ACSIP

School Plan

FAYETTEVILLE HIGH SCHOOL EAST
1001 W STONE,FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72701

Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

2009-2010

Fayetteville High School is a collaborative learning community where well-prepared faculty and staff provide a broad, deep curriculum and varied activities that offer students opportunities to be critical thinkers and responsible citizens.

Grade Span: 10-12

Title I: Not Applicable

School Improvement: A

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 Literary, Content, and Practical 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 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 6: Safety and Security
    Goal: To continue and to augment the provision of a safe and secure educational environment for all students, faculty, staff, and administrators.
Priority 7: Parent Engagement
    Goal: To create parent/school relationships which occur in an atmosphere of trust, where confidentiality is ensured and parents and teachers treat each other with respect, and in which students may view their parents and teachers working together cooperatively.
Priority 8: Drop-out Decrease
    Goal: Decrease the gap between the general student population drop out rate and the special education drop out rate.
Priority 9: English Language Learners
    Goal: All students who are English Language Learners will improve in reading comprehension, vocabulary in context skills, and written expression in English with additional attention to Literary, Content, and Practical reading passages, and Mechanics and Sentence Formation writing domains. The number of certified teachers who are ELL certified will increase.

Priority 1:

Improving Literacy

Supporting Data:

Iowa Test of Basic Skills:

1.  Combined (Total) Population:  Reading Comprehension, Grade 9.

In 2009 zero students were tested.  In 2008, zero students were tested. 
In 2007, 21 students were tested and 9.5% had an NPR score of 50, or
above.	   

In 2007, an analysis of the Content Sub Skill and Skill Cluster
Performance revealed the following area of concern: reading comprehension.
 

2.  Economically Disadvantaged (SES) Grade 9:
In 2007, 13 students were tested and 15.4% had an NPR score of 50, or
above.	In 2007, an analysis of the Content Sub Skill and Skill Cluster
Performance revealed the following areas of concern:  vocabulary and
reading comprehension. 

3.  Caucasian, Grade 9:
In 2007, 15 students were tested and 13.3% had an NPR score of 50, or
above.	
An analysis of the Content Sub Skill and Skill Cluster Performance
revealed the following areas of concern: reading comprehension.

Literacy Priority
1.  Combined Population:
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009, 549 students were tested and 71.22%. 
In 2008, 549 students were tested and 71.4% scored proficient or advanced.
 In 2007, 629 students were tested and 66.8% scored proficient or
advanced.  

In 2009, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest Identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice was was also content passage. The trend analysis of the
writing domains revealed that the lowest identified areas were content
domain. 

In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was also content passage. The trend analysis of
the writing domains revealed that the lowest identified areas were content
passage and content.

In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was practical passage and in
multiple-choice questions was also practical passage. The trend analysis
of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that
the lowest identified area were practical passage and literary passage.


  

2.  Students with Disabilities (IEP):
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009, 55 students were tested and 14.55%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 50 students were tested and 18%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 80 students were tested and 11.2%
scored proficient or advanced.	  

In 2009, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was literary passage.  The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.


In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was literary passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.
  

In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was practical passage and in
multiple-choice was practical passage.	The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified areas were practical passage and content.



  
3.  Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009, 30 students were tested and 16.67%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 27 students were tested and 11.1%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 31 students were tested and 16.1%
scored proficient or advanced.	

In 2009, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.


In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was also content passage.  The trend analysis of
the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were content passage and style.    


In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was practical passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were practical passage and content passage.    



4.  Economically Disadvantaged (SES):
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009, 240 students were tested and 30.83%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 105 students were tested and
41.9% were proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 112 students were tested and
32.1% scored proficient or advanced.  

In 2009, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.


In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was also content passage.  The trend analysis of
the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were  content passage and style.
 

In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was practical passage and in
multiple-choice questions was practical passage.  The trend analysis of
the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were practical passage and content passage.



5.  Caucasian:
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009, 435 students were tested and 77.93%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 427 students were tested and
78.2% scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 489 students were tested
and 73.4% scored proficient or advanced.  

In 2009, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.


In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response questions was content passage and
in multiple-choice questions was also content passage. The trend analysis
of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that
the lowest identified areas were content passage and style and content.
  

In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response questions was practical passage
and in multiple-choice questions was practical passage. The trend analysis
of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that
the lowest identified areas were practical passage and literary passage.

 

6.  African American:
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:   In 2009, 47 students were tested and 36.17%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 41 students were tested and 39%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 53 students were tested and 24.5%
scored proficient or advanced.	

In 2009, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.


In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in the open response questions was content passage
and in multiple-choice questions was also content passage.  The trend
analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified areas were content passage and
content.
 

In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in the open response questions was practical
passage and in multiple-choice questions was literary passage.	The trend
analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified areas were practical passage and
content passage.


7.  Hispanic:
Grade 11 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009, 36 students were tested and 36.11%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 44 students were tested and 34.1%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 55 students were tested and 41.8%
scored proficient or advanced.	 

In 200, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in 9open response was content passage and in
multiple-choice questions was content passage.	The trend analysis of the
open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified areas were style and content passage.


In 2008, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in the open response questions was content passage
and in multiple-choice questions was also content passage.  The trend
analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified areas were content passage and style.

In 2007, the trend analysis of the open response and multiple-choice
questions, in the three types of reading passages, revealed that the
lowest identified area in the open response questions was practical
passage and in multiple-choice questions was content passage.  The trend
analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified areas were practical passage and
content passage.

AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE RATE:
In 2009, the attendance rate was 92.82%.  In 2008, the attendance rate was
95.14%.  In 2007, the attendance rate was 93.0%.  
ACT:
In 2009, the average score for the English portion of the ACT was 24.1% In
2008, 484 students took the ACT and the average score for the English
portion was 23.9.  In 2007, 383 students took the ACT and the average
score for the English portion was 23.4.  
GRADUATION RATE:
In 2009, the graduation rate is not yet available.  In 2008, the
graduation rate was 81%.  In 2007, the graduation rate was 86.6%. In 2006,
the graduation rate was 84.6%.

Goal

All students will improve in reading comprehension, vocabulary in context skills, and written expression with additional attention to Literary, Content, and Practical reading passages, and Mechanics and Sentence Formation writing domains.

Benchmark

The Combined Population MET the 2009 AYP target of 59.75% scoring Proficient/Advanced. However, the SED sub-population did not meet the AYP target which has but Fayetteville on "Alert" status. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP Target of 67.75% scoring Proficient/Advanced, or make AYP through either the Safe Harbor or Growth models.

Intervention: Writing to Learn in Content Areas: Students will write in all core classes.

Scientific Based Research: Wagner, Tony. The Global Achievement Gap. 2008. Fisher, Douglas, and Nancy Frey. Better Learning Through Structured Teaching. 2008. Popham, W. James. Transformative Assessment. 2008. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Schlechty, Philip. Working on the Work. 2002. Sisserson, Kendra et.al. Authentic Intellectual Achievement in Writing. English Journal. July 2002. Jolliffe, David. Criteria for Measuring Authentic Intellectual Achievement in Writing. Practice in Context: Situating the Work of Writing Teachers. 2002. Newmann, Fred. Et.al. A Guide to Authentic Instruction and Assessment: Vision, Standards and Scoring. 1995. Strickland, Cindy. Tools for High-Quality Differentiated Instruction. 2007. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 2001. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. Leadership for Differentiating Schools and Classrooms. 2000. Garner, Betty K. Getting It to Got It: How Struggling Students Learn How to Learn. 2007. Strickland, Cindy and Carol Ann Tomlinson. Differentiation in Practice: A Resource Guide for Differentiating Curriculum. 2005. Payne, Ruby. Framework for Understanding Poverty, 2005. Payne, Ruby. Under-Resourced Learners, 2008. Lubrano, Alfred. Limbo: Blue-Collar Roots, White-Collar Dreams, 2004. Educational Leadership, Poverty & Learning, Apr. 2008, vol. 65, No.7. 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. Downey, Carolyn J. Leaving No Child Behind: 50 Ways to Close the Achievement Gap, 2003. Popham, W. James. TransFormative Assessment. 2008. Beers, Kyleen. When Kids Cant Read. 2002.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Provide professional development activities that stress critical analysis in the classroom and the alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Community Leaders
Computers
District Staff
Outside Consultants
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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. The method and means for this review will be established by the ACSIP steering committee and School Principal.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP Steering Committee, Leadership Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Plan Evaluation: Annual faculty evaluation of the ACSIP document will be accomplished as directed by the ACSIP steering committee and building Principal.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP steering committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Computers
District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Equity

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP Literacy Goal Chair, David F. Young, Literacy Administrator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Make Triand training & access available for sophomore advisory teachers for the purpose of being able to access student test data from their own computers.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Building testing coordinator, Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Computers
District Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will design and administer ongoing formative and summative evaluations in literacy that include open-ended and open-response kinds of questions and will use the results for reteaching and instructional modifications.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP literacy goal chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Professional development designed to enhance teacher understanding of low socio-economic sub-population will be offered to teachers of all curriculum areas to enhance writing scores on the 11th grade literacy exam.
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through: mandatory formative and summative assessments in English for sophomores and juniors and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. The following EVALUATION RESULTS demonstrate that this Intervention is valid in support of the teaching and learning tat are part of this program: 577 sophomores tested in the fall with a mean score of 60.88%, and 520 sophomores tested in the spring with a mean score of 65.62% for an increase of 4.74%. 555 juniors tested in the fall with a mean score of 35.7% and 427 tested in the spring with a mean score of 75.2% for an increase of 39.5%. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to use the following protocol for in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: formative and summative assessments, collaborative meetings for sophomore and junior English teachers to assess student achievement. In order to measure student growth and determine the EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERVENTION/PROGRAM we will administer the 11th grade Literacy Exam. We expect to see a minimum of 51.9% scoring proficient, or advanced, on the last assessment we administer. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objective of this Intervention/Program was achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results in our 2010/2011 Plan and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Training offered to teachers in the Achievement Series will allow teachers to access student scores on all state mandated tests, as well as local formative assessments.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Lester Long

