Center Grove Elementary School



Center Grove Elementary School

A Four Star School

North Central Association

and Indiana PL 221

School Improvement Plan

2008-2012

Updated July, 2010

[pic]

2455 S. Morgantown Road

Greenwood, IN 46143

(317) 881-1720

Fax (317) 885-4535

centergrove.k12.in.us

Bruce Haddix, Principal

haddixb@centergrove.k12.in.us

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Committee Members Page 3

II. Mission Statement 4

III. Belief Statements 5

IV. Attendance 6

V. Profile – Unique Local Insights 7

i. School Distinctions 8

ii. Staffing 8

iii. Diversity 8

iv. Socio-Economic Status 9

v. Special Education 10

vi. Community Demographics 10

vii. Parent Involvement 11

viii. Community Involvement 12

ix. Technology 12

x. Professional Development 13

xi. Safe and Disciplined Schools 16

xii. Suspensions 18

xiii. Title I 18

xiv. English as a New Language 18

xv. Curriculum Location 18

xvi. Cultural Competency 18

xvii. Interventions 18

xviii. Student involvement 19

xix. High Ability Students 19

xx. Statutes and Rules 20

VI. Presentation of Data 20

VII. Goal Selection 22

VIII. Action Plans 24

i. Center Grove Community School Corporation 25

ii. Center Grove Elementary School 32

[pic]

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Mission/Belief Statements

Connie Allen

Debbie Harty

Dwayne Marshall

Karol Mullen

Becky Pennington

Stacey Raftery

Bekah Smith

Dana Thompson

School Profile

Elijah Adams

Amanda Ardizzone

Susan Campbell

Malia Casper

Melody Cragen

Kim King

Carol Stahl

Pam Vawter

Kristi Watters

Data Collection

Jeannine Browning

Nicole DeKemper

Jennifer Hueston

Karen Isenhour

LeAnne Matthews

Eric Long

Peggy Young

Goal Selection

Michelle Allen

Jamie Bender

Andrea Jahnke

Megan McKinney

Shannon Nunnelly

Jon Rugenstein

John Voelz

School Improvement Team

Malia Casper

Melody Cragen

Jennifer Hueston

Karen Isenhour

Andrea Jahnke

Karol Mullen

Carol Stahl

John Voelz

Kristi Watters

Professional Development Team

Connie Allen

Jamie Bender

Jeannine Browning

Marcia Boehning

Susan Campbell

Debbie Harty

Carol Stahl

Dana Thompson

Peggy Young

Technology Team

Elijah Adams

Marcia Boehning

Karen Isenhour

Eric Long

Becky Pennington

Jon Rugenstein

Bekah Smith

John Voelz

Kristi Watters

Parent/Community

Kim Kovacs

Angie Cox

Phil Chamberlin

Rick Kovacs

Kip Kelly

CENTER GROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

MISSION STATEMENT

[pic]

Center Grove Elementary is a dynamic and caring school that prepares students to become productive, responsible citizens. We strive to prepare our students for their next level of learning by:

• Implementing mandated curriculum standards,

• Encouraging each student to reach his/her potential by providing meaningful instructional activities, materials, programs, and assessments, and

• Challenging each student to become a critical, independent thinker.

Our school is a family that cultivates the love of learning through strong home/school partnerships.

Revised, January, 2010

Belief Statements

[pic]

The Center Grove Elementary Team believes . . .

• All children can learn when varied and multiple opportunities are offered to meet their individual needs.

• Children learn best with clear expectations in a safe environment.

Revised January, 2010

CENTER GROVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

ATTENDANCE RATES 1992-2007

[pic]

|Attendance Rate |

Year 95th Percentile State Average CGES

|1992-93 |97.4 |95.4 |97.0 |

|1993-94 |97.6 |95.4 |97.1 |

|1994-95 |97.5 |95.4 |96.9 |

|1995-96 |97.5 |95.5 |96.7 |

|1996-97 |97.5 |95.6 |96.7 |

|1997-98 |97.5 |95.7 |97.1 |

|1998-99 |97.6 |95.7 |97.0 |

|1999-00 |97.7 |95.9 |97.3 |

|2000-01 |97.6 |95.7 |97.2 |

|2001-02 |97.6 |95.7 |97.2 |

|2002-03 |97.5 |95.8 |96.4 |

|2003-04 |97.8 |95.9 |97.4 |

|2004-05 |97.7 |95.9 |97.1 |

|2005-06 |98.2 |96.0 |97.1 |

|2006-07 |97.7 |95.8 |97.2 |

|2007-08 | |95.9 |96.7 |

|2008-09 | |96.1 |97.3 |

|2009-10 | | | |

In the fifteen years of collected data above, Center Grove Elementary School has been above the state average every year. Although we have never met the 95th percentile ranking, we have come within 0.4% of reaching that goal six times.

[pic]

[pic]

Center Grove Elementary School

Profile – Unique Local Insights

Center Grove Elementary School is located at 2455 S. Morgantown Road in Greenwood, Indiana. One of five elementary schools in the Center Grove Community School Corporation, Center Grove Elementary School enjoys success on a variety of levels which are a great source of pride for our staff and community. As of this writing, our current enrollment is 650 wonderful students. Nine percent of our students come from ethnicities other than Caucasian and eight percent of our students receive free or reduced lunch. The Center Grove community, in general, is an area of affluence with families of highly educated professionals. Center Grove Elementary is unique among our six elementary schools in that we are the only school that is not a part of the Title I program.

In the fall of 2001, the Center Grove Community School Corporation began the

school improvement process utilizing the North Central Accreditation model. Multiple committees were formed at Center Grove Elementary School to identify goals, research best practice strategies, and implement data-driven decision-making. Our data indicated that we needed to focus on increasing reading comprehension and math computation skills across every grade level. With the combined efforts of each committee, the Center Grove School Improvement Plan came into existence and has been fully implemented. Over the past six years, the plan has been reviewed, refined and revised as staff members explored new best strategies to address the needs of our changing student population, and our study of the data has directed our efforts to achieve these two goals at new levels.

Over the course of the past seven years, both our school and corporation have utilized a variety of assessment methods to collect data. At the district level, locally developed criterion-referenced assessments (CRA) were developed for use as consistent tools among all schools. This effort ultimately failed to produce reliable data, though, and was discontinued in 2004. In place of this, our district used Scantron testing in grades 2 through 5, along with ISTEP+, and InView testing to determine CSI scores in grades 3 and 5. We now use Acuity. At the building level, students in grades K and 1 are given the DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) assessments. A new assessment as of 2005, STEEP (Screening to Enhance Education Performance), was given to all students in Grades 1-5 to quickly assess reading fluency and math computation accuracy. They now take AIMSWEB. Students in grades 3, 4 and 5 participate in the ISTEP+ testing each fall. Along with other building-based common assessments in grade levels and unit assessments in subject areas, we have gathered data for this report to show our student performance is consistently improving.

Individually, as funds are available, teachers are encouraged to attend workshops and trainings that they feel will enhance the excellence of their teaching. Examples of these can be found in the Professional Development section that follows. Our community of learners celebrates the many accomplishments our students make academically. This is a source of pride among the students, parents, patrons and staff of our school.

i. School Distinctions:

Center Grove Elementary School is consistently named an Exemplary School for No Child Left Behind and Indiana rankings. We have been named an Indiana Four Star School for eight of the last nine years, missing one year only by attendance. Our teachers have been Golden Apple nominees, Disney Hand Award nominees, Meijer Teacher of the Month winners, elected to Who’s Who Among America’s Teachers, and many have facilitated and state, local and national conferences. Our principal is the 2004 Indiana Elementary Principal of the Year and a 2005 National Distinguished Principal. He has edited books for Corwin Press and is published in USA Today and Educational Leadership.

ii. Staffing:

Center Grove Elementary School staff members include a principal, a counselor, twenty-seven regular education certified classroom teachers, two certified special education teachers, a music teacher, an art teacher, a physical education teacher, a media specialist, and ten assistants. We have a literacy lab assistant, a technology assistant, a media assistant, three custodians and seven cafeteria employees. A Speech and Language specialist is also an integral part of our staff on a daily basis. We have three sections of full day Kindergarten. Our school provides and before- and after-care program through Honey Grove Educational Services.

iii. Diversity:

Center Grove Community Schools as a whole has typically lacked significant ethnic diversity throughout the community. However, that is beginning to change. During the 2006-07 school year, Center Grove Elementary School hosted the district’s English as a New Language (ENL) program and welcomed 11 students from a wide range of nationalities, including Japanese, Hispanic, Turkish, Indian and a student from Holland. In 2007, the program was relocated to another school, but has returned to us from the 2010-2011 school year. Six ENL students elected to remain at Center Grove Elementary and forfeit services at the new site. We are blessed to have two students of Russian origin, three from Japan and one Hindi Indian student. We are also seeing a slight increase in our African-American population, yet this represents only 2% of our total population. The multi-racial students make up 2% of our enrollment. Contrary to what many neighboring school districts are seeing, our Hispanic population remains at 2%. Our Asian population is the highest ethnicity at 4%, with the balance of our enrollment representing Caucasian students at 91% in the 2009-2010 school year.

