ACSIP

School Plan

HOLT MIDDLE SCHOOL
2365 N RUPPLE RD.,FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72704

Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

2009-2010

The mission of Holt Middle School at Mt. Comfort is that all students demonstrate academic success and responsible, ethical citizenship.

Grade Span: 6-7

Title I: Title I Schoolwide

School Improvement: SI_2

Table of Contents

Priority 1: Literacy
    Goal: All students will become proficient or advanced, as determined by the Arkansas Benchmark Exam, in reading comprehension and written expression.
Priority 2: Math
    Goal: All students will become proficient or advanced, as determined by the Arkansas Benchmark Exam, in math computation and problem solving.
Priority 3: Parent Involvement
    Goal: Holt will cultivate strong parent/school/community relationships in order to strengthen student achievement.
Priority 4: Wellness
    Goal: Students participating in the BMI activity will show improvement in their cardiovascular, muscular strength/endurance, and flexibility.
Priority 5: Title III/ELL- Budgeting and Support
    Goal: All ELL students will improve in reading, writing, math.

Priority 1:

All students will become proficient or advanced in literacy.

Supporting Data:

ACSIP CRT Data Source for HOLT MIDDLE SCHOOL 	    
  
	    
 Benchmark-6th Grade Literacy Exam 
 				  
  
Report Created:  Sep 9, 2009

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 

       
	  203 Students:        73.89% of Combined Students 
 	  
   
	   38 Students:        55.26% of African American Students 
   
   
	   28 Students:        71.43% of Hispanic Students 
 	  
   
	  130 Students:        78.46% of Caucasian Students 
	  
   
	   101 Students:	58.42% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students

	
	   14 Students:        73.33% of LEP Students 
		  
   
	   25 Students:        16.67% of Students with Disabilities

Combined Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content . The trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style. African American Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content. The trend analysis of the questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content and style. Hispanic Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content. The trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content and style. Caucasian Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) is: content. The trend analysis of the questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content and style. Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content . The trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content and style. LEP Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content. The trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style. Students with Disabilities Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content . The trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style.

ACSIP CRT Data Source for HOLT MIDDLE SCHOOL	      
	  
      
 Benchmark-7th Grade Literacy Exam 
 				  
  
Report Created:  Sep 9, 2009 					  
	


2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 

       
	  175 Students:        73.14% of Combined Students 
 	  
   
	   39 Students:        71.79% of African American Students 
   
   
	   23 Students:        56.52% of Hispanic Students 
 	  
   
	  104 Students:        76.92% of Caucasian Students 
	  
   
	   88 Students:        63.33% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 

   
	   12 Students:        33.3% of LEP students 
		  
  
	  15 Students:	       26.67% of Students with Disabilities

	


Combined Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and
multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed
that the lowest identified area(s) are:  Content .  The trend analysis of
the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified area(s) are: Content and style.

African American Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response
and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages
revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are:  Content.  The trend
analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style.

Hispanic Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and
multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed
that the lowest identified area(s) are:  Content.  The trend analysis of
the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style.

Caucasian Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open response and
multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading passages revealed
that the lowest identified area(s) are:  Content.  The trend analysis of
the open response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the
lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style.

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open
response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading
passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are:  content .  The
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: content and style.

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation: The trend analysis of the open
response and multiple choice questions, in the three types of reading
passages revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are:  Content.  The
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified area(s) are: Content and Style.

Literacy Priority
1. Combined Population:  
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  73.89  % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 69.6 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 70 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: literary and content. 
The 3 year trend analysis of the open response questions in the five
writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: Content
and Style.


2. Students with Disabilities (IEP):
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  16.67 % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 48 % scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007,11.1 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:  Content.  The 3 year
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:  Content and Style.



3. Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  73.3	% scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 47.6 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 52.1 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008 and
2009 content. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response questions in
the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:
Content.



4.  Economically Disadvantaged (FRLP):
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 58.42	% scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 58.2 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 59.2 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008 and
2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response questions in
the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:
 Content and Style.



5.  Caucasian:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  78.46 % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 78 % scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 77.3 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008 and
2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response questions in
the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:
Content and Style.



