| School: Lemmon Valley Elementary School | District: Washoe |
| Principal: Troy Parks | School Year: 2006-2007 |
|
Address
255 West Patrician Drive
Reno , NV 89506 |
| EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | |
|---|---|
| The Washoe County School District provides each student the opportunity to achieve his or her potential through a superior education in a safe and challenging environment in order to develop responsible and productive citizens for our diverse and rapidly changing community.
Washoe County School District will become a "world class school district" in which ALL students will acquire the knowledge, skills, and values necessary for student success. | |
| The Lemmon Valley School community is dedicated to creating an environment that is safe, positive, and respectful. As a team of students, families, and staff we focus on high achievement and learning for everyone.
| |
| Lemmon Valley is a rural school of about 700 students. Our population consist of about 65% white, 25% Hispanic, 12% IEP, and 12% LEP. About 50% of our students receive free and reduced lunch. Lemmon Valley was able to acquire an Assistant Principal, Instructional Coach, full day kindergarten, a Reading Specialist, $50,000 in leveled readers, and $25,000 to improve our non-fictional resources in the library. Despite not making the benchmarks for AYP Lemmon Valley students showed academic growth in reading/language arts and math--with the exception of one sub-population. Our IEP student population improved in reading /language arts from 21% proficient in 2005 to 31% proficient in 2006. We continue to improve our inclusion model for all learning disabled and limited English proficient students. This year Lemmon Valley’s goal will be to improve literacy achievement for all students. We will accomplish this through our 45 minute literacy intervention blocks and our 90 minute reading blocks.
|
| Plan Section Description | |
|---|---|
| Executive Summary | |
| 1A. Comprehensive Needs Assessment: Review and analysis of data | |
| 1B. Comprehensive Needs Assessment: Goals | |
| 2. Inquiry Process: Goals, Causes (Factors), Solutions (Strategies) | |
| 3A. Master Plan Design: Action Plan(s) for Goal(s) |
1A. Review and analysis of data. Each school improvement plan must be based on a review and analysis of the school accountability report and any more recent data. Schools can use the data tables in Appendix A, as well as district test results, interim assessment results, classroom assessment results, classroom observations, surveys, and any other data from the comprehensive School Profile (Appendix B).
| Areas of Strength(e.g., subject areas that exceed targeted proficiency levels). |
|---|
|
• Lemmon Valley was on the Watch List for math in 04-05 but made AYP in all subgroups in math in 05-06
• Lemmon Valley made AYP in ELA as a whole school in 05-06 • Lemmon Valley made AYP by Safe Harbor for IEP students in ELA in 05-06 • Lemmon Valley IEP student showed academic growth in both reading/language arts and math. |
| Areas of Concern (e.g., subject areas below the targeted proficiency levels, subject areas in which safe harbor was made but not the targeted proficiency levels, subject areas that are low relative to other subject areas, and non-academic concerns, such as student behavior) |
|
Despite academic gains in almost all subpopulations Lemmon Valley did not make AYP for Reading/Language arts in the subgroups of Hispanic, LEP, or FRL in 05-06.
|
1B. Goals: Based on your review and analysis, which goal(s) are identified for improvement? Identify the specific skill(s) (e.g., reading - main idea and fluency) and the specific student subpopulation(s) (e.g., ELL, low SES, ethnic group) to be targeted for improvement. A goal is the overall plan or big picture outcome for a content area. Example: All students, especially our LEP students, will increase language skills, particularly in the area of vocabulary.
|
Goal 1: ELA Proficiency
Increase student achievement in English Language Arts for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. |
|
Goal 2: Math Proficiency
Increase student achievement in math for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. |
What are the causes/factors that may impact or impede student achievement for each goal, and what are the solutions/strategies that will address each goal and the underlying causes/factors? When selecting solutions/strategies for the school improvement plan, consider four requirements for school improvement plans under Senate Bill 1: School Improvement plans must include:
|
Goal 1: ELA Proficiency
Increase student achievement in English Language Arts for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. | |
| Causes (Factors): | Solutions (Strategies): |
|---|---|
|
Developing school-wide systematic assessments to support learning
|
1.1 Grade level and vertical alignment of common assessments based on the QSI, Quick Writes, and STAR to be used to target and remediate non-proficient students.
1.2 Continue training and implementation of Compass Learning to support ongoing skill development, remediation, and assessment in ELA and math. |
|
Inconsistent use of instructional strategies to support LEP students
|
1.3 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our LEP students in ELA.