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We formed ACSIP Leadership Teams and analyzed the test scores from the 2009 administration of the 11th Grade Literacy Exam and the Literacy formative and summative assessments of sophomores. We examined the results from both the combined population and EACH subpopulation. We conducted data analysis to determine our main areas of weakness. In addition we studied the three most recent years of Attendance, Graduation Rate, Disciplinary, Formative and Summative Achievement Data across grade levels within our building. We aggregated and disaggregated all the data for the purpose of establishing student learning and behavioral goals. We looked at our trend data in order to better identify the specific areas of need and help align classroom instruction with our curriculum, assessment, and professional development. Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Literacy Priority: CONTENT PASSAGES FOR READING, CONTENT PASSAGES FOR WRITING, and STYLE FOR WRITING. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas. In addition, we meet regularly in grade level and departmental teams and as an entire faculty periodically so that we can review formative, "real time" classroom performance data for the purpose of making decisions regarding the direction, and focus, of our Classroom Instruction.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PLAN EVALUATION: Tenth and eleventh grade students were administered both formative and summative assessments during school year 2008/2009. In the fall, 577 tenth grade students took the formative assessment with a mean score of 60.88%. In the spring 520 tenth grade students took the summative assessment with a mean score of 65.62%, resulting in an increase of 4.74%. In the fall, 555 eleventh grade students took the formative assessment with a mean score of 35.53%. In the spring 427 students tood the summative assessment with a mean score of 75.2%, resulting in an increase of 39.5%. Teachers will use the results in making decisions regarding the direction and focus of our classroom instruction.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

All sophomores will take the PSAT in the fall of 2009 as a formative assessment. Teachers will evaluate the results and determine classroom interventions and curriculum based on the results.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

We have been notified by the Arkansas Department of Education that our school has been placed on "Alert" because we failed to meet the expected Literacy performance level for the SED Sub Pop during the 2008-2009 school year. We are taking the following measures, during the 2009-2010 school year, that are designed to make a positive difference in the teaching and learning that occurs in our building: 10th and 11th grade teachers will meet regularly to analyze assessments and procedures in order to better prepare students for the literacy exam; 10th and 11th grade teachers will utilize released items for practice to better prepare students; 10th grade core teachers will meet regularly to determine common skills and to assess the teaching and learning of those skills.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Reading in the Content Areas: Students will learn to read critically and analytically in all core classes.

Scientific Based Research: Wagner, Tony. The Global Achievement Gap. 2008. Fisher, Douglas, and Nancy Frey. Better Learning Through Structured Teaching. 2008. Popham, W. James. Transformative Assessment. 2008. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Strickland, Cindy. Tools for High-Quality Differentiated Instruction. 2007. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 2001. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. Leadership for Differentiating Schools and Classrooms. 2000. Garner, Betty K. Getting It to Got It: How Struggling Students Learn How to Learn. 2007. Strickland, Cindy and Carol Ann Tomlinson. Differentiation in Practice: A Resource Guide for Differentiating Curriculum. 2005. Payne, Ruby. Framework for Understanding Poverty, 2005. Payne, Ruby. Under-Resourced Learners, 2008. Lubrano, Alfred. Limbo: Blue-Collar Roots, White-Collar Dreams, 2004. Educational Leadership, Poverty & Learning, Apr. 2008, vol. 65, No.7. 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 and Jeffrey D. Wilhelm. 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. Popham, W. James. TransFormative Assessment. 2008. Beers, Kyleen. When Kids Cant Read. 2002.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

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 literacy interventionist who is familiar with our curriculum and frameworks.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Mr. Jim Price, Principal;Language Arts/Soc. Studies/Humanities Dept. Chairs, Literacy Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore the use of 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. Explore the development of practice tests to 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/IRI
Action Type: Professional Development

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, ACSIP Literacy Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Public Library
School Library


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Special Education

Special Education Designee, Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, Byron Zeagler, 504 coordinator, Literacy Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

We plan to 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 summative AP/PSAT/ACT/Benchmark exams. Explore ways to improve student literacy based on the results of these tests and provide training to teachers.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Professional Development

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, PD Committee, ACSIP Steering Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Continue optional reading remediation class led by a literacy interventionist for students identified with at least a 3 grade level reading deficiency based on benchmark scores.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, Literacy Goal Chair, English Department Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Plan Evaluation: Annual faculty evaluation of the ACSIP document will accomplished as directed by the ACSIP steering committee and building Principal.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal; ACSIP steering committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through: mandatory formative and summative assessments in English for sophomores and juniors and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. The following EVALUATION RESULTS demonstrate that this Intervention is valid in support of the teaching and learning tat are part of this program: 577 sophomores tested in the fall with a mean score of 60.88%, and 520 sophomores tested in the spring with a mean score of 65.62% for an increase of 4.74%. 555 juniors tested in the fall with a mean score of 35.7% and 427 tested in the spring with a mean score of 75.2% for an increase of 39.5%. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to use the following protocol for in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: formative and summative assessments, collaborative meetings for sophomore and junior English teachers to assess student achievement. In order to measure student growth and determine the EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERVENTION/PROGRAM we will administer the 11th grade Literacy Exam. We expect to see a minimum of 51.9% scoring proficient, or advanced, on the last assessment we administer. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objective of this Intervention/Program was achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results in our 2010/2011 Plan and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Sophomore core teachers will meet to determine common skills that will be emphasized and reinforced in all content areas. Teachers will give formative and summative assessment of the targeted skills to assess the validity of the "Sophomore Commons" program. Sophomore teachers will continue to meet regularly to discuss and evaluate assessments.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

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: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Purchase and maintain audio visual equipment to support instruction, following district purchase procedures.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Media & Technology Specialist

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Central Office
Computers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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/IRI
Action Type: Special Education

Media Specialists & Special Education Designee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use technology to access information, develop reading skills, and publish student work.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Media & Technology Specialist

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
District Staff
School Library


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Collaborate with teachers to analyze student performance on summative benchmark/end of course exams and the PLAN in terms of information skills performance.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Media Specialists

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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 based on formative tests.
Action Type: Collaboration

Media Specialists

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Plan Evaluation: Teacher and student end of year survey, ACTAAP.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/30/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Curriculum Mapping: Implementing collaboration at all levels and in all core and elective areas.

Scientific Based Research: Schlechty, Philip. Working on the Work. 2002. Sisserson, Kendra et.al. Authentic Intellectual Achievement in Writing. English Journal. July 2002. Jolliffe, David. Criteria for Measuring Authentic Intellectual Achievement in Writing. Practice in Context: Situating the Work of Writing Teachers. 2002. Newmann, Fred. et.al. A Guide to Authentic Instruction and Assessment: Vision, Standards and Scoring. 1995. Carter, Lisa. Total Instructional Alignment. 2007. Drake, Susan. Creating Standards-Based Integrated Curriculum. 2007. Jacobs, Heidi Hayes. Mapping the Big Picture: Integrating Curriculum and Assessment. 1997. Aligning Curriculum, Standards, and Assessments: Fulfilling the Promise of School Reform. CSE Report 645, 2004. Developing Knowledgeable Teachers: A Framework for Standards-Based Teacher Education Supported by Institutional Collaboration. The STEP reports. Garvin, Patty. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 2007. Curriculum Mapping: Building Collaboration and Communication. Koppang, Angela. 2004.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Teachers will be trained in the implementation of Curriculum Recorder in order to align the district curriculum and assessments with the state frameworks.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Central Office
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore devoting one of the required faculty meetings per month to vertical and horizontal team meetings within departments.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Department Chairs, Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Grade level or common subject teachers will meet monthly to align curriculum, instruction, and assessment to state frameworks as well as benchmark and end of course testing. In addition, the textbook adoption process should ensure that textbooks are aligned with Arkansas State Frameworks.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jim Price, Building Principal, Dept Chairs

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

FHS has targeted the subpopulation of Socioeconomically disadvantaged students. Targeted professional development in these areas will be provided for teachers and administrative staff. The school leadership team and central office are developing a comprehensive plan that will include formative and summative evaluations and designated resources along with allocation of resources to address the needs of this subpopulation.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Computers
District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Departments will utilize Barbara Brown's work to determine common verbs in frameworks and 11th Grade Literacy Exam to instruct students in the meaning of those verbs and give students practice in activities that align with the exam.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Departments will explore the creation of curriculum documents for core classes in the content areas to include units, objectives, and skills. These documents will be available on the school web page.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 2:

Improving Mathematics

Supporting Data:

1.	Combined Population:
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 19 students were tested and 17.65%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 22 students were tested and 31.8%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 13 students were tested and 38.4%
scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed
weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in
the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation
and Probability. 

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed
weaknesses in Sovling Equations and Inequalities and Linear Functions. 
The lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Language of Algebra. 

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed
weaknesses in Language of Algebra and Non-Linear Functions.  The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Solving Equations and Inequalities and Non-Linear Functions.  



