School
Improvement Plan
2006-07
School
Improvement Plan
2006-07
School
Improvement Plan
Year: 2006-07
|
PROFILE |
|
NorthLake
Park Community school is projected to have a population of 1150 students
during the 2006-2007 school year. The
racial composition should be approximately 55% Caucasian, 35% Hispanic, 5%
Black, and 5% Other. Approximately 30%
of our students are predicted to receive federal assistance through the Free
and Reduced School Lunch Program. Most
of our students continue to come from “traditional” family homes (two
parents). In most cases, both parents
are gainfully employed. Our school is
expected to experience a growth spurt over the year as apartments and homes
continue to be built in the immediate area.
We anticipate a second rezoning of students to occur in
2007-2008. This will once more alter
our current demographics and help relieve severe overcrowding. Our
school improvement plan continues to focus on developing Professional
Learning Communities. We should have a
strong handle on PLC in our second year of implementation and we will be more
able to accurately tailor the meetings to correct learning gaps. Our teachers
will receive training in learning the new state standards for Language Arts. At-risk students in grades 3-5 will
continue to be serviced through our Targeted Assistance Before School
Tutorial Program. We strive to put upgraded hardware in the classrooms thus
allowing more touches on the Success Maker program for the bottom 25% of
achievers. We will implement a “Pyramid of Interventions” for all bottom 25%
achievers. This will address both
academic and social needs. Specialized
training will be provided for parents of struggling readers through the |
|
VISION |
|
|
School
Improvement Plan
Year: 2006-07
Development
of the School Improvement Plan
The district ENDS Policy,
Charter School District Performance Goals, and the Comprehensive Academic
Achievement Plan (CAAP) were all used to develop our school improvement plan. The plan is a tool for identifying and
creating a desirable future for our students and school. The school improvement plan process will
enable us to anticipate and manage the complex
changes that we face. Furthermore,
because our School Advisory Council is broadly representative of our school’s
community, we are confident that our school improvement plan reflects a shared
vision of success for all of our students.
We began the strategic
planning process by developing and clarifying a vision statement for our school. Our vision statement expresses the
"desirable future" we want to create and is presented on the previous
page.
In order to assess the needs
of our school, we collected and analyzed a great deal of data. From these data we identified a number of
priority needs, which are stated in our plan.
These needs formed the basis for our plan this year.
The mission of the Orange
County Public Schools is, “Each student will acquire the skills, attitudes, and
knowledge necessary to reach full potential.” Based on this mission, we reviewed the Performance
Goals from the Charter School District Contract and built objectives around the
goals that reflected the priority needs of our school. OCPS also has five Supporting Conditions to help
accomplish the district’s mission. We
reviewed the Supporting Conditions and selected supporting conditions that
related to our needs assessment.
The
purpose of the OCPS CAAP is to create curriculum consistency for all students
and provide instructional strategies that meet the needs of our diverse student
population. To make this happen,
developmental, accelerated, and remedial strategies have been incorporated into
this plan to ensure student achievement.
Our school improvement plan
focuses on how we will work toward meeting the needs at our school. We used the results of our needs assessment as
a starting point to select and develop three-year objectives. We used the needs assessment results to
address budget, training, instructional materials, technology, staffing,
student support services, specific school safety, discipline strategies,
student health and fitness, including physical fitness, parental information on
student health/fitness, and indoor environmental air quality. The SAC’s assistance was used to prepare the
budget for next year so that it effectively supports the school improvement
plan.
Annual objectives were
developed to identify where we would be at the end of each year of our three‑year
objectives or objectives based on the Supporting Conditions. Finally, action plans were written, which outlined
the activities that needed to be completed in order to reach our annual
objectives. These action plans are
clearly defined activities that show what we will accomplish in working toward
our objectives.
The four state education
goals,
Once our plan was completed,
it was reviewed by our community, the area superintendent, the superintendent,
and the school board. This review
focused on determining how much progress toward state goals and the district's mission
would result from the implementation of the plan. When the school board approved our plan, they
agreed that achieving the annual objectives would produce adequate progress
toward meeting these important goals.
The actual implementation of
our plan will be evaluated at two points during the school year. The first review of progress will be in
December-January with the area superintendent.
The mid-year progress review will determine if we are on schedule in completing
the action plan activities that are written in our plan and data showing
progress at the middle of the school year. The final progress report is made after the
school year is over. At that time, we
will determine if we accomplished our annual objectives. We will use those results to begin our needs
assessment for next year.
