SCHOOL: Grant Elementary School - … · Phyllis Miranda LTE Marcus Carlson ... attendance, turnover) ... • Self-assessment tools (district and/or school level)

SCHOOL:

Grant Elementary School

NCLB School Improvement Status Accreditation Status School Status Not on Improvement Accredited---ALERT Traditional Year 1 Accredited—Accreditation Watch School-wide Year 2 Accredited—Accreditation Probation Technical Assistance Tier I Corrective Action Non-accredited Technical Assistance Tier II Restructuring Technical Assistance Tier III

School Improvement Planning Team: Signatures of people who were involved in the preparation of the plan. Parents must be included.

Building Advisory Accountability Committee: To be completed by the Title I/Operations office:

Name Position Veronica Anderson

Principal 1) Date the Plan was presented to SAC for review: Date received in Title I/Operations office:

Jessica Hawkins

Assistant Principal November, 2011

Kim Bolling

LRT 2) Signature of Principal: Date the Plan was reviewed:

Michelle Kelly

School Psychologist Veronica Anderson

Susan Schneider

5th grade teacher 3) Signature of SAC Chairperson: Members of the Review Team:

Julene Dorion

2nd grade teacher Marcus Carlson

Joan O’Connor

3rd grade teacher 4) Signatures of SAC members:

Phyllis Miranda

LTE Marcus Carlson

Katie Smit

1st grade teacher Larry Thomas

Jen Bosler

4th grade teacher/parent Jo Meyers Date of Plan Approval:

Deb Asiano

Signature of Title I/School-wide Director:

Section II: Improvement Plan Information

Directions: This section should be completed by the school or district. Additional Information about the School

Improvement Plan Information The school is submitting this improvement plan to satisfy requirements for (check all that apply):

State Accountability Title IA Tiered Intervention Grant School Improvement Grant Other: ________________

Comprehensive Review and Selected Grant History

Related Grant Awards

Did the school receive a Tiered Intervention grant? Indicate the intervention approach.

Turnaround Restart Transformation

Closure

Has the school received a School Improvement grant? When was the grant awarded?

School Support Team or Expedited Review

Has (or will) the school participated in an SST review or Expedited Review? When?

External Evaluator Has the school partnered with an external evaluator to provide comprehensive evaluation? Indicate the year and the name of the provider/tool used.

School Contact Information (Additional contacts may be added, if needed)

1 Name and Title Veronica Anderson, Principal

Email [email protected]

Phone 719-328-5700

Mailing Address 3215 Westwood Blvd., Colorado Springs, CO 80918

2 Name and Title Jessica Hawkins, Assistant Principal

Email [email protected]

Phone 719-328-5700

Mailing Address 3215 Westwood Blvd., Colorado Springs, CO 80918

Section III: Narrative on Data Analysis and Root Cause Identification

This section corresponds with the “evaluate” portion of the continuous improvement cycle. Provide a narrative that examines the data for your school – especially in any areas where the school was identified for accountability purposes. To help you construct this narrative, this section has been broken down into four steps: (1) Gather and organize relevant data, (2) Analyze trends in the data and identify priority needs, (3) Determine the root causes of those identified needs, and (4) Create the narrative. Step One: Gather and Organize Relevant Data The planning team must gather data from a variety of sources to inform the planning process. For this process, schools are required to pull specific performance reports and are expected to supplement their analysis with local data to help explain the performance data. The team will need to include three years of data to conduct a trend analysis in step two.

• Required reports. At a minimum, the school is expected to reference the key data sources posted on SchoolView (www.schoolview.org/SchoolPerformance/ index.asp), including: (1) School Performance Framework Report, (2) Growth Summary Report, (3) AYP Summaries (including detailed reports in reading and math for each subpopulation of students), and (4) Post Secondary Readiness data.