2.	Students with Disabilities (IEP): 
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, fewer than 10 students were tested. 
In 2008, fewer than 10 students were tested. In 2007, fewer than 10
students were tested.  

In 2009, the number of Students with Disabilities taking the Algebra End
of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population.

In 2008, the number of Students with Disabilities taking the Algebra End
of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population.

In 2007, the number of Students with Disabilities taking the Algebra End
of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population.



3.	Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, fewer than 10 students were tested. 
In 2008, fewer than 10 students were tested. In 2007, fewer than 10
students were tested. 

In 2009, the number of Limited English Proficient Students taking the
Algebra End of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population. 


In 2008, the number of Limited English Proficient Students taking the
Algebra End of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population. 


In 2007, the number of Limited English Proficient Students taking the
Algebra End of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population.


				   
4.	Economically Disadvantaged (SES):
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, fewer than 10 students were tested. 
In 2008, 14 students were tested and 14/3% scored proficient or advanced. 
In 2007, 10 students were tested and 40.0% scored proficient or advanced. 

			       
In 2009, the number of Economically Disadvantaged Students taking the
Algebra End of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population. 


In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Solving Equations and Inequalities and Linear Functions. 
The lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Language of Algebra.
	  
In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Algebra and Non-Linear Functions.  The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Solving
Equations and Inequalities and Non-Linear Functions.


5.	Caucasian:
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 13 students were tested and 16.67%
were proficient or advanced.  In 2008, 14 students were tested and 42.9%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 10 students were tested and 40.0%
scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Linear Functions.  The lowest identified area (based on the
trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics
strands revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability.


In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Linear Functions.  The lowest identified area (based on the
trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics
strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Algebra.

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Solving Equations & Inequalities and Non-Linear Functions. 
The lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Language of Algebra and Non-Linear Functions.

							



6.	African-American:
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, fewer than 10 students were tested. 
In 2008, fewer than 10 students were tested. In 2007, fewer than 10
student were tested. 

In 2009, 2008, and 2007, the number of African American Students taking
the Algebra End of Course exam did not comprise a significant
sub-population.
 
7.	Hispanic:
Algebra End of Course Exam:  In 2009, fewer than 10 students were tested. 
In 2008, fewer than 10 students were tested.  In 2007, fewer than 10
students were tested. 

In 2009, 2008, and 2007, the number of Hispanic Students taking the
Algebra End of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population.
1.	 Combined Population:
Geometry End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 384 students were tested and 69.61%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 345 students were tested and
71.6% scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 400 students were tested
and 64.0% scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.	The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Triangles. 

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.  

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Triangles.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Triangles and
Relationships Between Two & Three Dimensions.  


				 
2.	Students with Disabilities (IEP): 
Geometry End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 36 students were tested and 41.67%
scored proficient or advanced. In 2008, 29 students were tested and 48.3%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 35 students were tested and 31.4%
scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Relationships Between Two & Three Dimensions.  The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Triangles. 

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations. 

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Triangles.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in 
Language of Geometry and Triangles. 


				   
3.	Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Geometry End of Course Exam:  In 2009, fewer than 10 students were tested.
 In 2008, 25 students were tested and 44% scored proficient or advanced. 
In 2007, 36 students were tested and 25.0% scored proficient or advanced. 


In 2009, the number of Limited English Proficient Students taking the
Geometry End of Course exam did not comprise a significant sub-population.


In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.     

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles and Relationships Between Two and Three
Dimensions.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of
the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles and Relationships Between Two & Three
Dimensions.				       

      


4.	Economically Disadvantaged (SES):
Geometry End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 131 students were tested and 51.13%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 101 students were tested and
52.5% scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 115 students were tested
and 44.3% scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.	The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Measurement.

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Triangles.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Triangles and
Relationships Between Two & Three Dimensions.

				   
5.	Caucasian:
Geometry End of Course Exam: In 2009, 276 students were tested and 74.18%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 266 students were tested and
77.8% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 304 students were tested and
70.7% scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.	The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Measurement.		    

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Triangles.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Triangles and
Relationships Between Two & Three Dimensions.		      

		

6.	African-American:
Geometry End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 45 students were tested and 48.89%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 33 students were tested and 45.5%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 40 students were tested and 40.0%
scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.	The lowest
identified area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Triangles.     

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Triangles.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the
In five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Triangles and
Relationships Between Two & Three Dimensions.				  
	 



7.	Hispanic:
Geometry End of Course Exam:  In 2009, 47 students were tested and 61.22%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2008, 32 students were tested and 50%
scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 48 students were tested and 41.6%
scored proficient or advanced. 

In 2009, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Non-Linear Functions.  The lowest identified area (based on
the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five
mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Relationships Between Two &
Three Dimensions.

In 2008, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Triangles.  The lowest identified area (based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.    

In 2007, the lowest identified area (based on the trend analysis of the
open response questions) in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Triangles.  The lowest identified
area (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Triangles and
Relationships Between Two & Three Dimensions.				   
Grade 9-Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) 2009: Combined
Population: 0 Students were tested. 

Grade 9-Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) 2008: Combined Population: 0
Students were tested. 

Grade 9-Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) 2007: Combined Population:  21
students were tested and 5.3% scored above the 50th percentile.  Analysis
of data indicates weakness in the area of math computation.   


In 2007 13 Economically Disadvantaged students took the ITBS and 9.1%
scored above the 50th percentile with a weakness in math
computation.GRADUATION RATE:

2006--84.6%
2007--86.6%
2008--81%
2009--not yet available
AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE RATE:

2009--92.82%
2008--95.14%
2007--93.0%ACT SCORES:

2007 ACT -- MATHEMATICS--22.4
2008 ACT -- MATHEMATICS--23.0
2009 ACT -- MATHEMATICS--23.4%

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.

Benchmark

The Combined Population MET the 2009 AYP target of 55.75% scoring Proficient/Advanced; however, the SED sub-pop did not meet the required AYP target. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP Target of 64.60% scoring Proficient/Advanced, or make AYP through either the Safe Harbor or Growth models.

Intervention: Standards-Based Math Program: In which course instruction will effectively lead all students through the state frameworks and standards for mathematics instruction to an effective level of understanding and application.

Scientific Based Research: Wagner, Tony. The Global Achievement Gap. 2008. Fisher, Douglas, and Nancy Frey. Better Learning Through Structured Teaching. 2008. Popham, W. James. Transformative Assessment. 2008. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Strickland, Cindy. Tools for High-Quality Differentiated Instruction. 2007. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 2001. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. Leadership for Differentiating Schools and Classrooms. 2000. Garner, Betty K. Getting It to Got It: How Struggling Students Learn How to Learn. 2007. Strickland, Cindy and Carol Ann Tomlinson. Differentiation in Practice: A Resource Guide for Differentiating Curriculum. 2005. The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, Klein, David, et.al. The State of State Math Standards, 2005. Popham, W. James. TransFormative Assessment. 2008.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Implement standards-based mathematics strategies using lessons and assessments appropriate for 10 - 12 grade math.
Action Type: Collaboration

Jim Price, Building Principal, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Common subject area teachers will continue to meet weekly to review student work, share effective teaching and formative/summative assessment strategies, and align curriculum, instruction, and summative assessment to state frameworks as well as benchmark and end of course testing to assist all students to achieve proficiency in mathematics. Teams will be grouped based on courses taught (Geometry, Algebra II, Pre-Calculus w/Trig Honors, Advanced Algebra with Trig).
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Math Department Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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 mathematics skills including, but not limited to, tutorial sessions, make-up sessions and the use of mathematics tutorial software.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Special Education Designee, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
Performance Assessments
Teachers
Teaching Aids


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use district technology resources to pool and aggregate data results from 8th grade benchmarks and the Algebra I and Geometry End of Course Exams to address specific needs of incoming sophomore students' progress in math achievement. Give Mathematics teachers access to this data and previous math grades. Use this information to make predictions and appropriate placement for sophomores and transfer students.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Math Dept. Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Help students improve test-taking skills by simulating the types of questions on the EOC exams at every opportunity. District Quarterly Assessments will be given.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Math Dept. Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use EOC exams to evaluate teaching strategies and student progress.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Math Dept. Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will implement mathematics problem-solving strategies similar to those on the EOC exams into appropriate math classes.
Action Type: Alignment

Math Dept. Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Continue to evaluate the effectiveness of problem-solving strategies using performance assessments, open-ended math prompts, etc. Share results with parents through either grade reports, progress reports, parent/teacher conference, e-mail, etc. or a combination of the above.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Math Department Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Align the use of integrated technology with mathematics standards. Once a year, new software and technology equipment will be evaluated and plans for acquiring will be made as needed.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jim Price, Building Principal, Math Goal Chair, Math Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Central Office
Computers
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Continue to implement the use of integrated technology in classroom instruction and evaluate the effectiveness through teacher input and subjective individual evaluations of students.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Math Committee, Math Goal Chair, Math Dept. Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Central Office
Community Leaders
Computers
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

EOC Remediation: Students who score below proficient on any end-of-course exam will be required to complete a program of remedial activities ranging from regularly scheduled tutorial sessions to enrollment in a non-credit remedial course. Placement will be based upon the students score on the EOC exam.
Action Type: AIP/IRI

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal, Math Goal Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Provide Triand training & access for sophomore advisory teachers for the purpose of being able to access student test data from their own computers.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Building testing coordinator, Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Computers
District Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore the development of a process for 10th grade biology teachers to receive time to work with geometry teachers and to consider problem areas with end of course test scores together, with the goal of being able to work together to highlight common curriculum areas and opportunities for collaborative teaching.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