[pic]

93% White

3% Asian

2% Multiracial

1% Hispanic

1% African-American

iv. Socio-Economic Status:

Center Grove Elementary School is seeing a very gradual increase in the number of students receiving free and reduced lunch and book rental over previous years. It is worth noting that when we began our association with North Central in 2000-2001, we had 100 percent paid lunch (see chart below and pie graph above). Since then, our free/reduced total has wavered in the 3 percent to 9 percent range. For 2010-2011, it is projected at this writing to be near 12%.

[pic]

v. Special Education:

The Special Education population of Center Grove Elementary School has been steadily growing over the past seven years. Additional personnel and services have been added to meet the needs of these awesome children. Currently, our school’s special education population includes children with Learning Disabilities, Mild and Moderate, emotional handicaps, and communications disorders. Our staff includes two certified teachers, one speech specialist and six assistants. These incredible staff members modify work, personalize student schedules, collaborate with regular education teachers, develop visual reminders, support adult parent volunteers, partner with other classrooms, set up and manage individual work stations for students, provide small group and individual remediation time, write and implement behavior plans, communicate regularly with parents, coordinate supportive computer software, provide peer tutoring with upper grade students, differentiate assignments, homework and grading, adjust goals for Accelerated Reading, partner with a Big Brother-Big Sister or Dad’s Club mentor, assess through ISTAR, provide instruction in resource rooms, adapt special class lessons for the physically challenged, and meet the needs of often complicated and extensive IEP’s.

The results of this work with special education students can be seen in the chart below. A respectable percentage of our special education students do indeed pass ISTEP+ and some have even Pass+ed in some areas. Center Grove Elementary does have a subgroup with more than 30 special education students for AYP, and we are proud to say that our students contribute to our making AYP each year by passing at a strong rate.

vi. Community Demographics:

Subtle changes have taken place in the Center Grove community in the past ten years. We are seeing many more transient families, notably those who reside in the apartment complexes our school now serves through enrollment management procedures. Although not a large number, we also are experiencing an increase in the number of single-parent families and divorce. This has been uncommon in our school community. We’ve also noticed changes in the levels of educational backgrounds of parents not previously present- still parents with strong educational and professional backgrounds, but increasingly more blue-collar families. Parental involvement has always been a marked strength of our school, but though still very strong, even that seems to be changing somewhat. We believe that there are more instances of both parents now needing to be employed to maintain the standard of living in this community.

In the Center Grove area in general, business has boomed over the past ten years. There are a significantly increased number of retailers, restaurants, medical/dental offices, and large so-called “big-box” chain stores such as Target, Menards, Home Depot, and Meijer. Housing starts also have increased both in starter homes and those appraised at a quarter of a million dollars and above. What was once mostly a rural area is now becoming a residential and business area. However, the area served by Center Grove Elementary remains relatively stable as there is not much land left on which to build homes in our immediate school area. Most of our new students come to us from areas served by other schools that are overcrowded through enrollment management processes.

vii. Parental Involvement

If asked about the unique major strengths of Center Grove Elementary School, most would answer immediately that we enjoy an exceptional amount of parental support and participation – so much so that it is envied by most. We enjoy a PTO that is active, progressive and generous in supplementing the needs of our building. The PTO parents fund mini-grants to teachers for materials and supplies that enhance the educational opportunities of our students. PTO also sponsors Family Fun Nights, a Spring Carnival, holiday classroom parties, Santa Shop, Career Day, Book Fairs, Market Day, Math Pentathlon, Spiritwear Sales and Staff Appreciation recognitions.

Unique to us in many ways is the existence and strength of our Dads Club – about 50 fathers who meet monthly to support the efforts of the school. Their goal is to provide enrichment for students through extracurricular activities, which include a Robotics Club, Science Fair, after- school Movie Nights and tutoring mentorships. They have also generously provided physical improvements to the school such as purchasing and installing a new mailbox, framing our student picture composites, sponsoring the painting and redecoration of our dining room and playground equipment. They recently completed painting the gym to coordinate it with the cafeteria – a huge and costly undertaking. In addition, the Dad’s Club caters and runs the kitchen for Family Fun Night and Carnival. It’s quite a sight to see all the Dads cooking for and serving more than 800 people.

During school hours, it is very common to see many parents volunteering in classrooms throughout every grade level. In many instances, there are so many volunteers that many teachers have to schedule parents on a calendar to make sure they all get a turn. Parents run a mini-economy, help with special projects in every grade level, help in field trips, serve as guest experts for Career Day, read to students, mentor and remediate in small groups, help at stations, and gladly do the menial tasks to make the teacher’s time with students more productive. They work with special class teachers with Jump Rope for Heart, Art Club, Student Council, and music programs. As of this writing, a team of parents is transforming our school into farm and State Fair decorations in support of our all-school thematic unit on Charlotte’s Web.

Parents tell us they feel welcome and vital to the success of the school and teachers realize the value of their involvement in making special things happen for our children. At fall conferences, we took a parent survey of “how we are doing at CGES” and 99% of parents reported feeling welcome in our school and overwhelmingly happy with the education their children are receiving. Center Grove Elementary School is truly blessed by the involvement of our parents in every aspect of their children’s education. They are, indeed, our strongest and most positive advocates. Among the opportunities parents have for participation are:

• PTO

• Dad’s Club

• Classroom volunteers

• OASIS tutoring

• Breakfast with Santa

• Santa Shop

• Spring Carnival

• Fall Festival

• Room parents

• Parent/Teacher Conferences

• Open House

• Annual parent surveys on our performance

• All-School Thematic Units

• Field Trips

• Volunteer Dinner

• Career Day

• All-Pro Dads Club

viii. Community Involvement:

Our school has created partnerships with many local businesses and organizations, including,

• McDonalds

• Chick-Fil-A

• Marsh Supermarkets

• Target

• Golden Corral

• Texas Roadhouse

• Fazolis

• Ambassadors for Children in Jamaica

• Heifer International

• Special Olympics

• Riley Hospital for Children

• Johnson County Waste Management

• Dairy Queen

• Country Charm Nursing Home

• The Hearth at Stones Crossing

ix. Technology

Center Grove Elementary School has seen some major improvements in the quality of technology available for both staff and students in recent years. We now enjoy two full computer labs; four computers and a teacher computer in every classroom; scanners, printers, LCD projectors in the lab and LGI; and recently installed new teacher computers. In general, technology efforts for the district have been limited only by monetary resources available. The expertise to move our district forward has been here, but funding all that we would like to do has not been possible. At the district level, the Alert Instant Alert System, Skyward access for parents, Moodle, DynaCal, VersaTrans, and a cafeteria pre-pay system have all been added within the past four years and are major advancements in communicating technologically with our constituents.

Within our school itself, we have many teachers and staff members who serve as technology resources for both adults and children. Some are sought after at the district level for their expertise and have presented locally. Our media specialist, Marcia Boehning and our technology representative, Karen Isenhour, both are knowledgeable advocates for technology and provide a wealth of resources. Between them, they manage our school website, schedule a SmartBoard, Classroom Performance System, two Computers on Wheels (COW), the Alpha Smart Cart, and two brand new lap top carts; they manage the video system and daily visual announcements; created a second computer lab; and both serve as willing and available experts for staff and students. We are also enjoying having computer lab as part of our special class rotation in which students spend time learning a new keyboarding curriculum, word-processing and Internet skills on a regular basis with assistant Barb Clements. They access Webquests and learn how to do internet research on topics relating to the standards being taught in the classroom. Our Waterford lab serves students in grades K and 1 for early literacy and is a key component to their success as emerging readers. Use of software such as Compass/Odyssey, Headsprout, the Reading Center, PowerPoint, Math Facts in a Flash, Type to Learn, EdHelper, the Pila Reading Series, IntelliKeys, EdMark, Co-Writer, Boardmaker, Accelerated Reader, Write Out Loud, Writing with Symbols, STAR Reading, and keyboarding instruction is used regularly by students and strengthens technology skills.

