Revised – March
2005
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
CENTRAL
PRIMARY
CORBIN
INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS
ü
PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE
1. How were planning and needs assessment teams
organized?
Needs assessment teams were
organized during a comprehensive school improvement planning meeting after
school. Teachers from a variety of grade
levels and subject areas were represented on the teams.
2. Who were
members/representative groups whom served on planning and needs assessment
committees?
Teachers, Family Resource,
Parents, Community Members
3. How were the needs of the school determined?
The
needs of the school were determined through the analysis of parent, student and
staff surveys as well as past and current test data.
4. How were goals and strategies decided upon?
Each team met and discussed
goals and strategies using information gathered along with a copy of the most
recent comprehensive school improvement plan.
In depth discussions were held concerning current student performance so
as to ascertain the most pressing student needs.
5. What is the plan expected to achieve?
It is
our hope that by implementing this revised comprehensive school improvement
plan at Central Primary that our students will achieve mastery of skills needed
to reach the goal of proficiency by 2014.
The strategies, which were no longer current or relevant, were removed,
while others were revised to make them more appropriate. Still more were added which included the new
focus areas for the upcoming year.
6. How was the public comment
secured and what was the response from the school?
Public comment was secured
through presentation to the SBDM council, PTO and the Corbin Board of Education
at an open meeting. The response from
the school was positive and mainly stemmed from the process of completing the
plan. Many team members had never spent
a substantial amount of time reviewing their schools test scores and dissecting
data into sub-groups. The process of
forming objectives based upon data and then deriving strategies to meet the
objectives was empowering for team members.
7. How will school improvement planning be
ensured in the future?
School
improvement planning will be ensured by involving all staff in the process of
developing the plan, which consequently results in administration, teachers,
and staff believing in the process of analyzing data, creating objectives, and
developing strategies and activities as a means to promote student achievement. On a monthly basis, progress checks are made
at the school level to ensure that the CSIP is being implemented. These results are reported to both the SBDM
council as well as the school board.
8. How will the comprehensive
school improvement plan and other important information be shared with
stakeholders?
The comprehensive school
improvement plan and other pertinent information will be shared with
stakeholders by presenting the plan to a variety of audiences such as PTO,
civic clubs, the chamber of commerce, and the media. Copies of the plan will be distributed to an
array of clubs, organizations, and institutions as possible.
9. How will input continually be gathered from
stakeholders?
Central
Primary will maintain a calendar indicating events, which will host target
audiences who may provide feedback and innovative strategies to ensure
successful completion of the plan. Such
audiences may include board meetings, staff meetings, and community gatherings.
Action Component: STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
Draft · Final
District Name: Corbin Independent Component Manager: Principal
School Name:
|
Priority Need – STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT |
Goal (Addresses the Priority
Need) |
|
According to the 2004
77% of students are
scoring 2 or below in literary reading ( no change from 2004) 69% of students are
scoring 2 or below in 75% of students are
scoring 2 or below in persuasive reading (an increase of 15%
from 2004) 67% of students are
scoring 2 or below in
61% of students scored 2 or below in Numbers/Computation (an increase of
4%) 62% of students scored 2 or below in Geometry/Measurement (an
increase of 7%) 48% of the students scored 2 or
below in Probability/ Statistics 49% of students scored 2 or
below in Algebraic Ideas |
.0 A.
By Spring 2006, the Academic
Index for B.
By Spring, 2006, the Academic
Index for Mathematics will be 90.0 C.
By Spring 2006, the percentage
of students scoring a two (2) or below on Open Response Questions will
decrease by 20%. D.
By Spring 2006, the percentage
of students scoring proficient in On-Demand writing will increase by 20%. E.
By Spring 2006, the percentage
of students scoring proficient in Arts & Humanities will increase by 25%. |
|
Priority Need – STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT – CONTINUED |
|
|
|
|
Causes and Contributing Factors |
Objectives with Measures of Success |
|
Ø
There is not sufficient time
allotted for daily reading instruction. Ø
Students have not been formally
assessed on a regular basis to determine weaknesses in phonemic awareness and
phonic skills in order to modify instruction. Ø
Students have not been receiving
sufficient reading instruction based on individual needs. Ø
Not all teachers feel secure in
teaching the Everyday Math® curriculum and how to integrate this curriculum
with Program of Studies and Core Content. Ø
Students are not able to answer
open response questions at a proficient level. |
A1. All students will have specific, targeted
reading A2. All kindergarten and 1st grade
students will be A3. 100% of the teachers will have an
intentional |
|
Causes and Contributing Factors - continued |
Objectives with Measures of Success - continued |
|
Ø
Teachers are not using open
response questions in their assessments on a regular basis. Ø
Teachers are not intentional in
requiring students to write with a focus in “On-Demand writing.” Ø
There is insufficient
collaboration between the related arts teachers and general education
teachers in integrating classroom content during library, music, drama, and
art classes. Ø
Music, art, and drama
terminology is not addressed outside the related arts classes on a regular basis.
|
B. 100% of the
teachers will feel competent in C. Open-response questions will be a component C1. Teachers will model proficient work for
students, D. Students will be provided with
opportunities to E. There will be integration of units of
instruction |
Action
Component: STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Draft · Final
District Name: Corbin Independent Component Manager: Principal
School Name:
|
Objective Label |
Strategy/Activity |
Expected Impact in Terms of
Student Performance & Classroom Practice |
Responsible Person |
Start Date |
End Date |
Resources Needed |
Fund Source |
|
A. 1a |
Teachers’ lesson plans for reading, based upon
on-going assessment data, will reflect how instruction is individualized to
target specific skills for individuals and small groups. |
Because of the school-wide reading block and the
increased time allotted to reading, teachers will have more instructional
time with a smaller group of students to target specific needs, which will
impact reading scores. |
Principal/ Team Leaders/ Ann Longworth |
May 2005 |
May 2006 |
None |
N/A |
|
|
|||||||
|
A. 1b |
Based on DIBELS assessment data, students who
have not mastered phonemic awareness skills will be receiving LiPS® instruction. |
LiPS® is based on the scientific research which states phoneme/phonological
awareness is the best single predictor of success in learning to read. With the previous success of this program,
the number of students receiving LiPS® instruction will increase which will in turn improve reading scores. |
Ann Longworth |
Aug. 2005 |
May 2006 |
None |
N/A |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|