ACSIP Math goal chair, Science Department Chair, Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Summative Assessments: end of course exams, ACT/SAT
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Building test coordinator, ACSIP Math goal chair, Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Formative Assessments: teacher and department produced unit, quarterly, and semester exams.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Math Department Chair, Math Committee, Math Goal Chair, Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Professional development on low socio-economic sub-populations will be given to teachers of all content areas in order to raise scores on end of course mathematics exams.
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Math interventionist will work with students scoring Below Basic on the Algebra I EOC taken prior to attending Fayetteville High in order to remediate Algebra I skills and supplement Geometry topics.
Action Type: AIP/IRI

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore tutoring options available for students.
Action Type: Collaboration

Math Dept. Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Make assignments, Power Point presentations, worksheets, and the timeline for tests and quizzes available on the team website .
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Math Dept. Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Computers
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Students who are identified as at-risk will be placed in an alternative learning environment (ALE) with access to services of a school counselor/mental health professional, a nurse, and support services, all provided by the district. The ALE will employ sufficient personnel in the core academic content areas in order to meet the student/teacher ratios (as outlined in section 4.02-Rules Governing the Distribution of Student Special Needs Funding-September, 2007) and allow students to secure enough credits for graduation. Any student eligible for special education services will continue to receive services while in the ALE. Students will not be placed in the ALE based on academic problems alone. Students placed, otherwise intelligent and capable, may have one or more of the following characteristics: Disruptive behavior, potential drop out, personal or family problems, recurring absenteeism, transition to or from residential programs or conditions that negatively affect the student's academic progress. (Abuse-physical, mental, sexual, frequent relocation of residency, homelessness, inadequate emotional support, mental/physical health problems, pregnancy, single parenting) Documentation shall be maintained as to placement decisions made by the Alternative Education Placement Team. All ALE teachers will receive professional development pursuant to ADE Rules and Regulations. The Alternative Learning Environment will have as its goal to increase attendance of at-risk students and to graduate them. Parent conferences will be required for placement in the program and school personnel will be in frequent contact with parents. The placement conference will include the principal, counselor, teachers, parents, and other appropriate personnel in order to make good decisions about what services will be available while in the ALE. If the student makes significant academic and/or behavioral progress while in the ALE, the student may be exited from the program. The ALE Placement Team will develop exit criteria. The ALE will meet all guidelines required by the ADE and state laws. The counselor for the ALE, who is also the homeless liaison, will work directly with the FIT (families in transition) director to provide food, clothing, school supplies and sometimes rental reimbursement for students in need.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the formative assessments and teacher-created summative assessments in all math classes in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objective (s) of this Intervention/Program was (were) achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program."
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2008-2009 School Year we elected to use Algebra EOC and Geometry EOC as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. Although 17.65% of our students scored proficient, or advanced, on the first assessment of the Algebra EOC compared to 38.5%, on the last, 69.61% of our students scored proficient or advanced on the first assessment of the Geometry EOC compared to 64% on the last. WE plan to use the same protocol for assessing the Intervention/Program and making decisions that impact the various activities, as described in the action descriptions, during the 2009-2010 School Year. In order to measure student growth and determine the EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERVENTION/PROGRAM we will administer Algebra EOC and Geometry EOC. We expect to see a minimum of 55.75% scoring proficient, or advanced, on the last assessment we administer. We will report the results in our 2010/2011 Plan. The evaluation results will be used to impact the decisions we make that affect our future instructional program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Closing the Achievement Gap (Math): Regular meetings of our ACSIP Leadership Committee will continue to be held. These meetings will focus on building capacity within our school. Each meeting agenda will include the following Core Principles: A. The selection, and continuous evaluation, of research-based, scientifically validated, Interventions designed to improve our ability to improve student performance on the Literacy portion of all Assessments. B. The ongoing monitoring of student progress in order to influence classroom instruction. C. The utilization of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to make decisions that impact: Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. D. Coordination of resources in order to better meet the needs of all students. Written minutes of each meeting, along with a sign-in sheet, will be kept and made available upon request. The intent is that each Intervention, and Action, is carefully monitoredthrough the collection of Formative and Summative Data.so that those strategies that prove ineffective can be revised, or abandoned. Our ACSIP Plan will be revised each spring, and fall, in order to keep it timely and valid in our efforts to improve teaching and learning.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Training is offered in the Achievement Series which will enable teachers to access student scores on state mandated tests as well as local formative assessments.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Lester Long

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We formed ACSIP Leadership Teams and analyzed the test scores from the 2009 administration of the Algebra EOC and the Geometry EOC. We examined the results from both the combined population and EACH subpopulation. We conducted data analysis to determine our main areas of weakness. In addition, we studied the three most recent years of Attendance, Graduation Rate, Disciplinary, Formative and Summative Achievement Data across grade levels within our building. We aggregated and disaggregated all the data for the purpose of establishing student learning and behavioral goals. We looked at our trend data in order to better identify the specific areas of need and help align classroom instruction with our curriculum, assessment and professional development. We are modifying our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development practices to better meet the needs of all our populations. Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Math Priority: ALGEBRA I-LINEAR FUNCTIONS; GEOMETRY--COORDINATE GEOMETRY and TRANSFORMATION and RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN 2 AND 3 DIMENSIONS. In addition, we meet in teams determined by course of study weekly and as a faculty periodically so that we can review formative, "real time" classroom performance data for the purpose of making decisions regarding the direction, and focus, of our Classroom Instruction.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

We have been notified by the Arkansas Department of Education that our school has been placed on "Alert" because we failed to meet the expected Math performance level for the SED sub-pop during the 2008-2009 school year. We are taking the following measures, during the 2009-2010 school year, that are designed to make a positive difference in the teaching and learning that occurs in our building: all subject area math teachers will meet weekly to assess teaching strategies and create common assessments based on the released items for the EOC of each individual course; Power Point presentations of lessons will be available to all students through the math web site for the school; teachers are available during lunch for interventions that will assist in comprehension.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 3:

Develop meaningful job-embedded professional development

Supporting Data:

Goal

To provide high-quality professional development [to all faculty and teacher support personnel] which is classroom and student focused.

Benchmark

Evaluation of professional development activities will be based on teacher response to an evaluation survey, and on student growth (documented improvement on standardized tests, class assignments and performance assessments) anually.

Intervention: Professional Development Design: Meeting professional development mandates by fulfilling teacher and student needs.

Scientific Based Research: Wagner, Tony. The Global Achievement Gap. 2008. Fisher, Douglas, and Nancy Frey. Better Learning Through Structured Teaching. 2008. Popham, W. James. Transformative Assessment. 2008. Erkens, Cassandrs. et.al. The Collaborative Teacher. 2008. DuFour, R., and Eaker, R. Professional Learning Communities at Work. 1998. DuFour, R., et.al. Learning by Doing. 2006. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Schlechty, Philip. Working on the Work. 2002. Sisserson, Kendra, et.al. Authentic Intellectual Achievement in Writing. English Journal. July 2002. Jolliffe, David. Criteria for Measuring Authentic Intellectual Achievement in Writing. Practice in Context: Situating the Work of Writing Teachers. 2002. Newmann, Fred, et.al. A Guide to Authentic Instruction and Assessment: Vision, Standards and Scoring. 1995. Payne, Ruby. Framework for Understanding Poverty, 2005. Payne, Ruby. Under-Resourced Learners, 2008. Lubrano, Alfred. Limbo: Blue-Collar Roots, White-Collar Dreams, 2004. Educational Leadership, Poverty & Learning, Apr. 2008, vol. 65, No.7. Strickland, Cindy. Tools for High-Quality Differentiated Instruction. 2007. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 2001. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. Leadership for Differentiating Schools and Classrooms. 2000. Garner, Betty K. Getting It to Got It: How Struggling Students Learn How to Learn. 2007. Strickland, Cindy and Carol Ann Tomlinson. Differentiation in Practice: A Resource Guide for Differentiating Curriculum. 2005. Cumming, Jim and Christine Owen. Reforming Schools through Innovative Teaching, 2001. Sandholtz, Judith Haymore. Inservice Training or Professional Development: Contrasting Opportunities in a School/University Partnership, 2002. Mendler, Brian, et.al. Strategies for Successful Classroom Management.2008. Boynton, Mark and Christine Boynton. Assessing and Improving School Discipline Programs. 2007. Rothstein-Fisch, Carrie and Elise Trumbell. Managing Diverse Classrooms: How to Build on Students Cultural Strengths. 2008. Kohn, Alfie. Beyond Discipline: From Compliance to Community. 1996. Hall, Philip and Nancy Hall. Educating Oppositional and Defiant Children. 2003. Di Martino, Joseph. Personalizing the High School Experience. 2008. Sullo, Mark. Activating the Desire to Learn. 2007. Goldberg, Mark. How to Design an Advisory. 1998. Dillow, Roger. Mission-Based Adisory. 2006.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Encourage professional development which enhances teacher knowledge and skills (deep teacher knowledge of content, strong foundation in pedagogy, general knowledge on teaching and learning processes, general knowledge about school culture, library services, information access and use).
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Mr. Jim Price,Building Principal; Professional Development Committee.