6.  African-American:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 55.26	% scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 56.8 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 53.3 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary; 2007,
2008, and 2009 content. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area (s) are: Content and Style.
							 


7.  Hispanic:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  71.43  % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 59.1 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 53.8 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: Content. The 3 year
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing domains
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: Content and Style.





 Literacy Priority
1. Combined Population:  
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam:  In 2009,  73.14  % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 71.79 % scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 66.9 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008
practical, 2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area (s) are: Content and Style.


2. Students with Disabilities (IEP):
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  26.67  % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 20 % scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 17.8 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 content, 2008
practical, 2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area (s) are: Content and Style.


3. Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  33.33 % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 50 % scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 46.4 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, .The 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions in the five writing
domains revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:
NOT IN 2008 PLAN.  Need data.


4.  Economically Disadvantaged (FRLP):
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009,  63.33  % scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 55.6 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 57.3 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008 and
2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response questions in
the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are:
Content and Style.



5.  Caucasian:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 76.92	% scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 78.1 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 73.5 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008
practical, 2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area (s) are: Content and Style.



6.  African-American:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 71.79	% scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 64.7% scored proficient or advanced.  In 2007, 51.4 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008
practical, 2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area (s) are: Content and Style.



7.  Hispanic:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 56.52	% scored proficient or advanced.
In 2008, 69.6 % scored proficient or advanced.	In 2007, 50 % scored
proficient or advanced. The 3 year trend analysis of the open response and
multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading passages,
revealed that the lowest identified area (s) are: 2007 literary, 2008
practical, 2009 content.  The 3 year trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area (s) are: Content and Style.

SAT-10 (09): Combined population: Reading Comprehension Grade 6:  In
2009 204 students were tested and 57.1% had an NPR score of 50, or above. 


SAT-10 (09): Combined population: Reading Comprehension Grade 7:  In 2009
177 students were tested and 62.1% had an NPR score of 50, or above.  

ITBS:  (07) SAT-10 (08-09): Combined (Total) Population:  Reading
Comprehension, Grade 6: In 2009, 55.8% had an NPR score of 50, or above. 
In 2008, 62.1% had an NPR score of 50, or above. In 2007, 54.8% had an NPR
score of 50, or above. 

ITBS:  (07) SAT-10 (08-09): Combined (Total) Population:  Reading
Comprehension, Grade 7: In 2009, 65.1% had an NPR score of 50, or above. 
In 2008, 62.1% had an NPR score of 50, or above. In 2007, 59.7% had an NPR
score of 50, or above. 

Attendance Rate:
2009:  The attendance rate for the building was 95.45%
2008:  The attendance rate for the building was 96.1%.
2007: The attendance rate for the building was 95.2%.

Goal

All students will become proficient or advanced, as determined by the Arkansas Benchmark Exam, in reading comprehension and written expression.

Benchmark

The Combined Population and each Subpop MET the 2009 AYP target of 59.50% scoring Proficient/Advanced, except for the Students with Disabilities population, which scored 20.42%. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP Target of 67.60% scoring Proficient/Advanced. Because all sub population did not meet the AMO target, Holt Middle School status is School Improvement Year Two (Targeted).

Intervention: Holt teachers and students will be provided high quality materials and resources to create a school of proficient readers and writers.

Scientific Based Research: Step Up To Writing, Maureen E. Auman. Arkansas Writing Project, Sopris West, 1999 Arkansas Department of Education Literacy Lab Project

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

To recognize and encourage ongoing student achievement in literacy,Holt's media specialist will maintain a School Publishing Center for publication of students' writing from across the curriculum. Funds will be used to purchase materials and supplies necessary for the publishing of student work. Parents will be recruited to assist with running the publishing center. Published materials will be sent home for parents to read. Committee will meet to evaluate and reflect upon current programs and practices using formative and summative data in order to determine areas for future focus and improvement.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Pam Skipper

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

Computers
School Library
Teachers
Title Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$500.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$500

Holt will promote school-wide and community-wide literacy by conducting reading/writing celebrations. This will include a Family Literacy Night, presentations by visiting authors, and field trip transportation for students to see a movie based on a book they have read. Funds will be used to purchase food and fees for visiting authors.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Anna Howard

