Greater Clark County Schools (1010)
PL221 PLAN
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0865)
Spring, 2014
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Table of Contents School Overview
Page 3
Description & Location of Curriculum
Page 7
Titles & Descriptions of Assessments
Page 9
Mission/Vision/Belief
Page 10
Data Summary Comprehensive Needs Assessment
Page 11
Conclusions & Guiding Principles
Page 25
Goals/Objectives
Page 27
Implementation Profile
Page 28
Timeline
Page 39
Statutes to be Waived
Page 45
Bibliography
Page 46
Appendix
Page 47
Reading /Math Plan
Pages 48,54
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 2
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Overview of Jonathan Jennings Elementary School School Information Jonathan Jennings Elementary School is a K-5 public education facility. Jonathan Jennings Elementary is one of 12 elementary schools under the jurisdiction of the Greater Clark County School Corporation. The corporation has three middle schools and three high schools strategically located to serve a geographically and ethnically diverse community. The Greater Clark County Schools is situated in southeastern tip of Indiana; its southern border is the Ohio River and across the river is Louisville, Kentucky. The community is an area of mixed income with 56% of the students receiving free or reduced lunch. The Charlestown community is comprised of mostly single family dwellings.
Key Student Demographic The current population of Jonathan Jennings Elementary School is 486 students. This is an increase in the number of students enrolled at Jonathan Jennings in a number of years. Our current population is average: 2% African American, 12% Hispanic, 81 % White/Non Hispanic, and 5 % Multiracial. In the fall of 2007, 54.87% of the students received free and reduced lunch. In the spring of 2013, 56% of the students are receiving free and reduced lunch.
School Learning Climate Our attendance rate for 2013-2014 stands at 96%.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 3
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Curriculum and Instruction Beginning in 2009-present time, Jonathan Jennings Elementary School began the use of Goal Clarity lesson planning. This is a standards based collaborative system that focuses on standards, vocabulary, Depth of Knowledge, and assessment. Teachers utilized the state curriculum maps that are placed on-line through the IDOE’s Learning Connection site in all planning In accordance with the district and state, Jonathan Jennings Elementary School has adopted the newest version of Indiana College and Career Ready Standards as its curriculum. GCCS formed a cadre of teachers to create grade level pacing guides. These were distributed for use in planning the Goal Clarity lessons, rubrics, and exemplars. Teachers also bring pacing guides to use at all articulation meetings. Each grade level team was given a printed binder copy of the new pacing guides. All lessons and assessments are planned from the adopted and unpacked standards within the pacing guides and the IDOE maps. As a focus of curriculum and instruction, Jonathan Jennings Elementary School continues to use a Balanced Math Framework as the primary means of mathematics instruction. A Balanced Literacy Framework, developed by JJES, is the primary means of teaching reading/language arts. We also continue to emphasize the 5 components of reading— phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, reading comprehension, and fluency during our 90 minute reading block. A modified gradual release is implemented with the reading block. We also continue to implement the Houghton Mifflin Math series. In addition, our students study science and social studies. Other areas of the curriculum include art, music and physical education. All instruction is again based on the Goal Clarity form of planning. Special needs students receive services through the practice of inclusion for all subjects. They are pulled out for small group and individualized instruction in reading/language arts and math. Interventions that were implemented in the 2013-14 school year: At risk fourth and fifth grade students were chosen to participate in either System 44 or the Read 180 on-line programs. For the 2014-2015 school year, we have continued the use of the System 44 and Read 180 programs. JJES teachers provide small group interventions within each day for all grade levels. We also provide Tier II and Tier III daily by 1.5 staff members through our CIS program, additional small groups are formed and individual instruction occurs. In 2011-12 we began Math intervention based on our Goal Clarity assessment results during semester 2. For the 2014-2015 school year, we have continued Math intervention based on GCS assessment, STAR, and Acuity data. We have a number of programs to extend learning beyond the regular school day/year. In previous years funds have been available to have remediation programs that focus on preparing students for ISTEP+ and reviewing key concepts and strategies that will help them be more successful on the tests. The students of Jonathan Jennings Elementary also Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 4
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
receive tutoring through our Community in Schools Program. This is a program which meets 4 days per week for students in grades 1st through 5th.
Staff Jonathan Jennings Elementary School has 20 certified classroom teachers K-5. We also have two special area teachers, one teacher for technology, and one Academic Improvement Coordinator. There are two special needs assistants; one kindergarten assistant, one ESL teacher and one ESL translator, and one speech educator. Certified Staff Adrienne Bach-Principal Grade K
Mari Harbin, Kara Dieterlen, Bev Hughes
Grade 1
Lori Blaydes, Kristi Weber, Diane Welle
Grade 2
Sulayne Kaelin, Cristie Haire, Jillian Richardson, Marge Robison
Grade 3
Rebecca DeCamp, Erica Sparks, Anne Cage, Marge Robison
Grade 4
Jamie Spear, Daniel Dietrich, JoAnn Sawyer
Grade 5
Julie Bellou, Christy DeSpain, Aimee Doherty, Ronda Hostetler
Special Area
Joel Viars ½ day, Alicia McAfee ½ day (Physical Education) Amy Short (Art/Music/Computers) Beth Day (Computers) Angela Smith (AIC/Intervention) Dina Schafer (ELL)
Interventionist/Coach
Special Needs
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Jennifer Hutton, Ashley Padget, Lara Schillizzi (Speech)
Page 5
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
PL221 Committees 2011-12 Assessment: Co-Chairs: Kristie Weber and Ashley Padgett Jill Richardson, Cristie Haire, Erica Sparks, Lori Blaydes, Adrienne Bach Curriculum: Co-Chairs: Sulayne Kaelin and Mari Harbin Becki DeCamp, Diane Welle, Julie Bellou, Ronda Hostetler, Beth Day Intervention: Chair: Angela Smith Marge Robinson, Ashley Padgett, Jennifer Hutton, Dina Schafer Pedagogy: Co-Chairs: Aimee Doherty and Amy Short Angela Smith, Marge Robinson, Planning: Chair: Christy DeSpain JoAnn Sawyer, Jason Hawkins, Adrienne Bach, Bev Hughes Professional Development: Chair: Cristie Haire Mari Harbin, Kristie Weber, Sulayne Kaelin, Amy Short, Christy DeSpain, Aimee Doherty, Ashley Padgett, Adrienne Bach Leadership: Co-Chairs: Adrienne Bach Building Leadership Team: Mari Harbin, Kristie Weber, Sulayne Kaelin, Jill Richardson, Amy Short, Aimee Doherty, Jamie Spear, Ashley Padgett, Angela Smith
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 6
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Description & Location of Curriculum
GCCS curriculum is aligned with state standards. Curriculum information is located in the main office as well as on the Greater Clark County Website. All certified staff has been trained and is participating Curriculum Mapping and Goal Clarity Windows. Classroom elementary teachers in grades K-5 have mapped the curriculum for: language arts, math, science, and social studies which are aligned to the State Curriculum Maps. GCCS schools will implement the Indiana College and Career Ready Standards. Performance data is linked to the maps and routinely reviewed to guide the process for improving instruction and aligning the formativeassessment process. Curriculum development occurs in the following areas: Language Arts Mathematics Science/Health Social Studies Library Media Skills Music Art Physical Education Technology Education
In order to understand the level of implementation of key programs and strategies, implementation data are collected and analyzed as evidenced by observations, walk-throughs, collaboration, and student work samples. Students failing ISTEP+ participate in remediation during the school day and/or after school programs. Supplemental programs are monitored and evaluated with assessments. Student grades and report cards are aligned with Indiana Academic Standards and ISTEP+ as evidenced by correlations of student grades with scores on ISTEP+. The intervention that will address critical areas will include: Full-day kindergarten After School through CIS In school remediation by Interventionists and classroom teachers -Tier II intensive instruction in reading and math for those who are below the current grade level. -Tier III is specifically designed to provide an alternative curriculum to students that are functioning more than 1 year below current grade level. Some implementation activities and persons responsible have changed to address building and district needs. Standardized assessments have remained the same and Local Assessments Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 7
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
have been added to each of the goal areas except attendance. Interventions have also changed due to additional research of best practices and their implications for our building. • • •
Our curriculum is aligned with CCR standards. 100% of teachers identify their CCR Standards within their daily lessons plans based on Goal Clarity Windows. Consistent language in the academic areas will follow the published ISTEP list provided by the DOE across grade level.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 8
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Titles and Descriptions of Assessment Instruments Used in Addition to ISTEP+ Elementary School
ELA Reading/Writing:
Applied Performance Based Assessments – These ELA assessments focus on Indiana College and Career Ready Standards providing students with exposure to open-ended response questions. Teachers score the applied assessments with Rubrics designed from State Assessments. The teacher created assessments are administered every two-three weeks then scored and analyzed by the teacher.
Writing: A district writing prompt is administered to K-5 students at the end of each quarter and scored with the Indiana Writing and Conventions Rubrics. Each quarter a different writing genre is addressed with quarter one and quarter four being the same genre. STAR: Grades K-5 teachers administer and analyze STAR Reading results three times a year. Acuity: Grades 2-5 teachers administer and analyze Acuity ELA three times per year
Math:
Applied Performance Based Assessments – These assessments focus on Indiana College and Career Ready Standards providing students with exposure to open-ended response questions. Teachers score the applied assessments with Rubrics designed from State Assessments. The teacher created assessments are administered every two-three weeks then scored and analyzed by the teacher. STAR: Grades K-5 teachers administer and analyze STAR results three times a year.