1.4 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support LEP students in ELA. |
|
Inconsistent use of instructional strategies to support IEP students
|
1.5 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our special needs students in ELA.
1.6 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support IEP students in ELA. |
|
Inconsistent use of key elements of teaching literacy:
• comprehension • writing • phonics • vocabulary • fluency • phonemic awareness |
1.7 Implement intervention time blocks for all students to support key elements in teaching.
1.8 Use vocabulary readers and intervention kits during literacy intervention blocks to support key elements in teaching literacy 1.9 Increase accountability for teachers in using key elements in literacy through utilization of principal Walk-throughs, teacher self-reporting, collaboration with certified support staff, and feedback during PLCs. (Actions – Sharing at PLCs, faculty meetings, peer observations) |
|
Inconsistent focus on writing across grade levels and curriculum.
|
1.10 Introduce consistent writing rubric for writing assessment across grade levels with a focus on writing in 4th and 5th grades,
1.11 Assess 4th grade students in writing skills in May 2007 1.12 Assess 5th grade students in writing skills on a monthly basis. Use data from assessments to drive instruction and goals for improving writing. 1.13 Use district writing rubrics to score Quick Writes across all grade levels |
|
Inconsistent use of effective student engagement strategies in the classrooms
|
1.14 Continue to provide professional development in student engagement strategies for teachers and administrators and continue to use the criteria-based Walk-through for student engagement
1.15 Continue support for Student Engagement instructional activities: Student Engagement Day, modeling of student engagement strategies in all classrooms by certified staff trained in T4S strategies 1.16 Data collection classroom visits during the school year to document improvement in student engagement. |
|
Inconsistent use of higher order thinking questioning techniques
|
1.17 Provide professional development in higher order thinking questioning techniques via instructional coache and literacy specialists through modeling and collaborating
|
|
Need for early intervention for at-risk students
|
1.18 Reapply for grants and/or use resources from fundraising to support development of an early intervention system for at-risk students
|
|
Lack of time for teachers to use data to form instructional goals
|
1.19 PLCs will meet after literacy formative assessments are given to follow up with data analysis. Principal will provide substitutes.
1.20 Reapply for SB 404 monies for teachers to analyze quarterly data: District literacy formatives, QSI, Quick Writes, STAR, and teacher assessments. |
|
Inconsistent parent involvement to support student learning
|
1.21 Implement Education Accords, provide information to parents through newsletters, attaching academic information to school events
|
|
Goal 2: Math Proficiency
Increase student achievement in math for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. | |
| Causes (Factors): | Solutions (Strategies): |
|---|---|
|
Inconsistent use of instructional strategies to support LEP and IEP students
|
2.1 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support LEP and IEP students in ELA & math
2.2 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our LEP and special needs students in math. 2.3 Continue training and implementation of Compass Learning to support ongoing skill development, remediation, and assessment in math |
|
Lack of time for teachers to use data to form instructional goals
|
2.4 Continue to disaggregate and use math formative assessments to target and remediate non-proficient students
2.5 PLCs will meet after math formative assessments are given to follow up with data analysis. Principal will provide substitutes. 2.6 Reapply for grants to support instructional strategies for early intervention and to allow teachers time to analyze data: math formatives, STAR math, and teacher assessments |
|
Inconsistent use of effective student engagement strategies in the classrooms
|
2.7 Continue support for student engagement instructional activities: Student Engagement Day, modeling of student engagement strategies in all classrooms by certified staff trained in T4S strategies
2.8 Walkthrough observations during the school year to document improvement in student engagement. |
|
Inconsistent parent involvement to support student learning
|
2.9 Implement Education Accords, provide information to parents through newsletters, and include an academic component at school events, such as achievement award assemblies and math nights
|
3A. Action Plan. List the action steps to implement the solutions/strategies for each goal, as well as the timeline, resources, and the person(s) responsible for the action steps.
|
Goal 1: ELA Proficiency
Increase student achievement in English Language Arts for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. | |||
| Measurable Objective(s): (Objectives are specific, measurable outcomes of a goal that include an outcome indicator, baseline, expected performance level, and timeline. Example: Third grade students identified as approaching or developing in the content area of reading fluency will increase their reading fluency by X%, as measured by the XYZ diagnostic test between fall 2004 and end of May 2005.) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 45.87% of all Lemmon Valley students were proficient in ELA, above the 39.6% target. Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students overall by 10%, to reach a target goal of 52% of students proficient as measured by the 06-07 State CRT in reading and the 06-07 State Writing Proficiency Exam.
2. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 30.56% of Lemmon Valley IEP students, 26.54% Hispanic students, 30% LEP students, and 32.79% FRL students were proficient, all under the 39.6% target. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students by 10% in each disaggregated group of IEP, LEP, Hispanic, and FRL students as demonstrated by the 06-07 State CRT in reading and the 06-07 State Writing Proficiency Exam. | |||
| Action Steps | Timeline | Resources | Person(s) Responsible |
|
1. Assessments to Target and Remediate
1.1 Grade level and vertical alignment of common assessments based on the QSI, Quick Writes, and STAR to be used to target and remediate non-proficient students.
|
- Formative assessment calendar for 2006-2007 (QSI, Quick Writes, literacy formatives)
- STAR reassessed every 6-7 weeks |
District formatives
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
2. Compass Learning
1.2 Continue training and implementation of Compass Learning to support ongoing skill development, remediation, and assessment in ELA and math.
|
As needed for individual teachers in the Computer Lab
|
Computer lab time
|
Teachers
Computer Aide Lindsie Banning |
|
3. Best Instructional Practices for LEP Student
1.3 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our LEP students in ELA.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
PLC time
District trainer |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Liz Warner and Diana Lundgren |
|
4. Professional Development for LEP Teaching
1.4 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support LEP students in ELA.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
District trainer
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Liz Warner and Diana Lundgren |
|
5. Best Instructional Practices for IEP Teaching
1.5 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our special needs students in ELA.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
District trainer
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
6. Professional Development for IEP Teaching
1.6 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support IEP students in ELA.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
District trainer
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
7. Intervention Time Blocks
1.7 Implement intervention time blocks for all students to support key elements in teaching.
|
Daily for each grade level for 45 minutes
|
HM support materials (Early Success, Soar to Success, and vocabulary readers)
Literacy Specialists |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Becky Colwell |
|
8. Vocabulary Readers and Intervention Kits
1.8 Use vocabulary readers and intervention kits during literacy intervention blocks to support key elements in teaching literacy
|
Daily for each grade level for 45 minutes
|
HM support materials (Early Success, Soar to Success, and vocabulary readers)
Literacy Specialists |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Becky Colwell |
|
9. Assurance of Covering Key Literacy Elements
1.9 Increase accountability for teachers in using key elements in literacy through utilization of principal walk-throughs, teacher self-reporting, collaboration with certified support staff, and feedback during PLCs.
(Actions – Sharing at PLCs, faculty meetings, peer observations) |
On-going
|
Key Literacy Elements
|
Troy Parks
Teachers |
|
10. Consistent Writing Rubric
1.10 Introduce consistent writing rubric for writing assessment across grade levels with a focus on writing in 4th and 5th grades
|
Dates TBA following formative assessment calendar
|
District writing rubrics
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers Becky Colwell |
|
11. 4th Grade Writing Assessments
1.11 Assess 4th grade students in writing skills in May 2007
|
May 2007
|
External writing consultant (SB 404 Funds)
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
4th grade teachers |
|
12. 5th Grade Writing Assessments
1.12 Assess 5th grade students in writing skills on a monthly basis. Use data from assessments to drive instruction and goals for improving writing.
|
Monthly
|
External writing consultant (SB 404 Funds)
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
5th grade teachers |
|
13. Quick Writes
1.13 Use district writing rubrics to score Quick Writes across all grade levels
|
Dates TBA following formative assessment calendar
|
District Writing Rubric
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers Becky Colwell |
|
14. Professional Development in Student Engagemen
1.14 Continue to provide professional development in student engagement strategies for teachers and administrators and continue to use the criteria-based walk-through for student engagement
|
On-going
|
Student Engagement Strategies and Criteria
|
Troy Parks
|
|
15. Student Engagement Instructional Activities
1.15 Continue support for Student Engagement instructional activities: Student Engagement Day, modeling of student engagement strategies in all classrooms by certified staff trained in T4S strategies
|
- Student Engagement Day 10/25/06
- Modeling of strategies: October 2006 November 7, 2006 Spring dates TBA |
T4S Protocol
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Kirsten Gleissner |
|
16. Data Collection on Student Engagement
1.16 Data collection classroom visits during the school year to document improvement in student engagement.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
Walkthrough Criteria
Observers |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Kirsten Gleissner |
|
17. Higher Order Questioning
1.17 Provide professional development in higher order thinking questioning techniques via instructional coaches and literacy specialists through modeling and collaborating
|
Daily in classrooms
|
SB404 funds for Instructional coach and Literacy Specialist
|
Kathy Lawrence
Becky Colwell Justina Wu |
|
18. Funding Sources to Support Early Intervention
1.18 Reapply for grants and/or use resources from fundraising to support development of an early intervention system for at-risk students
|
Fall 2006
|
SB404 funds for Instructional coach, Literacy Specialist, and Sub days for data analysis
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
19. PLCs for Data Analysis
1.19 PLCs will meet after literacy formative assessments are given to follow up with data analysis. Principal will provide substitutes.