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

Outside Consultants
Public Library
Teachers
Title Teachers

Title I - Purchased Services:	$3500.00
Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$1700.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$5200

Holt will hold an annual spelling bee to encourage expanding vocabulary and word study. Materials and necessary supplies will be purchased.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Anna Howard

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

Community Leaders
Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$150.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$150

To foster a literacy-rich environment in alignment with the ADE Literacy Lab philosophy, the school will procure appropriate reading materials and supplies and create reading corners and rooms conducive to a good reading atmosphere. Title I funds will be used to purchase these books and supplies.
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers
Teaching Aids
Title Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$15031.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$15031

Holt counselors and teachers will conduct a school-wide celebration of success for those students who participate successfully in the Benchmark Exams. Materials will be purchased so that all students may participate. The event will be educationally motivational in nature, focused on helping all children become literate.
Action Type: Collaboration

Jane Corrigan

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

Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$500.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$500

To provide supplemental instructional resources for 6th grade literacy, teachers will order a classroom set of "Scholastic Storyworks" for each pack. 7th grade literacy teachers will order "BuckleDown Benchmark" booklets for each pack.
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Audra Corbitt

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

Teaching Aids

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$2000.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$2000

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention by reviewing expenditures for materials and resources and by surveying the teachers in a staff meeting about the effectiveness of the funds used for this intervention. The staff determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. Students have access to high quality reading materials in every classroom in the building and teachers are able to display these materials in an attractive, inviting manner. We believe the evidence shows that this intervention is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student literacy achievement. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to follow the protocol listed above. We will use all available data, including Staff/student surveys and ACTAAP Reading scores, 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 these results in our 2010/2011 ACSIP plan, and will use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Principal

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

Performance Assessments


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Supplemental reading materials and supplies will be purchased for struggling readers and writers, particularly for the school's ELL population. This will include Read180 materials. Title 1 funds will be used for these purchases.
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Deborah Karnes

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

Teachers
Teaching Aids

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$2820.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$2820

Total Budget:

$26201

Intervention: Holt teachers will conduct a variety of intervention programs for students who need remediation in literacy. The criteria used to determine need will be the Arkansas Benchmark scores, literacy screener results, formative and summative classroom assessments, and teacher recommendations.

Scientific Based Research: "Strategies that Work" by Harvey, S. & Goudvis, A. 2000.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT YEAR 2: Holt will hire three part time (.57 FTE, .29 FTE, .5 FTE), highly-qualified teachers to provide intervention services for struggling readers and writers. This will be in addition to the daily literacy instruction these students receive. Parents will be notified of student participation in extended literacy instruction.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Teachers
Title Teachers

Title I - Employee Salaries:	$51602.00
Title I - Employee Benefits:	$13417.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$65019

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We formed ACSIP Leadership Teams and analyzed the test scores from the 2009 administration of the 6th and 7th grade (Augmented Benchmark) (EOC) and SAT 10 Exams. 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, 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 examined our routines, customs, and norms in order to dig deeper for the root cause why more of our students are not achieving to their full potential. Our 2009 Supporting Data Statements show the discrepancies in achievement, among our various populations. 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 Literacy Priority: the Content and Style domains in writing, Content and Literary open response. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas. IN addition, we meet in core teaching teams daily, as an entire faculty weekly, and in departmental teams monthly 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. We chart progress in our network assessment folders as well as students cumulative folders.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

AIP/IRI: According to the guidelines of ACT 35, each student scoring below proficient will have an AIP created with the involvement of parents, teachers, and counselors. Parent signatures will be required for all AIPs. AIP students will participate in intervention classes and activities designed to provide POINT-IN TIME REMEDIATION for the development of the skills necessary to pass the various CRT exams. The process for determining students in need of remediation will be the following: 1)Benchmark scores and other pertinent data will be recorded on a spreadsheet for the entire school population. 2) This data will be sorted so that students scoring below proficient will be listed in order of their Benchmark scaled score. 3) Individual student strengths/weaknesses will be reviewed by core teachers, counselor, ESL/Sped teacher (if appropriate), and principal. 4) This team will recommend appropriate interventions. 5) Parents will be notified of these recommendations either in writing or at the fall parent/teacher conferences. 6) Holt will have the following literacy programs available to provide flexibility in placing students in appropriate reading and writing levels according to their needs: 1) Literacy Lab instructional model, 2) Reading/Writing Workshop, 3) "Buckle Down" curriculum for 7th grade, and 4) READ 180.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Janice Ferguson