All classrooms are now equipped with a comprehensive multi-media system which includes a ceiling-mounted projection system. A new student information management system, Skyward, has replaced CenterPoint and has been widely accepted as much more user-friendly in the district. Teachers continue to use a curriculum mapping software called Rubicon Atlas across the district in a long-term commitment to professional development for increased student achievement. New copying equipment has been installed in all Center Grove schools and has been positively received by all.

x. Professional Development

A three-tiered framework of Professional Development opportunities exists for our teachers and staff – district-level, building-level and individual. Within the past three years, district-level professional development opportunities have been significantly enhanced, largely because of the efforts of assistant superintendent, Janet Boyle. Dr. Boyle has implemented intensive efforts in Differentiation of Instruction and Curriculum Mapping across the district. She has made a long-term commitment to these two initiatives and provides strong leadership and consistency of focus for every school.

Dr. Boyle also has been instrumental in creating an every-Wednesday, 45-minute Early Release time for students. This provides time that is totally dedicated to professional development for teachers, within contract time – a major advantage in all aspects. Teachers spend this time at the end of the day on Wednesdays in building-level initiatives, or district-level curriculum mapping activities, but not staff meetings. The time is for professional development learning only.

At Center Grove Elementary School, our building initiatives have centered largely on our past NCA/PL221 goals – increasing reading comprehension and math computation across every grade level. We have focused professional development activities on such initiatives as Four Blocks training; Six Traits +1 training; Professional Learning Community studies by Richard DuFour and the FISH! Philosophies; book studies on Differentiated Instruction by Carol Ann Tomlinson, Curriculum Mapping work by Heidi Hayes Jacobs, as well as spending three years on a program sponsored by the Department of Education called Levels of Service. Levels of Service provided a framework in which students are provided individualized enrichment learning opportunities through their interests, talents and abilities. Over the course of this work, staff members identified areas in which the current practices and curriculum met needs of students and identified gaps that needed attention. Through their work, we have addressed closing these gaps and now try to make the philosophies learned through Levels of Service a part of our school culture as opposed to a stand-alone initiative.

Staff members at CGES have also been afforded opportunities to enhance their interpretation of data to make better informed decisions for instruction on numerous occasions. By drilling deeper into the data available to us, we have been able to isolate the areas in which our students need improvement and create strategies to address those needs specifically.

Individually, teachers have also received training and attended in-service workshops on such topics as DIBELS; LETTRS; the Phonics Dance; ROPES; Technology in the Classroom; use of the SmartBoard, digital camera, and CPS system; Vertical Articulation; NCA Matrix with Mark Stock; Professional Development Strategies with Robby Champion; Learning for All leadership training with Larry Lezotte; data analysis with Karen Wilkerson; Differentiated Instruction with Rick Wormeli; Curriculum Mapping with Heidi Hayes Jacobs and Janet Hale; Article 7 trainings; AlphaSmart training; Centerpoint training; Rubicon Atlas training; STEEP and RTI trainings; the BBST/GEI process training; Autism; TEACCH; Tucker Sign Language;1-2-3, Magic; ENL; handwriting, reading and math adoptions; Guided Reading conference; PE Summer Institute; IMEA; IOSA; NCA; Levels of Service; Zoo Phonics; and, finally, workshops conducted during a first-ever district-wide Technology Day featuring our own in-house experts covering a variety of subjects from which teachers could choose to personalize their technology training needs.

A recent Literacy Audit has been completed, and results have been released. Each individual building has recommendations for literacy enhancements. The district is currently in the process of creating a literacy framework that will connect the goals and initiatives for all schools. This will have a significant impact in helping us move to the next level of excellence in literacy. A sample model is shown below:

[pic]

Printed with permission from Learning Unlimited.

Through a survey taken during the Literacy Audit information gathering process, we learned that 82% of Center Grove Elementary students surveyed indicate they like to read. 67% say they like to read for fun while not in school. 100% of them said they understand what they read in textbook sometimes or often. Over half the students said they talk about what they read outside of school once or twice a week. Parents who were surveyed said that 80% felt their children were adequately challenged in Reading, while 19% did not. The results of the Literacy Audit Survey will help formulate our next steps in addressing literacy needs at both the district and building levels.

The entire staff of Center Grove Elementary School will continue to receive intense training in literacy instruction, including the differentiation of instruction as defined by Carol Ann Tomlinson and others. The strategies of Levels of Service are being embraced within the culture of our building and no longer exist as a stand-alone program. These initiatives, along with the district focus on Curriculum Mapping, will be the intense focus of our professional growth plan over the next three to five years. Continuous reflection and evaluation of what we are learning and using in the classroom will occur to ensure we remain highly focused on increasing student achievement.

xi. Safe and Disciplined Schools:

When you enter our school building, you might notice some very distinctive special touches. You will hear instrumental music playing in the hallways. You will see banners identifying every hall by a core value we teach students (Respect Road, Success Street, and Personal Best Boulevard). Our entryway is warm and inviting. The showcases highlight the school’s thematic unit for the year. In every hallway, student work of all kinds is displayed. You will see evidence of how our students serve the community through recycling, baskets of food donations to the local food pantry, coats for Operation Bundle Up, shoes for the Reuse-a-Shoe Campaign, United Way, Student Council initiatives to support Johnson County needy families, all school support of Special Olympics and the Polar Plunge, Heifer International, and food and clothing for our sister school, Kyger Elementary in LaPorte, Indiana. Parents and visitors comment regularly about how inviting it feels to visit our school and how our students are entranced in service learning.

Students at Center Grove Elementary School begin their day each morning reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, our own Center Grove Elementary School Creed and by observing a moment of silence. If you were a visitor here, you would hear them doing so enthusiastically, understanding what it is they are saying. The CGES Creed is the measuring stick for our goals and behavior while at school. Teachers refer to it often to remind students of their responsibility to keep it. Students regularly practice emergency safety procedures with fire, tornado, lockdown, emergency and evacuation drills.

Our school is highly secured during the day; all doors are locked with the exception of the front doors where office personnel can visually see who enters the building. Visitors are required to sign in at the office and receive a yellow visitor’s sticker which identifies them as having a legitimate reason to be in the building. Staff members know to question anyone without this form of identification. ID is required to be shown by those adults we do not know personally. Students are well versed in the playground rules, hallway expectations, bus safety procedures, and bullying guidelines. All adults in the building are expected to model respectful behavior to each other, students and parents. A special program in our cafeteria, Manners Matters, acknowledges students who exhibit proper manners while dining. They are able to choose friends to sit with them at lunch in our 1950s style diner booths and listen to 50s music on our Jukebox. Our school counselor teaches in every classroom to presenting lessons on character education and bullying. This past year, the counselor has created and put in place a committee to monitor bullying in our school. This is a highly effective procedure to identify bullying incidents at CGES. The procedures have been well communicated to all students and parents though classroom lessons and parental forums.

Though in its first complete year, data we have would indicate fewer incidents of bullying in our school so far.

Children are rewarded and praised for respectful behavior. Consequences for poor behavior are designed to help change that behavior into a positive life skill, instead of being simply punitive. Each month, students are acknowledged with the presentation of Core Essentials and Students of the Month Awards. Parents are invited to a special ceremony where students receive a certificate and dining cards from supportive local restaurants for having been chosen by their teacher as the Student of the Month, or having exhibited the core value of the month – a program we use created and sponsored by Chick Fil-A. Our newsletter also acknowledges student achievements and our annual Honors Day at the end of the school year is an anticipated event. We take every opportunity available to celebrate the successes of our students.