• Suggested data sources. Furthermore, it is assumed that more detailed data is available at the school/district level to provide additional context and deepen the analysis. Some recommended sources may include:

Student Learning Local Demographic Data School Processes Data Perception Data

• Local outcome and interim assessments

• Student work samples

• Classroom assessments (type and frequency)

• School locale and size of student population

• Student characteristics, including poverty, language proficiency, IEP, migrant, race/ethnicity

• Student mobility rates • Staff characteristics (e.g., experience,

attendance, turnover) • List of schools and feeder patterns • Student attendance • Discipline referrals and suspension rates

• Comprehensive evaluations of the school (e.g., SST)

• Curriculum and instructional materials • Instruction (time and consistency among grade

levels) • Academic interventions available to students • Schedules and class sizes • Family/community involvement policies/practices • Professional development structure • Services and/or programs (Title I, special ed,

ESL) • Extended day or summer programs

• Teaching and learning conditions surveys (e.g., TELL Colorado)

• Any perception survey data (e.g., parents, students, teachers, community, school leaders)

• Self-assessment tools (district and/or school level)

Step Two: Analyze Trends in the Data and Identify Priority Needs Using at least three years of data, the team should begin by identifying positive and negative trends in each of the key performance indicators (i.e., academic achievement, academic growth, academic growth gaps, post secondary readiness). The summary provided in Part I of this template (pp. 1-2) will provide some clues on content areas, grade levels and disaggregated groups where the school needs to focus its attention. Local data (suggestions provided above) should also be included – especially in grade levels and subject areas not included in state testing. Next, the team should share observations of its strengths on which it can build, and identify areas of need. Finally, those needs should be prioritized. At least one priority need must be identified for every performance indicator for which school performance did not at least meet state and/or federal expectations. These efforts should be documented in the Data Analysis Worksheet below. Step Three: Root Cause Analysis This step is focused on examining the underlying cause of the priority needs identified in step two. A cause is a “root cause” if: (1) the problem would not have occurred if the cause had not been present, (2) the problem will not reoccur if the cause is dissolved and (3) correction of the cause will not lead to the same or similar problems (Preuss, 2003). Finally, the school should have control over the proposed solution – or the means to implement the solution. Remember to verify the root cause with multiple data sources. These efforts should be documented in the Data Analysis Worksheet below. Data Analysis Worksheet Directions: This chart will help you record and organize your observations about your school level data for the required data analysis narrative. You are encouraged to conduct a more comprehensive analysis by examining all of the performance indicators. – at a minimum, you must address the performance indicators for the targets that were not met for accountability purposes. Ultimately, your analysis will guide the major improvement strategies you choose in section IV. You may add rows, as necessary.

Performance Indicators Description of Significant Trends (1 year of past data) Priority Needs Root Causes

Academic Achievement (Status)

School wide CSAP Reading (%P and A) 69.8% is “Approaching” state expectations School wide CSAP Math (%P and A) 64.9% “Meets” state expectations

Tier 1 grade level skills and Tier 2 and Tier 3 small group with Skill Boards 90/60 Reading blocks ST Math

• a need for improvement in oral reading fluency and phonics instruction.

• improvement in teaching of fidelity to the standards and the best practice of explicit instruction.

• Improvement is needed in math facts, fidelity of teaching math exemplar and fidelity of EDM daily routine

School wide CSAP Writing (%P and A) 53.4% “Meets” state expectations Fifth Grade CSAP (%P and A) Science 43.6% is “Approaching” state expectations

45 minutes of Daily, Writer’s Workshop Five Science Focus Days Scheduled throughout the school year

• Fidelity of following the Writer’s Workshop format -Big Gulp Paragraph -Mini lesson with daily conferencing -Status of the class -Writing Conferences

• Focus on Reading, Math and Writing, little focus

on Science because of time contraints *Reading Free /Reduced Lunch, Meets, Median Growth 46, needed 35 Minority Students, Approaching, Median Growth 39, needed 35 Students needing to catch up, Approaching Median Growth 53, needed 62 *Math FRL, Does Not Meet Median Growth 39, needed 43 Minority Students, Does Not Meet Median Growth 39, needed 48 Students needing to catch up, Does Not Meet Median Growth 38, needed 76 *Writing Free/Reduced, Approaching, Median Growth 37, needed 36 Minority Students, Does not meet Median Growth 34, needed 36 StudentsNeeding to Catch Up, Approaching Median Growth 42, needed 57