Start: 07/31/2009
End: 06/29/2010

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Computers
District Staff
Outside Consultants
Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: 2YEAR PLAN: Action 1: PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through pre/post testing (STAR Reading, Scholastic Reading Inventory, DIBELS ORF), CRT/NRT assessments (ACTAAP, Buckle Down Benchmark), and common local summative assessments and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. In addition, we implemented Target Assessments aligned with state standards that were developed by the NWAESC. Specific intervention progress monitoring assessments were utilized to determine student growth as well (i.e. Read 180). The following EVALUATION RESULTS demonstrate that this Intervention is valid in support of the teaching and learning that are part of this program: 40% of students scored below grade-level on their first ORF assessment. That number had decreased to 21% below grade-level by the end of year assessment. 86% of students involved in the intervention made ACTAAP scale score gains in literacy, 42% advanced one level of ACTAAP proficiency in literacy. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to follow the protocol listed above with the exception of the use of STAR Reading and Target Assessments developed by the NWAESC. 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: Program Evaluation

Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Closing the Achievement Gap (Literacy): Regular monthly meetings of our (Literacy) 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: Equity

Andrew Chance

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

$65019

Intervention: Holt will provide its students and teachers with a rich, diverse library, media collection and technology to create a school of proficient readers and writers. These will be integrated into the curriculum through direct and indirect instruction by the library media specialist.

Scientific Based Research: Information Power: Building Partnerships for Learning, American Library Association, 1998

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Using the district selection policy, the Holt media center will provide students and staff with access to a rich collection of diverse and up-to-date resources such as books, research and instructional materials, videos, and learning games which support students in reaching challenging state learning expectations in all content areas.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Pam Skipper

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

School Library
Teachers
Title Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$9500.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$9500

The media specialist will provide opportunities for independent and group research projects that are integrated with classroom instruction and that result in written pieces that demonstrate students' abilities to communicate content knowledge.
Action Type: Collaboration

Pam Skipper

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

School Library
Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Students and staff will use technology to access information for content learning, to motivate students, to develop reading and writing skills, and to publish student work.
Action Type: Collaboration

Pam Skipper

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

School Library
Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program by doing an inventory of library holdings and an informal survey of the Holt staff. Holt has built up a tremendous library collection of: 18,000 books, 75 audio books, 15 MP3 players for the audio books, and subscriptions to 25 periodicals. The Holt staff believes that the library does an outstanding job of supporting their literacy instruction and research projects. The librarian uses the materials purchased to motivate students to read, to help students learn to conduct effective research on a wide range of topics, and to support teachers in selecting and acquiring appropriate instructional materials.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

$9500

Intervention: Professional Development

Scientific Based Research: National Staff Development Council Standards, 2001; "Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development" Joellen Killion, 2002, www.nsdc.org

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

SCHOOLWIDE REFORM STRATEGIES: To assist in their efforts toward continuous improvement in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and student achievement, a representative segment of the Holt staff will participate in an annual planning event to evaluate and reflect upon current programs and practices using formative and summative data in order to determine areas for future focus and improvement. In addition, a PEER REVIEW of the Holt curriculum and practices will take place with the planning team of another district middle school. Findings of the events will be recorded and shared with the entire Holt staff for further discussion and research. Changes adopted will be included in the following year's improvement goals and the student and/or staff handbooks (as appropriate). Substitutes will be hired, food, drink, and materials purchased.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