In the past, we utilized a “Clock” system in each classroom to monitor citizenship and communicate weekly with parents. Though discipline in this school is excellent with less than a dozen referrals this year so far, we felt it would be a good thing to have a consistent way of monitoring behavior and citizenship that would cross all grade levels and move with students as they progress through the grades. We also felt it would be an asset for us to be able to communicate more frequently with parents about their child’s behavior and responsibility in the classroom. With the “Clock” system, students have an actual paper clock with Grades from A+ down to F as the numerals of the clock. When they have an infraction based on not following our school creed, the teachers will punch one of the letter grades and write a comment on the back of the clock. This is done weekly, and students take their clocks home to parents each Friday. In this way, parents are fully apprised of how their child’s week went behaviorally. There is a very prescribed step system for infractions, including warnings, time outs, visits to the principal, all the way to in- and out-of-school suspensions. We are piloting this program during this semester and gathering data to see if it actually helps improve our classroom discipline. At the end of this year, the committee that developed it will revisit the system and make recommendations for its further use, and refinements.

xii. Suspensions:

Center Grove Elementary School has had no out-of-school suspensions this year, or any referrals to our alternative to suspension program. As of this writing we have only about twelve total referrals to the office for this school year. We enjoy a well-disciplined school environment and student behavioral infractions on the whole are very minimal and minor in nature. I would insert a chart here, but there is not much to show!

xiii. Title I: Center Grove Elementary School is not a Title I school.

xiv. English as a New Language:

Center Grove Elementary is now the host school for our district’s elementary ENL program. The program has been relocated to another Center Grove school, but this year will return to us. Participants include ethnicities of Asian, Hispanic and Eastern descents.

xv. Curriculum:

Our school and district has a written curriculum for all subject areas that is

located at both our Educational Services Building and in each school. At CGES, the curriculum is located in our professional library, as well as in every classroom. Binders containing all academic standards are easily accessible to staff, parents and patrons.

xvi. Cultural Competency (IC 20-10-10.2-8.3):

Benchmark: As evidenced by the data available on the DOE website, Center Grove Elementary School demonstrates no achievement gaps in the No Child Left Behind legislation sub-groups. We have no significant gaps in the areas of Free/Reduced Lunch, English as a Second Language or Ethnicity. While the data shows that we do have students in our Special Education populace who pass the ISTEP+ test, we have a low percentage that do not, so interventions are being created to specifically target this group of students with special needs. With our increased knowledge of interpreting data, drilling deeply into the subskills and creating strong interventions for these students, we are seeing a strong increase in the percentages passing ISTEP+. Our staff members realize that every child belongs to each of us and that we all bear the responsibility for ensuring their academic successes.

xvii. Interventions:

In the past, Center Grove Elementary School made a significant commitment to implementing the strategies of the Levels of Service framework with our students. The Levels of Service framework is a tool that enables teachers to identify the strengths and needs of students by talent, interest and academic achievements, and involves high levels of individualization and personalization, as differentiating instruction. We have also made a strong commitment to Response to Intervention strategies through the STEEP program, which provides us with intervention strategies for low-performing students. As of this year, we replaced STEEP with AIMSWEB and Acuity software. Students are quickly assigned to intervention software such as The Reading Center, Headsprout or FasttMath when assessments are done the first week of school. Progress monitoring on these students is on-going until the mid-year assessment. Adjustments are made based on the data from the monitoring. Results of the progress of the interventions are very promising. It is our intent to very narrowly focus our instructional strategies over a significant period of time to highly focus on research-based best practices that empower teachers to personalize instruction for students.

xviii. Student Involvement:

There are many opportunities for student involvement at Center Grove Elementary School. These include:

• Student Council

• Spell Bowl

• Math Bowl

• Spelling Bee

• Music Club

• Art Club

• Intramurals

• Ecology Club

• Science Fair

• Student Ambassadors

• Recycling

• Children’s Theatre

• Operation Bundle-Up

• Summer Reading Programs

• Jump Rope for Heart

• Special Olympics

• Reuse-a-Shoe

• Circle the State with Song

• Service Learning projects

• Bible Club (parent sponsored)

xix. High Ability Students:

In accordance with new Indiana Law, Center Grove Community Schools Corporation spent the 2007-08 school year studying and planning for implementation of High Ability identification and services to students in grades K-12. A district task force has worked all year to make recommendations to our School Board. The task force has an elementary and a secondary sub committee to study needs and programs. Since previously no services have been provided to students in K-2, this was an intensive area of study. Recommendations have been made to the School Board and implementation of those recommendations will determine the extent of services and resources provided to our students K-5 at Center Grove Elementary School. Center Grove Elementary currently hosts a 4th and 5th grade High Ability class for the district.

xx. Statutes and Rules: None recommended for suspension.

Presentation of Data

Center Grove Elementary School has been named a Four Star School eight of the past nine years. We enjoy a high level of achievement across every grade level. We also have the distinction of having met our Adequate Yearly Progress measures every year. As we look at the data we have from ISTEP+ over time, we see that our scores are consistently in the ninetieth percentile over the past four years.

[pic]

Teachers at Center Grove Elementary School have become much more knowledgeable in the use of data for decision-making about their teaching in the past three years. Staff development has been provided to explore our results in depth, looking specifically at sub-skills in which improvement would be indicated. In formulating this report, and selecting the literacy of improving reading comprehension across the curriculum, teachers at each grade level studied their data intensely to select specific areas of focus for the next five years.

In the ISTEP+ grades 3, 4, and 5, teachers created specific individual plans for students who were within a 20 point range of passing ISTEP+ the previous year. These students were given focused attention prior to the test being given in September of this year, and the results of these interventions proved positive. The majority of students given this extra “boost” in intervening went on to pass the current ISTEP+ test.

In addition to looking at students who did not pass the previous ISTEP+ in a remedial sense, we looked at data that showed students who were within 20 points of Pass+ing the ISTEP+ and provided the same “boost” for many of those students in hopes of helping them move into this area of distinction, as it ultimately did. In general, we realize that what gets attention usually gets better, as the results of these efforts support.

Teachers also used a variety of additional assessments to formulate the literacy goal, indicated below:

Support Data Sources Used in Goal Selection:

➢ ISTEP + in grades 3, 4, and 5 – Given in the fall of each year

➢ DIBELS in grades K and 1 – Given three times each year (pre- mid- and post-tests)

➢ Waterford in grades K and 1

➢ LETTRS in Kindergarten

➢ AIMSWEB in all grades – Given four times each year to all students

➢ Acuity in all grades- given four times each year to all students

➢ Grade Level Assessments

➢ LAS Links for ENL students- Given once a year to ENL students

➢ Grade level Common Assessments

Teachers at Center Grove Elementary School have spent time compiling our personal list of “best practices” that we know work for our children. These are tried and true, tested over time and consistently bring us a high level of student achievement. These are the practices we continue to refine and provide professional development support for to strengthen our mastery of the strategies:

Interventions and Strategies Making the Most Significant Impact:

Since the selection of this goal, the following interventions and strategies have been implemented and retained over time, indicating significance as best practices in the successful increase in student achievement at CGES:

➢ Levels of Service – A framework that supports providing instruction based on ability, talents and interest, similar to teaching to the gifted and talented students. Studied and implemented in every grade level.

➢ Fountas and Pinnell Guided Reading – Staff members have all received training and currently, every class is using this strategy. Some staff members have had advanced training and are serving as teacher leaders in the building.

➢ FISH! – Staff members have done book studies on the FISH philosophy in an effort to support building a more cohesive team.

➢ ROPES training – Another team-building exercise.

➢ *Differentiated Instruction – Staff members have studied the works of Charlotte Danielson in book study format. Each school now has a team of teachers who serve on the district DI team, preparing strategies for implementation in all buildings in cooperation with Curriculum Mapping.

➢ Curriculum Mapping – This is a district initiative in every school. CGES teachers are well versed in the process. Our first efforts have been to map math, but we will be moving to reading in the near future.

➢ Six Traits + 1 – All staff members, with the exception of a very few first year teachers, have received training in Six Traits, and although writing was not chosen as a goal, it is connected so strongly to reading comprehension that this is a good investment in professional development.

➢ *Data Analysis – Staff members have received training on how to drill down into sub-skills, notably on the DOE website, to make data-based decisions regarding instruction.

* Determined by staff as the best practices most significantly responsible for student successes.

Other strategies used but somewhat grade-level specific:

➢ Building Blocks

➢ Phonics Dance

➢ Problem Solving

➢ Waterford Literacy Lab

➢ Headsprout/Reading Center technology/FasttMath

➢ Distance Learning

➢ Mentor Training

➢ COMPASS/Odyssey technology

➢ Quality Professional Development

➢ Development of the Fine Arts for the whole child

As a staff, we are confident that our goal has been chosen based on solid data and that the plans we have formulated, both at the district and building levels, will result in increased student achievement across every grade level.