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
District Staff
Outside Consultants
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Coordinate building-level professional development with district professional development steering committee (PDSC) and build connections among schools
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Kristen Scanlon, District PD Coordinator, Building PD Committee, ACSIP Steering Committee, Mr. Jim Price, Building Princ

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use technology to plan,deliver, and evaluate professional development.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; Professional Development Committee Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use community resources to provide additional expertise in meeting the professional development needs of teachers.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Mr. Jim Price; PD Committee, ACSIP Steering Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Required Professional Development hours will include six hours of educational technology and two hours of parent involvement strategy for teachers, and six hours of educational technology and three hours of parent involvement strategy for administrators.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INTERVENTION/PROGRAM: All teachers will have the opportunity to participate in the school and district professional development plan. Teachers will use the National Staff Development Council's NSDC Standards Assessment Inventory to evaluate the effectiveness of the professional development plan, the course offerings and the effectiveness of the knowledge gained. Annually, upon review of the test data, the professional development committee, working under the guidelines of the district professional development plan, will develop a professional development plan for the school and individual teachers based on information obtained through data analysis. All new teachers (first 3 years) and teachers in need of assistance will be assigned a mentor to assist them in reaching their professional development goals and needs. All teachers will have the opportunity to have input on the district and building level professional development plan. The district will provide all teachers and administrators will no less than 60 hours of professional development including 6 hours of technology and 2 hours of parental involvement development (3 hours of Parental Involvement for Administrators) and for those who teach Arkansas History, 2 hours of training in that subject. Teachers will have the opportunity to evaluate the benefit of the professional development activities and provide feedback on needed changes.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

PD committee; ACSIP Chair; Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Each faculty member belongs to a Professional Learning Community and participates in independent study to complete district professional development requirements and support teacher learning and the implementation of new theories, best practices, and trends in the classroom.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; Professional Development Committee Chair

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

One of the required faculty meetings per month will be devoted to vertical and horizontal team meetings within departments.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Mr. Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through the National Staff Development Council's NSDC Standards Assessment Inventory and determined that it was effective in support of our Professional Development. The Following EVALUATION RESULTS demonstrate that this Intervention is valid in support of the teaching and learning that are part of this program: 42% OF TEACHERS FELT THE GREATEST IMPACT OF PD ON STUDENT LEARNING RESULTED FROM DISRICT PD OFFERINGS and 90% OF TEACHERS FELT THAT PD OFFERINGS HAD AS MOST IMPORTANT THOSE SESSIONS THAT WERE STUDENT CENTERED LEARNING PD. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting the program, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: National Staff Development Council's NSDC Standards Assessment Inventory. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results in our 2010-2011 ACSIP Plan and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Central Office
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will participate in 12 hours of embedded professional development.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Faculty members completed a PD NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY in the spring of 2009. Based on the results of this survey, 42% OF TEACHERS FELT THE GREATEST IMPACT OF PD ON STUDENT LEARNING RESULTED FROM DISRICT PD OFFERINGS and 90% OF TEACHERS FELT THAT PD OFFERINGS HAD AS MOST IMPORTATN THOSE SESSIONS THAT WERE STUDENT CENTERED LEARNING PD. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas.
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 5:

To increase student awareness and knowledge of the effects of good nutrition and physical activity.

Supporting Data:

Body Mass Index Data 2008-2009: of the 1810 student population, only 254 10th grade students were assessed. Of the students assessed, the following represents the percent of students at risk of overweight or overweight: Grade 10: Males 29.3%, Females 15% Body Mass Index Data 2007-2008: of the 1877 student population, only 306 10th grade students were assessed. Of the students assessed, the following represents the percent of students at risk of overweight or overweight: Grade 10: Males 36.0%, 22.2% Females Body Mass Index Data 2006-07: of the 1940 student population, 383 students were assessed. Of the students assessed, the following represents the percent of students at risk of overweight and overweight: Grade 10: Males 34.1%, 9.5% Females Grade 11: Males 28.2%, 11.8% Females Grade 12: Males 19.6%, 14.0% Females

 National Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS):2005 The percentage
of 9-12 grade students that did not participate in any vigorous or
moderate physical activity has not significantly changed since 1999. 

 

The number of students who attended physical education classes on one or
more days in an average week when they were in school has not
significantly changed since 1995. 

 

The number of students who watched television on an average school day for
three or more hours per day has significantly decreased (5.6%) since 1999.
Free/Reduced Rate: In 2009 the percentage of free and reduced lunch
was 23%.  In 2008 the percentage of free and reduced lunch was 28%.  In
2007 the percentage of free and reduced lunch was 22%.	
COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT:  The two lowest areas on our health
index report were SCHOOL HEALTH POLICIES AND ENVIRONMENT and HEALTH
PROMOTION FOR STAFF.

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.

Benchmark

Healthier BMI results will be evident by June 30, 2010. There will be a 1/2% difference in the 2009-2010 BMI results indicating healthier lifestyles are being practiced.

Benchmark

To decrease the number of students at risk of overweight and overweight by 5% annually.

Intervention: Increase awareness and knowledge of the benefits of physical activity for lifelong health and wellness.

Scientific Based Research: Morrow, James R., Jr. and Allen W. Jackson, et. al. Physcial Activity Promotion and School Physical Education, 1999. Weiss, Maureen R. Motivating Kids in Physical Activity, 2000.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Assert efforts to increase and/or maintain the current approximate 50% of student population involved in courses and/or school activities which require daily physical activity.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal, Heather Hunsucker, Chair FHS Child Health Advisory Committee, Daryl Patton, SIP provider

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore processes for collection of data regarding student participation in after-school activities which require daily/weekly participation in physical activity and the employment of that data in promoting participation in such programs.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Monitor data regarding student participation in both school coursework/activities and after-school activities which require daily/weekly physical activity.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Buidling Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

When students are not participating in a course or school activity which provides a minimum of 150 minutes per week of physical activity, FHS makes contact with parents regarding the importance of significant physical activity, and parents are required to sign a waiver and to provide information about after-school physical activities in which their children engage regularly. This functions to increase awareness of the importance of staying physically active and promotes the school's interest in the idea of a healthy mind and a healthy body.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore membership in Healthy Schools Program (HSP) through the national Alliance for a Healthier Generation (funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation)
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, ACSIP chair, Heather Hunsucker

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
District Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Implement and encourage participation in physical education program taught by a highly qualified teacher that supports phsyical activity.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Promote reduction of time children spend engaged in sedentary activities such as watching television and playing video games by sending home informational packages that include tips for parents/caregivers.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Encourage participation in family oriented, community-based physical activity program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore assessing Fayetteville High School's physical education program through a survey for parents, students, and faculty members.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Asthma management strategies will be available in the parent information center for parents.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Parent Involvement Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2008-2009 school year we elected to use BMI screening and a School Health Index Survey as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. EVALUATION RESULTS: Males 29.3%, Females 15% of our assessed students were considered to have a high body mass index. The School Health Index Survey results showed that the percentage of 9-12 grade students that did not participate in any vigorous or moderate physical activity has not significantly changed since 1999. During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the AR Prevention Needs Assessment Student Survey and the Health Index Survey in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within the intervention program. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this intervention were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report these results in 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Byron Zeagler

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Administer the AR Prevention Needs Assessment Student Survey.
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Increase awareness and knowledge of the benefits of sound nutritional practices for lifelong health and wellness.

Scientific Based Research: Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services (USDA), Washington, DC. Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, Breakfast and Learning in Children. Symposium Proceedings (Washington, DC, April 22, 1999). Schlosser, Eric. Fast food nation : the dark side of the all-American meal,2001.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Specific nutrition standards pertain to all foods and beverages served or made available to students on our campus (school meals are governed by USDA regulations). Maximum portion size restricitions pertain to all foods and beverages served, sold, or made available to students on our campus.
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal, Arlene Davis, Food Service Manager

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Healthy breakfast foods will be available near the school's entrance each morning to promote students beginning the day nutritionally and helping them to avoid overeating during the lunch period.
Action Type: Wellness

Arlene Davis, Food Services Manager

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Faculty will be provided with alternatives to selling candy/baked goods and creative fundraising possibilities at the beginning of each school year.
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Sophomore BMI assessments will be analyzed annually to determine the percentage of students decreasing in the categories of at risk of overweight or overweight. Interventions will be evaluated for their effectiveness based on this data.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore the creation of an Eating Disorder Prevention Awareness Week in which our health & wellness classes create awareness items for display in the school and the announcements will include one of our faculty or a school nurse with information about prevention of eating disorders
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal, School Nurse

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Information will be available in the parent information center for parents on the new nutrition pyramid and portion size.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Parent Involvement Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore the possibility of creating a Student Wellness Professional Learning Team to address eating disorders and other elements of lifestyles that impact the health and wellness of our student population.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Byron Zeagler

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Administer the AR Prevention Needs Assessment Student Survey.
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We met to assess the needs of our school with regard to Health and Wellness, using the School Health Index to identify our strengths and weaknesses. Based on our data analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Wellness Priority: ASTHMA EDUCATION FOR STUDENTS and ASTHMA INFORMATION FOR THE PARENT CENTER. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 6:

Maintain a safe and secure environment

Supporting Data:

Goal

To continue and to augment the provision of a safe and secure educational environment for all students, faculty, staff, and administrators.

Benchmark

The faculty will be trained in A.L.I.C.E.

Intervention: Implement training, education, and practice required by the effective execution of FHS CRISIS plan in the event of emergencies. Consider innovations in our current handling of safety/security problems as new technology, data, and situations arise.