Academic Growth NA

Academic Growth Gaps

NA

Post Secondary Readiness

Preuss, P. G. (2003). School Leader’s Guide to Root Cause Analysis: Using Data to Dissolve Problems. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education Step 4: Create the Data Narrative Directions: Blend the work that you have done in the previous three steps: (1) Gather and organize relevant data, (2) Analyze trends in the data and identify priority needs, and (3) Determine the root causes of those identified needs. The narrative should not take more than five pages. Consider the questions below as you write your narrative. Data Narrative for School rend Analysis and Priority Needs: On which performance indicators is our school trending positively? On which performance indicators is our school trending negatively? Does this differ for any disaggregated student groups, e.g., by grade level or gender? What performance challenges are the highest priorities for our school?

Root Cause Analysis: Why do we think our school’s performance is what it is?

Verification of Root Cause: What evidence do you have for your conclusions?

Ulysses S. Grant Elementary is a neighborhood school serving students in Kindergarten through Fifth grades. We are one of the thirty-five elementary schools in Colorado Springs School District Eleven. Built in 1966, Grant is located in the heart of the spectacular Pikes Peak region, in scenic Colorado Springs, Colorado. In 2007, Grant received the NCLB Blue Ribbon School title. The success of Grant is due to the collaborative effort of excellent students, involved parents, a supportive community, and a committed, experienced staff. The Grant PTA promotes parent involvement and last year logged over 4000 hours of volunteer time. We believe education is a partnership between home and school and together, we strive to create a warm, safe, caring environment where children are able to develop to their full potential academically, socially, emotionally, and physically. The Grant staff is committed to improving Tier 1 instruction in the areas of reading, writing and math. Special Populations Currently there are 508 students enrolled at Grant; of those students, 6.1% are receiving special education services, 10.8 % are identified as English Language Learners, ELL students, and 66.3% are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL). The Gifted and Talented enrollment is 4.3%. The student mobility rate of 45% significantly impacts Grant. The FRL in the 2004-2005 school year was 39.2% and this year we are at 66.3% FRL. In the 2004-2005, there were 48 ELL/ESL students and this year there are 52 students from seven different language backgrounds. The mobility rate in 2007-2008 was 16.6% and is now 45%.

Root Cause Root Cause work was done for each subject area:

• a need for improvement in oral reading fluency and phonics instruction. • improvement in teaching of fidelity to the standards and the best practice of explicit instruction. • Improvement is needed in math facts, fidelity of teaching math exemplar and fidelity of EDM daily routine • Fidelity of following the Writer’s Workshop format

-Big Gulp Paragraph -Mini lesson with daily conferencing -Status of the class -Writing Conferences

• Focus on Reading, Math and Writing, little focus on Science because of time contraints

Overall, Grant Elementary meets Academic Growth in Reading. It also meets Academic Growth Gaps for the Free/Reduced Lunch group of students. More specifically, Grant Elementary has had some great improvements to showcase and recognize. In Spring 2011, 5th grade increased in Reading by 9%, from 62% to 71%. In writing, 5th grade increased by 10%, from 55% to 65%. In Math, 5th grade increased by 2%, from 59% to 61%. In Science, 5th increased by 8%, from 35% to 43%. Reading Trends Reading Growth Percentile–Fourth and Fifth grade Median Growth Percentile is above the district and even with the state: 50 school 49 district 50 state Percentage Caching Up – Fourth and Fifth grade is below the district and the state: 31 school 36 district 36 state Percent Keeping Up – Fourth and Fifth grade is above the district and the state: 77 school 74 district 76 state Reading Growth Percent Moving Up – Fourth and fifth grade are below the district and the state: 10 school 20 district 21 state