Acuity: Grades 2-5 teachers administer and analyze Acuity Math three times a year.
Science:
Acuity - Grade 4 teachers administer and analyze Acuity Science two times per year.
Social Studies:
Acuity - Grade 5 teachers administer and analyze Acuity Social Studies two times per year.
Technology:
21st Century Skills - Grade 5 teachers administer and analyze technology skills results at the end of each year.
Across the Curriculum:
Goal Clarity Window – Grades K-5 teachers create assessments aligned to standards and are administered every two - three weeks to assess Content standards taught. Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 9
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Mission, Vision, and Belief Mission: Lead GCCS Corporation in Academic Achievement.
Vision: Every student has a value added education at our school.
Beliefs: We will deliver on our promise to ensure all students are reading on level by Grade 3 utilizing academic frameworks. We will change the future of Charlestown one student at a time. At JJ, we find a way.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 10
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Jonathan Jennings Elementary School Comprehensive Needs Assessment Overview
An updated comprehensive needs assessment of all students in the school, including subgroups was used to review and revise the school wide comprehensive plan to improve teaching and learning. The needs assessment includes data collection and analysis as well as integration with key teaching strategies. The plan was developed in consultation with Director for Curriculum and Instruction, Supervisor for Assessment, Title I Supervisor, and Supervisor for School Improvement, Informational Services Coordinator, and Supervisor for Student Support Services, Director of Special Education and Bi-lingual Education. Parents, community members, teachers, and administrators will participate in reviewing and updating the plan through PL221 school wide planning committee meetings. Collaboration at grade level and cross grade level meetings, all staff provided input to the development of the plan.. The process and plan was and will be shared with parents during parent training opportunities and annual meetings. The Jonathan Jennings SWP/ PL221 School Improvement Plan is shared on the school’s website for access by parents and community members. Parents, community members, teachers, and administrators will participate in reviewing and updating the plan through PL221 school wide planning meetings. Results, analysis, and recommendations for improvement will be reported on Summative Assessment forms within the plan. The plan will be evaluated annually to determine whether the key strategies of the school wide program have increased the achievement of students, particularly the students who are the lowest achievers of academic standards on ISTEP+. Evaluation results are used to make necessary revisions to the plan. Jonathan Jennings utilizes a common 45 minute planning time for K-5 teachers once a week and two 40 minute staff professional development meetings a week. Special faculty meetings are often scheduled to address management issues.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 11
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Assessment Assessment Q1. How many/what % of students meet state standards? Have mastered which skills? Answer: Building wide totals for 2009-2010 in ISTEP+=ELA was 74% overall, and Math was 75% overall. Data Statement: Using current year Acuity data: 71% of 3rd graders, 68% of 4th graders, and 76% of 5th graders are meeting state standards in English/Language Arts. Using the same test data: 66% of 3rd graders, 64% of 4th graders, and 78% of 5th graders are meeting state standards in Math . Assessment Q2. Are some groups not performing as well as others? Answer: Yes-our subgroups are not performing as well as our majority group of white/Caucasian population. Data Statements: : ISTEP+ ELA 2010 26% of students did not pass. 44% of special needs students did not pass. 37% of free/reduced lunch students did not pass. ISTEP+ Math 2010 25% of students did not pass. 46% of special needs students did not pass. 25% of free/reduced lunch students did not pass. Assessment Q3. What are the critical errors made by students below mastery? Answer: Critical errors are reading comprehension and multi step math problem solutions. Data Statements: Assessment Q4. Are students showing adequate yearly progress; are #s of students not-passing decreasing/fewer? Answer: Students are showing AYP and in 2010 student overall % of not passing did decrease.
Data Statement: Based on ISTEP + data: ELA 2009 64% of students passed Math 2009 62% of students passed ELA 2010 74% of students passed (+ 10%) Math 2010 75% of students passed (+ 13%) Assessment Q5. How well are students meeting standards in non-ISTEP+ grades? Errors? Answer: Students are performing well in non-ISTEP grades based on Dibels and GCW assessments. The key errors were phonemic awareness, handwriting, spelling, making up story problems, comparing and sorting shapes, knowing morning, afternoon, yesterday, tomorrow, choosing the approach to solve a problem, using self correction strategies when reading. While some students were not proficient at other standards, the percentage not meeting each of those standards was less than 30%. The key errors were: Comma usage, Time, Measurement, Fact Families, Plot, Setting, Characters, Beginning, Middle, and End.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 12
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Data Statements: Of the 57 Kindergarteners, 95% or more did not master standards k.1.7, k.1.8, k.1.18, and k.6.1. Between 79% and 90% of the students did not master standards k.1.16, k.6.2, k.2.3, k.4.2, k.5.1, k.5.2, and k.6.1. Of the 32 standards analyzed on Goal Clarity Windows in 1st and 2nd grades, 19 standards were mastered by 80% or more of the students.
Assessment Q6. How many students read at/above gr. level? W/ comprehension? Answer: A high % of students read at or above grade level.
Data Statement: Kindergarten: 63/65 (97%) First Grade: 54/75 (72%) Second Grade: 55/69 (80%) Third Grade: 37/72 (51%) Fourth Grade: 39/75 (52%) Fifth Grade: 47/65 (72%) Assessment Q7. Do students w/ As, Bs, & Cs on report cards pass ISTEP+ (elem)? Answer 10%-25%, depending on grade level and subject area, do not pass ISTEP+ but do pass by their classroom report card scores.
Data Statements: In 2010, 81% of 3rd graders earned A’s, B’s and C’s in Language Arts and passed the ELA portion of ISTEP. 19% had A’s, B’s and C’s but did not pass. In 2010, 75% of 3rd graders earned A’s, B’s and C’s in Math and passed the Math portion of ISTEP. 25% had A’s, B’s and C’s but did not pass. In 2010, 87% of 4th graders earned A’s, B’s and C’s in Language Arts and passed the ELA portion of ISTEP. 13% had A’s, B’s and C’s but did not pass. In 2010, 90% of 4th graders earned A’s, B’s and C’s in Math but did not pass the Math portion of ISTEP. 10% had A’s, B’s and C’s but did not pass. Assessment Q9. How well prepared do Kdg. Students come to school? Answer: About 1/3 of students entering kindergarten qualified for Intervention. Data Statements: Reading: 44/65 (68%) students came into kindergarten able to recognize at least 20 letters out of 52 (capital and lowercase). 21/65 (32%) students needed intervention. 26/65 (40%) students received extra support with interventionist during the 2009-2010 school year. 24/26 (86%) students that received extra support with interventionist were at benchmark according to DIBELS by the end of the year. (The two students that did not make it to benchmark according to DIBELS were retained.) Math: 14/64 (22%) students came into kindergarten able to recognize numbers 1-20. 18/64 (28%) students came into kindergarten able to write numbers 1-20. 46/64 (72%) students came into kindergarten able to count to 20.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 13
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Culture Culture Q1. Are culturally appropriate strategies utilized in classrooms (racial, ethnic, language-minority, cultural, exceptional learning, and socioeconomic groups)? Answer: Teachers receive training and most have aware of culturally appropriate strategies and lessons. Data Statements: 12/25 teachers are trained in 6-Parck (ESL program) Art and Music projects focus on cultural awareness.
Culture Q2. Is the number of student disruptions kept to a minimum so that learning time for students is maximized? Answer: Meetings with teachers must be scheduled to not interfere with classroom instructional time. Dismissal changes are made to each room in the last 10 minutes of the day Data Statements: All announcements are made from the office at only the beginning and end of the day, unless severe emergency arises.
Culture Q3. Do we have a safe learning environment? Answer: JJES does have and promote a safe learning environment. Data Statements < 5% of office referrals are for unsafe behavior
Culture Q4. How well are our rules or procedures for behavior followed? Answer: Data shows that rules and procedures for proper behavior are mainly followed. Data Statements: 100% of staff and students are aware of “The JJ Way”-behavior plan.