Scientific Based Research: Wide Scope, Questionable Quality: Three Reports from the Study on School Violence and Prevention Executive Summary. U.S. Dept. of Education, 2002. A Comprehensive Framework for School Violence Prevention. Hamilton Fish Institute, 2001. NASRO School Resource Office Survey, 2002:Final Report on the 2nd Annual National Survey of School-Based Police Officers. Trump, Kenneth S. 2002. School Resource Officers and School Administrators: Talking and Walking Together to Make Safer Schools. Research Bulletin. Center for the Prevention of School Violence North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2002. Violence in U.S. Public Schools: A Summary of Findings. ERIC development team, 2003. Brian Mendler. et.al. Strategies for Successful Classroom Management.2008. Boynton, Mark and Christine Boynton. Assessing and Improving School Discipline Programs. 2007. Rothstein-Fisch, Carrie and Elise Trumbell. Managing Diverse Classrooms: How to Build on Students Cultural Strengths. 2008. Kohn, Alfie. BeyondDiscipline: From Compliance to Community.. 1996. Hall, Philip and Nancy Hall. Educating Oppositional and Defiant Children. 2003. Mendler, Brian. et.al. Strategies for Successful Classroom Management.2008. Boynton, Mark and Christine Boynton. Assessing and Improving School Discipline Programs. 2007. Rothstein-Fisch, Carrie and Elise Trumbell. Managing Diverse Classrooms: How to Build on Students Cultural Strengths. 2008. Kohn, Alfie. Beyond Discipline: From Compliance to Community.. 1996. Hall, Philip and Nancy Hall. Educating Oppositional and Defiant Children. 2003.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

A copy of the FHS Crisis Plan will be in every classroom, within reach of the teaching professional or substitute teacher, on the desks of administrators, and all support staff, all of the time.

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use Resource Officers as security consultants to work with students and faculty/staff to prepare for possible crises.

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore the process (over the course of subsequent book adoptions) of issuing each student a book to keep at home for the term of the coursework and each teacher 1 class set to keep in the classroom in an effort to eliminate students carrying backpacks.

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2006
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Explore spending 1/4 professional development inservice day led by the CRISIS committee to cover the building CRISIS plan carefully.
Action Type: Professional Development

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Conduct 12-16 CRISIS drills of various sorts throughout the year to train students about their responsibilities in the event of a CRISIS.
Action Type: Wellness

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Purchase and install a proliferation of cameras both inside the building and in entry and parking areas, funded by the Student Council.
Action Type: Wellness

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Include two student representatives on the crisis team to respond effectively to emergencies and train fire marshalls who will be able to respond effectively in the event of fire.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Kirk Sutton, Asst. Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2008-2009 school year we elected to use a Parent Survey developed by the School Climate Professional Learning Team administered in the spring of 2009 as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. EVALUATION RESULTS: Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Safety and Security Priority: PROVIDE MEANINGFUL STUDENT RECOGNITION PROGRAMS and FOR STAFF MEMBERS TO CONSISTENTLY ENFORCE SCHOOL RULES. During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use faculty, parent and student surveys developed by the School Climate Professional Learning Team in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within the intervention program. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this intervention were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report these results in 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Byron Zeagler

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We administered an Parent Survey in the spring of 2009. Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Safety and Security Priority: PROVIDE MEANINGFUL STUDENT RECOGNITION PROGRAMS and FOR STAFF MEMBERS TO CONSISTENTLY ENFORCE SCHOOL RULES. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 7:

Foster quality parent/school relationships

Supporting Data:

Goal

To create parent/school relationships which occur in an atmosphere of trust, where confidentiality is ensured and parents and teachers treat each other with respect, and in which students may view their parents and teachers working together cooperatively.

Benchmark

Parent, teacher, and administrators will complete evaluation surveys annually for frequent consideration of the processes involved.

Intervention: Encouraging effective parent communication and interaction with their students, students' teachers, and administrators.

Scientific Based Research: Yonezawa, Susan and Jeannie Oakes. "Making Parents Partners in the Placement Process." 1999. White-Hood, Marian. "Mapping the Road to High School." 2001. Rosenzwieg, Charlotte. "A Meta-Analysis of Parenting and School Success: The Role of Parents in Promoting Students' Academic Performance." 2001. Henderson, A. and K. Mapp. "A new wave of evidence. The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement." 2002.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

The school will maintain an advisory board of teachers, administrators, students, parents, and alumni to provide advice and guidance for school improvement. Current students and recent graduates will be placed in appropriate existing advisory capacities. School alumni on the committee will be asked to help evaluate academic progress as well as the amount of parental participation within the school and identification of barriers that exist that hinder greater participation by parents.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mr. Jim Price, School Principal; Parent Involvement Coordinator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In order to encourage communication with parents our school will prepare an information packet in the form of a student handbook to be distributed annually to the parents of each child in the school. These handbooks will describe: The school's parental involvement program; The recommended role of the parent, student, teacher and school; Ways for parents to become involved in the school and their child's education; A survey for the parent regarding their interests concerning volunteering at the school; A schedule of activities planned throughout the school year to encourage parental involvement; and Procedures to allow the parents and teachers to communicate in a regular, two-way, and meaningful manner with the child's teacher and principal.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; Parent Involvement Coordinator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

To help our parents in assisting their children our school shall: Schedule regular parental involvement meetings at which parents are given a report on the state of the school and an overview of: A. What students will be learning. B. How students are assessed. C. What parents should expect for their child's education and D. How a parent can assist and make a difference in their child's education.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; Parent Involvement Coordinator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will sponsor an annual seminar to inform the parents about decisions affecting course selection, career planning, and preparation for post-secondary opportunities.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal; Parental Invovlement Coordinator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will maintain a designated area to be used as the Parent Center. Parenting books, magazines and other informative material regarding responsive parenting will be available for parents to borrow for review. Parent Center materials, which may include, but are not limited to brochures, pamphlets, and computers for use on site. The school will publicize the center on the school's website, at Parent/Teacher conferences and through the Parent Teacher Student Organization.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal; Parental Involvement Coordinator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will have the option of receiving training that specifically addresses how to hold effective and appropriate parent conferences.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal; Building Professional Development Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Administrators will have the option of receiving training that specifically addresses how to hold effective and appropriate conferences with parents, conflict resolution, and communicating effectively with parents.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal; Building Professional Development Committee

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
District Staff
Outside Consultants
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Each department will engage parents through various means including, but not limited to, newsletters, email, web pages and progress reports
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The building principal will designate one certified staff member to serve as a parent facilitator to organize meaningful training for staff and parents and to undertake efforts to ensure that parental participation is recognized as an asset to the school. The district will ensure that parental participation is recognized as an asset to the school. The district will pay the parent facilitator a stipend for assuming duties as required by ACT 603 of 2003. Effectiveness will be documented by results of parental involvment survey.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mr. Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In order to welcome parents our school shall use the volunteer surveys to compile a volunteer resource book listing the interests and availability of volunteers so that school staff may determine how frequently a volunteer would like to participate; including options for those who are available to help at home and help match school needs with volunteer interests.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will use the Career and Academic Plan (CAP) process to help students develop a six-year academic plan based on their Career Focus and state graduation requirements.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will provide parents with information concerning the CAP process through a variety of means such as letters, flyers, information packets, parent nights, website postings, telephone messages, email, radio, television, and newspapers
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will provide CAP Advisors with training and information on state laws dealing with parent involvement in academic planning, graduation requirements, and the CAP process through professional development at faculty meetings and other training sessions.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will conduct parent-teacher conferences in the fall and include parent conferences in the spring CAP conferences each year with parents and students in order to make decisions concerning class schedules based on students six-year plans.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will form a committee made up of certified staff representing all disciplines to coordinate all activities relating to the CAP process.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will form a student focus group comprised of graduating seniors to advise the CAP committee about their experiences with the CAP process and make suggestions for improvement. The CAP committee will determine a process for choosing the students who will participate
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In order to encourage parents to participate as a full partner in the decisions that affect their child and family, our school will include in our school's student handbook the school's process for resolving parental concerns, including how to define a problem, who to approach first and how to develop solutions.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In order to take advantage of community resources our school will enable the formation of a parent teacher association, or organization, that will foster parental and community involvement within the school.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In order to help sophomores transition into high school, all sophomore students will be assigned advisory teachers who will assist in getting information to both students and parents, monitor student attendance, monitor student academic standing, assist in course selections for junior and senior year, and be a liaison between the parent and the school. Advisory teachers will be part of an Advisory Professional Learning Team to research and develop effective advisory methods and lessons.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Parents and teachers are encouraged to join the Parent-Teacher-Student Organization.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2008-2009 school year we elected to use Parent Surveys as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. EVALUATION RESULTS: Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Parent Engagement Priority: INCORPORATE TECHNOLOGY INTO CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES TO ENGAGE THE STUDENTS IN UNDERSTANDING THE LEGAL, ETHICAL, AND CULTURAL ISSUES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY and TEACHERS DIFFERENTIATE INSTRUCTION RELATIVE TO EACH CHILD'S INTEREST AND LEARNING STYLE. During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the Fayetteville High School Parent Survey and Advisory Parent Survey in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within the intervention program. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objective of this intervention was achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report these results in 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Byron Zeagler

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Parental Involvement Committee developed and administered a high school parent survey during the 2008/2009 school year. The assessment will be administered during the 2009/2010 school and the results will be reported in the 2010/2011 ACSIP report.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Building Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We created and administered a Parent Survey during school year 2008/2009. Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Parent Engagement Priority: INCORPORATE TECHNOLOGY INTO CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES TO ENGAGE THE STUDENTS IN UNDERSTANDING THE LEGAL, ETHICAL, AND CULTURAL ISSUES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY and TEACHERS DIFFERENTIATE INSTRUCTION RELATIVE TO EACH CHILD'S INTEREST AND LEARNING STYLE. We will select interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Our school will provide instruction to parents on how to incorporate developmentally appropriate learning activities in the home environment through parent conferences and materials available in the parent library.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Our school will engage in other activities determined by the school to help a parent assist in his or her child's learning.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Outside Consultants
Public Library
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 8:

District personnel will work with high school personnel to analyze and address an increasing drop out rate among high school students

Supporting Data:

1. Drop Out Rate: In 2009 the drop out rate for the for the high school was 9%. In 2008 the drop out rate for the district was 9.1%. In 2007 the drop out rate for the district was 6.4%.

