Shopville Elementary School

 

COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

 

SCHOOL ASSURANCE REVIEW

SCHOOL YEAR 2006-2008

 

The Shopville Elementary School council and school planning committee reviewed the Assurances in the Kentucky Comprehensive Improvement Planning School Framework (2004) prior to approval of our plan.

                                                

Anthony Cress                                               ____________________________

Chairperson, School Council                                                           Date

 

Shannon Dick                                                ____________________________

Chairperson, School Planning Committee                                    Date

 

Plan Approved by the School Council:

 

___________________________

Date

 

School Council Members:

 

Anthony Cress, Principal

Rhonda Hewitt, Teacher

Natalie Daniels, Parent

Wendy Ping, Teacher

Kimberly Davis, Teacher

Jeff Whitaker, Parent

 

Note:  Although the Assurance Certification is not included in the school’s improvement plan, the assurances for the categorical programs should be reviewed by the school council and the school planning committee prior to approval of the plan by the school council.  The Assurances for 2004-2005 are in the Comprehensive School Improvement Planning Framework (2004) and can be downloaded from the KDE Web Page at: http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Administrative+Resources/School+Improvement/Comprehensive+Improvement+Planning/default.htm

COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

PLAN SUMMARY

The stakeholders of Shopville Elementary School will strive to achieve each of the goals and objectives in the following Comprehensive School Improvement Plan.  Throughout each component of the plan, the ultimate goal is to improve teaching and learning in order to fulfill the school’s mission statement of enabling students to become life-long learners and eventually, productive members of society.

We will increase our CATS indices in each content area.  In addition, achievement gaps for specific subgroups (males, students receiving free/ reduced lunch, students with disabilities) will be decreased and the total number of students scoring at the novice performance level will be reduced.

 

Process summary

All stakeholders were involved in the development of this Comprehensive School Improvement Plan.  On November 7, 2005, the staff, parent representatives, and members of the central office staff analyzed and disaggregated assessment data.  This information assisted the Needs Assessment Team in developing key findings, priority needs, and possible causes and contributing factors.

 

MISSION STATEMENT DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW

Shopville Elementary Mission Statement: The entire staff of Shopville Elementary School accepts the responsibility to facilitate the learning of all students, enabling them to achieve their personal best academically, socially, physically, and emotionally.  This will ensure that all students acquire the knowledge necessary for them to function as life-long learners and productive members of society.

Our mission statement was originally created in 2001 but has been reviewed and discussed regularly.  In October 2005, all staff members reviewed the statement and it was agreed that the current mission statement defines what each of us believes and desires to achieve for each of our students.

 

NEEDS ASSESSMENT PROCESS; PRIORITY NEEDS, CAUSES, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES; ACHIEVEMENT GAPS

The Needs Assessment Committee completed an in-depth self-study utilizing the Standards and Indicators for School Improvement (SISI).  The SISI document, assessment data, and teacher and parent surveys were all used to identify the needs and possible causes and contributing factors.  The SISI document will continue to guide the work of the Planning Committee and SBDM committees throughout the year.

The Needs Assessment committee consisted of: Holly Mounce (special education teacher), Margaret Barron (community member), Dana Isaacs (instructional assistant), Sheryl Cooper (G/T Specialist), Kim Davis (speech pathologist/ SBDM teacher), Shirley Hargis (kindergarten teacher), Roben Haynes (Parent), Bud Meece (Title I teacher), Tracy Rice (1st grade teacher), Molly Dalton (4th grade teacher), Delsie LeMaster (5th grade teacher), Pam Strunk (3rd grade teacher), Stephanie Blevins (2nd grade teacher), and Shannon Dick (curriculum specialist/ building facilitator).

On November 2005, the Needs Assessment committee met to begin organizing data into key findings.  Members of the committee worked together to analyze each of the Standards and Indicators, compile survey results, and review the achievement gap plan and testing analysis documents developed on Nov.7, 2005.  On Nov. 30, 2005, the committee compiled the results into key findings and determined which of the key findings were priority needs.  On Dec. 6, 2005, the committee began recording possible causes and contributing factors for the identified priority needs.  This work was completed on Dec. 13, 2005 and the Planning Committee was then ready to begin developing goals and objectives along with activities/ strategies to address them.

The SBDM Council decided on the priority needs, causes, goals and objectives at the regularly scheduled meeting on January 24, 2006.  The council approved the Achievement Gap plan, including the identification of substantive gaps, gap targets, and time schedules for closing the identified gaps, at the November 2005 council meeting.