Culture Q5. How do we inform families about state standards, student performance, grade level expectations, class policies & procedures? Answer There is weekly and monthly communication from the school to the homes Data Statements: 100% signed parent compacts and report cards. 20/20 classrooms send home weekly/monthly happenings.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 14
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Minimum of one monthly newsletter from the Principal. Parental phone calls are either made and returned in a timely manner,
Culture Q6. What level of attendance do we have at parent conf. Open house, other? Answer: JJES has high levels of parent partiipation Data Statements:
100% of parents meet or are contacted at both the October and February conferences. 95%+ attend conferences in person. -5% communicated by phone or note Culture Q7. What business partnerships do we have? With what outcomes? Role in decision-making? Answer: Our school qualifies for services form CIS (Community in Schools, 21st Century Scholars) We are also served by the CEEF council (Charlestown Excellence in Education Foundation) Data Statements:
100% of F/R Lunch children are eligible for CIS services. 32/475 students participate in Blessings in a Backpack. 13/475 students participate in the 21st Century Program 100% of students benefit from CEEF-Charlestown Initiative
Curriculum Curriculum Q1. Is curriculum aligned with state standards? Instruction? Are curriculum maps completed, reviewed and updated regularly? •
Answer: In accordance with district and state guidelines, Jonathan Jennings has adopted the Indiana Academic Standards as the curriculum. Curriculum is aligned with state standards and instruction using the State Core Standards for K-5 with Goal Clarity Windows, Jonathan Jennings Math Facts scope and sequences, and Daily Balanced Math and Literacy Review scope and sequences. Data Statement: 19/19 classroom teachers were surveyed and 19/19 or 100% of classroom teacher’s curriculum is aligned with the Indiana state standards. 100% of teachers are creating goal clarity windows on a weekly basis with their grade level. Windows are being created using the state core standards and reviewed by Goal Clarity/Mapping Consultant. Windows for each week can be viewed by visiting gcs.rubiconatlas.org
Curriculum Q2. Is staff fully implementing key programs trained in? Answer: Staff is implementing daily balanced math and literacy reviews and goal clarity windows. Data to prove implementation will come from the schedule, Goal Clarity Window results, Walkthroughs, Indiana Reading Framework, Daily balanced math and literacy review results turned into grade level leaders. (Math-Mrs. Doherty and Literacy-Ms. Weber)
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 15
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Data Statements: 19/19 teachers were surveyed and 19/19 or 100% of teachers teach whole group and small reading groups during the 90 minute reading block. 16/19 or 84% of teachers have implemented reading stations in their 90 minute reading block. 18/19 or 95% of teachers use writer’s workshop during their 45 min. writing block. 19/19 or 100% of teachers conduct daily intervention-Tier 2. 19/19 or 100% of teachers do daily balanced math and literacy in their classrooms. Curriculum Q3. How are Goal Clarity Windows being used? Answer:GCW are being used to plan all instruction , creation, and storage of lesson plans , assessments, and rubrics. Data Statement: 100% of teachers are creating goal clarity windows on a weekly basis with their grade level. Windows are being created using the state core standards and reviewed by Goal Clarity/Mapping Consultant. Windows for each week can be viewed by visiting gcs.rubiconatlas.org
Curriculum Q4. Are rubrics and exemplars being developed and used by teachers AND Students: Are state rubrics posted and used by students? Answer: Rubric training and discussions has occurred.. Each grade level has created and implemented the use of rubrics in their classroom through goal clarity windows. Data Statements: 54% of teachers are using rubrics to assess word problems, and 23% have students self-assess using rubrics in math. 79% of teachers are using rubrics to assess writing prompts, and 50% have students self-assess using rubrics in ELA 19/19 teachers were surveyed and 18/19 or 95% of teachers use rubrics on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. 9/18 or 50% of teachers use rubrics more that once per week. 19/19 or 100% of teachers use exemplary work as expectations/models for their student.
Curriculum Q5. Are students provided technology classes? How often? How assessed? Answer: Students are provided technology classes each week. Grades K-3 receives classes 1 time per week. Grades 4-5 receive classes 2 times per week.
Data Statement: Students have a lack of standardized technology curriculum for grades K-5 Grades K-3 receives classes 1 time per week. Grades 4-5 receive classes 2 times per week. Third graders take a TechLiteracy Assessment on the computer. This is a computer based assessment with multiple choice and application based questions. 4% (3/72) passed the assessment.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 16
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Curriculum Q6. How many/what percent of students are enrolled in Advanced Placement and or Honor courses? Served by the corporation’s highly Able program? Answer: A low % of students at JJES have qualified for the Highly Able program, Data Statement: 1% (3/476) students are served by the corporation’s Highly Able Program.
Intervention Intervention Q1. Are extended time interventions (i.e., tutoring, summer school, supplemental classes) increasing student learning? Answer: According to our Intervention Model-Yes Data statements: -100% of qualifying students are served by Tier II and III during each school day -12/12 5th graders and 11/11 4th graders in Read 180 improved their lexile scores from BOY to MOY assessment -30-45 mins, outside of core, is utilized in each grade level every day for ELA and for Math
Intervention Q2. What data is used to identify students, programs and personnel for our intervention program? Answer: Dibels data, lexile scores, acuity scores for each round, prior year ISTEP+ data, GCW results Data Statements: -100% of students not passing Spring IDTEP+ were identified and receive Tier II and Tier III as needed -Core/Tier I is received from the classroom teacher -Acuity results and GCW results/data is used to group and place as necessary. Intervention Q3. How often is student data reviewed for intervention groups? Answer: Weekly grade level meetings allow for GCW review. Standardized test data is reviewed as soon as availabl ( Acuity, SRI, ISTEP+,etc.) Data Statements: 100% of students participate in GCW work and assessments 100% of teachers attend weekly grade level meetings with principal and Title 1 coordinator. 3/3 interventionists meet with each grade level served at least monthly.
Intervention Q4. How is intervention data communicated with the regular classroom teacher? Answer: Grade level meetings are held with Interventionists no less than once a month. Meetings are called earlier whenever necessary.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 17
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Data Statements: 100% of Progress Monitoring data , i.e SRI data for Read 180 and System 44 students, Dibels, Scott Foreman, etc. is shared for each testing session. Any meeting can be called to discuss changed to Intervention.
Intervention Q5. What methods are used to evaluate and track the effectiveness of intervention initiatives? Answer: All interventionists keep data on each child. Classroom teachers collect and monitor their own flexible groups. Read 180 and System 44 create and track each student on the systems. Data Statement: -16/20 (80%) of teachers agree that the school core and intervention schedule enhances learning --18/20 (90%) of teachers agree that the school schedule enhances time on task
Pedagogy Pedagogy Q1. Is consistent language & strategies used across grades & classes within grades? Answer: Yes it is. Examples would be Balanced Math, Balanced Literacy, Exemplar/Problem Solving, Poster Method, 12 Powerful Words, Small Flexible reading groups, Tier Intervention, Rubrics, Word Walls, Self-Assessment, 4 square Data Statements: Based on walkthrough, MRF reports, GCW planning meetings and on-line postings 9/11 above are utilized in +90% of the grade levels and classrooms.
Pedagogy Q2. How much time is spent in teach, guided practice, independent practice? Answer: Building walk-throughs are conducted with superintendent as scheduled, during grade-level planning walks, and/or jus t by the principal. Discussion following centers on the items of T, GP, and IP. JJES will continue to move instruction to GP. Data Statements: 100% of staff have been a part of the discussion of T, GP, IP.
Pedagogy Q3. What methodologies are used consistently in our building? Answer: Writing=4 Square graphic organizer, balanced math, monthly math review, weekly math review tests, balanced literacy, poster method for problem solving, rubrics in GCW, ISTEP+ writing rubrics I do, We do, You do, JJ Way Data Statements: 100% of teachers use weekly math review sheets in some fashion
Pedagogy Q4. Do we have guidelines for homework that are consistent in each classroom? How do we ensure guidelines are adhered to?
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 18
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Answer: Not shown to be consistent across the grade levels. Data Statements: Majority shows that students are graded on pass/not pass the skill, but not on the homework being completed. Pedagogy Q5. What strategies are used to ensure student engagement? Answer: small groups, partners, technology in grades 3-5, verbal cues, physical cues, JJ Way, proximity, hocus pocus, positive reinforcement, dry erase, thumbs up and down sign language Data Statement: >90% of teachers use a signaling system of some kind within their classrooms daily.
Planning Planning Q1. Do students have enough time to learn? Answer: Students have enough time to learn. Data Statement: >5 hours of actual learning time each day. >90 minutes of reading, tier 2, and 60-75 minutes for math. 15/20 (75%) teachers agree that students have enough time to learn. Planning Q2. Does the school schedule enhance or hinder learning? Time on task? Answer: Our school schedule allows 90 minutes of uninterrupted reading time. This includes the mini-lesson, whole group, and small group instruction. Students are reading and participating in skill-related activities at all times. Data Statements: 16/20 (80%) teachers agree that the school schedule enhances learning. 18/20 (90%) agree that the school schedule enhances time on task. Comments made by those who think the schedule hinders: We need year-round school or longer days. Too much time spent on testing. Too many pull-out programs. The schedule is choppy. Reading in the afternoon is hard for primary grades. - We don’t have enough time for math intervention
Planning Q4. Are school improvement strategies monitored on a regular basis? Answer: The monitoring of school improvement strategies include: Balanced math: weekly and biweekly assessments – results are analyzed.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 19
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Balanced literacy: weekly and biweekly assessments – results are analyzed. Reading and math skills: weekly and Biweekly assessment. Results are analyzed by class and by grade-level as a whole. Reading level: Students test quarterly, using SRI (Scholastic Reading Inventory). Students who are far below proficient are tested biweekly and students who are below proficient are tested monthly using DIBELS TRC progress monitoring. Reading and math skills are also tested 3 times each year by Dibels (for grades k-2) and Acuity (for grades 3-5).