High Quality Instruction Statement:
School
Improvement Plan
READING OBJECTIVE
|
District
|
|
|
Baseline Expectations (Percent of Students) |
|
|
Reading
Performance: |
Elementary: 85 Middle Schools: 65 High Schools: 60 |
|
Reading
Learning Gains: |
Elementary: 70 Middle Schools: 75 High Schools: 75 |
|
Reading
Lowest 25% Learning Gains: |
Elementary: 70 Middle Schools: 75 High Schools: 65 |
|
Narrative to Describe Major Steps to Meet
Baseline Expectations in |
|
|
We expect to improve
student performance by 3% each year to reach a 90% baseline that will be
maintained for all students. ·
analyze and monitor progress using district and in-house simulations ·
provide more practice for extended response questions ·
incorporate Year Two of Professional Learning Communities to address
weekly ·
conduct family literacy nights to teach parents how to assist their
children with reading strategies |
|
|
Five-Year
Objectives: |
Insert the three reading objectives in the
space provided. By July 2011, 90 percent or more of all
students taking the FCAT Reading test at By July 2011, 90
percent or more of all students taking the FCAT Reading test at By July 2011, 87 percent
of all students taking the FCAT Reading test at |
|
2005-06 Needs
Statement: |
In June 2005, 79% of
students at |
|
2005-06 Annual
Objective: |
In June 2006, 82% of
all students will score at Level 3 and above on FCAT Reading. |
|
2005-06 Mid-Year
Progress: |
All simulations given point to steady
progress toward this goal. These
simulations included teacher generated tests, DRP, and Success Maker. The new Benchmark Testing is inconclusive
at this time. |
|
2005-06 Results: |
In June 2006, 87% of students at |
|
2006-07 Needs
Statement: |
In June 2006, 87 percent of students at In June 2006, 76
percent of students at In June 2006, 72 percent
of students at |
|
2006-07 Annual
Objectives: |
By July 2007, 90 percent of all students
taking the FCAT Reading test at By July 2007, 79
percent of all students taking the FCAT Reading test at By July 2007, 75 percent of all students
taking the FCAT Reading test at |
|
2006-07 Mid-Year
Progress: |
Enter progress made at mid-year of 2006-07
here. |
|
2006-07 Results: |
Enter data for 2006-07 here. |
|
2007-08 Needs
Statement: |
Enter data for 2007-08
here. |
|
2007-08 Annual
Objective: |
Enter annual objective for 2007-08 here. |
|
2007-08 Mid-Year
Progress: |
Enter progress made at mid-year of 2007-08
here. |
|
2007-08 Results: |
Enter data for 2007-08
here. |
|
Do rules,
regulations, policies, or laws at the state or district level prevent the
school from accomplishing this plan? |
Yes: |
|
No: |
X |
|
Yes: |
|
No: |
|
|
|
Attachment D contains the form and
procedures for requesting a waiver. |
||||
School
Improvement Plan
Action Plan for
2006-07
|
|
|
|
Status |
||
|
Activities (May 31, 2007) |
Funding Source |
Position of Responsibility |
Completed |
In Progress |
Planned |
|
1. Analyze
test scores to determine areas of strengths and weaknesses in Reading (July
1, 2006) |
None |
Administration |
|
|
|
|
2. Train
teachers on how to maximize instructional opportunities through time
management staff development and through “powering up” center time (August 4,
2006). |
None |
CRT, Administrative Team,
Team Leaders. |
|
|
|
|
3. Train
teachers on the new Language Arts benchmarks (August 4, 2006). |
None |
CRT |
|
|
|
|
4. Incorporate
Year Two of Professional Learning Communities to address weekly |
None |
CRT, Administrative Team,
Teachers |
|
|
|
|
5. Train
teachers how to better teach their children how to write extended responses
for FCAT purposes (August 23, 2006) |
None |
CRT, District
Administrators |
|
|
|
|
6. Train
teachers on how to better integrate Social Studies content as informational
text into the |
None |
CRT |
|
|
|
|
7.
Identify Bottom 25% and place into our Pyramid of Interventions
programs (August 31, 2006) |
Targeted Assistance Money |
Administrators, Teachers,
Resource Teachers |
|
|
|
|
8.
Monitor Progress Quarterly with At-Risk Meetings using DIBELS,
Benchmark Assessment, DRP, and Simulations as monitoring tools (Beginning
September, 2006) |
Additional DRP Test – SAC |
AP, Teachers, Principal,
CRT, Resource Teacher |
|
|
|
|
9.
Conduct a Family Literacy Night to share with parents ways in which
they can help their children become better readers (October 17, 2006) |
None |
Administrative Team |
|
|
|
|
10.
Analyze FCAT scores and set a new course of action for the 2007-2008
school year (May 31, 2007) |
None |
Administrative Team |
|
|
|
Funding Source: Designate where funds will come from, if
applicable, such as School Improvement Funds, School Budget, Title I funds, or
a grant.
School
Improvement Plan
MATH OBJECTIVE
|
District
|
|
|
Baseline Expectations (Percent of Students) |
|
|
Math
Performance: |
Elementary: 80 Middle Schools: 70 High Schools: 80 |
|
Math
Learning Gains: |
Elementary: 70 Middle Schools: 75 High Schools: 75 |
|
Math
Lowest 25% Learning Gains: |
Elementary: 70 Middle Schools: 75 High Schools: 75 |
|
Narrative to Describe Major Steps to Meet
Baseline Expectations in Math Within 5 Years: |
|
|
We expect to improve
student performance by 3% each year to reach a 90% baseline that will be
maintained for all students. ·
incorporate Year Two of Professional Learning Communities to address
weekly Math issues to problem solve as a grade level ·
train teachers on how to better teach their children how to write
extended responses for FCAT purposes ·
monitor Progress Quarterly with At-Risk Meetings using district and
in-house simulations as monitoring tools |
|
|
Five-Year
Objectives: |
By July 2011, 90 percent of all students
taking the FCAT Math test at By July 2011, 86
percent of all students taking the FCAT Math test at By July 2011, 81 percent
of all students taking the FCAT Math test at |
|
2005-06 Needs
Statement: |
In June 2005, 76% of all |
|
2005-06 Annual Objective: |
In June 2006, 79% of all students will
score at Level 3 or above on the FCAT Math exam. |
|
2005-06 Mid-Year
Progress: |
All simulation data coming in at the mid
point indicate that we are on track to achieve our annual goal. This is based primarily on the Everyday
Math simulations and math facts tests. |
|
2005-06 Results: |
In June 2006, 81% of all students scored
at grade level or above on the Math FCAT.
|
|
2006-07 Needs
Statement: |
In June 2006, 81 percent of students at In June 2006, 71
percent of students at In June 2006, 66
percent of students at |
|
2006-07 Annual
Objectives: |
|