GOAL SELECTION

Literacy Goal: Reading Comprehension

Goal: All Center Grove Elementary School students will improve reading comprehension skills across the curricula.

The following page was included as evidence of the growth we made in the previous cycle focusing on reading comprehension:

Documentation of Scores for Reading Comprehension Goal

|Data |Grade |Year |Score |Standard |

|Source |Level | | |Score |

| | | | |Equivalent |

|Instructional best | | | | |

|practices: | | | | |

|Guided Reading and | | | | |

|Writing: |Introduce and support implementation:|Reinforce and support |Reinforce, support and evaluate |Reinforce, support and evaluate |

|1. Reader |Guided Reading and Writing: |implementation: |implementation: |implementation: |

|Response Journals. |1. Reader Response Journals: |Guided Reading and Writing: |Guided Reading and Writing: |Guided Reading and Writing: |

| |Reading response journals are a place|1. Reader Response Journals: |1. Reader Response Journals: |1. Reader Response Journals: |

|Student Literacy |where students respond to literature |Reading response journals are a |Reading response journals are a |Reading response journals are a |

|Conferences |by recording their thoughts, |place where students respond to |place where students respond to |place where students respond to |

| |feelings, reactions, and questions |literature by recording their |literature by recording their |literature by recording their |

| |about the book they are reading. |thoughts, feelings, reactions, and |thoughts, feelings, reactions, |thoughts, feelings, reactions, and |

| | |questions about the book they are |and questions about the book they |questions about the book they are |

| |Through the use of response journals,|reading. |are reading. |reading. |

| |students will ask questions about | | | |

| |literature, respond to characters |Through the use of response |Through the use of response |Through the use of response |

| |decision-making skills, make |journals, students will ask |journals, students will ask |journals, students will ask |

| |connections to their own lives, and |questions about literature, respond |questions about literature, |questions about literature, respond |

| |make meaning for themselves. |to characters decision-making |respond to characters |to characters decision-making |

| | |skills, make connections to their |decision-making skills, make |skills, make connections to their |

| |Student Literacy Conferences |own lives, and make meaning for |connections to their own lives, |own lives, and make meaning for |

| |A student led conference allows for |themselves. |and make meaning for themselves. |themselves. |

| |the student to facilitate part of the| | | |

| |conference as they show mastery of |Student Literacy Conferences |Student Literacy Conferences |Student Literacy Conferences |

| |learning.  The student includes |A student led conference allows for |A student led conference allows |A student led conference allows for |

| |self-assessment and reflection as |the student to facilitate part of |for the student to facilitate part|the student to facilitate part of |

| |part of the conference.  The student,|the conference as they show mastery |of the conference as they show |the conference as they show mastery |

| |teacher, and parent help to determine|of learning.  The student includes |mastery of learning.  The student |of learning.  The student includes |

| |future goals. |self-assessment and reflection as |includes self-assessment and |self-assessment and reflection as |

| | |part of the conference.  The |reflection as part of the |part of the conference.  The |

| |Through student literacy conferences,|student, teacher, and parent help to|conference.  The student, teacher,|student, teacher, and parent help to|

| |students and teachers will celebrate,|determine future goals. |and parent help to determine |determine future goals. |

| |validate, encourage, nudge, teach, | |future goals. | |

| |assess and set goals in reading and |Through student literacy | |Through student literacy |

| |writing. |conferences, students and teachers |Through student literacy |conferences, students and teachers |

| | |will celebrate, validate, encourage,|conferences, students and teachers|will celebrate, validate, encourage,|

| | |nudge, teach, assess and set goals |will celebrate, validate, |nudge, teach, assess and set goals |

| | |in reading and writing. |encourage, nudge, teach, assess |in reading and writing. |

| | | |and set goals in reading and | |

| | |**Additional district strategies may|writing. |**Additional district strategies may|

| | |be added to meet student/teacher | |be added to meet student/teacher |

| | |needs and goals |**Additional district strategies |needs and goals |

| | | |may be added to meet | |

| | | |student/teacher needs and goals | |

|Professional |Summer 2008: |Summer 2009: |Summer 2010: |Summer 2011: |

|development |Consultant Janet Hale working with |Curriculum mapping science/social |Will be determined based on staff |Will be determined based on staff |

| |K-12 curriculum mapping language arts|studies task force to complete K-12 |needs following years one and two.|needs following years one and two. |

| |task force to complete K-12 language |science and social studies essential| | |

| |arts essential maps and common |maps and common assessments, and |CG administrators attend “literacy| |

| |assessments |academic vocabulary list |bootcamp” | |

| |CG administrators attend National |Language Arts Task Force will revise|to focus leadership skills around | |

| |Differentiated Instruction Conference|common assessments and Essential |modeled reading/writing. | |

| |with focus on literacy |Maps | | |

| |CG administrators attend “literacy |CG administrators attend “literacy | | |

| |bootcamp” to enhance literacy |bootcamp” | | |

| |instructional leadership skills |to focus leadership skills around | | |

| | |shared reading/writing | |School Year 2010-2011 |

| | | |School Year 2010-2011 |District wide common book study: |

| |School Year 2008-2009 | |District wide common book study: |will be determined following years |

| |District wide common book study: The |School Year 2009-2010 |Writing Essentials by Regie |one and two |

| |Continuum |District wide common book study: |Routman | |

| |of Literacy Learning by Fountas and |Reading Essentials by Regie Routman | |Early Releases will be structured so|

| |Pinnell | |Early Releases will be structured |that each |

| |Early Releases will be structured so |Early Releases will be structured so|so that each |month provides: |

| |that each |that each |month provides: |1 Early Release for literacy |

| |month provides: |month provides: |1 Early Release for literacy |learning |

| |1 Early Release for literacy learning|1 Early Release for literacy |learning |1 Early Release for district book |

| |1 Early Release for district book |learning |1 Early Release for district book|study |

| |study |1 Early Release for district book |study |1 Early Release for Curriculum |

| |1 Early Release for Curriculum |study |1 Early Release for Curriculum |Mapping |

| |Mapping |1 Early Release for Curriculum |Mapping |(focus: Language Arts Consensus |

| |(focus: Language Arts Consensus Maps)|Mapping |(focus: Language Arts Consensus |Maps) |

| |1 Early Release for building |(focus: Language Arts Consensus |Maps) |1 Early Release for building |

| |work/coaching |Maps) |1 Early Release for building |work/coaching |

| | |1 Early Release for building |work/coaching | |

| |Professional Development will be |work/coaching | |Professional Development will be |

| |provided by: | |Professional Development will be |provided by: |

| |District-hired consultants – |Professional Development will be |provided by: |District-hired consultants – |

| |curriculum mapping, literacy |provided by: |District-hired consultants – |curriculum mapping, literacy |

| |strategies, support, assessment and |District-hired consultants – |curriculum mapping, literacy |strategies, support, assessment and |

| |management |curriculum mapping, literacy |strategies, support, assessment |management |

| |Building instructional leaders – |strategies, support, assessment and |and management |Building instructional leaders – |

| |supporting a literacy environment, |management |Building instructional leaders – |supporting a literacy environment, |

| |instructional best practices |Building instructional leaders – |supporting a literacy environment,|instructional best practices |

| |Coaches – will provide building-based|supporting a literacy environment, |instructional best practices |Coaches – will provide |

| |support and will meet with each grade|instructional best practices |Coaches – will provide |building-based support and will meet|

| |level 2X per semester to discuss, |Coaches – will provide |building-based support and will |with each grade level 2X per |

| |follow-up and extend previous Early |building-based support and will meet|meet with each grade level 2X per |semester to discuss, follow-up and |

| |Release professional development |with each grade level 2X per |semester to discuss, follow-up and|extend previous Early Release |

| |topic. Will model strategies. “At-the|semester to discuss, follow-up and |extend previous Early Release |professional development topic. Will|

| |elbow” professional development: |extend previous Early Release |professional development topic. |model strategies. “At-the elbow” |

| |will be provided by building-based |professional development topic. Will|Will model strategies. “At-the |professional development: will be |

| |literacy coaches and will emphasize |model strategies. “At-the elbow” |elbow” professional development: |provided by building-based literacy |

| |the topics of each early release |professional development: will be |will be provided by building-based|coaches and will emphasize the |

| |Literacy leaders – practical |provided by building-based literacy |literacy coaches and will |topics of each early release |

| |applications |coaches and will emphasize the |emphasize the topics of each early|Literacy leaders – practical |