SCHOOLWIDE REFORM STRATEGIES: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT YEAR 2: Holt teachers will participate in local, state, and national PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT opportunities in literacy. Because Holt is Schoolwide Title I, 10% of the building's Title I allocation will be set aside for professional development for teachers and administrators in regard to the School Improvement status area of Literacy specific to the special education population. In addition, Title II-A funds will be budgeted in order to provide ongoing professional trainings which include but are not limited to: Smart Step Literacy Lab Project, Northwest Arkansas Educational Services Cooperative, International Reading Association Conference, Northwest Arkansas Writing Project (Fall and Spring Mini-Conferences), the Open Summer Institute, So Many Books - So Little Time, Young Authors Series at Harding University, Reading in the Content Areas, READ180 National Summer Conference, University of Arkansas Literacy Symposium, Northwest Arkansas Middle Level Conference, and the NMSA National Conference in Denver. Substitute will be provided during release time for teachers to attend said trainings/conferences. The Language Arts teachers will provide MENTORING activites for teachers of other content areas, in addition to Pathwise, that are connected to the professional development and include a quality coaching model to provide assistance to the teachers. This comprehensive literacy model includes job-embedded, ongoing professional development with classroom protocols and conferences with teachers. In addition to purchased services, books and other professional development materials will be purchased for Professional Learning Teams and food, drinks, and snacks will be provided for all-day and evening Professional Development activities.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers
Title Teachers

Title II-A - Purchased Services:	$8200.00
Title I - Purchased Services:	$13000.00
Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$6930.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$28130

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: All teachers will have the opportunity to participate in the school and district professional development plan. Teachers will use an instrument developed by the district professional development committee 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 with 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
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program by reviewing the professional development received through the use of Title I funds. Holt spent more than the amount required on professional development. In an informal survey at a staff meeting and in ACSIP meetings, the Holt staff overwhelming stated that the professional development received had helped them improve their instruction, resulting in higher levels of student achievement on the literacy Benchmark exam. Especially beneficial was the professional development received at the READ-180 National Summer Conference. A similar Likert-scale survey will be submitted to staff this year to determine this intervention's effectiveness during the 2009-2010 school year.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt principals are being trained to do Classroom Walk Throughs and will conduct them daily. Data will be made available to teachers.

Mike Mason

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

$28130

Intervention: Holt Teachers will teach students to become proficient or advanced readers and writers.

Scientific Based Research: Arkansas Smart Step Literacy Lab models, NRP's Becoming a Nation of Readers, University of Oregon's DIBELS, Classroom Instruction that Works- R. Marzano,2002

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Holt Language Arts Teachers will administer reading screeners (SRI, STAR reading, DIBELS ORF) to each student at the beginning of the school year to determine student reading proficiency levels and instructional needs.
Action Type: Equity

Andrew Chance

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt Core Teachers will work with students to become fluent readers who are able to comprehend a variety of texts. Strategies to be used to achieve this goal include; making connections, questioning, visualizing, inferring and predicting, analyzing, and synthesizing.
Action Type: Equity

Audra Corbitt

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

HIGHLY QUALIFIED: Holt Core Teachers, all of whom are highly qualified according to federal standards, will integrate reading instruction into every content area. STRATEGIES TO ATTRACT HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS: We advertise locally, and statewide, our faculty openings. We make every attempt to secure the most highly qualified candidates for each position that becomes available. WE work with the University of Arkansas in the placement of their best teacher candidates in our school.
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Richard Guthrie

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt Language Arts Teachers will, throughout each quarter, administer Formative reading assessments to monitor instructional effectiveness.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Audra Corbitt

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

At the end of each quarter, Holt Language Arts Teachers will administer common Summative reading assessments (SRI) to their students. Results of these assessments will be placed in a student portfolio and made available to parents.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Audra Corbitt

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

Computers
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT YEAR 2: Holts ACSIP Literacy Committee will meet monthly to establish uniform standards and ensure consistency in scoring of formative assessments. Teacher mentoring activities will be incorporated into monthly meetings to provide assistance to teachers. ACSIP peer reviews will take place quarterly to implement and revise a two year plan.
Action Type: Alignment