Data Statements: 20/20 (100%) teachers agree that school improvement strategies are monitored on a regular basis. Planning Q5. How is shared leadership demonstrated in the building? What opportunities are available for teacher leaders? Answer: Each grade level, including the special needs department, has at least one team leader. These leaders have the opportunity to participate in biweekly meetings with the principal and Title I coordinator to discuss any questions, concerns, or to share information. Team leaders are able to share their opinions with the principal before many final decisions (regarding school functions) are made. Teachers share areas of expertise. Leaders guide grade level teachers. Teachers lead sports and clubs. Great communication between grade level and school. Collaboration on planning. Opportunities to share ideas for improvement. Balanced math and literacy leaders. Data Statements: 100% of grade levels and special populations department has representation on the building leadership team. >90% of professional development is performed by building staff members.
Professional Development Professional Development Q1. What is the relationship of student achievement, state standards, & professional dev? Answer: All Professional Development at JJES related to student achievement, best practices, GCW creations, and data discussion for planning.
Data Statement : 100% attend (at a minimum) 3/10 PD sessions each week. Professional Development Q2. What impact has PD had on classroom practice? How do we know? How do we evaluate impact? Answer: Professional development drives all GCW usage and data results. Data Statements: 100% of grade level teachers plan common lessons and assessments each week 100% of PD is instructional in nature.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 20
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Professional Development Q3. What kinds of collaboration exist? How effective is each? Answer: Grade levels plan at least twice a week for GCW creation. Interventionists collaborate with grade level teachers Special population collaborate with grade level teachers 0 period allows for cross-grade level collaboration Data Statements: 100% attend (at a minimum) 3/10 PD sessions each week >90% of teachers state GCW are positive and effective.
Professional Development Q4. Does PD increase cultural competency? Answer: As a school, our PD reinforces competency in our building, due to discussion of research based instruction and common creation and usage of GCW. Data Statements: 100% attend (at a minimum) 3/10 PD sessions each week. 100% of grade level teachers plan common lessons and assessments weekly.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 21
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Elementary Summary Sheet for Key ISTEP+ Data English/Language Arts (ELA)
Mathematics (Math)
ELA - OVERALL
MATH - OVERALL
Number of students passing/total assessed (%) From each “Disaggregation Summary Report”
Grade* Spring 12 61/72=86% 3 55/70=79% 4 60/73=82% 5 Total
176/215=82%
Spring 13
Spring 14
69/82=84% 59/67=88 63/74=85
65/79=82% 73/85=86% 60/70=86%
191/223=86%
198/234=85%
ELA - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 3 Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
*/7 34/40=85 */6 */3 47/54=87%
8/12=67% 31/42=74% */5 */3 61/71=86%
6/10=60% 27/39=69% */9 */2 51/57=89%
Number of students passing/total assessed (%) From each “Disaggregation Summary Report”
Grade* 3 4 5 Total
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
*/6 21/33=64 */8 */2 44/53=83%
*/6 31/36=86 */6 */3 44/47=94
*/9 33/43=77% */8 */3 63/73=86%
Spring 13
Spring 14
*/3 30/40=75% 8/11=73% */3 42/48=88%
*/7 27/35=77% */9 */3 47/55=85%
*/8 29/38=78% */9 */3 44/50=88%
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
180/215=84%
179/223=80%
201/234=86%
Spring 12 */7 31/40=78 */6 */3 42/54=78
Spring 13 7/12=58% 25/42=60% */5 */3 50/71=70%
Spring 14 5/10=50% 24/39=62% */9 *2 46/57=81%
MATH - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 4 Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12 */6 24/33=73% */8 */2 45/53=85
Spring 13 */6 28/36=78% */6 */3 41/47=87%
Spring 14 */9 32/43=74% */8 */3 62/73=85%
MATH - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 5
Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Spring 12
Spring 14 61/79=77% 71/85=84% 69/70=99%
Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
ELA - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 5 Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 13 57/82=70% 56/67=84% 66/74=89%
MATH - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 3
ELA - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 4 Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Spring 12 58/72=77% 57/70=81% 65/73=89%
Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12 */3 34/40=85% */11 */3 44/48=92%
Spring 13 */7 29/35=83% */9 */3 50/55=91%
Spring 14 */8 36/37=97% */9 */3 49/50=98%
Page 22
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
ELA-TOTAL SUBGROUPS: All Grades Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
*/16 85/113=75% */25 */8 133/155=86%
*/25 89/113=78% */20 */9 152/173=88%
12/27=44% 89/120=74% 20/26=77% 8/8=100% 158/180=88%
Science
MATH-TOTAL SUBGROUPS: All Grades Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
*/16 89/113=79% */25 */8 131/155=85%
*/25 82/113=73% */20 */9 141/173=82%
17/27=63% 92/119=77% 21/26=81% 7/8=88% 157/180=87%
Social Studies
SCIENCE - OVERALL
SOCIAL STUDIES - OVERALL
Number of students passing/total assessed (%) From each “Disaggregation Summary Report”
Number of students passing/total assessed (%) From each “Disaggregation Summary Report”
Grade* Spring 12 Spring 13 Spring 14 50/70=71% 59/67=88% 69/85=81% 4 Total
50/70=71%
59/67=88%
69/85=81%
Science - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 4 Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12
Spring 13
Spring 14
*/6 17/33=52% */8 */2 40/53=75%
*/6 31/36=86% */6 */3 44/47=94%
*/9 29/43=67% */8 */3 61/73=84%
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Grade* Spring 12 51/73=70% 5 Total
51/73=70%
Spring 13
Spring 14
50/74=68%
55/70=79%
50/74=68%
55/70=79%
Social Studies - KEY SUBGROUPS: Grade 5 Number of students passing/total assessed (%)
Group Sp Ed Free/Red LEP Black White
Spring 12 */3 26/40=65% */11 */3 36/48=75%
Spring 13 */7 17/35=49% */9 */3 38/55=69%
Spring 14 */8 25/37=68% */9 */3 40/50=80%
Page 23
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
SPRING 2013 IREAD RESULTS JJES Summer 2013
Total Tested 79 8
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Pass 71 4
% Passed 90% 94%
Page 24
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Conclusions/Guiding Principles/Strategies Conclusions/Guiding Principles
Implementation Strategies
ELA
ELA
Guiding Principle 1: Utilizing the GCW model will include: CCR standards, common grade level assessments and rubrics, direct vocabulary instruction, and DOK planning
1. Utilize an uninterrupted 90 minute literacy block that included Teach, Guided Practice, and Independent Practice. 2. Utilize a 30 and/or 45 minute Intervention block for Tier II and Tier III.
Guiding Principle 2: Developing common assessments will help guide instruction and allow students to self assess for improving skills
3. GCW creation will guide instruction and the development of common assessments and rubrics
Guiding Principle 3: Developing student assessment and product assessment rubrics will guide instruction and self assessment for improving skills by all students. (Marzano-Transforming Classroom Grading)
4. Focus all instructional planning for GCW with CCR Standards in all grades. 5. Reading Framework and Opportunity School guidelines will be followed.
Guiding Principle 4 : Using a balanced literary plan, based on the Reading Framework that includes: comprehension, vocabulary, fluency, phonics, and phonemic awareness.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
6. All assessments will include multiple choice and open-ended response questions.
Page 25
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Math
Guiding Principle 1: Utilizing the GCW model will include: CCR standards, common grade level assessments and rubrics, direct vocabulary instruction, and DOK planning. Guiding Principle 2: A Balanced Math program must include: computation skill practice, problem solving opportunities, mastery of math facts, units of conceptual understanding, and common formative assessments.
Guiding Principle 3: Problem solving activities allow students to think through rigorous math problems and equations while teaching logical/systematic processes.
____________________________________
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Math
1. GCW creation will guide instruction and the development of common assessments and rubrics
2. Focus all instructional planning for GCW with CCR Standards in all grades. 3. Administer Daily Math Review with fidelity. 4. Utilize and uninterrupted 60 minute math block that includes teach, guided practice, and independent practice. 5. All assessments will include multiple choice and open-ended response questions. 6. Utilize problem solving methods when completing the Poster Method.
_____________________________________
Page 26
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
PL221 Goal Template ELA GOAL 1 By Spring 2015 > 88.1% of students at Grades 3,4,5 will meet State Standards in ELA as measured by ISTEP+/ISTAR. By Spring 2015 > 95.7 % of students at Grade 3 will meet State Standards in Reading as measured by IREAD-3. Benchmarks: On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 79.4% of students in the Free and Reduced subgroup will meet State Standards in ELA in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 63.5% of students in the Special Ed. subgroup will meet State Standards in ELA in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 71.2% of students in the English Language Learner subgroup will meet State Standards in ELA in grades 3-5.
Math GOAL 2 By Spring 2015 > 89.4% of students at Grades 3,4,5 will meet State Standards in Mathematics as measured by ISTEP+/ISTAR. Benchmarks: On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 82% of students in the Free and Reduced subgroup will meet State Standards in Math in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 71.2% of students in the Special Ed. subgroup will meet State Standards in Math in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 82% of students in the English Language Learner subgroup will meet State Standards in Math in grades 3-5.
