|
Fayetteville High School provides a learning
environment in which there are opportunities for all individuals to
develop the skills and values needed to realize their potential.
|
Grade Span: 9-12
|
Title I: Not Applicable
|
School Improvement:
|
Table of Contents
Priority 1: Literacy
Goal: All students will improve in reading
comprehension, vocabulary in context skills, and written expression with
additional attention to Literacy and Content reading passages, and
Mechanics and Sentence Formation writing domains.
Priority 2: Mathematics
Goal: All students will improve in
mathematic skills and responding to constructed response questions with
additional attention to Functions, Relations and Patterns and Solve
Equations mathematic strands.
Priority 3: Professional Development
Goal: To provide high-quality professional
development [to all faculty and teacher support personnel] which is
classroom and student focused.
Priority 4: Drop Out Rate
Goal: Decrease the gap between the general
student population drop out rate and the special education drop out rate,
and reduce the drop out rate significantly among students in at-risk
sub-populations.
Priority 5: Wellness
Goal: Provide support for students in
making healthy lifestyle choices by implementing systems to aid in
decreasing the average BMI on routine annual student screening and
increasing collaboration between all segments of the school community in
support of positive lifestyle choices.
|
Priority 1:
|
Improving Literacy
|
|
Supporting Data:
|
- Grade 9-Iowa
Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) 2004: Combined Population: 606
Students were tested and 67.9% scored above the 50th percentile.
Grade 9- Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) 2005: Combined
Population: 670 Students were tested and 71.6% scored above the
50th percentile. Grade 9- Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) 2006:
Combined Population: 660 Students were tested and 71.5% scored
above the 50th percentile. The analysis of the reading subtests
revealed weaknesses in spelling and reading comprehension.
- 2004 Grade 11
End of Course Literacy Exam: 56 % of the Combined Population
Students scored at, or above, Proficient; 10.3 % of the
Economically Disadvantaged (SES) students scored, at or above,
Proficient; 29.4 % of the Limited English Proficient (LEP)
students scored, at, or above, Proficient; 12.1 % of the Students
with Disabilities (IEP) scored at, or above, Proficient; 28.5 % of
the African American Students scored at, or above, Proficient;
35.7 % of the Hispanic Students scored, at, or above, Proficient;
60.4 % of the Caucasian Students scored at, or above, Proficient.
The lowest identified areas for the Combined Population Students
in the five writing domains are content passage and practical
passage. The lowest identified areas in the analysis of the three
types of literacy passages in multiple choice is practical
passage, and in open response questions is practical passage. The
lowest identified areas for the Economically Disadvantaged
Students (SES) in the five writing domains are content passage and
practical passage. The lowest identified areas in the analysis of
the three types of literacy passages in multiple choice is content
passage, and in open response questions is practical passage. The
lowest identified areas for Students with Disabilities in the five
writing domains are style and practical passage. The lowest
identified areas in the analysis of the three types of literacy
passages in multiple choice is content passage, and in open
response questions is practical passage. The lowest identified
areas for African American students in the five writing domains
are content passage and practical passage. The lowest identified
areas in the analysis of the three types of literacy passages in
multiple choice is practical passage, and in open response
questions is practical passage. The lowest identified areas for
Hispanic Students in the five writing domains are content passage
and practical passage. The lowest identified areas in the analysis
of the three types of literacy passages in multiple choice is
practical passage, and in open response questions is practical
passage. The lowest identified areas for Caucasion students in the
five writing domains are content passage and practical passage.