Math Trends Math Growth Percentile – Fourth and fifth grade growth is below the district and the state: 40 school 46 district 50 state Math Growth Percent Catching Up – Fourth and fifth grade U/PP is significantly below the district and the state: 12 school 22 district 25 state Math Growth Percent Keeping Up – Fourth and fifth grade P/A is below the district and the state: 60 school 62 district 66 state Math Growth Percent Moving Up – Fourth and fifth grade P moving to A is the same as the district and below the state: 25 school 25 district 28 state Writing Trends Writing Growth Percentile – Fourth and fifth grade growth is below the district and the state: 40 school 45 district 50 state Writing Growth Percent Catching Up – Fourth and fifth grade U/PP is below the district and the state: 34 school 40 district 42 state Writing Growth Percent Keeping Up – Fourth and fifth grade P/A is below the district and the state: 71 school 72 district 76 state Writing Growth Percent Moving Up – Fourth and fifth grade P moving to A is below the district and below the state: 13 school 24 district 30 state

Professional development that is systematic, explicit, and focused was provided for staff during the spring and summer of 2011. As a result of the professional development, Grant staff is committed to improving the delivery of core programs, increasing student engagement, and strengthing Tier 1 instruction. Follow through will include continued focus during PLC time, evidence of implementation by Walkthrough data, and data analysis. The training included High Engagement Strategies, The 6 Minute Solution, and Read Naturally software. ST Math will be implemented for all students and we continue to implement a Writer’s Workshop format with fidelity for continued improvement in writing. Section IV: Action Plan(s)

This section focuses on the “plan” portion of the continuous improvement cycle. First you will identify your annual targets and the interim measures. This will be documented in the School Goals Worksheet. Then you will move into the action plans, where you will use the action planning worksheet. School Goals Worksheet Directions: Complete the worksheet for the priority needs identified in section III; although, all schools are encouraged to set targets for all performance indicators. Annual targets for AYP have already been determined by the state and may be viewed on the CDE website at: www.cde.state.co.us/FedPrograms/AYP/prof.asp#table. Safe Harbor and Matched Safe Harbor goals may be used instead of performance targets. For state accountability, schools are expected to set their own annual targets for academic achievement, academic growth, academic growth gaps and post secondary readiness. Once annual targets are established, then the school must identify interim measures that will be used to monitor progress toward the annual targets at least twice during the school year. Make sure to include interim targets for disaggregated groups that were identified as needing additional attention in section III (data analysis and root cause analysis). Finally, list the major strategies that will enable the school to meet those targets. The major improvement strategies will be detailed in the action planning worksheet below. Example of an Annual Target for a Title I Elementary School

Measures/ Metrics 2010-11 Target 2011-12 Target

AYP R 88.46% of all students and of each disaggregated group will be PP and above OR will show a 10% reduction in percent of students scoring non-

94.23% of all students and by each disaggregated group will be PP and above OR will show a 10% reduction in percent of students scoring non-proficient.

proficient.

Performance Indicators

Measures/ Metrics

Annual Targets Interim Measures for 2010-11

Major Improvement

Strategies 2010-11 2011-12

Academic Achievement

(Status)

CSAP, CSAPA, Lectura, Escritura

R Percent Proficient and Advanced will be at or above the state 50th percentile

Percent Proficient and Advanced will be at or above the state 50th percentile

NWEA Maps Assessments (administered 3 times during the year). Fall-spring RIT growth in reading, with goal of meeting or exceeding NWEA growth targets for all grades and disaggregated student groups.

See strategies under Action Planning Worksheet, goals 1, 2, and 3

M Percent Proficient and Advanced will be at or above the state 50th percentile


NWEA Maps Assessments (administered 3 times during the year). Fall-spring RIT growth in math, with goal of meeting or exceeding NWEA growth targets for all grades and disaggregated student groups.


W Percent Proficient and Advanced will be at or above the state 50th percentile


NWEA Maps Assessments (administered 2 times during the year). Fall-spring RIT growth in language usage, with goal of meeting or exceeding NWEA growth targets for all grades and disaggregated student groups.