|
Dates TBA following formative assessment calendar
|
SB404 Grant for subs
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
20. Funding to Assist with Analysis of Quarterly
1.20 Reapply for SB 404 monies for teachers to analyze quarterly data: District literacy formatives, QSI, Quick Writes, STAR, and teacher assessments.
|
Grant funding cycle
|
Grant
|
Troy Parks
|
|
21. Disseminate Parent Information
1.21 Implement Education Accords, provide information to parents through newsletters, attaching academic information to school events
|
Time set aside in school day for assemblies
Planning time for teachers Dates TBA |
Education Accords
Printing |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
Goal 2: Math Proficiency
Increase student achievement in math for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. | |||
| Measurable Objective(s): (Objectives are specific, measurable outcomes of a goal that include an outcome indicator, baseline, expected performance level, and timeline. Example: Third grade students identified as approaching or developing in the content area of reading fluency will increase their reading fluency by X%, as measured by the XYZ diagnostic test between fall 2004 and end of May 2005.) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
1. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 49.32% of all Lemmon Valley students were proficient in math. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students overall by 10%, to reach a target goal of 55% of students proficient as measured by the 06-07 State CRT in math.
2. The 2006-2007 AYP report shows that 37.5% of Lemmon Valley IEP students, 30.86% Hispanic students, 30% LEP students, and 40.44% FRL students were proficient. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students by 10% in each disaggregated group of IEP, LEP, Hispanic, and FRL students as demonstrated by the 06-07 State CRT in math. | |||
| Action Steps | Timeline | Resources | Person(s) Responsible |
|
1. Professional Development in PLC to Support LE
2.1 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support LEP and IEP students in ELA & math
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
PLC time
District trainer |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Liz Warner and Diana Lundgren |
|
2. Develop Norms, Routines, and Strategies of Be
2.2 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our LEP and special needs students in math.
|
On-going
|
Training
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Liz Warner and Diana Lundgren |
|
3. Compass Learning
2.3 Continue training and implementation of Compass Learning to support ongoing skill development, remediation, and assessment in math
|
As needed for individual teachers in the Computer Lab
|
Computer lab time
|
Teachers
Computer Aide Lindsie Banning |
|
4. Math Formative Assessments for Remediation
2.4 Continue to disaggregate and use math formative assessments to target and remediate non-proficient students
|
Formative assessment calendar for 2006-2007
|
District formatives
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
5. PLC Data Analysis
2.5 PLCs will meet after math formative assessments are given to follow up with data analysis. Principal will provide substitutes.
|
Dates TBA following formative assessment calendar
|
SB404 Grant for subs
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
6. Funding
2.6 Reapply for grants to support instructional strategies for early intervention and to allow teachers time to analyze data: math formatives, STAR math, and teacher assessments
|
Fall 2006
|
SB404 funds for Instructional coach, Literacy Specialist, and Sub days for data analysis
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
7. Student Engagement Activities
2.7 Continue support for student engagement instructional activities: Student Engagement Day, modeling of student engagement strategies in all classrooms by certified staff trained in T4S strategies
|
- Student Engagement Day 10/25/06
- Modeling of strategies: October 2006 November 7, 2006 Spring dates TBA |
T4S Protocol
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Kirsten Gleissner |
|
8. Walkthough Observations of Student Engagement
2.8 Walkthrough observations during the school year to document improvement in student engagement.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
Walkthrough Criteria
Observers |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Kirsten Gleissner |
|
9. Parent Communications
2.9 Implement Education Accords, provide information to parents through newsletters, and include an academic component at school events, such as achievement award assemblies and math nights
|
Dates TBA
|
- Time set aside in school day for assemblies
- Planning time for teachers |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
3B. Monitor Plan Implementation. Identify how each of the action steps for the solutions/strategies of each goal listed in 3A will be monitored, including the data that will be collected as well as the timeline and the person(s) responsible for monitoring the action steps.