The lowest identified areas in the analysis of the three types of
literacy passages in multiple choice is practical passage , and in
open response questions is practical passage. 2005 Grade 11 End of
Course Literacy Exam: 62.7% of the Combined Population Students
scored at, or above, Proficient; 39.0 % of the Economically
Disadvantaged (SES) students scored, at or above, Proficient; 42.8
% of the Limited English Proficient (LEP) students scored, at, or
above, Proficient; 15.5 % of the Students with Disabilities (IEP)
scored at, or above, Proficient; 36.1 % of the African American
Students scored at, or above, Proficient; 38.2 % of the Hispanic
Students scored, at, or above, Proficient; 65.8 % of the Caucasian
Students scored at, or above, Proficient. The lowest identified
areas for the Combined Population Students in the five writing
domains are content passage and literary passage. The lowest
identified areas in the analysis of the three types of literacy
passages in multiple choice is content passage, and in open
response questions is content passage. The lowest identified areas
for the Economically Disadvantaged Students (SES) in the five
writing domains are content passage and literary passage. The
lowest identified areas in the analysis of the three types of
literacy passages in multiple choice is content passage, and in
open response questions is content passage. The lowest identified
areas for Students with Disabilities in the five writing domains
are content passage and practical passage. The lowest identified
areas in the analysis of the three types of literacy passages in
multiple choice is content passage, and in open response questions
is content passage. The lowest identified areas for African
American students in the five writing domains are content passage
and literary passage. The lowest identified areas in the analysis
of the three types of literacy passages in multiple choice is
content passage, and in open response questions is content
passage. The lowest identified areas for Hispanic Students in the
five writing domains are content passage and literary passage. The
lowest identified areas in the analysis of the three types of
literacy passages in multiple choice is content passage, and in
open response questions is content passage. The lowest identified
areas for Caucasion students in the five writing domains are
content passage and literary passage. The lowest identified areas
in the analysis of the three types of literacy passages in
multiple choice is content passage, and in open response questions
literary passage. 2006 Grade 11 End of Course Literacy Exam: 58.6%
of the Combined Population Students scored at, or above,
Proficient; 33.0 % of the Economically Disadvantaged (SES)
students scored, at or above, Proficient; 26.9 % of the Limited
English Proficient (LEP) students scored, at, or above,
Proficient; 5.6 % of the Students with Disabilities (IEP) scored
at, or above, Proficient; 22.4 % of the African American Students
scored at, or above, Proficient; 42.3 % of the Hispanic Students
scored, at, or above, Proficient; 63.9 % of the Caucasian Students
scored at, or above, Proficient. The lowest identified areas for
the Combined Population Students in the five writing domains are
content passage and literary passage. The lowest identified areas
in the analysis of the three types of literacy passages in
multiple choice is content passage, and in open response questions
is content passage. The lowest identified areas for the
Economically Disadvantaged Students (SES) in the five writing
domains are content passage and literary passage. The lowest
identified areas in the analysis of the three types of literacy
passages in multiple choice is content passage, and in open
response questions is content passage. The lowest identified areas
for Students with Disabilities in the five writing domains are
content passage and practical passage. The lowest identified areas
in the analysis of the three types of literacy passages in
multiple choice is content passage, and in open response questions
is content passage. The lowest identified areas for African
American students in the five writing domains are content passage
and literary passage. The lowest identified areas in the analysis
of the three types of literacy passages in multiple choice is
content passage, and in open response questions is content
passage. The lowest identified areas for Hispanic Students in the
five writing domains are content passage and literary passage. The
lowest identified areas in the analysis of the three types of
literacy passages in multiple choice is content passage, and in
open response questions is content passage. The lowest identified
areas for Caucasion students in the five writing domains are
content passage and literary passage. The lowest identified areas
in the analysis of the three types of literacy passages in
multiple choice is content passage, and in open response questions
literary passage.
- AVERAGE DAILY
ATTENDANCE RATE: 2004--94.7% 2005--97.8% 2006--95.8%
- ACT ENGLISH:
2004--23.9 2005--23.5 2006--23.4
- GRADUATION
RATE: 2003--95% 2004--92.8% 2005--88.6% 2006--
|
|
Goal
|
All students will improve in reading comprehension,
vocabulary in context skills, and written expression with additional
attention to Literacy and Content reading passages, and Mechanics and
Sentence Formation writing domains.
|
|
Benchmark
|
The Combined Population, and each subgroup, is
expected to meet the AYP target calculated by the ADE and included in
the NCLB Accountability Workbook.
|
|
Intervention: Writing to Learn in Content Areas:
Students will write in all core classes.
|
|
Scientific Based Research: Brynildssen, Shawna,
Vocabulary's Influence on Successful Writing, 2000. Fisher, Douglas
and Nancy Frey, Improving Adolescent Literacy, 2003.Jacobs, Vicki A.,
Reading, Writing, and Understanding, 2002. Brandenburg, Sister M.