GOAL 3 By Spring 2015 Jonathan Jennings School attendance rate will be 97% or higher. By Spring 2015 95% of students at Jonathan Jennings School will have received no behavioral referrals for the 2014-2015 school year.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 27
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (ELA) ELA GOAL 1 By Spring 2015 > 88.1 % of students at Grades 3,4,5 will meet State Standards in ELA as measured by ISTEP+/ISTAR. By Spring 2015 > 95.7% of students at Grade 3 will meet State Standards in Reading as measured by IREAD-3. Benchmarks: On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 79.4% of students in the Free and Reduced subgroup will meet State Standards in ELA in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 63.5% of students in the Special Ed. subgroup will meet State Standards in ELA in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 71.2% of students in the English Language Learner subgroup will meet State Standards in ELA in grades 3-5. System
Assessment
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Guiding Principle Strategy/Activity/Implementation Guiding Principle 1: Leading students to read every day, write every day, and publish every quarter to raise achievement. Guiding Principle 2: Utilizing the GCW model with CCR Standards, common grade level assessments and rubrics, direct vocabulary instruction, and DOK planning. Guiding Principle 3: Developing student assessment and product assessment rubrics will guide instruction and self assessment for improving skills by all students. (Marzano-Transforming Classroom Grading) Guiding Principle 4 : Using a balanced literary plan, based on the Reading Frameworks that includes: comprehension, vocabulary, fluency, phonics, and phonemic awareness. Strategy 1 - Administer common Goal Clarity Windows and assessments to track student progress and plan instruction. Strategy 2 – Administer and progress monitor all students through STAR, Acuity, Running Records, and LID. Strategy3 –Progress monitor intervention students every three weeks using STAR assessment. Strategy 4 - Administer Writing benchmark four times per year to help guide instruction.
•
•
Evaluation Results/Revisions All teachers will continue to create lessons, plan instruction, and formulate assessments in the GCW format. CCR Standards will guide all planning and instruction. Teachers have committed to the following strategies and activities.
Monitoring: • Teachers will analyze student responses for successes and challenges using common Goal Clarity Window (GCW) assessments and benchmarks. • Grade level teachers will keep assessment analyzing sheets that will be reviewed at Page 28
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
• • • Curriculum
Culture
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Strategy 1 – Teachers will utilize the Literacy Framework to promote academic progress. Strategy 2 - Teachers will utilize Chromebooks to deliver instruction and assessments in third thru fifth grade from the 1:1 Technology District Initiative. Strategy 3 – Teachers will utilize the Frayer Model and Cornell Notetaking method for vocabulary, skill, and concept development. Strategy 4- All teachers will participate in walkthroughs where discussion will be based on: student engagement, “Who is doing the work”, feedback systems, rigor, relationships, and relevance. Strategy 5- All teachers will participate in engaging students in reading every day, writing every day, and publishing once a quarter. Strategy 6 - Teachers will utilize graphic organizers to enhance learning. Strategy 1 -All will follow the JJ Way/PRIDE for school wide expectations and guidelines. Strategy 2 - During orientation/Open House, educate parents on strategies that our school is using to improve instruction. Strategy 3 - Parents will have the opportunity to attend classrooms on event days such as: classroom parties, game day, job fair, etc., and they may plan to eat lunch with their children. Strategy 4 – Weekly newsletters by classroom teachers and monthly newsletters by the principal will be used and monitored for communication.
weekly grade level meetings. Weekly GCW data discussions at grade level. Walkthroughs will show matching of the GCW to instruction. Using assessment data, IMPACT groups will be adjusted according to student progress.
Monitoring: • • •
Teachers will analyze common assessment data at grade level meetings. District implemented technology assessment will be analyzed. Weekly MRF will be used to document collaboration and grade level planning.
Monitoring: • • •
Attendance sheet will be collected after each family event. Surveys created in school and in corporation for parents, staff, and students when necessary. Leadership team will work with teachers to schedule and plan literacy nights and open Page 29
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Strategy 5- 5th grade teaches will meet with 6th grade teachers in spring to discuss placement for the incoming students. Strategy 6- 5th grade students and parents are invited to attend an open house at the middle school in May (evening). Strategy 7- 5th graders visit the middle school for a portion of a school day in May.
•
houses to improve communication between home and school. Obtain parent/teacher feedback on the transition.
Intervention
Tier 1: Strategy 1 - Adapt classroom GCW to allow additional time on needed standards. Strategy 2 - Continue a 90 minute core literacy block and a 45 minute writing block. Strategy 3 - Differentiate learning during the 90 minute literacy block by grouping students according to their needs. Tier 2: Strategy 1 - An Intervention schedule during IMPACT block will provide at least an additional 30 minutes of reading instruction to struggling readers. Strategy 2 - STAR, Acuity, Running Records, and Letter Identification data will be used to monitor and guide movement within and out of Intervention groupings during IMPACT block. Strategy 3- Utilize Read 180 and System 44 for students in need of intervention. Tier 3: Strategy 1- Progress monitoring data and collaboration between interventionist and classroom teacher will determine support needed to gain accelerated growth.
Monitoring: • STAR will be given every three weeks to progress monitor students participating in intervention. • Intervention Team will meet monthly to discuss progress of intervention students and programs/frameworks. • Student progress data will be kept by all providing Intervention. • Constant review of the Core and Intervention schedules; movement of students will occur as needed. • Weekly GCW meetings
Planning/Leadership
Strategy 1 -Define components of literacy block aligned to the Indiana Reading Framework. Strategy 2 –Building Leadership Team members will facilitate grade level discussions and establish GCW exemplars and rubrics for each grade level.
Monitoring: • Based on student GCW data, revisions will be made as needed. • Walkthroughs will be conducted by the principal to monitor implementation.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 30
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Strategy 3 – The literacy block will consist of whole group and small group instruction. Strategy 4 – Literacy lessons will be standards based and in GCW form. Strategy 5 - Create intervention/enrichment groups using current student data. Pedagogy
Professional Development
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Strategy 1 – GCWs will include common student engagement activities and common assessment formats. Strategy 2 – Utilize rubrics and exemplars for student self-assessment. Strategy 4 – Use total participation techniques to promote student engagement in the classroom. Strategy 5 - Focused teaching and revision (Teach, guided practice, and independent practice that is explicit and engaging).
Monitoring:
Strategy 1 - Professional development will focus on teacher collaboration plans for implementation of GCW and all pedagogy pieces during Period 0 meetings. Strategy 2 – Use of Cornell Notes, Frayer Model for vocabulary and concept development, and Gradual Release Model will be reviewed continually during period 0 meetings.
Monitoring: • MRF will document all PD sessions. • Student data will be used to track the effectiveness of PD.
• • •
Principal and teacher walkthroughs will be used to monitor implementation. Period 0 will be used to demonstrate strategies. MRF will document the discussion and implementation.
Page 31
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (Math) Math GOAL 2 By Spring 2015 > 89.4% of students at Grades 3,4,5 will meet State Standards in Mathematics as measured by ISTEP/ISTAR. Benchmarks: On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 82% of students in the Free and Reduced subgroup will meet State Standards in Math in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 71.2% of students in the Special Ed. subgroup will meet State Standards in Math in grades 3-5. On the Spring 2015 ISTEP+, 82% of students in the English Language Learner subgroup will meet State Standards in Math in grades 3-5. System
Assessment
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Guiding Principle Strategy/Activity/Implementation Guiding Principle 1: Utilizing the GCW model with include: CCR Standards, common grade level assessments and rubrics, direct vocabulary instruction, and DOK planning. Guiding Principle 2: A Balanced Math program must include: computation skill practice, problem solving opportunities, mastery of math facts, units of conceptual understanding, and common formative assessments. Guiding Principle 3: Problem solving activities allow students to think through rigorous math problems and equations while teaching logical/systematic processes.
Strategy 1- Administer assessments according to the district calendar to track student progress and plan remediation. Strategy 2- Administer Balanced Math/Daily Math Review assessments to monitor student progress weekly/biweekly.
Evaluation Results/Revisions •
• •
All teachers will continue to create lessons, plan instruction, and formulate common assessments in the GCW format. CCR Standards will guide all planning and instruction. Teachers have committed to the following strategies and activities. Professional Growth Points will be issued to teachers for participating in the professional development included in this plan.
Monitoring: • Teachers will analyze student responses for successes and challenges using common Goal Page 32
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Strategy 3- Use STAR, Acuity, and Daily Math Review assessments to benchmark and progress monitor students. • • •
Curriculum
`
Culture
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Clarity Windows (GCW) assessments and benchmarks. Grade level teachers will keep assessment analyzing sheets that will be reviewed at grade level meetings. GCW data discussions at grade level. Walkthroughs will show matching of the GCW to instruction
Strategy 1- Follow the district quarterly pacing guides and curriculum map. Strategy 2- Use Goal Clarity Window results to gage student mastery of math skills. Strategy 3- Spend 45 minutes every two weeks working through a problem solving lesson that involves student interaction and collaboration. Strategy 4- Continue to work on the development of DOK within GCW. Strategy 5- Align GCW standards and assessments to CCR Standards, classroom activities and technology at each grade level. Strategy 6- Develop and align instructional rubrics on GCW units. Strategy 7- All teachers will participate in walkthroughs where discussion will be based on: student engagement, “Who is doing the work”, feedback systems, rigor, relationships, and relevance.
Monitoring:
Strategy 1- All will follow the JJ Way/PRIDE for school wide expectations and guidelines.