|
Goal 1: ELA Proficiency
Increase student achievement in English Language Arts for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. | |||
| Measurable Objective: | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 45.87% of all Lemmon Valley students were proficient in ELA, above the 39.6% target. Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students overall by 10%, to reach a target goal of 52% of students proficient as measured by the 06-07 State CRT in reading and the 06-07 State Writing Proficiency Exam. 2. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 30.56% of Lemmon Valley IEP students, 26.54% Hispanic students, 30% LEP students, and 32.79% FRL students were proficient, all under the 39.6% target. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students by 10% in each disaggregated group of IEP, LEP, Hispanic, and FRL students as demonstrated by the 06-07 State CRT in reading and the 06-07 State Writing Proficiency Exam. | |||
| Action Steps to monitor Note: Action steps must address causes and solutions from 2. Inquiry Process. Cut and paste from 3A. | Timeline for collecting data | Data to collect in order to verify the action step has occurred. | Person(s) responsible in the district, region, or school who will ensure that each action step is implemented. |
|
Assessments to Target and Remediate 1.1 Grade level and vertical alignment of common assessments based on the QSI, Quick Writes, and STAR to be used to target and remediate non-proficient students.
|
- Trimester
- Trimester - Trimester - Every 6-7 weeks |
- Results of QSIs
- Results of Quick Writes - Results of literacy formatives - Results of STAR - Lists of students by grouped by results |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
Compass Learning 1.2 Continue training and implementation of Compass Learning to support ongoing skill development, remediation, and assessment in ELA and math.
|
Weekly
|
Sign-ins from teacher training
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Computer Aide Lindsie Banning |
|
Best Instructional Practices for LEP Student 1.3 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our LEP students in ELA.
|
On-going
|
Walk through notations
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
Professional Development for LEP Teaching 1.4 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support LEP students in ELA.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
- PLC logs
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Liz Warner and Diana Lundgren |
|
Best Instructional Practices for IEP Teaching 1.5 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our special needs students in ELA.
|
On-going
|
Walk through notations
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
Professional Development for IEP Teaching 1.6 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support IEP students in ELA.
|
On-going
|
PLC Logs
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
PLC members |
|
Intervention Time Blocks 1.7 Implement intervention time blocks for all students to support key elements in teaching.
|
- Daily
- Daily - Weekly |
- School schedule
- Literacy specialist log - Walkthroughs by principal and VP |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Becky Colwell |
|
Vocabulary Readers and Intervention Kits 1.8 Use vocabulary readers and intervention kits during literacy intervention blocks to support key elements in teaching literacy
|
- Daily
- Daily - Weekly |
- School schedule
- Literacy specialist schedule and lesson plans - Walkthroughs by principal and VP |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Becky Colwell |
|
Assurance of Covering Key Literacy Elements 1.9 Increase accountability for teachers in using key elements in literacy through utilization of principal walk-throughs, teacher self-reporting, collaboration with certified support staff, and feedback during PLCs.
(Actions – Sharing at PLCs, faculty meetings, peer observations) |
On-going
|
Walk-through notations
Self-evaluation reports PLC Logs |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
Consistent Writing Rubric 1.10 Introduce consistent writing rubric for writing assessment across grade levels with a focus on writing in 4th and 5th grades
|
After assessments
|
Student writing
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
4th Grade Writing Assessments 1.11 Assess 4th grade students in writing skills in May 2007
|
May 2007
|
- Results of scoring by External Consultant
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Dina Harrison, Writing Consultant 5th grade teachers |
|
5th Grade Writing Assessments 1.12 Assess 5th grade students in writing skills on a monthly basis. Use data from assessments to drive instruction and goals for improving writing.