 

DRAFTS OF ACTION COMPONENTS

The Planning committee began work on the action components in early January.  The committee consisted of the following members: Joy Ball, FRC Coordinator; Sonia Corder, 2nd grade teacher; Beverly Stringer, 1st grade teacher; Kim Davis, SLP/SBDM member; Susan Doss, 1st grade teacher; Betty Eggers, kindergarten teacher; Rebecca Ford, 3rd grade teacher; Janet New, LMS; Lana Renner, preschool teacher; Robin Gates, 4th grade teacher; Delana Smith, music teacher; Debbie Washam, 2nd grade teacher; and Shannon Dick, building facilitator.  The committee met one to two times per week.  They finished the draft components on Feb. 27, 2006.

Drafts of the action components were reviewed at the February and March 2006 SBDM meetings.

 

ESTIMATES FOR SECTION 7 FUNDING

The SBDM Council reviewed estimates for costs and drafts of the Section 7 requests at the March 28, 2006 meeting.

 

INTERNAL REVIEW, EXTERNAL REVIEW, AND PUBLIC PRESENTATION

The Review Team consisted of the following members: Rhonda Hewitt, 3rd grade teacher/ SBDM member; Ronda Crawford, STC; Susan Doss, 1st grade teacher; Rebecca Cash, 5th grade teacher; Teresa Roark-Adams, special education liaison; Mary Hendricksen, preschool teacher; Patty Hibbs, kindergarten teacher; Arlene Broyles, instructional assistant; Misty Newberry, 1st grade teacher; Wendy Ping, Title I teacher/ SBDM member; Kristy Nicely, special education teacher; Stephanie Harris, 5th grade teacher; Rebecca Ford, 3rd grade teacher; and Shannon Dick, building facilitator. 

The Plan will be presented to the community at the April 17, 2006 PTA meeting.  There are always parents, teachers, and community members at the PTA meetings.  In addition, the plan will be available for review at the school from April 10, 2006 through April 21, 2006.  This will be publicized in the newspaper

 

APPROVAL, ADOPTION, AND REVISION OF THE PLAN

The SBDM Council at the May 2006 meeting will officially adopt the revised Plan for the 2006-2008 biennium.

The Plan will be revised as assessment information is received and analyzed (Nov. of each year).

Implementation and Impact Checks will officially be conducted three times per year.  However, the plan will be reviewed and monitored at each SBDM Council meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

ACTION COMPONENT

Academic Performance (Standards 1-3)

 

X

School

 

District

 

 Curriculum, Assessment, Instruction

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

X

Preliminary

 

Revised

 

District Name

Pulaski County Schools

501

Component Manager

Wendy Ping

X

School Name

Shopville Elementary School

 440

Current Date

03/27/06

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Priority Need

Goal

In the 2005 KY performance report, our total Academic Index is 65.7, with the following indices in each content area:

·         Reading 80.8, with 13.21% Novice;

  • Mathematics 50.6, with 50.79% Novice;
  • Social Studies 56.5, with 42.85% Novice;
  • Science 81.1, with 5.66% Novice;
  • Arts and Humanities 56.9, with 38.09% Novice;
  • Practical Living/Vocational Studies 69.7, with 28.57% Novice; and Writing 61.0 with 15.09% Novice portfolios and 26.42% On-Demand Writing; and
  • National NRT index 78.7, with 19.6% of students scoring in the first quartile.

Indices in the following content areas will increase by the 2008 CATS assessment:

    • Reading by 4.8 points to 85.6;
    • Mathematics by 21 points to 71.6;
    • Social Studies by 18.4 points to 74.9;
    • Science by 4.7 points to 85.8
    • Arts and Humanities by 19.6 points to 76.5;
    • PL/VS by 13.2 points to 82.9;
    • Writing by 9.8 points to 70.8; and
    • National NRT by 6 points to 84.6.

 

*Fifth grade accountability areas have been calculated using 2004 data.

 

The following Novice reduction rates will be met by the 2008 CATS assessment:

·         Reading will reduce by 2.1% to 11.1%;

·         Mathematics will reduce by 11.5% to 39.3%;

·         Social Studies will reduce by 9.5% to 33.4%;

·         Science will be reduced to 5% or below;

·         Arts and Humanities will be reduced by 8.3% to 29.8%;

·         PL/VS will be reduced by 5.9% to 22.7%; and

·         No more than 7% of students will score in the lowest quartile on the National NRT.

Causes of the Need

Objectives For Reaching the Goal

®Based on the SISI self-study conducted in November 2005, we found the following causes:

  • The curriculum maps are not fully aligned with the Program of Studies, Core Content, and Academic Expectations. (1.1a)
  • Integration of content areas in each grade level is limited. (1.1g)
  • Curriculum maps lack higher order thinking and problem solving skills. (1.1g)

® According to parent surveys sent home in November 2005, the majority of parents are not aware of everything their children will learn during the current school year. (1.1g)

® CATS results show that there were numerous blanks, ones, and zeros on the open response questions in contradiction with the Good Faith Effort Checklists maintained by the test monitors.  (2.1f)

® Results from the Test Analysis meeting indicated the following:

  • There is a lack of open response modeling and instruction in all content areas. (3.1a)
  • Lack of content knowledge is a major problem in mathematics. (3.1f)
  • No students scored proficient or distinguished in on-demand writing.  (3.1a)
  • Teachers cited lack of modeling, practice, and not teaching to higher levels as causes of low writing scores. (3.1a)

Teachers report that more training in on-demand writing and open response would improve student achievement. (6.2f)

  1. All students will be instructed through a revised, aligned, intentional, and rigorous curriculum.  This curriculum will be based on Core Content 4.0, Program of Studies, and Academic Expectations.