Goal

Decrease the gap between the general student population drop out rate and the special education drop out rate.

Benchmark

Reduce the drop out rate of special education to be no more than 5.46 percentile points above the combined population.

Intervention: Prevention, Retention, and Recovery of Drop Out students.

Scientific Based Research: Price, Hugh. Mobilizing the Community to Help Students Succeed. 2008. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Scientific Based Research: Moving Beyond Dropout Towards School Completion: An Integrative Review of Data-Based Interventions. School Psychology Review 2003. Di Martino, Joseph. Personalizing the High School Experience. 2008. Sullo, Mark. Activating the Desire to Learn. 2007. Mendler, Brian, et.al. Strategies for Successful Classroom Management.2008. Boynton, Mark and Christine Boynton. Assessing and Improving School Discipline Programs. 2007. Rothstein-Fisch, Carrie and Elise Trumbell. Managing Diverse Classrooms: How to Build on Students Cultural Strengths. 2008. Kohn, Alfie. BeyondDiscipline: From Compliance to Community.. 1996. Hall, Philip and Nancy Hall. Educating Oppositional and Defiant Children. 2003. Goldberg, Mark. How to Design an Advisory. 1998. Dillow, Roger. Mission-Based Adisory. 2006.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Data collection and follow up procedures regarding students who have left Fayetteville schools will be more clearly defined between administrative personnel, and APSCN personnel.
Action Type: Collaboration

Debbie Wilson - Special Education Director

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Computers
District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Identify commonalities in students who have dropped out of school. Analysis of this information will be used to determine goals and types of professional development offered.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development

Debbie Wilson - Special Education Director

Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2009

Central Office
Computers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Provide additional and more intensive professional development opportunities for teachers in the following areas: dealing with issues of lower socioeconomic background, universal design, co-teaching, multiple intelligences, learning styles and differentiated instruction.
Action Type: Professional Development

Chris Epperson - Special Projects Coordinator

Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2009

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Computers
Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Create a wider spectrum of course offerings in academic classrooms that would allow for and encourage additional co-teaching and multiple intelligence classrooms that would provide more curricular support for students with special needs thereby creating a culture of acceptance of everyone. Emphasize information regarding these classes during CAP conferences with parents and students so they may make an informed decision regarding selection of academic courses and a career focus based on the individual needs of the student.
Action Type: Equity

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Continue Ozark Guidance Center school-based counseling services as well as Aggression Replacement Training (ART), a social skills program used with targeted ALE students and families to address emotional and social issues.
Action Type: Wellness

Jim Price - Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Analyze annual drop out rate of the high school student body in general and subpopulations to determine interventions to help prevent, retain and recover students at risk of dropping out of school.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education

Debbie Wilson - Special Education Director

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Central Office


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2008-2009 school year we elected to use the Advisory survey of parents as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. EVALUATION RESULTS: HAVE AN ADVISORY PROGRAM THAT PERSONALIZES THE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE and FOR EACH CHILD TO HAVE AN ADVISOR AS A CONTACT PERSON FOR BOTH THE CHILD AND THE PARENT. During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the AR Prevention Needs Assessment Student Survey in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within the intervention program. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objective of this intervention was achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report these results in 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We administered an Advisory Survey in the spring of 2009. Based on our Data Analysis we came to the conclusion that the following areas reflect our greatest need within the Drop-out Decrease Priority: HAVE AN ADVISORY PROGRAM THAT PERSONALIZES THE EDUCATION EXPERIENCE and FOR EACH CHILD TO HAVE AN ADVISOR AS A CONTACT PERSON FOR BOTH THE CHILD AND THE PARENT. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Faculty members meet as a Professional Learning Community to research, document, develop and begin implementation of an advisory program for Fayetteville High School.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 9:

Improve in reading comprehension, vocabulary in context skills, and written expression in English for ELL students

Supporting Data:

Current data has the following: 20 students who are levels 1, 2, or 3 who receive no direct services 27 students who are level 4 who receive no direct services Only 6 teachers at the high school are or are seeking endorsement in ESL/ELL (3 of the 6 are English certified, one foreign language certified and one special ed certified)
In 2009, 27% of Limited English Proficient Students scored proficient or advanced on the 11th Grade Literacy Exam. In 2008, 11% of Limited English Proficient Students scored proficient or advanced on the 11th Grade Literacy Exam. In 2007, 46% of Limited English Proficient Students scored proficient or advanced on the 11th Grade Literacy Exam.
In 2009, 53.1% of Limited English Proficient Students scored proficient or advanced on the Math End of Course Exams. In 2008, 39.3% of Limited English Proficient Students scored proficient or advanced on the Math End of Course Exams. In 2007, 24.3% of Limited English Proficient Students scored proficient or advanced on the Math End of Course Exams.
The building has two ELL endorsed teachers who work with all Limited English Proficient students: Gail DeWitt and Christen Hall. In addition we have Diana Bonilla in our building, one of the district interpreters, who aids teachers in parental contact both by telephone and in writing.

Goal

All students who are English Language Learners will improve in reading comprehension, vocabulary in context skills, and written expression in English with additional attention to Literary, Content, and Practical reading passages, and Mechanics and Sentence Formation writing domains. The number of certified teachers who are ELL certified will increase.

Benchmark

The LEP sub population did not have enough students to qualify as an official sub population for AYP, however, The percentage of proficient or advanced students for mathematics is 53.1% for 2009 and the percentage for literacy is 26.7% for 2009. It is expected that there will be a 10% increase from 2009 to 2010 CRT scores, which would be 58.4% in Math and 29.37% in Literacy.

Intervention: Students will write in the content areas.

Scientific Based Research: Lubrana, Alfred. Limbo Blue-Collar Roots, White-Collar Dreams. 2004. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

The school will host two ESL/ELL parent nights to increase parental involvement and knowledge of student achievement. We will provide parents with information about school and community resources to facilitate student achievement.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Public Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

We will explore the implementation of the SIOP program as a means to improve student achievement for ELL/ESL students.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school provides ELL professional development twice a year for all high school faculty.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2009-2010 school year we will use Literacy EOC scores of the ELL subpopulation as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. EVALUATION RESULTS: the number of LEP scoring proficient on the Litercy EOC rose from 11.1% in 2008 to 26.7% in 2009 which demonstrates that this Intervention is valid in support of the teaching and learning that are part of this program. During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: all English Language Learners will be tested annually to determine level of proficiency and necessary services; all faculty will attend professional development twice a year to further their knowledge of differentiation necessary for English Language Learners. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcomes. We will report the results in our 2010-2011 ACSIP Plan and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Students will read in the content areas.

Scientific Based Research: Billmeyer, Rachel, and Mary Lee Barton. Teaching Reading in the Content Areas If Not Me, Then Who? 1998. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Strickland, Cindy. Tools for High-Quality Differentiated Instruction. 2007. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 2001.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Public Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school provides ELL professional development twice a year for all high school faculty.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: We will develop a Standards-Based Math Program in which course instruction will effectively lead all students through the state frameworks and standards for mathematics instruction to an effective level of understanding and application.

Scientific Based Research: Better Learning Through Structured Teaching. 2008. Popham, W. James. Transformative Assessment. 2008. Bender, William, and Cara Shores. Response to Intervention. 2007. Strickland, Cindy. Tools for High-Quality Differentiated Instruction. 2007. Tomlinson, Carol Ann. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 2001.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Public Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Since our data shows 40 ELL students are failing math or science, we feel HAVING MATH AND SCIENCE TEACHERS WHO HAVE ELL ENDORSEMENT is a priority. In addition, we feel that ELL DEPARTMENTS SHOULD BE STAFFED SIMILARLY TO THE SPECIAL ED DEPARTMENT (15 Special Ed teachers contrasted to 2 ELL teachers shows inequity).
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school provides ELL professional development twice a year for all high school faculty.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development