|
Monthly
|
- Results of scoring by External Consultant
- Goals for writing instruction |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Dina Harrison, Writing Consultant 5th grade teachers |
|
Quick Writes 1.13 Use district writing rubrics to score Quick Writes across all grade levels
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
- District writing rubric results after
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Becky Colwell Justina Wu |
|
Professional Development in Student Engagemen 1.14 Continue to provide professional development in student engagement strategies for teachers and administrators and continue to use the criteria-based walk-through for student engagement
|
On-going
|
Walk-though notations
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
Student Engagement Instructional Activities 1.15 Continue support for Student Engagement instructional activities: Student Engagement Day, modeling of student engagement strategies in all classrooms by certified staff trained in T4S strategies
|
October 25, 2006
November 7, 2006 |
- Sign-ins from Student Engagement presentation
- Log of teachers visited |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Kirsten Gleissner |
|
Data Collection on Student Engagement 1.16 Data collection classroom visits during the school year to document improvement in student engagement.
|
Fall 2006
Spring 2007 |
- General compiled observation results
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Kirsten Gleissner |
|
Higher Order Questioning 1.17 Provide professional development in higher order thinking questioning techniques via instructional coaches and literacy specialists through modeling and collaborating
|
- Weekly
- Weekly - Monthly |
- IC template for time
- Literacy specialist log - SIP monitoring |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Kathy Lawrence Becky Colwell Justina Wu |
|
Funding Sources to Support Early Intervention 1.18 Reapply for grants and/or use resources from fundraising to support development of an early intervention system for at-risk students
|
November 2006
|
- Grant application
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Leadership team |
|
PLCs for Data Analysis 1.19 PLCs will meet after literacy formative assessments are given to follow up with data analysis. Principal will provide substitutes.
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
- PLC logs
- Literacy formative assessment results |
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Becky Colwell Justina Wu |
|
Funding to Assist with Analysis of Quarterly 1.20 Reapply for SB 404 monies for teachers to analyze quarterly data: District literacy formatives, QSI, Quick Writes, STAR, and teacher assessments.
|
Grant funding cycles
|
Funding amounts
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
|
|
Disseminate Parent Information 1.21 Implement Education Accords, provide information to parents through newsletters, attaching academic information to school events
|
Dates TBA
|
- Parent sign-ins at events
|
Troy Parks and Michelle Edwards
Teachers |
|
Goal 2: Math Proficiency
Increase student achievement in math for all students, especially our non-proficient students in the areas of special needs and limited English proficiency. | |||
| Measurable Objective: | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 49.32% of all Lemmon Valley students were proficient in math. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students overall by 10%, to reach a target goal of 55% of students proficient as measured by the 06-07 State CRT in math. 2. The 2006-2007 AYP report shows that 37.5% of Lemmon Valley IEP students, 30.86% Hispanic students, 30% LEP students, and 40.44% FRL students were proficient. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students by 10% in each disaggregated group of IEP, LEP, Hispanic, and FRL students as demonstrated by the 06-07 State CRT in math. | |||
| Action Steps to monitor Note: Action steps must address causes and solutions from 2. Inquiry Process. Cut and paste from 3A. | Timeline for collecting data | Data to collect in order to verify the action step has occurred. | Person(s) responsible in the district, region, or school who will ensure that each action step is implemented. |
|
Professional Development in PLC to Support LE 2.1 Provide professional development opportunities for teachers during PLC time to support LEP and IEP students in ELA & math
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Develop Norms, Routines, and Strategies of Be 2.2 Continue to develop norms, routines, and instructional strategies to sustain best practices for our LEP and special needs students in math.
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Compass Learning 2.3 Continue training and implementation of Compass Learning to support ongoing skill development, remediation, and assessment in math
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Math Formative Assessments for Remediation 2.4 Continue to disaggregate and use math formative assessments to target and remediate non-proficient students
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
PLC Data Analysis 2.5 PLCs will meet after math formative assessments are given to follow up with data analysis. Principal will provide substitutes.
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Funding 2.6 Reapply for grants to support instructional strategies for early intervention and to allow teachers time to analyze data: math formatives, STAR math, and teacher assessments
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Student Engagement Activities 2.7 Continue support for student engagement instructional activities: Student Engagement Day, modeling of student engagement strategies in all classrooms by certified staff trained in T4S strategies
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Walkthough Observations of Student Engagement 2.8 Walkthrough observations during the school year to document improvement in student engagement.