Monitoring: • Attendance sheet will be collected after each
• • • • • • •
Teachers will analyze common assessment data at grade level meetings. District implemented technology assessment will be analyzed. School technology implementation will be analyzed. Weekly MRF will be posted and used to document collaboration and grade level planning. During grade level meetings, if assessments do not match chosen standards, teachers revise GCW and a the matching assessment Weekly GCW grade level meeting 0 period meetings
Page 33
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Strategy 2- Develop differentiated classroom activities to support subgroup needs to master open ended questions. Strategy 3 - During orientation/Open House, educate parents on strategies that our school is using to improve instruction. Strategy 4 - Parents will have the opportunity to attend classrooms on event day such as: classroom parties, game day, Family Math Carnival, etc., and they may plan to eat lunch with their children. Strategy 5 – Weekly newsletters by classroom teachers and monthly newsletters by the principal will be used and monitored for communication.
• •
family event. Surveys created in school and in corporation for parents, staff, and students when necessary. Leadership team will work with teachers to schedule and plan Family Night and open houses to improve communication between home and school.
Intervention
Tier 1: Strategy 1 - Adapt classroom GCW to allow additional time on needed standards. Strategy 2 - Daily Math Review, GCW assessments, and STAR data will be used to plan instruction. Strategy 3 - Differentiate learning during math block by grouping students according to their needs. Tier 2: Strategy 1 - An Intervention schedule during IMPACT block will provide additional instruction to struggling students. Strategy 2 - STAR, Acuity, and number identification data will be used to monitor and guide movement within and out of intervention groupings during IMPACT block. Tier 3: Strategy 1- Progress monitoring data and collaboration between interventionist and classroom teacher will determine support needed to gain accelerated growth.
Monitoring: • Intervention teachers will meet with grade level teachers regularly and document these meetings on the MRF form. • Student profile sheets will be kept by all providing intervention. • Constant review of the core and intervention schedules; movement of students will occur as needed. • Weekly GCW meetings
Planning/Leadership
Strategy 1- Utilize STAR, Acuity, GCWs, and Daily Math Review Data to plan instruction. Strategy 2 - Building Leadership Team members will facilitate grade
Monitoring: • Based on student GCW data, revisions will be made as needed.
*Include Tier I, II and III
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 34
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
level discussions and collaborate on student progress. Strategy 3 - Continue to review the Balanced Math Program consisting of whole group and small group instruction. Strategy 4 - Math instruction will be standards based and in GCW form.
• •
Walkthroughs will be conducted by the principal to monitor implementation. GCW will be monitored.
Pedagogy
Strategy 1 – GCWs will include common student engagement activities and common assessment formats. Strategy 2 – Utilize rubrics and exemplars for student self-assessment. Strategy 4 – Use total participation techniques to promote student engagement in the classroom. Strategy 5 - Focused teaching and revision (Teach, guided practice, and independent practice that is explicit and engaging).
Monitoring: • Principal and teacher walkthroughs will be used to monitor implementation. • Period 0 • MRF will document the discussion and implementation.
Professional Development
Strategy 1 - Focus on teacher collaboration plans for implementation of GCW and all pedagogy pieces during Period 0 meetings. Strategy 2 – Use of Cornell Notes, Frayer Model for vocabulary and concept development, and Gradual Release Model will be reviewed continually during period 0 meetings. Strategy 3- PD focus on student data from open ended assessments; T/G/IP; Differentiation; Engagement activities; Collaboration.
Monitoring: • MRF will document all PD sessions. • Student data will be used to track the effectiveness of PD.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 35
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (Behavior/Attendance) GOAL 3 By Spring 2015 Jonathan Jennings School attendance rate will be 97% or higher. By Spring 2015 95% of students at Jonathan Jennings School will have received no behavioral referrals for the 2013-14 school year.
System
Assessment
Curriculum
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Guiding Principle Strategy/Activity/Implementation Guiding Principle 1: Plans in place to promote PRIDE (Persistence, Respectfulness, Initiative, Dependability, Efficiency) helps students reach their full potential behaviorally and academically. Guiding Principle 2: Relationships with students are important for understanding who they are, how they learn, their challenges and obstacles, and their goals and dreams (Kafele) Guiding Principle 3: A positive school climate shapes the attitude of the students and staff. Strategy 1 - Use Power School/SWIS report analysis to gather data regarding student office discipline referrals, in school suspension, and out of school suspension. Strategy 2 – PBIS Intervention and support team will meet bi-weekly to evaluate Tier 2 and Tier 3 behavior student plans and progress made. Strategy 3 – Ongoing review of attendance data and parent notification of excessive absences. Strategy 4- Office Discipline Referral is consistently utilized by staff. Strategy 1 – Teachers will present lessons covering school wide behavior expectations. Strategy 2 - Teachers will teach weekly PRIDE expectations using a collection of developed lesson plans, videos, and demonstrations.
•
Evaluation Results/Revisions Teachers are committed to the school wide PBIS Behavior Plan.
• •
SWIS PBIS Intervention and Support Team meetings
• •
Weekly Power School reports Teacher observation and documentation
•
Building Leadership Team meetings
• •
PBIS intervention and support team meeting Teacher observation and documentation
•
Teacher and Principal walkthroughs
Page 36
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Culture
Intervention
*Include Tier I, II and III
Strategy 1 - Through Tier 1,2, and 3 course work and lessons students will develop social skills which will bring about belonging and school pride. Strategy 2- Continue school wide positive reinforcement plan using Pride Bucks to promote appropriate behaviors with weekly and quarterly incentives. Strategy 3- Expectations of PRIDE behavior intervention and support plan will be posted in each classroom and in all areas of the building. Strategy 4- A sense of school pride and respect for others will be instilled in students through Magnificent Mateys, Kindness Clubs, Service Clubs, and character pledge recited each morning.
•
PBIS Intervention and Support Team meetings
•
Teacher observation and documentation
• • •
Building Leadership Team meetings Teacher and principal walkthroughs Meeting record forms
Tier 1: Strategy 1 – Walkthroughs will be conducted to ensure that Tier 1 supports are in place throughout the school. Strategy 2 - Daily lessons will be taught to promote personal best, respect, integrity, safety, and engagement in learning.
• •
Power School log entries PBIS intervention and support team meetings
• • •
Teacher observation and documentation Parent communication logs Building Leadership Team meetings
• •
Teacher and Principal walkthroughs SWIS
Tier 2: Strategy 1 - Parent notification will be required for any student qualifying for Tier 2 behavior intervention. Strategy 2 - A behavior intervention schedule during IMPACT block will provide additional instruction to students that qualify for Tier 2. Strategy 3 – Teacher observation, SWIS data, office referral, in school suspension, and out of school suspension data will be used to monitor and guide movement within and out of intervention groupings during IMPACT block. Tier 3: Strategy 1- Parent conference must be held to discuss plan for all students qualifying for Tier 3 behavior intervention. Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 37
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Strategy 2- Tier 3 intervention students will meet with interventionists weekly to discuss progress of individual behavior plan. Strategy 3 – Social skills and replacement behaviors will be taught like academic lessons with specific components. Planning/Leadership
Pedagogy
Professional Development
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Strategy 1 - PBIS intervention and support team will review data to determine continued intervention needs and teacher professional development needs. Strategy 2 – Intervention Team meeting will meet bi-weekly to discuss progress monitoring data for intervention students.
Strategy 1 – Teachers display a wide range of skills and abilities that lead to creating a positive learning environment where all students can succeed both academically and personally. Strategy 2 – Use student engagement activities such as collaboration, discussion, and reflection during social skills lessons. Strategy 3 – Positive student behaviors will be acknowledged and celebrated daily, weekly, and quarterly.
• •
Power School log entries PBIS Intervention and support team meetings
• • •
Teacher observation and documentation Parent communication logs Building Leadership Team meetings
• •
Teacher and Principal walkthroughs SWIS Data
• •
Teacher and Principal walkthroughs PBIS Intervention and Support Team meetings
•
Teacher lesson plans
Strategy 1 – Period 0 meetings will be used for review of effective classroom management strategies and positive behavior plans in place. Strategy 2 – Period 0 meetings will be used for review and revision of positive behavior intervention and support school wide plan.