S Percent Proficient and Advanced will be at or above the state 50th percentile



AYP (Overall and for each disaggregated groups)

R

94.23% of all students and of each disaggregated group will be PP and above OR will show a 10% reduction in percent of students scoring non-proficient.




M





Academic Growth

Median Student Growth Percentile

R Observed growth will meet or exceed adequate growth

Observed growth will meet or exceed adequate growth



M Observed growth will meet or exceed adequate growth




W Observed growth will meet or exceed adequate growth

NWEA Maps Assessments (administered 2 times during the year). Fall-spring RIT

See strategies under Action Planning


growth in language usage, with goal of meeting or exceeding NWEA growth targets for all grades and disaggregated student groups.

Worksheet, goals 1, 2, and 3

Academic Growth Gaps

Median Student Growth Percentile

R

There will be 5 percentage points or less gap between each disaggregated sub-group with an N of 30 students or more




M





W



NWEA Maps Assessments (administered 2 times during the year). Fall-spring RIT growth in language usage, with goal of meeting or exceeding NWEA growth targets for all grades and disaggregated student groups.


Post Secondary & Workforce Readiness

Graduation Rate At or above 80%

At or above 80%

Monitoring of high risk groups

Continue interventions at school level

Dropout Rate Monitoring of high risk Continue

At or below the state average At or below the state average groups interventions at school level

Mean ACT At or above the state average

At or above the state average

Document that students are receiving instruction in content prior to test

Curriculum alignment

Action Planning Worksheet Directions: Based on your data analysis in section III, prioritize the root causes that you will address through your action plans and then identify a major improvement strategy(s). For each major improvement strategy (e.g., differentiate reading instruction in grades 3-5) identify the root cause(s) that the action steps will help to dissolve. Then indicate which accountability provision or grant opportunity it will address. In the chart, provide details on key action steps (e.g., re-evaluating supplemental reading materials, providing new professional development and coaching to school staff) necessary to implement the major improvement strategy. Details should include a description of the action steps, a general timeline, resources that will be used to implement the actions and implementation benchmarks. Implementation benchmarks provide the school with checkpoints to ensure that activities are being implemented as expected. If the school is identified for improvement/corrective action/restructuring under Title I (see pre-populated report on p. 2), action steps should include family/community engagement strategies and professional development (including mentoring) as they are specifically required by ESEA. Add rows in the chart, as needed. While space has been provided for three major improvement strategies, the school may add other major strategies, as needed. Major Improvement Goal #1: Top Quality Tier 1 instruction for every student, every day, in every classroom through differentiated instruction and a personalized learning plan as evidenced by: Strategy #1: All teachers in every classroom every day will deliver high engagement teaching as observed by implementation of these strategies using the following Core Curriculum at Grant Elementary School:

Whole Group (Tier I)

Grade Level Reading Material Grade Level Standards/Skills

• Choral Response • Choral/Cloze Reading/ Partner Reading

(variety of reading) • Depth of Knowledge • Think pair/share • Direct Vocabulary Instruction • Whiteboard Quick Check • Common Stimulus Response

Small Group (Tier I)

Instructional Reading Level Material Grade Level Standards/Skills

• Choral Response • Choral/Cloze Reading/ Partner Reading

(variety of reading) • Depth of Knowledge • Think pair/share • Direct Vocabulary Instruction • Whiteboard Quick Check • Common Stimulus Response

Core Programs 2010-2011 StoryTown Reading, Harcourt/Houghton Mifflin:

• 90 minute whole group instruction using StoryTown Reading. Includes:

o Grade level skill specific whole group o 6 Minute Solution, daily o Short constructed response o Summary writing/Main idea, three supporting details o Grammar, conventions, mechanics, punctuation o Reading level, skill focused small groups

Writer’s Workshop: 40 to 45 minutes everyday

• Follow grade-level format

Every Day Mathematics (EDM)

• 75 minutes daily • 4 day, lessons • 5th day, small group re-teach, EDM games, EDM on-line

• Math Exemplars 1x every other week; MUST DO THIS!! ST Math for all students Science