Luka, Advanced Math? Write!, 2002. Irvin, Judith L., Assisting
Struggling Readers in Building Vocabulary and Background Knowledge,
2001. Kezar, Adrianna, Summer Bridge Programs, Supporting All
Students, 2000.
|
|
Actions
|
Person Responsible
|
Timeline
|
Resources
|
Source of Funds
|
|
Explore the development of two common note-taking
systems: one for math/science emphasis courses and one for writing
intensive courses. Two interdepartmental committees will be
established to select/develop the systems. All core content areas
will employ use of these systems. After development and
implementation, sophomore students will be introduced to both systems
in a sophomore academic orientation program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Department Chairs, ACSIP Steering
Comm.
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Explore the ability to provide non-blocked sophomore
English and Social Studies teachers with common planning time.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal
|
Start: 07/01/2005
End: 06/30/2006
|
- Administrative
Staff
- Central
Office
- Community
Leaders
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Provide professional development activities that
stress critical analysis in the classroom.
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Jim Price, Building Principal
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Community
Leaders
- Computers
- District
Staff
- Outside
Consultants
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Plan Evaluation: All literacy intensive (Fine
Arts, Social Studies, English, Humanities, Foreign Languages)
departments will meet to consider plan effectiveness, review ACSIP
document and most recent ACTAAP scores annually. This will occur
during a school or district PD/Inservice day. The method and means
for this review will be established by the ACSIP committee and School
Principal.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Plan Evaluation
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP Steering
Committee, Leadership Committee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Explore the establishment an intensive 3-5 day
Summer Bridge Program for Sophomores. Curriculum would include a
review of/introduction to basic study skills (note-taking, library
research, writing in high-school, etc.), motivational/relationship
building activities including upper classmen and student council,
planning for the future (college/career—success begins now—including
FHS Alumni, members of the community, etc.), how to manage homework
and a job/athletic schedule, and Admin. Expectations for behavior,
dress, etc., technology documentation, student handbooks, etc. The
program would occur at the end of the summer, prior to first day of
school and would be conducted by teaching professionals to be
compensated appropriately by salary, stipend, flex-time, or PD
credit.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP Steering
Committee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Administrative
Staff
- Community
Leaders
- Computers
- School Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Plan Evaluation: Annual faculty evaluation of the
ACSIP document will accomplished as directed by the ACSIP steering
committee and building Principal.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Plan Evaluation
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP steering
committee
|
Start: 07/01/2005
End: 06/30/2006
|
- Administrative
Staff
- Community
Leaders
- Computers
- District
Staff
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Literacy Remediation: Students who score below
proficient on any end-of-course exam are required by governing state
regulations to complete a program of remediation. Placement will be
based upon student’s score on the 11th grade Literacy exam,
correspondent evaluations, and the letter grade earned in the
corresponding course.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Equity
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP Literacy
Goal Chair, Mr. Bobby Smith, Literacy Administrator
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Administrative
Staff
- Teachers
|
|
|
Total Budget:
|
$0
|
|
Intervention: Reading in the Content Areas:
Students will learn to read critically and analytically in all core
classes.
|
|
Scientific Based Research: Billmeyer, Rachel &
Mary Lee Barton, Teaching Reading in the Content Areas, If Not Me,
Then Who? McREL,1998. Hall, L.A., Teachers and Content Area Reading:
Attitudes, Beliefs, and Change, 2005. National Endowment for the Arts,
Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America, 2004.