Jim Price, Principal

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Planning Team

Classification	Name	Position	Committee
Classroom Teacher	Andrew Yoakum	member/Social Studies and Athletics Depts.	CAP; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Andy Milburn	member/Career-Tech Education Dept.	Chair Remediation Committee; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Anita Lietzke	member/Foreign Languages Dept.	Field Trip Procedure
Classroom Teacher	Anna Beaulieu	member/Foreign Languages Dept.	Technology
Classroom Teacher	April Harrell	member/English Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Barry Gebhart	member/Health education and Athletics Depts.	School Day Committee Chair; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Barry Harper	member/Fine Arts Dept.	School Day; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Becky Cox	member/English Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Becky Petty	member/ALLPS Teacher	ACSIP STEERING COMMITTEE; Math Committee; Technology Committee
Classroom Teacher	Betty Brutus	member/Special Education Dept.	Grade Replacement; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Bill Laney	member/Career-Tech Education Dept.	Grade Replacement; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Bobby Smith	member/English and Athletics dept.	Field Trip Policy; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Boyd Logan	member/English Dept	Academic Honesty; Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Brenda Hancock	member/English Dept.	Co-Chair ACSIP Steering; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Brett Bell	Member/Science Dept.	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Carol Cogburn	Member/Math Department	Field Trip Procedure; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Carol Hooper	member/Special Education--Inclusion	CAP; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Carol Widder	member/Special Education Dept.	Chair Parent Involvement committee; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Carolyn Powell	Member/Special Ed. Dept.	Grade Replacement; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Carolyn Steward	member/Math Dept.	Make-up Work Policy; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Chris Clarke	member/Business Education and Leadership	Technology; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Christen Hall	ESL/ELL	Literacy; ESL/ELL
Classroom Teacher	Claire Lowe	member/Special Ed Teacher	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Darin Phelan	member/ Physical Education/ Special Education	Field Trip Procedure; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Daryl Patton	member/Athletics	Parent Involvement, SIP Coordinator
Classroom Teacher	David A. Young	member/Math dept.	Math committee
Classroom Teacher	David Riggs	member/Social Studies	Advisory Committee
Classroom Teacher	Dawnelle Fincher	member/Fine Arts Dept.	School Day; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Deanna. Easton	member/Consumer Science Dept.	Parent Involvement; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Debbie Crouch	member/Special Education Dept.	Remediation; Math committee
Classroom Teacher	Debbie McChristian	member/Science Dept. and Alternative Learning Programs	Acsip Steering; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Debbie McFall	member/Career and Tech Education Dept.	CAP; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Denise Hoy-Whitfield	member/ Special Education Dept.	ACSIP Steering; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Diane Adams	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Field Trip Procedure; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Dona Brady	member/Math dept.	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Drew Yoakum	member/Social Studies Dept.	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Emery Faulkner	member/Career-Tech Education Dept.	Chair Technology Committee; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Erin Johnson	member/English Dept.	English Dept. Chair, Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Gail DeWitt	member/English dept.	ESL/ELL; Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Gena McGee	member/Social Studies dept.	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Geniece Yates	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Course Approval; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	George Spencer	member/Science Dept.	CAP; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Ginger Eubanks	member/ALLPS Social Studies	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	H.B. Whitaker	member/Career-Tech Education	Technology; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Heather Hunsucker	member/Health Dept.	Math Committee; Chair Health Dept
Classroom Teacher	Jackie White	member/Special Ed Dept	ASCIP Steering Committe Rep for Special Ed Dept.; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Jared McBride	member/Business Dept	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jeff Carter	member/Health Dept	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jeff Jackson	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Jennifer Norbberg	member/English Dept.	Advisory; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Jessica Phelan	member/Social Studies Dept.	Activities; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Jeter Morse	member/ALLPS Teacher	ACSIP STEERING COMMITTEE
Classroom Teacher	Jim Frisby	member/Career-Tech Education Dept.	Professional Development; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Joel Emerson	member/Science Dept	Course Approval; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Joel Henderson	member/Alternative Education	Grade Replacement; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	John Delap	member/Social Studies Dept.	School Day; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Jon Gheen	member/ALLPS Social Studies	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jon Medders	member/English dept.	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jonelle Grace Lipscomb	member/Fine Arts Dept.	ACSIP Steering Committee; Make-Up Work Policy; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Jonna Dodd	member/Science Dept.	Field Trip Procedures; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Katie Stueart	member/English Dept	ACSIP Steering Committee; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Kelly Riley	ALLPS English	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Kelly Williams	member/ Math Dept.	Math
Classroom Teacher	Kimberly Thomas	Member/Math Dept.	Chair Grade Replacement committee; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Kris Sykes	member/Consumer Science Dept.	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Kyle Adams	member/Physical Education and Athletics Depts.	Field Trip Procedure; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Laura Leto	member/Alternative Education Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Laura Ring	member/Science Dept	ACSIP Steering Committee; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Lauren Elam	member/Foreign Language Dept.	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Leslie Martin	member/Special Ed Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Leverett Archer	member/ALLPS Math	Technology; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Libby Combs	Special Education Dept.	Parent Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Linda Clay	Chair/Business Education and Leadership Dept.	Activities; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Linda Heter	member/Math Dept.	Academic Honesty; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Linda Martens	Special Ed Teacher	Literary
Classroom Teacher	Linda Turner	member/Humanities-Social Studies Dept	Academic Honesty; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Linley Lyerly	member/ALLPS Science	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Lynda Brothers	member/English & Social Studies	Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Lynn Burnett	member/Social Studies Dept.	Grade Replacement; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Mark Reif	member/Science Dept.	Crisis Management; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Mark White	member/Special Education and Athletics Depts.	Remediation; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Martha McNair	member/English Dept.	Course Approval; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Melody Jones	member/English Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Michelle Fyfe	member/English Dept	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Michelle Miller	member/Math Dept.	ACSIP Steering;Chair Math Goal; Math Committee; Leadership committee
Classroom Teacher	Michelle Moore	member/Foreign Languages Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Mike Johnson	member/Science Dept.	Crisis; Math
Classroom Teacher	Mike Robinson	member/Math Dept.	Technology; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Milton Burke	member/English Dept.	School Day; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Mim Heinrichs	member/Foreign Languages Dept.	Professional Development; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Nate Magre	member/Social Studies Dept.	Chair, Professional Development Committee; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Pamela Baker	member/Math Dept.	Chair, Make-up Work Policy Committee; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Patricia Richmond	member/Special Education Dept.	School Day; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Peggy James	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Professional Development
Classroom Teacher	Pete Howard	member/Foreign Languages Dept	ACSIP Steering Committee;Remediation; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Phyllis McGinty	member/Consumer Science	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Rita Caver	member/Social Studies Dept.	Grade Replacement; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Robert McKee	member/Social Studies Dept.	School Day; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Robin Buff	member/Science Department	Activities; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Ron Liter	member/Math Dept.	Professional Development; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Ronald Townsend	member/Math Dept.	Activities; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Russ Cole	member/Social Studies Dept.	Crisis; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Sallie Langford	member/Fine Arts Dept	Chair Fine Arts Dept.; Parent Involvement; Professional Development
Classroom Teacher	Sarah Applegate	member/English Dept.	Advisory Committee
Classroom Teacher	Sarah Roberson	member/Librarian	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Scott Gallagher	member/Social Studies Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Scott Norberg	member/Social Studies and Humanities Dept.	Make-Up Work Policy; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Scott Williams	member/Science Dept.	Make-Up Work Policy; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Stephen Adams	member/Social Studies Dept.	Social Studies Chair ; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Stephen Teague	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Suki Highers	member/Social Studies Dept	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Susan Colvin	member/ Social Studies Dept.	Co-chair ACSIP Steering Committee
Classroom Teacher	Susan Hunt	member/Social Studies Dept.	Activities; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Susan King	member/Math Dept	Professional Development; Math Dept. Chair
Classroom Teacher	Susie Stewart	member/Social Studies Dept.	Academic Honesty; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	T. Vance Arnold	member/Social Studies and Student Government Depts.	Activities; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tam Stassen	member/Foreign Languages Dept.	Remediation; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tanya Evans	member/Foreign Languages Dept.	Make-Up Work Policy; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Thomas Cochran	member/English Dept.	Academic Honesty; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tim Chitwood	member/Science Dept.	Professional Development; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tim Hollis	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Activities; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tim Miller	member/Social Studies	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Todd Ballanger	member/English Dept.	Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tommi Caston	member/English Dept.	Activities; Literacy Committee
Classroom Teacher	Tony Travis	member/G.E.D.	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Virginia Swinney	member/Math Dept	Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	Warren Rosenaur	member/Fine Arts Dept.	Activities; Leadership Committee
Classroom Teacher	Wendell Harris	member/Science and Athletics Depts.	Crisis Management; Math Committee
Classroom Teacher	William Rosser	member/Science Dept	Professional Development; Math Committee
District-Level Professional	Christie Jay	District ACSIP	ACSIP Steering Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Blake Childers	member/Special Education	Remediation; Math Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Cassandra Barnett	member/Librarian	Parental Involvement; Leadership Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Connie Crisp	member/Service Learning Depts.	School Day; Literacy Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Dawn Norman	member/School Counselor	ACSIP Steering Committee; Leadership Committee; Chair, Professional Development; CAP
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Diana Bonilla	member/Translator	ACSIP Steering Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Doug Wright	member/School Counselor	CAP committee; ACSIP steering
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	John Foster	Resource Officer	CRISIS Management, Leadership Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Leigh Hudson	member/School Counselor	Parent Involvement; CAP committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Lesli Zeagler	member/School Counselor	Chair CAP committee; Leadership Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Louise Gamache	Teacher/Study Hall
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	LuAnn Raymick	member/Alternative Education--School Counselor	Crisis; Literacy Committee
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Mac Macaulay	member/Technical Specialist	ACSIP Committee; Literacy Committee
Parent	Chris Bell	member	ACSIP Planning, School Board
Parent	Daniel Levine	member	ACSIP Planning; Parental Involvement
Parent	George Sabo	member	ACSIP Planning
Parent	Jim Stowe	Member	Parent Involvement
Parent	Jorge Lopez-Mendoza	member	ACSIP Planning
Parent	Mark Arnold	member	ACSIP Planning; Math Committee
Parent	Necia Parker Gibson	member	ACSIP Planning; Literacy Committee
Principal	Byron Zeagler	Member/Assistant Principal	Leadership Committee
Principal	David F. Young	Assistant Principal	ACSIP Steering Committee, Leadership Committee
Principal	Evelyn Marbury	member/Assistant Principal	CAP; Leadership Committee
Principal	Jim Price	member/Principal	Leadership, ACSIP Steering
Principal	Kirk Sutton	member/Assistant Principal	Crisis Management; Leadership Committee