• D11 grade level science kits, Five Science Focus Days Social Studies

• D11 aligned Social Studies curriculum

• Align with Grant Writing At A Glance Strategy #2: All teachers in every classroom every day will align standards to instructional strategies as observed by implementation of target goals as measured by Classroom Walkthroughs. Root Cause(s) Addressed: Root cause analysis indicates a need for improvement in teaching of fidelity to the standards and the best practice of explicit instruction. Accountability Provisions or Grant Opportunities Addressed by this Major Improvement Strategy (check all that apply):

School Plan under State Accountability Title IA School Improvement/Corrective Action Plan Application for a Tiered Intervention Grant Title I school-wide or targeted assistance plan requirements School Improvement Grant

Description of Action Steps to Implement the Major Improvement Strategy Timeline Key Personnel*

Resources (Amount and

Source: federal, state, and/or local)

Implementation Benchmarks

Facilitate a “Data Dig” in grades 3 through 5, aligning standards to instruction

October 2011 AP, LRT Alpine, Colorado Academic Standards

1st Quarter, On-going, as teachers meet with LRT, MAP data dig, 1/18/12 with AERO

Participation by all staff in high engagement strategies training

June 2011 Principal, AP, LRT, BLT

Achieve Team Consultant

Fall 2011

Implement research-based engagement strategies

Ongoing Principal, AP, LRT, BLT, All staff

High Engagement Strategies, “Kill the Robin” reading strategies

2011-2012 School year Ongoing , observed in weekly Walkthroughs

Collect Engagement Strategy Data through classroom walkthroughs

ongoing Principal, AP, LRT District Walk through form

ongoing

Collect Fidelity Data through classroom walkthroughs

ongoing Principal, AP, LRT District Walk through form

ongoing

Distribute teacher survey to self-evaluate implementation of engagement strategies, quarterly

Quarterly Principal, Ap, LRT, BLT

Survey Monkey Quarterly, 2011-2012 10/25/11, 2/13/12

Collect data, analyze and share at quarterly intervals

ongoing Principal, AP, LRT, staff

District Walk through form

October through May 2010-2011

Develop school-wide schedule to ensure fidelity to all core programs

August 2011 LRT, Staff, Principal

Time, Staff, Professional Development

August 2011, ongoing Developed May 2011 Implemented August 2011

Participate in Writer’s Workshop Training to review key components

First Semester, 2011

All staff, ACHIEVE Team

ACHIEVE Team First Semester, 2011 Completed Saturday January 7, 2012, following April 21, 2012

Develop a personalized learning plan Fall Semester, 2011-2012

Principal, LTE, teacher leaders, Personalized Learning Coordinator, consultant

Completed plan and progress chart

* Not required for state or federal requirements. Completion of the “Key Personnel” column is optional for schools.

Elementary School Implementation and Performance Data

Organization Code: District Name: Colorado Springs District 11 School Code: 111 School Name: US Grant Elementary GOAL #1. Top Quality Tier 1 Instruction Strategy #1: All teachers in every classroom every day will deliver high engagement teaching as observed by implementation of these strategies using the following Core Curriculum at Grant Elementary School:

• Choral Response • Partner reading, pair/share • Common stimulus signaling • Small group instruction • Whiteboards for Quick Check • Cloze reading • Direct vocabulary instruction from StoryTown Reading • 6 Minute Solution grades 1-5, 100% Implementation

Strategy #2: All teachers in every classroom every day will deliver align standards to instructional strategies as observed by implementation of target goals as measured by Classroom Walkthroughs.

Walk-through Implementation Data

(% of Classrooms)

MAP Performance

Fall Winter Spring Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Oct Feb May Evidence of Six Minute Solution

81% 81% 81% MA

Evidence of Skill Board 81% 81% 100% LA

Research Informed Strategies

100% 100% 100%

2011 CSAP Performance

Composite Scores

69.5% 67.2%

Major Improvement Goal #2: Increase math achievement for all students using the ST Math program with focus, fidelity and follow-though as evidenced by improved MAP, TCAP and weekly math unit assessments. Strategy: All students K-5 will engage in ST Math

• K, 1 & 2 participate in ST Math 60 minutes per week • Grades 3, 4, & 5 participate in ST Math 30 minutes per day; the last 5 minutes will be used to journal that day’s learning • Tier 3-Gifted/Talented students, will engage in challenge activities after completing the grade-level ST Math

Root Cause(s) Addressed: Root cause analysis indicates improvement is needed in math for all students in math facts, computation, and math exemplars.