Barton, Mary Lee and Clare Heidema, et al, Teaching Reading in
Mathematics and Science, 2002. Morgan, Katherine R., Using Primary
Sources to Build a Community of Thinkers, 2002. Suhor, Charles,
Contemplative Reading--The Experience, the Idea, the Applications,
2002. Hirth, Paul, What's the Truth about Nonfiction?, 2002. Smith,
Michael ; Wilhelm, Jeffrey D Title: "I just like being good at
it": The importance of competence in the literate lives of young
men - Data from this study suggest that boys pursue activities
outside school, including literacy activities, in which they feel
competent. Literacy activities are often rejected in school because
boys do not feel competent in them, 2004.
|
|
Actions
|
Person Responsible
|
Timeline
|
Resources
|
Source of Funds
|
|
Compare the scores on the literacy portion of the
benchmark/end of course exams and ITBS exams to the aligned
curriculum to identify areas of weakness and gaps in the curriculum
and plan an evaluation. Develop or revise AIPs when appropriate.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Plan Evaluation
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP Literacy
Goal Chair, Dept. Chairs in Writing Intensive Courses
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Administrative
Staff
- Central
Office
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Research-based reading strategies for assisting
struggling readers through content areas professional development
will be provided to all faculty in the coming school year by a
reading specialist who is familiar with our curriculum and
frameworks.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Principal;Language Arts/Soc.
Studies/Humanities Dept. Chairs, Literacy Goal Chair
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Administrative
Staff
- Outside
Consultants
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Use performance assessments and open-ended
(constructed) responses with rubrics to enable students to demonstrate
proficiency in responding in writing to practical, content, and
literary passages by finding the main idea, interpreting, analyzing,
drawing conclusions, and providing examples and evidence. Practice
tests will be used to help develop assignments that are similar to
what students face on the ACTAAP. Staff Development activities will
be provided to teachers.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP Literacy
Goal Chair
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Outside
Consultants
- Performance
Assessments
- Public
Library
- School
Library
|
|
|
Explore the re-establishment of an
interdisciplinary coordinating council comprised of 5-7 core content
teachers and 1-2 building administrators. This council will, among
other tasks, make contact with the junior high schools to align
language arts and math curriculum vertically and horizontally and
investigate ways to integrate reading, writing, and math strategies
in all content areas. Faculty members of the council, chosen by the
building principal, will be compensated with either 2 additional
contract days or release time, and will be considered a policy making
entity.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; Dept. Chairs
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Central
Office
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Classroom teachers, special education teachers,
and other support staff will collaborate to implement differentiated
strategies for students with Academic Improvement Plans and/or
special needs to improve reading and writing skills
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Special Education
|
Special Education Designee, Mr. Jim Price,
Building Principal, Bobby Smith, 504 coordinator, Literacy Goal Chair
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Communicate reading, writing, and course
expectations to parents through various combinations of the following
methods: classroom assignment sheets, parent-teacher conferences,
graded work with accompanying rubric, newsletters, web access to
district curriculum and state frameworks, course syllabi, parent
letters, interactive assignments, department/classroom teacher web
sites.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, Parent
Coordinator
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Computers
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Using available vocabulary lists from PSAT, SAT,
ACT, and the College Board resources, the faculty will devote one
professional development day (in interdisciplinary grade-level teams)
(during the coming school year) developing vocabulary lists of words with
interdisciplinary connections to be used at each grade level.
Teachers will use the product to help students make interdisciplinary
connections with the material they are already teaching and students
may be given the product as a study aid for course work/assessment,
and to prepare for standardized/college entrance exams. Measurement
will be made through analysis of subsequently available student test
scores.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; District PD;
ACSIP Literacy Goal Chair
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Central
Office
- District
Staff
- Performance
Assessments
|
|
|
Develop test-making strategies for unit tests and
semester finals based on higher level thinking skills and the types
of questions used on standardized test such as AP/ACT/Benchmark
exams. Explore ways to improve student literacy based on the results
of these tests and provide training to teachers.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, PD Committee,
ACSIP Steering Committee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Outside
Consultants
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Provide opportunities for independent and group
library research projects that are integrated with classroom
instruction, and that result in demonstrations that show reading
comprehension skills, and ability to communicate content knowledge in
writing.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
|
Media Specialists
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Performance
Assessments
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Explore the possibility of the development of an
Academic Booster Club; for the purpose, among other academic
interests; involving the Fayetteville and University of Arkansas
community to motivate and inspire students and to support the
academic curriculum.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP Steering
Committee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Community
Leaders
- Public
Library
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
A quick-reference user-friendly guide to the
Arkansas frameworks for literacy will be provided to all content area
teachers at the beginning of the coming school year. The guide will
include those elements of the frameworks which are conducive to
cross-curricular teaching and learning. Teachers will evaluate the
value of the instrument in their end of the year school assessment.