Page 38
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
JJES P.L. 221 Calendar 2014-2015 Greater Clark County Schools Week
Professional Development
Group
Monitoring Who – How monitored How results are used
July 28-August 1, 2014
August 4-8, 2014
August 11-15, 2014
August 18-22, 2014
August 25-29, 2014
September 1-5, 2014
NO SCHOOL, Sept. 1
July 28th Welcome and Kick-off at CHS July 29th Corporation Training at Jeff High July 30th Building Level Professional Day Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis *Self Evaluations Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) Book Study Groups GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
District District Principal Smith Bach BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Smith Bach BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams Smith Bach BLT Grade Level Data Teams
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Page 39
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
September 8-12, 2014
September 15-19, 2014
September 22-26, 2014
September 29-October 3, 2014
October 20-24, 2014
October 27-31, 2014
November 3-7, 2014
Teacher only Nov. 4
Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study Groups Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Padgett Hutton E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach Smith BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams Spear BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Page 40
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
November 10-14, 2014
November 17-21, 2014
November 24-28, 2014
NO SCHOOL, Nov. 26-28
December 1-5, 2014
December 8-12, 2014
December 15-19, 2014
January 5-9, 2015
January 12-16, 2015
Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Blaydes BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach Smith BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams Richardson BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach Smith BLT
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Page 41
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study January 19-23, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery NO SCHOOL , Jan. 19 Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis January 26-30, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis February 2-6, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis February 9-13, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study February 16-20, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery NO SCHOOL or snow Week One: Literacy make up– Feb. 16 GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis February 23-27, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis March 2-6, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams Harbin BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach Smith BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams Kaelin BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level
Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through Page 42
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
March 9-13, 2015
March 16-20, 2015
GCW/Data Analysis Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week One: Literacy GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis
Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis April 13-17, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis April 20-24, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis Book Study April 27- May 1, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery NO SCHOOL or snow Week One: Literacy make up– May 1 GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis May 4-8, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Two: Balanced Math GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis April 6-10, 2015
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Data Teams Bach Smith BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams
MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
Smith BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams Padgett Hutton E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach Smith BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
BLT Grade Level Data Teams Doherty Cage Math Trainer Grade Level Data Teams
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Page 43
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Quarterly Focus: Mastery Week Three: College and Career Readiness (PBIS & Digital Citizenship) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis May 18-22, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Mastery NO SCHOOL or snow Week Four: Pedagogy (Relevance, Gradual make up– May 22 Release and Grading) GCW Development GCW/Data Analysis May 25-29, 2015 Quarterly Focus: Grading Practices NO SCHOOL– May EOY 25 May 11-15, 2015
June 1-5, 2015 Last student day- June 3 Last Teacher day-June 4
Quarterly Focus: Grading Practices EOY
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Hutton Padgett E-Learning PBIS Team Grade Level Data Teams Bach Smith BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams
MRF/Walk Through Lesson Plans Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams
Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
BLT Principal/AIC Grade Level Data Teams
Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through Lesson Plans/Walk Through MRF/Data Binders
Page 44
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
No statutes and/or rules will be waived by Jonathan Jennings Elementary School.
Spring, 2014 Planning
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 45
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Bibliography
Ainsworth, L., Christinson,(2006) J. Five Easy Steps to a Balanced Math Program. Archer, A. and Hughes, C. (2011) Explicit Instruction Effective and Efficient Teaching. Bell, L. ( 2005 ) 12 Powerful Words, That Increase Test Scores and Help Close the Achievement Gap Chappuis, Jan (2009). Seven Strategies of Assessment for Learning. Fielding, L., Kerr, N., and Rosier, P (2007). Annual Growth For All Students, Catch-Up Growth For Those Who Are Behind. Gould, J. and Gould E.J. (1999) Four Square Writing Methods. Grace, K. (2007) Phonics and Spelling Through Phoneme-Grapheme Mapping. Honig, B., Diamond, L., and Gutlohn, L. (2008) Teaching Reading Sourcebook Marzano, R. (2009). Six Steps to Better Vocabulary Instruction. Educational Leadership, 67 (1), 83-84. Marzano, R., Pickering, D. (2005) Building Academic Vocabulary Teacher’s Manual Marzano, R., Pickering, D. & Pollack, J. (2001). Classroom Instruction that Works. Marzano, R. & Pickering, D. (2011). The Highly Engaged Classroom. Morris, A. (2005) Vocabulary Unplugged… Owocki, G. (2010) The RTI Planning Book K-6. Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 46
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Stiggins, R., Arter, J., Chappuis, J., and Chappuis, S. (2006). Classroom Assessment for Student Learning Doing It Right-Using It Well Vaughn, S. and Lina-Thompson, S. (2004) Research-Based Methods of Reading Instruction Grades K-3. Whitaker, T. (2004) What Great Teachers Do Differently: 14 Things That Matter Most.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 47
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
READING PLAN GRR Model for Strategy Instruction (Used in conjunction with current JJ practices)
⇔
Teacher Regulated
Student Regulated
Reading Aloud
Shared Reading
Guided Reading
Independent Reading
• Teacher reads aloud, stopping periodically to model the strategy through a think-aloud • Teacher gives explanation of the strategy • The teacher demonstrates with a brief modeling of how the strategy is used to understand the text
• Teacher and students practice the strategy together with the teacher reading and students helping to think through the text • The teacher purposely guides large-group discussion • The teacher scaffolds the students attempts to use the strategy and provides support and feedback
• The teacher provides support as the students read in small groups
• Students apply their knowledge and strategies while reading alone or with partners • Students use strategies on their own and with partners • Students and the teacher provide feedback • Students apply strategy across genres, settings and contexts
• I do, you watch.
• I do, you help
• The teacher guides students use of the strategy providing support as needed • Students share how the strategy helped them while reading • The teacher assesses and responds to students needs (see Characteristics of Text Levels for observable behaviors) • You do, I help
• You do, I watch
Text Selection • Teacher choice
• Managed choice, matched to • Student choice students needs Source: Creating Lifelong Readers Through Independent Reading, Moss and Young, IRA Publications, 2010, pp. 94 (Table 13) Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
• Teacher choice
Page 48
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Literacy Framework --- How We Teach Strategies and Skills Using a Gradual Release Model Reading is comprehension. We must have a context for understanding the importance of foundations skills, such as phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, but the critical importance of focusing on vocabulary and comprehension. Guiding Principles: 1. Independent Reading/ Read to Yourself: The best way to become a better reader is to practice each day, with books you choose, on your independent level. It soon becomes a habit. 2. Partner Read/ Read to Someone: Reading to someone allows for more time to practice strategies, helping you work on fluency and expression, check for understanding, hear your own voice, and share in the learning community. 3. Work on writing/ Response to Reading: Just like reading, the best way to become a better writer is to practice writing each day. 4. Listen to Reading: We hear examples of good literature and fluent reading. We learn more words, thus expanding our vocabulary and becoming better readers. Focus Lesson --- Establishing Purpose and Modeling/ Demonstration Phase --- Teacher has 100% responsibility -- “I do it” 1. Instruction begins with the teacher. Inductively or explicitly the teacher instructs students on the strategy, skill, or procedure. The responsibility belongs to the teacher. 2. Establish a purpose and model teacher’s own thinking (i.e., think-aloud to solve problems, understand directions or in the case of literacy, comprehend text using a strategy or skill) 3. Teacher carries the responsibility for “knowing” 4. Teacher models the procedure, skill, strategy or standard using a read aloud (modeling the procedure, strategy, skill or standard in grade-level or above level text) 5. Components of the gradual release model can be used during this phase. Teacher does the modeling to emphasize cognition & meta-cognition: a. Teacher names the strategy, skill, procedure or standard. (what the strategy is) b. Teacher states the purpose of the strategy, skill, procedure, or standard. (why is it important) c. Teacher explains when the procedure, strategy, skill or standard is used (explicitly describe the strategy and when/ how it should be used) d. Teacher uses analogies to link prior knowledge to new learning. (provide examples) e. Teacher demonstrates how the procedure, skill, strategy, or standard is completed 1) Teacher thinks aloud to model the mental processes she/ he uses when she/ he reads; model the strategy in action 2) Teacher demonstrates how to apply the strategy successfully; 3) Then involves students collaboratively using the strategy; students share their thinking processes with each other (Think-Pair-Share; EEKK) during large-group discussions; teacher checks understanding based on students’ oral response 4) Link/ reinforce demonstration to skill or strategy chart (if appropriate)
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 49