| | |topics of each early release |release |applications |

| | |Literacy leaders – practical |Literacy leaders – practical | |

| |August 2008 Early Release |applications |applications |August 2011-April 2012 Early Release|

| |Common vocabulary of literacy, | | |Will be determined following years |

| |District literacy |August 2009 – April 2010 |August 2010-April 2011 Early |one and two |

| |framework, Lexile scores |Will focus on applying the strategy |Release |May 2012 Early Release |

| |September 2008 Early Release |of reader response journals to |Will focus on applying the |Reflecting upon professional growth.|

| |Classroom norms and a management for |student literacy conferences to |strategy of reader response | |

| |a literacy classroom (DVD examples: |shared reading/writing. |journals to student literacy | |

| |anchor charts, small, flexible groups|May 2010 Early Release |conferences to modeled | |

| |examples) |Reflecting upon professional growth.|reading/writing. | |

| |October 2008 Early Release | | | |

| |Using Lexiles, leveled readers (What | |May 2011 Early Release | |

| |are leveled readers, How do they | |Reflecting upon professional | |

| |support reading and writing?) | |growth. | |

| |November 2008 Early Release | | | |

| |Reader response journal concept | | | |

| |introduction. | | | |

| |December 2008 Early Release | | | |

| |Student literacy conferences concept | | | |

| |introduction. | | | |

| |January 2009 Early Release | | | |

| |Differentiating reader response | | | |

| |journals and student literacy | | | |

| |conferences for ENL, high ability, | | | |

| |special education students and | | | |

| |struggling readers. | | | |

| |February 2009 Early Release | | | |

| |Using leveled materials. | | | |

| |March 2009 Early Release | | | |

| |Sharing student work protocol using | | | |

| |Reader Response Journals. | | | |

| |April 2009 Early Release | | | |

| |Reader response journal assessment. | | | |

| |May 2009 Early Release | | | |

| |Reflecting upon professional growth. | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

|Accountability for |District Administrators – Build |District Administrators – Build |District Administrators – Build |District Administrators – Build |

|implementation |capacity among administrators for |capacity among administrators for |capacity among administrators for |capacity among administrators for |

| |creating a positive literacy |creating a positive literacy |creating a positive literacy |creating a positive literacy |

| |environment. build knowledge and |environment. build knowledge and |environment. build knowledge and |environment. build knowledge and |

| |capacity among administrators for |capacity among administrators for |capacity among administrators for |capacity among administrators for |

| |differentiated instruction. Support |differentiated instruction. Support |differentiated instruction. |differentiated instruction. Support |

| |technology needs of the building |technology needs of the building |Support technology needs of the |technology needs of the building |

| |through the district technology plan.|through the district technology |building through the district |through the district technology |

| |Screen and secure appropriate |plan. Screen and secure appropriate |technology plan. Screen and secure|plan. Screen and secure appropriate |

| |district-level consultants. Provide |district-level consultants. Provide |appropriate district-level |district-level consultants. Provide |

| |time for early release professional |time for early release professional |consultants. Provide time for |time for early release professional |

| |development. Provide literacy |development. Provide literacy |early release professional |development. Provide literacy |

| |coaches for the district. Present and|coaches for the district. Present |development. Provide literacy |coaches for the district. Present |

| |support K-12 Comprehensive Literacy |and support K-12 Comprehensive |coaches for the district. Present |and support K-12 Comprehensive |

| |Framework. Provide summer curriculum |Literacy Framework. Provide summer |and support K-12 Comprehensive |Literacy Framework. Provide summer |

| |mapping work time, stipends and |curriculum mapping work time, |Literacy Framework. Provide summer|curriculum mapping work time, |

| |consultant. |stipends and consultant. |curriculum mapping work time, |stipends and consultant. |

| | | |stipends and consultant. | |

| |Building Level Administrators -- |Building Level Administrators -- | |Building Level Administrators -- |

| |Build capacity among teachers for |Build capacity among teachers for |Building Level Administrators -- |Build capacity among teachers for |

| |creating a positive literacy |creating a positive literacy |Build capacity among teachers for |creating a positive literacy |

| |environment. build knowledge and |environment. build knowledge and |creating a positive literacy |environment. build knowledge and |

| |capacity among teachers for |capacity among teachers for |environment. build knowledge and |capacity among teachers for |

| |differentiated instruction. Schedule |differentiated instruction. Schedule|capacity among teachers for |differentiated instruction. Schedule|

| |and support need for 120 minutes |and support need for 120 minutes |differentiated instruction. |and support need for 120 minutes |

| |language arts block at each grade |language arts block at each grade |Schedule and support need for 120 |language arts block at each grade |

| |level. Work to support appropriate |level. Work to support appropriate |minutes language arts block at |level. Work to support appropriate |

| |district-level consultants. Provide |district-level consultants. Provide |each grade level. Work to support |district-level consultants. Provide |

| |time for early release professional |time for early release professional |appropriate district-level |time for early release professional |

| |development. Support literacy |development. Support literacy |consultants. Provide time for |development. Support literacy |

| |coaches building level work. Present |coaches building level work. Present|early release professional |coaches building level work. Present|

| |and support K-12 Comprehensive |and support K-12 Comprehensive |development. Support literacy |and support K-12 Comprehensive |

| |Literacy Framework. Provide books to |Literacy Framework. Provide books to|coaches building level work. |Literacy Framework. Provide books to|

| |teachers for district book study. |teachers for district book study. |Present and support K-12 |teachers for district book study. |

| |Work with faculty to administer |Work with faculty to administer |Comprehensive Literacy Framework. |Work with faculty to administer |

| |appropriate assessment and interpret |appropriate assessment and interpret|Provide books to teachers for |appropriate assessment and interpret|

| |and use the resulting data. |and use the resulting data. |district book study. Work with |and use the resulting data. |

| | | |faculty to administer appropriate | |

| |Coaches – Work collectively and |Coaches – Work collectively and |assessment and interpret and use | |

| |individually with teachers to |individually with teachers to |the resulting data. | |

| |implement the instructional |implement the instructional | | |

| |strategies for the building goal. |strategies for the building goal. |Our district no longer has | |

| |Will provide building-based support |Will provide building-based support |Literacy Coaches due to budgetary | |

| |and will meet with each grade level |and will meet with each grade level |cuts. | |

| |2X per semester to discuss, follow-up|2X per semester to discuss, | | |

| |and extend previous Early Release |follow-up and extend previous Early | |Teachers – The instructional staff |

| |professional development topic. Will |Release professional development |Teachers – The instructional staff|is responsible for creating a |

| |model strategies. “At-the elbow” |topic. Will model strategies. |is responsible for creating a |positive literacy classroom as part |

| |professional development: will be |“At-the elbow” professional |positive literacy classroom as |of the overall learning environment |

| |provided by building-based literacy |development: will be provided by |part of the overall learning |of the school. Instructional staff |

| |coaches and will emphasize the topics|building-based literacy coaches and |environment of the school. |members are responsible for |

| |of each early release. Work with |will emphasize the topics of each |Instructional staff members are |participating in professional |

| |faculty to administer appropriate |early release. Work with faculty to |responsible for participating in |development activities and for |

| |assessment and interpret and use the |administer appropriate assessment |professional development |providing quality, engaging teaching|

| |resulting data. |and interpret and use the resulting |activities and for providing |and learning experiences. |

| | |data. |quality, engaging teaching and |Specifically, the staff is |

| | | |learning experiences. |responsible for implementing the |

| |Teachers – The instructional staff is| |Specifically, the staff is |teaching strategies in this plan, |

| |responsible for creating a positive |Teachers – The instructional staff |responsible for implementing the |becoming familiar with the district |

| |literacy classroom as part of the |is responsible for creating a |teaching strategies in this plan, |literacy framework, and using |

| |overall learning environment of the |positive literacy classroom as part |becoming familiar with the |assessment data to form and guide |

| |school. Instructional staff members |of the overall learning environment |district literacy framework, and |instruction for each student. |

| |are responsible for participating in |of the school. Instructional staff |using assessment data to form and | |

| |professional development activities |members are responsible for |guide instruction for each |Students -- Students are |

| |and for providing quality, engaging |participating in professional |student. |responsible for giving effort, |

| |teaching and learning experiences. |development activities and for | |working collaboratively with |

| |Specifically, the staff is |providing quality, engaging teaching|Students -- Students are |instructional staff to meet, achieve|