 

  1. Stakeholders will develop an evaluation and assessment plan.  The plan will include multiple evaluation and assessment strategies to continuously monitor and modify instruction to meet student needs and support proficient work.

 

  1. The school’s instructional program will actively engage all students using effective, varied, and research-based practices, i.e.- differentiated instruction, higher order thinking skills, etc.

 

 

Evidence of Causes

Measures of Objectives (Practice and Results)

·         According to the KPR, scores in subdomains in each content area show inconsistencies.  Some subdomains are being taught in great depth while others are being neglected.

·         The majority of parents indicate that they do not understand what their child will learn during the year.

·         There is a large discrepancy between the results of the Good Faith Effort Checklist and the KPR report.  According to the KPR, there were a high number of blanks, ones, and zeros on the open response portion of the KCCT.

·          No student scored at the proficient or distinguished level in on-demand writing.

A.      By August 2007, the curriculum will be aligned and mapped according to Core Content 4.0, Program of Studies, and Academic Expectations.  The revised curriculum will assist to increase student achievement on daily work, classroom assessments, and CATS.

B.      By December 2007, the evaluation and assessment plan will be in place.  This plan will contain guidelines for aligning classroom assessments and Depth of Knowledge (DOK), the scrimmage process, and other pertinent assessment information.

C.      By May 2008, student performance in all content areas will improve as evidenced by the increase in the students performing at the proficient level and the decrease of students scoring at the novice level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Objective A:  The school will implement an aligned curriculum that is rigorous, relevant, and intentional.

Activity

Measure

Responsible Person

Start Date

End Date

Cost

Fund Source

1.  The staff will receive training in the updated Core Content 4.0, revised Program of Studies, and Depth of Knowledge (DOK). (1.1a)

A

Tony Cress Shannon Dick

06/06

12/06

$200

P.D. funds &

Job embedded PD (grade level meetings)

2.  The staff will align curriculum maps vertically and horizontally according to the revised Program of Studies, Core Content 4.0, and Academic Expectations. The curriculum maps will be utilized in all classrooms, including special education, related arts, and gifted/talented class. (1.1a; 1.1g) 

A

Tony Cress Shannon Dick

06/06

05/08

No funds required

Job embedded PD (grade level meetings)

3.  Grade level meetings and faculty meetings will be utilized to monitor, evaluate, and revise the curriculum.  This will occur no less than monthly. (1.1f)

A

Tony Cress Shannon Dick

08/06

05/08

No funds required

Job embedded PD (grade level & faculty meetings)

4.  Fifth grade students will receive daily instruction focusing on Arts and Humanities.  This instruction will include open response questions, hands on activities, and lessons coordinated with related arts teachers. (1.1g)

 

A

Connie Isaacs

08/06

05/08

$45,000

Title I position

5.  Fourth grade students will receive daily instruction in Practical Living/ Vocational Studies and Science. (1.1g)

A

Connie Isaacs

08/06

05/08

Same as #3

Same as #3

6.       All homerooms will have the opportunity to attend two Arts and Humanities productions each year. (1.1g)

A

Tony Cress

09/06

05/08

$1000

A & H account

7.       Research-based materials will be purchased according to the KY textbook adoption schedule. (1.1g)

A

Tony Cress
Betty Eggers

07/06

05/08

$16,572

Textbook allocation

8. ESS instruction will target identified subpopulations (free/reduced lunch, males, students with disabilities) from the Achievement Gap Plan.  This instruction will focus on specific student needs. (1.1g)

A

Lorie Carter

10/06

03/08

Central office allocation

ESS funds

9.  Fifth grade teachers and the curriculum specialist will participate in curriculum meetings with Northern Middle School teachers in order to ensure vertical articulation. (1.1b)

A

Tony Cress Shannon Dick

03/06

05/08

No funds required

To be completed on March records day

10.  Fifth grade students will participate in field trips to Northern Middle School and assemblies with NMS personnel in order to transition smoothly into the sixth grade. Males, students receiving free or reduced lunch, and students with disabilities will be encouraged to attend the Summer Academy at the middle school. (1.1d)

A

Tony Cress Joy Ball       Lorie Carter

03/07

05/08

 

ESS funds


 

Objective B: Develop and implement a high quality evaluation and assessment plan.