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Guided Instruction/ Practice --- Collaborative Learning --- Instruction, Practice and Application 1. At this point, students “practice” the strategy or skill. Depending on where students’ ability to successfully complete the task, students may practice individually, in small groups, or with a partner. Guided practice reinforces the learning from Guided Instruction. 2. Students consolidate their thinking and understanding 3. Negotiate with peers 4. Discuss ideas and information 5. Engage in inquiry with other students allowing them to use what they learned during focus lessons and guided instruction 6. It is not the time to introduce new information to students, but rather a time for students to apply information in novel situations or to engage in a spiral review of previous knowledge Opportunities for Guided Practice and Collaborative Learning Guided Instruction/ Practice --Partner Reading – Read Listen to Reading/ Comprehension Review Word Work “You do it, I help” --- Teacher/ student “You do it” to Someone Repeated Reading Practice and Application “You do it” “You do it” “You do it” Cues, Questions, and Scaffolding 1. Students reading w/ a 1. Good readers are strategic readers and Word work has several foci: 1. Monitoring for students use 1. building grade-appropriate sight partner 1. Fluency teachers must explore and provide guided of and application of the 2. Students share their 2. Accuracy instruction based on a research-anchored vocabulary strategies I am teaching in thinking processes with 3. Expression framework for the strategies that good 2. decoding/ word recognition skills guided reading lesson as each other during paired 4. Student(s) use Ireaders use; making connections between 3. structural analysis skills well as review/ reinforce reading. chart for Listen to those research-based strategies and the 4. vocabulary connections learned strategies. 3. Partner Reading with Reading expectations in CCR ELA Reading 2. Monitoring how students strategy chart Literature and Informational Text. Develop a framework for Word Work are internalizing strategies 4. Check for 2. Modeling and guided practice during at each grade level Poetry/ Readers used by independent understanding Guided Instruction is a core instructional 1. discuss day-to-day organizational Theater readers (what good readers 5. Students use I-chart for “You do it” practice for teaching strategies pragmatics of conducting Word 3. Teacher carefully takes small groups do when they read partner reading/ reading Work instruction through the new learning or reinforces independently to someone 1. Fluency 2. make grade level connections to learning of strategy or skill. Initially, the 3. Application of the Strategy 2. Accuracy CCR ELA Reading Foundational in leveled text teacher may model as the students practice 3. Expression Skills and Language (instructional or with the teacher observing and supporting. 4. Word Work (e.g., 3. Word Work needs to match challenging/ approaching There is “guided practice” during guided Rimes and making students’ instructional level level) instruction when students may practice words with onsets; 4. Students apply a clearly individually, in small groups, or with a sorting the words understood strategy to a partner as the teacher observes and aids in into Nonsense and supported genre or format the practice. Guided practice during Real Words I Can guided instruction is the “joint” Use When Writing) 5. Students demonstrate the 5. Student(s) use Ieffective use of a strategy responsibility of both the teacher and student. Teacher guidance is still needed. chart in more difficult text.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 50
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools 4. Effective strategy instruction is about developing readers who actively and independently monitor and regulate their own comprehension. 5. Teacher focuses guided instruction on the specific strategy, skill or procedure: a. Provides guided practice using the strategy. Gradually release responsibility for task completion b. Teacher and students practice the strategy together in small groups c. The teacher scaffolds the students’ attempts and supports student thinking, giving feedback during small group discussions 6. Key processes & skills align to standards & learning targets; target and support w/ Independent Reading Inside the Box &/or Making Meaning) 7. Teacher uses a variety of leveled text 8. Teachers must be “teaching in the zone” 90% of the time where readers are engaged in texts within their independent/ instructional range and connect this to Guided Instruction groups as a key for building reading comprehension 9. Small group models a common text; using predicting, questioning, summarizing and clarifying to understand the text 10. Use skill or strategy chart during Guided Instruction/ visual support to understand how to use the strategy 11. Focuses on a specific procedure, strategy or skill (1-2; no more than 2) 12. Small purposeful groups; composed based on students’ performance on formative assessments 13. Groups consist of students who share a common instructional need that the teacher can address 14. Guided instruction is an ideal time to
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
(change Poetry/ rotate genre and use Joke Books --- good for inferring and figurative language) Demonstrate how to have students monitor fluency and accuracy rates (take responsibility for learning and improving; setting/ meeting “ambitious” goals)
6. Students use graphic organizers and/or advanced organizers to summarize their understanding of the text 7. Embed classroom assessment --- Assessment on the fly --- a check to see how well students are able to apply the skill or strategy from the lesson; guides re-teaching/ instruction for small group 8. Model the role of using checklists and rubrics; providing students with guidelines and expectations followed by interactive discussions and feedback. Examine how rubrics and checklists look K-5. Relate to the IN ISTEP+ rubric for constructed and extended response as well as strategy rubrics, such as those found in Independent Reader. 9. Students work w/ partners; small groups; independently 10. Use I-charts for Comprehension Review 11. Use a variety of response options based on GI questions/ cues (HoTs) to monitor their use of strategy and engagement with text (these same questions could be used during conferencing):
Page 51
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools differentiate; differentiate content, process and product; varying the instructional materials, the level of prompting or questioning and the product expected 15. A series of guided instructional events, over time, with cues, prompts and questions, teachers can guide students to increasingly complex thinking (thinking about the text; thinking beyond the text). Guided instruction is, in part, about establishing high expectations and providing the support for students to reach those expectations. Independent Use and Application --- “You do it, I watch/ observe/ assess/ check for understanding” Teacher progress Formative-assessment Process; measurable behavior and Application of the Strategy in Real Reading Situations monitoring, 1. At this point, students can successfully use the procedure, strategy, skill or characteristics 1. Focus on key aspects of the Focus Lesson and the read-aloud; observation/ standard. The teacher’s role is to observe and assess. interactive discussions; reading practice for fluency, students’ selfconference (3+ min. 2. Encourage independent use of the procedure, strategy, skill or standard selecting in their zone; and understanding the critical role of 3. Self-selected reading conferences) conferencing. 4. Independent and (approaching) challenging levels of text 2. Progress monitoring 5. Provide individual skill or strategy chart for support during independent ⇒⇒⇒⇒ 3. ISTEP+ like assessment(s) focused on learning targets at grade level; reading; use I-charts for Read to Self/ Independent Sustained Reading Goal Clarity assessment at grade level 6. Variety of genre 4. Organization of the classroom library needs to support SSR 7. After working with the teacher in small guided instruction groups, the 5. Teacher spot checks well-anchored strategy use during independent students try to apply the strategy on their own; independent use of the reading strategy. 6. Students receive regular feedback from the teacher --- Conferencing 8. Independent tasks should require individual application of information about the skill or strategy with supporting evidence during previously taught and practiced independent reading 9. Provide opportunities to use their knowledge to produce new products (i.e., 7. Teacher uses key question(s) across the lesson (whole group; small apply strategies reading new text; applying strategies using new prompt; group; now one-on-one/ individual support) apply strategies using new problem/ task; apply strategies then ask students 8. Scaffold strategy questions used during conferences to support depth to self-assess/ reflect based on rubric --- am I getting closer to the expected of knowledge level of knowledge and skill) 9. Quick checks (records) that use rosters and key criteria (based on strategy and key indicators, such as, answered question asked; used information from text; responded using complete thoughts, ideas and higher order thinking). 10. Process for formally analyzing data guides small group instruction, collaboration discussions and identification of Goal Clarity Window for improvement
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 52
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools Wrap-up --- Whole group Essential Question(s) --- Revisit the strategy chart. 1. What have we learned about … 2. Let’s reread the chart. 3. What can we add to the chart to capture what we learned today?
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 53
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
Balanced Math Plan Guiding Principle 1: Establishing an uninterrupted 60 minute math block that includes DMR, teach, guided practice and independent practice implemented and documented by GCW will guide instruction and provide consistent implementation.
Guiding Principle 2: Student achievement will improve when we implement a balanced math block with fidelity that includes: 1. Daily DMR- Teacher Directed, Student Directed, Group Answer, Key words, key ideas, error analysis, mental math and reflection will improve instruction and student achievement. 2. Weekly or bi-weekly poster method. Daily Math Review: The following checklist was used to identify the weaknesses in our balanced math instruction. All classroom teachers participated in a fish bowl activity where their class watched another class complete DMR. Then the classes switched rooms and completed the process. Students and teachers discussed the similarities and differences of implementation. The teacher then met to answer questions and to make changes to their DMR. Videos of the balanced math program were also viewed and discussed to improve instruction.
Math Review Student Paper
Student papers should be organized with all necessary work show. Clear, consistent expectations set by the teacher should be evident. Student papers should be monitored by the teacher on a regular basis. Classroom Environment
Students should be involved in on-task conversations during math review. Errors should be seen as an opportunity to improve. Students should be supporting each other in the quest for all students to be successful with the math review categories. Conversation about the mathematics should be emphasized. Processing:
Teacher directed-When the categories are new, the teacher should set the expectations for each of the categories (key vocabulary, key concept, common misconceptions). Student directed- Student volunteers explain solutions to the class using similar information provided by the teacher during teacher directed and their own understanding of the concept. Error Analysis-students should be indicating which parts of problems are correct and which parts they need to work on. Student Reflection-Students should be reflecting on each math review problem. Students should be writing a reflective statement for their math review paper each day. The reflective statements should be specific to the concepts and skills that are contained in the math review categories. Math Review Quiz:
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 54
Jonathan Jennings Elementary (0825) – Greater Clark County Schools
A math review quiz should be given weekly or bi-weekly to allow teachers and students to determine progress with the math review categories. Math review data should be used to change categories. Math review data should be used to create flex groups to differentiate instruction. It is recommended to correct the quiz with the students to facilitate timely and specific feedback to students. Students should write a reflective statement and a plan for improvement on their quiz after correcting the quiz.
Mental Math Two or three mental math problems completed with students every day. Mental math problems are based on a number sense theme. Mental math problems repeated twice to increase student success. Students are encouraged to share their reasoning.
Problem Solving Students are doing problem solving on a regular basis to build capacity. The classroom environment is supportive of the process of problem solving (it is ok to struggle, problem solving is mess, we learn from mistakes, etc.). Problems are matched to concepts in current unit of instruction. The classroom environment is not answer driven/Student reasoning, meta-cognition and written explanation are emphasized. The classroom teacher facilitates problem solving, but does not “save” the students. Poster Method Components: Individual work, group work, group data sheet, visit, written explanation, circle discussion. Alternative Method Components: individual work, group work, rotation of students to different groups; hint process; individual write up including verification. Scoring Rubric: consistent across a grade level; consistent expectations across grade levels at a school. Student product: consistent format for each grade and consistent expectations across a school.
Poster Method: The following form was used school wide to improve the implementation of the poster method portion of the balanced math program. All classroom teachers partnered with a grade level colleague and completed this form. The teachers then met to discuss the similarities and differences.
Title 1/PL 221/SWP 2014
Page 55
![The Forgotten Forerunner [William Jennings Bryan] - Michael Kazin ...](https://p.pdfkul.com/img/300x300/the-forgotten-forerunner-william-jennings-bryan-mi_59cd3d021723ddf5f9f6c165.jpg)
