family and Community Engagement Committee in partnership with the PTO will help parents understand the importance of their child completing homework daily and we will work to increase the number of students bringing back signed homework.


High Yield Instructional Strategy:Increased and ongoing parent participation and presence at parent workshops and meetings that focus on homework and practice

General Funds



Other (specify):Professional Cycle of LearningEngaged Family and Community Strategy:Ongoing commitment to best practices surrounding increasing parent involvement in homework as evident on the number of parents we get to sign homework daily.


What strategies will your school use to support new teachers? Funding Resources

1. New teachers will participate in both systemic and school-based professional development designed to build content and teacher knowledge base.

General Funds

2. New teachers will receive montly mentoring and support from literacy-lead contact person in the form of after-school mentoring, lesson planning, and matching standards with objectives.

General Funds

3. New teachers will receive a peer-mentor within the building designed to provide informal mentoring and social/emotional support.

General Funds


Step 5: Determine Results Indicators

Results Indicator Statements: Results Indicators describe:

• What to look for in monitoring the implementation of the strategy; and• What relationships can be established between strategies and outcome data.

Your ILT should identify results indicators for each of the three strategies connected to each school-level goal.

(NOTE: The 3 primary strategies identified below will pre-populate here: Highly Effective Inst./Climate, Professional Development, and Engaged Fam and Comm.)


School-Level Goal #1 Strategies Results Indicator Reporting Mechanism

Summarizing and note-taking in reading and across all grade levels Evidence in student reading journals of summarizing and note-taking strategies; implementation of Marzano's High Yield Strategies; improved performance on Benchmark C is the expected outcome

Student JournalsStudent WorkGraphic OrganizersImproved scoresLesson plans

Continued use of small group instruction (guided reading); differentiation; and leveled text Review of reading lesson plans to see which students are in small groups; indication of level of text and skill

Lesson PlansIntervention LogAssessment DataInformal and Formal Observations




Continue to provide families with books from the school's lending libraries. Review lesson plans to ensure alignment with posted objective; indicaiton objectives have been annotated by the teacher collectively with the students

Lesson PlanObjective BoardWord WallInformal and Formal ObservationsStudent's Class NotesBCR & ECR Responses



Summarizing and note-taking in mathematics and across all grade levels Evidence in student math journals of summarizing and note-taking strategies; implementation of Marzano's High Yield Strategies; improved performance on Benchmark C is the expected outcome


Continued use of small group instruction; differentiation; real world problems and applicaitons Review of mathematics lesson plans to see which students are in small groups; indication of level of remedial or advanced skill

Lesson PlansIntervention LogAssessment DataInformal and Formal Observations




Provide families with flash cards, bags of manipulatives and practice activites for home use. Review lesson plans to ensure alignment with posted objective; indicaiton objectives have been annotated by the teacher collectively with the students

Lesson PlanObjective BoardWord WallInformal and Formal ObservationsStudent's Class NotesBCR & ECR Responses



Increased and ongoing parent participation and presence at parent workshops and meetings that focus on homework and practice

Looking for increased parent participation at meetings and involved in daily homework; results will help students improve performance on class assignments and assessments

SANE

Professional Cycle of Learning Looking for an increase in the number of students who turn in homework; results will help student perform better academically

Charting and posting students who complete homework daily

Ongoing commitment to best practices surrounding increasing parent involvement in homework as evident on the number of parents we get to sign homework daily.

Looking for an increase in the number of parents who support homework efforts; results will help to increase parent involvment in the instruction program

Reporting and collecting data, monthly, around the number of parents who sign homework


Step 6: Monitor and Evaluate Results

Guidance: Use this template at designated Instructional Leadership Team (ILT) and School Family Council (SFC) meetings throughout the year to monitor specific goals and strategies in your plan.

School: SFC Members: ILT Members: Date: Next Monitoring Cycle Date:


Highlandtown Elementary/Middle School Nancy Fagan, Principal, ILT ChairDr. Russell Perkins, RISGloria Baylor-Cook, Assistant Principal, FCE ChairIris Lewis, Special Education Teacher, SFC ChairJane Hendrickson, Classroom Teacher, SFC SecretaryJoan Goodson, ESOL Teacher/SFC Time KeeperLisa Brown, FCE SpecialistAlison Moore, IST, FCE ChairJessica Downes, Classroom Teacher/Attendance ChairJamie Baer-White, Classroom Teacher, Attendance ChairErica Strautin, Classroom Teacher, School Climate ChairMolly Bolek, Classroom Teacher, School Climate ChairRobert Novak, Classroom Teacher, Arts Everyday Co-ChairMiriam Sanchez, Special Education TeacherPaula Whitmore, Physical Education TeacherRebecca Smith-Wilson, School Social WorkerDonta Jones, ESOL Para EducatorChad Shoales, Art Teacher/BTU Representative/Arts Everyday ChairEdwin Ruiz, Middle School Student, Student RepresentativeAnna Carpenter, Parent, PTO PresidentRonnet Crowell, PTO ParentMolly Young, Community/Business PartnerApril Meise, Community/Business PartnerPastor Mark Parker, Community/Business PartnerDaniel Rettig, Community/Business PartnerMaria Aldana, Community/Business Partner

Nancy Fagan. PrincipalRussell Perkins, RISGloria Baylor-Cook, Assistant PrincipalAlison Moore, Instructional Support (Model Teacher)Jamie Baer, Kindergarten TeacherJessica Downes, Grade 1 TeacherJane Hendrickson, Grade 4 TeacherMolly Bolek, Grade 5 TeacherRobert Novak, Middle School Teacher (Model Teacher)Iris Lewis, Special Education Teacher (Model Teacher)Joan Goodson, ESOLChad Shoales, Arts Teacher (Model Teacher)

October 31, 2012 ---------------


Goal 1:There will be a school-wide increase from 66% to 76% by June 2013 in students reading at proficient or above in response to Becnhmark C for grades Pre-K through 8.

Instructional Strategy 1:Summarizing and note-taking in reading and across all grade levels

Has this strategy been implemented?Fully Implemented

What were the supports or barriers to implementing this strategy?Supports: Safe practice; regularity of meetings for PLC; use of research-based professional reading; teacher willingness

Barrier: Quantitative data sources

Has this activity had impact?Yes

What are the contributing factors?Treated the participants as learners; gave teachers a chance to confirm their own "best practices" and move beyond these; single focused skill; opportunity for professional reflective feedback

What is the evidence of the strategy’s impact on instructional practice and/or student learning?Qualitative data based on teacher feedback and student work

Did the strategy work? If not how do you plan to modify it?Yes