Reading Action Plan
|
K- 80% entering 1st grade at or above book 11. Roots 85% at grade level Wings 85% at grade level School MSP TARGET – 85% | |||||||
|
Action Strategies |
Sub Group? |
Responsible |
Inst. Change? |
Resources/Interventions |
Professional development |
Monitoring Effectiveness |
Evaluation |
|
Struggling Students will be identified via Dibels, classroom, and roots/ SRI assessments. Teachers will meet in Component meetings to research and determine instructional support |
ELL Sp. Ed Hispanic Homeless All Girls Boys |
Ellen Davis |
Focus on Fluency, clarification, summary, Small group instruction |
Title 1 Lap Tutoring Intervene…Teacher/aid Component Meeting CEA time Classroom visits. |
Component meetings PD 360 SFA consultant visits |
Meeting Agenda Minutes and documented collaboration and 8 week |
Evaluated every 8 weeks Team Collaboration |
|
Mrs. Davis and Mr. Roberts will walk through monitoring agreed upon instructional changes |
ELL Sped Hispanic Homeless All Boys Girls |
Davis and Roberts |
As determined by Component/ K /Roots/ Wings |
Title , Lap Intervention group? Aid time Classroom visits |
Ellen Davis PD 360 Ruth Steihl |
Notes, conversations emails |
Walk through observations and follow up conversations and notes with teachers. |
Reading Carousel Themes
35% of entering 3rd grade students are reading below grade level
24% of entering 2nd grade students are reading below grade level.
38% of 08-09 Hispanic students did not pass meet reading standards
80-90% of students entered first grade reading on or above grade level.
Writing Action Plan
|
80% of Students at Fords Prairie will achieve proficiency in writing, based on prioritized grade level standards as measured by team developed rubric or checklist and reported by spreadsheet by June 2010. MSP target: 80% meeting 4th grade writing standards | ||||||
|
Action Strategies |
Sub |
People /person responsible |
Resources available |
Instructional Change |
Professional development |
Monitoring effectiveness |
|
Grade level teams will meet in collaborative planning sessions to determine what students should know, recording how they did and research and plan interventions for struggling students |
ALL ELL Hispanic SE Boys Girls Low inc |
Wasson K Myhre 2 Johnna S 3 |
Carper, T1 CEA Writing $ Staff Dev Extended scoring sessions |
Team Identified acceleration strategies EVALUATE student work for instructional change. |
Team Collaboration Time PD 360 |
Team meeting minutes Principal/Coach participation in team meetings and observation of writing. Data collection of team progress on writing map. Spreadsheet with student scores for team reflection and data carousel in 2010. |
|
Team leaders will document individual writing scores to identify students that are struggling. |
All ELL Hispanic SE Boys Girls Low inc |
Wasson K Myhre 2 Johnna 3 |
determined by team and resources |
Common assessments, 3 minute prompts |
Team Collaboration Time |
At the end of the school year every team will have developed an EXCEL spreadsheet that is sortable by student to pass to the next year’s teacher. |
Writing Carousel Themes
Consistent Measurement tools in writing at all grade levels are needed (Confirmed by parent feedback at the SIP data carousel.)
CSD 4th graders scored 12% below the state average in writing. (WASL 2009)
SCIENCE Action Plan
|
Goal: 80% of Fords Prairie students will demonstrate proficiency in science achievement as measured by team developed and/or implemented assessment of student progress by June 2010. MSP Target: 60% of Oakview 5th graders will meet Science standards | ||||||
|
Action Strategies |
Sub Groups |
People /person responsible |
Resources available |
Instruction Change |
Professional development |
Monitoring effectiveness |
|
Grades k,1,2,3 will implement Foss kits. |
ELL,ALL SE, Homeless Boys ,Girls Hispanic LOWINC |
Wasson Myhre Steenkolk Roberts |
ESD Gabler Pro D Board maker? |
Implement Common Assessments |
Science Vocabulary Journal Writing Scientific Method Cycles Laser PD |
Pre / Post data (notebooks) Foss ESD 112 Science Quiz Results from Notebook scoring |
Science Carousel Themes:
CSD Students in 5th grade scored 14% below the state average on the Science WASL; FP does not have any common assessments in Science.
Math Action Plan
|
Goal: 85% of Fords Prairie students will demonstrate proficiency in math achievement as measured by quizzes and unit assessments developed in unit planning. MSP target TARGET 80% | ||||||
|
Action Strategies |
Sub group? |
Responsible |
Inst Change |
Resources available |
Professional development |
Monitoring effectiveness |
|
Fords Prairie Teachers will meet in ongoing collaborative grade level teams to plan units, plan assessments, and report student progress. Teachers will meet and rank order students highest to lowest for interventions (walk to math?) |
ELL ALL Hispanic Boys Girls Homeless Low inc |
Wasson Myhre Steenkolk Boyce |
Unit plans on computer |
Thumb drive, Title, LAP CEA Math Scoring Team time |
|
Newly Created unit plans. Rank ordered students. Possible intervention groups based on data. |
|
Kindergarten students will attend full day for extended learning opportunity |
ALL students |
Boyce + K |
Unit planning, coach led |
ARRA / Federal Funds |
Tom B. and K team |
Aligned units, plans and assessments |
Math Carousel Themes
50% of Hispanic Students met math standard in 08-09 3rd grade; 24% of Hispanic Students met math standard in 08-09 4th grade; 5.6 % of SE students passed 4th grade math WASL.
Perceptual Themes
|
Fords Prairie Staff will continue to hone instructional practices based on PD survey results. | ||||||
|
Action Strategies |
Sub group? |
Responsible |
Inst Change |
Resources available |
Professional development |
Monitoring effectiveness |
|
Review PD Survey Results with staff and Action plan/Research Steps |
ELL, SE, Migrant, Low Inc. Homeless All |
|
Student knowledge of Standards /ob |
Staff Meeting, T1, Pd resources |
As determined by team |
PD survey results. Staff meeting 10/6/09 reviewed results. |
Perceptual Themes 09-10
33% of teachers believe our assessment system does not tell them whether their work produces changes in student achievement
45% of staff feels that student achievement data is not used to compare various student populations (ELL, Migrant, SE, and LOWINC)
40% of teachers feel a high need for math professional development; 0% of teachers strongly agree that students can explain how their work relates to targeted standards.