Accountability Provisions or Grant Opportunities Addressed by this Major Improvement Strategy (check all that apply):

School Plan under State Accountability Title IA School Improvement/Corrective Action Plan Application for a Tiered Intervention Grant Title I school-wide or targeted assistance plan requirements School Improvement Grant

Description of Action Steps to Implement the Major Improvement Strategy Timeline Key Personnel

Resources (Amount and Source: federal, state, and/or

local)


Develop a schedule for all students to use netbooks and the computer lab to access ST Math

August 2011 Staff, LRT, Principal, AP

ST Math Grades 3-5 use ST Math in the lab 5x a week for 30 minutes, grades K-2 use ST Math with netbooks 2x per week for 60 minutes

Collection of ST Math data will be used to track students progress and to identify gaps and deficiencies in math to make instructional decisions and to provide timely interventions

Weekly Staff, LRT, Principal, AP, LTE,

ST Math program, reports

Improvement in EDM assessments, MAP data, and TCAP Math, ST Math reports disseminated monthly to grade level teachers

Major Improvement Goal #3: Ensure a positive climate and culture exists as evidenced by a Positive Behavior Support system, implemented with fidelity, supporting parents and community with effective home strategies to assist students with academic tasks. Strategy: Maintain an exemplar PBIS program and increase parent education student activities. Root Cause(s) Addressed: Root cause analysis indicates a need for parent/community education to assist students with academic tasks at home. Accountability Provisions or Grant Opportunities Addressed by this Major Improvement Strategy (check all that apply):

School Plan under State Accountability Title IA School Improvement/Corrective Action Plan Application for a Tiered Intervention Grant

Title I school-wide or targeted assistance plan requirements School Improvement Grant

Description of Action Steps to Implement the Major Improvement Strategy Timeline Key Personnel

Resources (Amount and Source: federal, state, and/or

local)


PBIS – • Maintain exemplar PBIS program • Educate parents through SAC PTA

meetings regarding Grant PBIS program and Second Step programs

• Increase use of token economy (ticket system)

2011-2012 school year Monthly 2011-2012 On-going 2011-2012

Principal, AP, School Psych, PBS Goal Team

$200 for tokens Robert March training Second Step and Why Try

Second Step and Why Try Bi-monthly lessons in classrooms, Ticket store 1 x per month, coupons added 9/2012

Provide KidPower Training for students and parents

September 2011

KidPower facilitators, School Psych

KidPower Program September 2011 KidPower Nights 9/15/2011, 9/22/2011

Educate community at SAC PTA meeting – Review the following

o ROAR and what it stands for o ROAR expectations in

various environments o ROAR Token economy o Office Referrals o Second Step Program

Monthly, 2011-2012

Principal, AP, School Psych, PBS Goal Team

PBIS Program Second Step and Why Try

Second Step and Why Try Presentation to SAC/PTA 1/10/2012

Provide a Parent Student Informational Guide in November to educate and promote ROAR behavior (PBIS systems), and to inform parents how they can help with homework and school wide supports.

November 2011

Office Staff, Principal, AP, Grant PTA Board, PBS Goal Team

PBIS Program PTA and SAC minutes Provided in student planners and student handbook March 2012 newsletter

Provide a Homework Help Night for Parents with a focus on reading, writing and math strategies.

November 2011

All Staff StoryTown, EDM, Writer’s Workshop strategies

November 2011 95 Parents attended Homework Help Night on 11/10 2011

SCHOOL: Grant Elementary School - … · Phyllis Miranda LTE Marcus Carlson ... attendance, turnover) ... • Self-assessment tools (district and/or school level)

Documents