Audra Corbitt

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: 2 Year Plan: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through pre/post testing (STAR Reading, Scholastic Reading Inventory, DIBELS ORF), CRT/NRT assessments (ACTAAP, Buckle Down Benchmark), and common local summative assessments and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. In addition, we implemented Target Assessments aligned with state standards that were developed by the NWAESC. Specific intervention progress monitoring assessments were utilized to determine student growth as well (i.e. Read 180). The following EVALUATION RESULTS demonstrate that this Intervention is valid in support of the teaching and learning that are part of this program: SRI results identify 86% of students demonstrating measureable gains in reading comprehension over the school year. 86% of students involved in Read-180 made ACTAAP scale score gains in literacy, while 42% advanced one level of ACTAAP proficiency in literacy. Writing Intervention results show that 81% of students in this intervention made ACTAAP scale score gains, while 42% of students moved up 1 level of proficiency on the Benchmark Exam. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to follow the protocol listed above with the exception of the use of STAR Reading and Target Assessments developed by the NWAESC. 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: Program Evaluation

Andrew Chance

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt Language Arts Teachers will administer a writing screener to each student at the beginning of the school year to determine student writing proficiency levels and instructional needs. In addition, Holt Language Arts Teachers will, throughout each quarter, administer Formative writing assessments to be scored using a modified Arkansas Scoring Guide for Writing.

Holt ACSIP Literacy Chair

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt Language Arts Teachers will teach students the five writing domains as per the Arkansas Scoring Guide for Writing through genres of writing defined by the Arkansas State Standards (narrative, expository, persuasive, descriptive, poetry).

Holt ACSIP Literacy Chair

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt students will be taught to use and assess their writing by using Holts modified version of the Arkansas Scoring Guide for Writing.

Holt ACSIP Literacy Chair

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

HIGHLY QUALIFIED: Holt Core Teachers, all of whom are highly qualified according to federal standards, will integrate writing instruction into every content area.

Assistant Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

At the end of each quarter, Holt Language Arts Teachers will administer a common Summative writing assessment to their students. These assessments will be developed by the ACSIP Literacy Committee. Core Teachers will use some of their team planning time to collectively score these student responses to determine areas of needed instruction and intervention. Results of these prompts will be placed in a student portfolio and made available to parents.

Holt ACSIP Literacy Chair

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 2:

All students will become proficient or advanced in math computation and problem solving.

Supporting Data:

 CombinACSIP CRT Data Source for HOLT MIDDLE SCHOOL	  
   
 	      
 Benchmark-6th Grade Mathematics Exam 
				  
  
Report Created:  Sep 2, 2008  					  
	

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 

       
	  203 Students:        83.33% of Combined Students 
 	  
   
	   38 Students:        60.53% of African American Students 
   
   
	   28 Students:        89.66% of Hispanic Students 
 	  
   
	  130 Students: 	 87.69% of Caucasian Students 
	  
     
	   101 Students:	75.49% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students

	
	  14 Students:		87.5% of LEP Students 
		  
   
	   24 Students: 	 41.67% of Students with Disabilities

	

Combined Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in measurement.  The lowest identified area(s) (based
on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations.

African American Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on
the trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in measurement and algebra.  The lowest
identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers
and Operations.

Hispanic Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in measurement.  The lowest identified area(s) (based
on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations.

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in measurement.  The lowest identified
area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in
the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and
Operations.

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s)
(based on the trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in measurement and algebra.  The
lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Numbers and Operations.

LEP Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in measurement.  The lowest identified area(s) (based
on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Number and Operations.

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s)
(based on the trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in measurement and algebra.  The
lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Numbers and Operations, and Algebra.


ACSIP CRT Data Source for HOLT MIDDLE SCHOOL	      
	  
      
 Benchmark-7th Grade Mathematics Exam 
				  
  
Report Created:  Sep 9, 2009  					  
	

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 

       
	  175 Students:        75.71% of Combined Students 
 	  
   
	   39 Students:        69.23% of African American Students 
   
   
	   23 Students:        60.87% of Hispanic Students 
 	  
   
	  104 Students:        81.73% of Caucasian Students 
	  
   
	   88 Students:        65.22% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 

   
	   12 Students:       50% of LEP Students 
			  

	   15 Students:       33.33% of Students with Disabilities

	


Combined Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Number and Operations.  The lowest identified
area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in
the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Geometry and
Measurement.

African American Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on
the trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, and Algebra.  The
lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Geometry and Measurement.

Hispanic Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, Geometry, and Measurement. 
The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Geometry and Measurement.

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, and Measurement. 
The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Geometry and Measurement.

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s)
(based on the trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, and
Measurement.  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis
of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Geometry and Measurement.