The work will be accomplished by a certified Language Arts teacher
who will be compensated with PD credit or Flex-time.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP Literacy Goal
Chair
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Performance
Assessments
- Teachers
|
|
|
Explore the development of a reading remediation
class will be mandatory for students identified with at least a 3
grade level reading deficiency based on benchmark scores. Explore whether
students taking the course may receive elective credit. Action
dependant upon pending course requests and master schedule.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, Literacy Goal
Chair, English Department Chair
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Administrative
Staff
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Plan Evaluation: Annual faculty evaluation of the
ACSIP document will accomplished as directed by the ACSIP steering
committee and building Principal.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Plan Evaluation
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Dr. Randy Willison, Building Principal; ACSIP
steering committee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Total Budget:
|
$0
|
|
Intervention: Library Media Program: The Library
will serve as an academic and research hub for all courses, teachers,
and students.
|
|
Scientific Based Research: Aronson, Marc,
Exploding the Myths: the Truth about Teenagers and Reading, 2001.
|
|
Actions
|
Person Responsible
|
Timeline
|
Resources
|
Source of Funds
|
|
Library faculty will teach information literacy
skills and strategies in lessons integrated with classroom learning
to enable students to find, access, evaluate and use information in
any subject area.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
|
Media Specialist
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Computers
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Continue to provide access to a rich collection of
diverse and up-to-date resources through the school library, using
the district selection policy.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
|
Media Specialist
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Performance
Assessments
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Purchase and maintain audio visual equipment to
support instruction, following district purchase procedures.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
|
Media & Technology Specialist
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Library faculty will continue to collaborate with
classroom teachers, special education teachers, and other support
staff to implement differentiated strategies for students with Academic
Improvement Plans and /or special needs to improve information
skills.
Action Type: AIP
Action Type: Special Education
|
Media Specialists & Special Education Designee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Use technology to access information, develop
reading skills, and publish student work.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
|
Media & Technology Specialist
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Computers
- District
Staff
- School
Library
|
|
|
Provide opportunities for a variety of reading
experiences for all students (e.g., library instructional units,
story times, shared reading experiences, reading motivation programs,
reading contests, sustained silent reading).
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
|
Media Specialists
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- District
Staff
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Collaborate with teachers to analyze student
performance on benchmark/end of course exams and the ITBS in terms of
information skills performance.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
|
Media Specialists
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Performance
Assessments
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Collaborate with teachers to develop lessons
integrated with classroom instructional units that implement
research-based information literacy strategies according to the
district curriculum and the identified needs of students.
Action Type: Collaboration
|
Media Specialists
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Performance
Assessments
- School
Library
- Teachers
|
|
|
Plan Evaluation: Teacher and student end of year
survey, ACTAAP.
Action Type: Plan Evaluation
|
Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal
|
Start: 07/30/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
Total Budget:
|
$0
|
|
Intervention: Parent Engagement Plan: Encouraging
effective parent communication and interaction with their students,
students' teachers, and administrators.
|
|
Scientific Based Research: ACT 603 National PTA
Standards 1998. Wheelock, Anne., and Miao, Jing., The ninth-grade
bottleneck: an enrollment bulge in a transition year that demands
careful attention and action, 2005.
|
|
Actions
|
Person Responsible
|
Timeline
|
Resources
|
Source of Funds
|
|
The school will create a student advisory board to
provide advice and guidance for school improvement. Current students
and recent graduates will be placed in appropriate existing advisory
capacities. School alumni will be asked to provide information about
their high school experience and their post-secondary experiences.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
|
Parent Facilitator, Mr. Jim Price, Building
Principal, ACSIP Steering Committee
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
|
|
|
All parents will receive "Family Kits"
that include: *Parental Involvement Plan *PTSO and Parental
Involvement information *School Calendar *School Map *School Policies
*A system encouraging the home and school connection
Action Type: Parental Engagement
|
Parent Facilitator, Mr. Jim Price, Building
Principal
|
Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2007
|
- Central
Office
- District
Staff
|
| | |