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
|
Parent Communications 2.9 Implement Education Accords, provide information to parents through newsletters, and include an academic component at school events, such as achievement award assemblies and math nights
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
3C. Evaluate Plan Implementation. For each goal, identify the data to collect (outcome indicator), when to collect it, and the person responsible for collecting it.
| Measurable Objectives | Data to Collect (Outcome Indicator: Assessment instrument to measure success) | Timeline for collecting data | Person(s) Responsible: designated person or group who will ensure that evaluation is completed |
|---|---|---|---|
| ELA Proficiency: 1. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 45.87% of all Lemmon Valley students were proficient in ELA, above the 39.6% target. Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students overall by 10%, to reach a target goal of 52% of students proficient as measured by the 06-07 State CRT in reading and the 06-07 State Writing Proficiency Exam. 2. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 30.56% of Lemmon Valley IEP students, 26.54% Hispanic students, 30% LEP students, and 32.79% FRL students were proficient, all under the 39.6% target. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students by 10% in each disaggregated group of IEP, LEP, Hispanic, and FRL students as demonstrated by the 06-07 State CRT in reading and the 06-07 State Writing Proficiency Exam. |
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
| Math Proficiency: 1. The 2005-2006 AYP report shows that 49.32% of all Lemmon Valley students were proficient in math. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students overall by 10%, to reach a target goal of 55% of students proficient as measured by the 06-07 State CRT in math. 2. The 2006-2007 AYP report shows that 37.5% of Lemmon Valley IEP students, 30.86% Hispanic students, 30% LEP students, and 40.44% FRL students were proficient. Therefore, Lemmon Valley will decrease the number of non-proficient students by 10% in each disaggregated group of IEP, LEP, Hispanic, and FRL students as demonstrated by the 06-07 State CRT in math. |
undefined
|
undefined
|
undefined
|
| What are the policies and practices in place that ensure proficiency of each subgroup in the core academic subjects? |
|---|
|
• Inclusion for ESL and IEP students with resource teachers in the classroom
• Intervention and remediation based on formative assessments in literacy and math • Compass Learning Classic during computer time • After school tutoring program through Washoe Education Foundation • Identification of students in the “approaching” category and placement in appropriate intervention/remediation programs |
| List and briefly describe, as appropriate, how the school has incorporated activities of remedial instruction or tutoring before school, after school, during the summer, and during any extension of the school year. |
|
Lemmon Valley implemented daily 45 minute literacy interventions blocks in addition to our 90 minute reading blocks. During interventions all students are divided into literacy ability groups and provided direct instruction based on their reading level. Instruction is focused on building skills that these students are lacking in literacy. In addition to literacy interventions Lemmon Valley has an after school literacy program that is funded by the Washoe Education Foundation. This program is focused on improving the literacy skills of students in grades 3, 4, and 5 that are approaching benchmarks in reading.
|
| Describe the resources available to the school to carry out the plan. |
|
This year Lemmon Valley was granted $50,000 to purchase leveled readers. We also purchased $25,000 worth of non-fiction materials to improve the quality of our library. We will be applying for additional textbook monies to ensure that all students have their own text books.
|
| Summarize the effectiveness of any appropriations for the school made by the Legislature to improve student academic achievement. |
|
Full day kindergarten was implemented in January of 2006. End of the kindergarten assessments proved that these students were able to surpass students that were not provided a full day of kindergarten. To start the 2006/2007 school year Lemmon Valley will have an Instructional Coach, a Reading Specialist, and an Assistant Principal. At this point we do not have any hard data that these positions have helped to improve student achievement. We will be looking at formative data throughout the school year to monitor student achievement and decide whether or not these positions are effective for improving student achievement.
|
| Discuss how the school will utilize Educational Involvement Accords for Parents including the Honor Code and meet all the requirements of the law. |
|
Lemmon Valley will be using the district provided Parent Accords and Honor Code
|
| If applicable, describe how the school will make its Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO) targets in English language proficiency (reading, writing, listening, speaking comprehension.) |
|
undefined
|
(section is not required for this school.)
| Describe how and when the school will provide written notice to parents on the school’s “Needs Improvement” status. |
|---|
|
Washoe County School District will notify all parents in writing before the first day of the school year of the current “Needs Improvement” status of the school as well as the status of Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO) status per Nevada Revised Statute 385.
|
| Describe the school’s teacher mentoring program and how it relates to achieving the school’s annual goals and objectives. |
|
Lemmon Valley follows the district mentoring program. Mentors at the site are trained through the district and assigned to new teachers at the school. These mentors work with the new teachers for a period of two years best practices and school routines. The school provides release time to the teachers and mentors for observations and reflections. Mentors will provide information to new teachers based on the school improvement plan’s goals, objectives, and action steps.
|