| |responsible for implementing the |and learning experiences. |responsible for giving effort, |and evaluate their learning goals. |

| |teaching strategies in this plan, |Specifically, the staff is |working collaboratively with | |

| |becoming familiar with the district |responsible for implementing the |instructional staff to meet, |Parents – Parents are an integral |

| |literacy framework, and using |teaching strategies in this plan, |achieve and evaluate their |part of the educational process, and|

| |assessment data to form and guide |becoming familiar with the district |learning goals. |thus, are responsible for getting |

| |instruction for each student. |literacy framework, and using | |students to school each day and |

| | |assessment data to form and guide |Parents – Parents are an integral |working in concert with the school |

| |Students -- Students are responsible|instruction for each student. |part of the educational process, |and the student to support teaching |

| |for giving effort, working | |and thus, are responsible for |and learning. |

| |collaboratively with instructional |Students -- Students are |getting students to school each | |

| |staff to meet, achieve and evaluate |responsible for giving effort, |day and working in concert with | |

| |their learning goals. |working collaboratively with |the school and the student to | |

| | |instructional staff to meet, achieve|support teaching and learning. | |

| |Parents – Parents are an integral |and evaluate their learning goals. | | |

| |part of the educational process, and | | | |

| |thus, are responsible for getting |Parents – Parents are an integral | | |

| |students to school each day and |part of the educational process, and| | |

| |working in concert with the school |thus, are responsible for getting | | |

| |and the student to support teaching |students to school each day and | | |

| |and learning. |working in concert with the school | | |

| | |and the student to support teaching | | |

| | |and learning. | | |

|Evaluation: How will|Increase in student ISTEP scores in |Increase in student ISTEP scores in |Increase in student ISTEP scores |Increase in student ISTEP scores in |

|the effectiveness |English/Language Arts (grades 3-5) |English/Language Arts (grades 3-5) |in English/Language Arts (grades |English/Language Arts (grades 3-5) |

|of the strategy be |Reading vocabulary, reading |Reading vocabulary, reading |3-5) Reading vocabulary, reading |Reading vocabulary, reading |

|measured |comprehension and writing |comprehension and writing |comprehension and writing |comprehension and writing |

| |applications by a minimum of 2% from |applications by a minimum of 2% from|applications by a minimum of 2% |applications by a minimum of 2% from|

| |2007-2011. Scores from 2008 spring |2007-2011 |from 2007-2011 |2007-2011 |

| |ISTEP testing will serve as the | | | |

| |grade-level baseline. |88% of grade 3-5 students will show |92% of grade 3-5 students will |95% of grade 3-5 students will show |

| | |at least 25 points of growth on the |show at least 25 points of growth |at least 25 points of growth on the |

| |85% of grade 3-5 students will show |Scantron Performance assessment from|on the Scantron Performance |Scantron Performance assessment from|

| |at least 25 points of growth on the |their fall to spring scores. |assessment from their fall to |their fall to spring scores. |

| |Scantron Performance assessment from | |spring scores. | |

| |their fall to spring scores. |DIBELS (grades K-2) | |DIBELS (grades K-2) |

| | |88% of students will show an |DIBELS (grades K-2) |95% of students will show an |

| |DIBELS (grades K-2) |increase over their individual |92% of students will show an |increase over their individual |

| |85% of students will show an |DIBELS fall baseline scores on both |increase over their individual |DIBELS fall baseline scores on both |

| |increase over their individual DIBELS|the mid-year and spring assessment |DIBELS fall baseline scores on |the mid-year and spring assessment |

| |fall baseline scores on both the | |both the mid-year and spring | |

| |mid-year and spring assessment |Common assessments (grades K-5) |assessment |Common assessments (grades K-5) |

| | |88% of students will show mastery | |95% of students will show mastery |

| |Common assessments (grades K-5) |(80%) of the concepts on grade |Common assessments (grades K-5) |(80%) of the concepts on grade |

| |Will be created and pilot to gather |level semester one and semester two |92% of students will show mastery|level semester one and semester two |

| |initial data. |common assessments. |(80%) of the concepts on grade |common assessments. |

| | | |level semester one and semester | |

| |Authentic student reading/writing |Authentic student reading/writing |two common assessments. |Authentic student reading/writing |

| |assessment products: Will create and|assessment products: 88% of | |assessment products: 95% of |

| |pilot to gather initial data using |students will show average or above |Authentic student reading/writing |students will show average or above |

| |the district grade-level rubric |skills, using the district |assessment products: 92% of |skills, using the district |

| |scores, on classroom reading and |grade-level rubric scores, on |students will show average or |grade-level rubric scores, on |

| |writing products. |classroom reading and writing |above skills, using the district |classroom reading and writing |

| | |products. |grade-level rubric scores, on |products. |

| | | |classroom reading and writing | |

| | | |products. | |

| | | | | |

|Resources |120 minutes literacy block at each |120 minutes literacy block at each |120 minutes literacy block at each|120 minutes literacy block at each |

| |grade level |grade level |grade level |grade level |

| | | | | |

| |Early Release Wednesday for |Early Release Wednesday for |Early Release Wednesday for |Early Release Wednesday for |

| |Professional Development time |Professional Development time |Professional Development time |Professional Development time |

| | | | | |

| |District literacy coaches |District literacy coaches |District literacy coaches |District literacy coaches |

| | | | | |

| |Scott Foresman basal series |Scott Foresman basal series |Scott Foresman basal series |Scott Foresman basal series |

| | | | | |

| |My Sidewalks Tier III intervention |My Sidewalks Tier III intervention |My Sidewalks Tier III intervention|My Sidewalks Tier III intervention |

| |reading program |reading program |reading program |reading program |

| | | | | |

| |The Continuum of Literacy Learning, |The Continuum of Literacy Learning, |The Continuum of Literacy |The Continuum of Literacy Learning, |

| |Fountas and Pinnell |Fountas and Pinnell |Learning, Fountas and Pinnell |Fountas and Pinnell |

| | | | | |

| |Reading Essentials, Regie Routman |Reading Essentials, Regie Routman |Reading Essentials, Regie Routman |Reading Essentials, Regie Routman |

| | | | | |

| |Writing Essentials, Regie Routman |Writing Essentials, Regie Routman |Writing Essentials, Regie Routman |Writing Essentials, Regie Routman |

| | | | | |

| |Guiding Readers and Writers, Fountas |Guiding Readers and Writers, Fountas|Guiding Readers and Writers, |Guiding Readers and Writers, Fountas|

| |and Pinnell |and Pinnell |Fountas and Pinnell |and Pinnell |

| | | | | |

| |Leveled classroom libraries |Leveled classroom libraries |Leveled classroom libraries |Leveled classroom libraries |

| | | | | |

| |Leveled K-5 bookroom |Leveled K-5 bookroom |Leveled K-5 bookroom |Leveled K-5 bookroom |

| | | | | |

| | (for | (for | (for | (for |

| |leveling readers and reader response |leveling readers and reader response|leveling readers and reader |leveling readers and reader response|

| |journals) |journals) |response journals) |journals) |

| | | | | |

| |

| |aderes-response-journal/ |eaderes-response-journal/ |/readeres-response-journal/ |eaderes-response-journal/ |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| |

| |renary/Reader%20Response%Journal%20Sc|trenary/Reader%20Response%Journal%20|/~trenary/Reader%20Response%Journa|trenary/Reader%20Response%Journal%20|

| |hedule |Schedule |l%20Schedule |Schedule |

| | | | | |

| |

| |/readers_response.htm |s/readers_response.htm |its/readers_response.htm |s/readers_response.htm |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| |Response to Intervention framework |Response to Intervention framework |Response to Intervention framework|Response to Intervention framework |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

| |Parent/Teacher Organization |Parent/Teacher Organization |Parent/Teacher Organization |Parent/Teacher Organization |

| | | | | |

| |Parent volunteers |Parent volunteers |Parent volunteers |Parent volunteers |

| | | | | |

| |Fountas and Pinnell leveling system |Fountas and Pinnell leveling system |Fountas and Pinnell leveling |Fountas and Pinnell leveling system |

| | | |system | |

| |District Curriculum library |District Curriculum library | |District Curriculum library |

| | | |District Curriculum library | |

| |CIESC library materials |CIESC library materials | |CIESC library materials |

| | | |CIESC library materials | |

| |Epsilen for communication and | | | |

| |document sharing | | | |

| | | | | |

| | | | | |

|Student remediation |ReadingA- (voluntary by |ReadingA- (voluntary by |ReadingA- (voluntary by |ReadingA- (voluntary by |

|assistance and |building) |building) |building) |building) |

|identification |Waterford K-2 |Waterford K-2 |Waterford K-2 |Waterford K-2 |

|assistance |Odyssey K-5 |Odyssey K-5 |Odyssey K-5 |Odyssey K-5 |

| |RTI: |RTI: |RTI: |RTI: |

| |Headsprouts K-1 |Headsprouts K-1 |Headsprouts K-1 |Headsprouts K-1 |

| |Earobics K-1 |Earobics K-1 |Earphonics K-1 |Earphonics K-1 |

| |Reading Center K-5 |Reading Center K-5 |Reading Center K-5 |Reading Center K-5 |

| |My Sidewalks (Tier III intervention) |My Sidewalks (Tier III intervention)|My Sidealks (Tier III |My Sidealks (Tier III intervention) |

| |1-5 |1-5 |intervention) 1-5 |1-5 |

| |Scantron Performance resources |Scantron Performance resources |Scantron Performance resources |Scantron Performance resources |

| |School site remediation |School site remediation |School site remediation |School site remediation |

| | | | | |

|Student |ReadingA- (voluntary by |ReadingA- (voluntary by |ReadingA- (voluntary by |ReadingA- (voluntary by |

|enrichment/high |building) |building) |building) |building) |

|ability |Scantron Performance resources |Scantron Performance resources |Scantron Performance resources |Scantron Performance resources |

|identification |Waterford K-2 |Waterford K-2 |Waterford K-2 |Waterford K-2 |

| |Odyssey K-5 |Odyssey K-5 |Odyssey K-5 |Odyssey K-5 |

| |Leveled libraries |Leveled libraries |Leveled libraries |Leveled libraries |

| |Classroom differentiation |Classroom differentiation |Classroom differentiation |Classroom differentiation |

| |District high-ability |District high-ability |District high-ability |District high-ability |

| |screening/identification |screening/identification |screening/identification |screening/identification |

| |Parent volunteers |Parent volunteers |Parent volunteers |Parent volunteers |

BUILDING FOCUS:

Grade Level Sub-skills Resources Technology Assessments Prof. Dev.

|Kindergarten – |Phonemic Awareness |Waterford |Waterford |DIBELS- progress |Indiana Kdg. Teachers |

|Reading Readiness | | | |monitoring |Conf. |

| |Guided Reading |Zoophonics |Zoophonics | | |

| | | | |Reading series benchmarks |Camp Kindergarten with Dr.|

| | |DIBELS inter-ventions |Compass/Odyssey | |Jean |

| | | | |Fall progress reports | |

| | |HA- leveled reading groups |Earobics | |DI Coach |

| | | | |Pre/post tests in reading | |

| | |Leveled library | |comp. | |

| | | | | | |

| | |1:1 remediation | |Summer Kdg. Screenings | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Kinderwork | | | |

|Grade 1- |Reading Comprehension |Graphic organizers |Compass/Odyssey |Oral Reading Fluency |Flexible grouping |

|Reading Comprehension | | | |checks |strategies |

| |Vocabulary |Retelling Cards |United Streaming | | |

| | | | |Unit/Selection tests |Differentiated Instruction|

| | |Leveled Library |RTI – Headsprout | | |

| | | |Reading Center |Writing prompts | |

| | |HA- leveled reading groups |FasttMath | | |

| | | | |STEEP | |

| | |Games/Flash cards | | | |

| | | | |RTI – progress monitoring | |

| | |Focused homework | | | |

| | | | |Waterford | |

|Grade 2 – |Reading Comprehension |RTI – |Compass/Odyssey |Scott/Foresman selections |Debbie Miller Conference |

|Reading Comprehension |Fact/Opinion |Reading Center | |and benchmarks |on Reading Comprehension |

| | |Headsprout | | |(attending 4/17/08) |

| |Literary Elements | | |STEEP | |

| | |Scantron skill | | |Training in use and |

| |Sequencing |Sheets | |SCANTRON |understanding data from |

| | | | | |SuccessNet |

| |Main Idea/Detail |Leveled Library | | | |

| | | | | |Training in how to |

| |Cause and Effect |Guided Reading | | |incorporate data from |

| | | | | |Scantron, STEEP, Compass |

| |Drawing Conclusions |HA/ENL leveled readers from | | |and Pearson SuccessNet to |

| | |Scott/Foresman | | |identify our students’ |

| |Author’s Purpose | | | |proficiencies and |

| | |Flexible Grouping | | |deficiencies. |

| | | | | | |

| | |Peer Mentoring | | | |

| |Vocabulary | | | | |

| | | | | | |

| |Context Clues |Picture Walk | | | |

| | | | |Scott/Foresman selections | |

| |Word Structure |Covered words | |and benchmarks | |

| | | | | | |

|Grade 3 |Reading Comprehension |Four Blocks Guided Reading |Compass/Odyssey |Selection Tests |Literacy Coach |

| | |Plans | | | |

| | | |Internet access for Webquest,|Project-based learning |Reading specialists |

| | |Leveled Reading groups |etc. | | |

| | | | |Benchmark tests |Additional training for |

| | |Leveled Library |Selection Test Reading | |use of new reading series |

| | | |Assignments |Teacher-created tests | |

| | |Compass/Odyssey Reading | | |Leveled Reading groups |

| | |Lessons | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Literacy centers to | | | |

| | |differentiate for ENL and HA | | | |

| | | |Compass/Odyssey activities | | |

| | |Literature Circles | | | |

| | | |“Word” | | |

| | |Reading series materials for | | | |

| | |comprehension |Internet |Class assignments | |

| | | |Compass/Odyssey | | |

| | |Daily Oral Language | |Writing rubrics |6 Traits training or |

| | | |Internet site-specific | |refresher courses |

| | |Morning Message |vocabulary builders | | |

| |Language Conventions | | |Selection tests | |

| | |Writing Process | | | |

| | |Four Blocks Strategies | |Benchmark tests |Partnership with reading |

| | | | | |specialist, coaches |

| | |ENL materials | | | |

| |Vocabulary | | |Compass | |

| | |Games | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Drops in a Bucket | | | |

| | |Review | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Vocabulary Cards | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Word Walls | | | |

| | | | | | |

|Grade 4 |Reading Comprehension |Instruction in comprehension |Compass/Odyssey |Scantron |Teacher collaboration |

| | |sub-skills across curriculum,| | |across the district |

| |Language Conventions |in all classes, such as |Laptop carts for |Daily Fix-It | |

| | |graphic sources, |individualization | |Vertical articulation |

| |Reading Vocabulary |compare/contrast, | |Varieties of writing | |

| | |cause/effect, sequencing, |Tech Labs for writing and |prompts and assignments |Language resources are |

| | |inference, etc. |editing | |needed |

| | | | |ISTEP+ | |

| | |Provide levels texts to |Scantron | | |

| | |enforce concepts via | |6 Traits +1 | |

| | |differentiated instruction. |RTI – progress monitoring |Rubrics | |

| | | |through Headsprout, Reading | | |

| | |Introduce math |Center |Reading series grammar | |

| | |problem-solving activities | |workbook supplement | |

| | |through literacy focus on |On-line Encyclopedia | | |

| | |identifying key words, | |Weekly selection test | |

| | |vocabulary, making tables, | | | |

| | |sequencing and identifying | | | |

| | |non-essential information. | | | |

| | | | |Vocabulary assessments | |

| | |Leveled texts for ENL and HA | |across the curricula | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Flexible grouping in all | | | |

| | |subjects | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |RTI – Headsprout | | | |

| | |Reading Center | | | |

| | |Peer Tutors | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Oasis | | | |

|Grade 5 |Reading Comprehension |Graphic Organizers |Compass/Odyssey |Selection tests | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Retelling cards | |6 Traits + 1 Writing | |

| | | | |Prompts | |

| | |Jeopardy | | | |

| | | | |Work book selections | |

| | |Reader’s Theatre | | | |

| | | | |Teacher-created tests | |

| | |Leveled Library | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Three Ring Circus | | | |

| | | | | | |

| | |Literature Circles | | | |

| | | | |Editing check list | |

| | | | | | |

| |Language Conventions |Basal text | |Daily Fix It | |

| | | |Compass/Odyssey | | |

| | |Daily Fix-It | | | |

| | | |United Streaming | | |

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download