LEP Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Number and Operations, and Measurement.	The lowest
identified area(s) (based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions) in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Geometry and Measurement.

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified area(s)
(based on the trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Number and Operations,
Geometry, and Measurement.  The lowest identified area(s) (based on the
trend analysis of the multiple choice questions) in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in Measurement.

Mathematics Priority
1. Combined Population:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 83.33 % scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 84.8% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 78.1 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Geometry and Measurement.  The
lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed
weaknesses in Data and Probability, and Numbers and Operations.


2. Students with Disabilities:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 41.67 % scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 68% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 37 % scored proficient
or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Geometry and Measurement.  The lowest identified
area (s) (based on the 3 year trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Numbers and Operations and Agebra.


3.  Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 87.5% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 66.7% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 60.8 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Geometry and Numbers and
Operations.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in Data analysis and Probability, and Numbers
and Operations.


4.  Economically Disadvantaged (SES): 
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 75.49% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 75.8% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 69.7 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Geometry, Numbers and
Operations, and Measurement.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the
3 year trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Data analysis and Probability,
and Numbers and Operations.



5.  African-American:

Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 60.53% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 86.5% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 73.3 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Geometry, Numbers and
Operations, Measurement, Geometry, and Algebra.  The lowest identified
area (s) (based on the 3 year trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Geometry and Numbers and Operations.



6.  Hispanic:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 89.66% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 72.7% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 69.2 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Algebra, Geometry, Numbers and
Operations, and Measurement.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the
3 year trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Data analysis and Probability,
 and Numbers and Operations.



7.  Caucasian:
Grade 6 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 87.69% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 87% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 82.6 % scored proficient
or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Geometry, Numbers and Operations, Measurement, and
Geometry.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five mathematics
strands, revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Numbers and Operations.


1. Combined Population:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 75.71% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 74.8% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 70 % scored proficient
or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, and Algebra.  The lowest
identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in
Geometry, Measurement, and Numbers and Operations.

2.  Students with Disabilities (IEP):
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 33.33% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 24% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 32.1 % scored proficient
or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, Measurement, and Algebra. 
The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed
weaknesses in Data analysis and Probability, and Measurement.



3.  Limited English Proficient (LEP):
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 50% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 60% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 31 % scored proficient
or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend
analysis of the open response questions) in the five mathematics strands,
revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, Measurement, and Algebra. 
The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3 year trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions), in the five mathematics strands, revealed
weaknesses in Numbers and Operations, and Measurement.




4.  Economically Disadvantaged (SES): 
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 65.22% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 55.6% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 56.9 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Measurement, and Algebra.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Geometry, and Measurement.




5.  Caucasian:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 81.73% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 77.2% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 79.4 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Measurement, and Algebra.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Geometry, and Measurement.



6.  African-American:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 69.23% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 58.8% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 54.2 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Measurement, and Algebra.  The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Geometry, Algebra, and Measurement.





7.  Hispanic:
Grade 7 Benchmark Exam: In 2009, 60.87% scored proficient or advanced. In
2008, 78.3% scored proficient or advanced. In 2007, 44.4 % scored
proficient or advanced. The lowest identified area (s) (based on the 3
year trend analysis of the open response questions) in the five
mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Measurement, Algebra, and Geometry.  The lowest identified area (s) (based
on the 3 year trend analysis of the multiple choice questions), in the
five mathematics strands, revealed weaknesses in Numbers and Operations,
Geometry, and Measurement.

Mathematics:

 ITBS:	(07) SAT-10 (08-09): Combined (Total) Population:  Total Math,
Grade 6: In 2009, 71.3% had an NPR score of 50, or above.  In 2008, 70.9%
had an NPR score of 50, or above. In 2007, 58.1% had an NPR score of 50,
or above. 

ITBS:  (07) SAT-10 (08-09): Combined (Total) Population:  Total Math,
Grade 7: In 2009, 71.3% had an NPR score of 50, or above.  In 2008, 70.3%
had an NPR score of 50, or above. In 2007, 60.8% had an NPR score of 50,
or above

Attendance Rate:

2009, the attendance rate for the building was 95.45%
2008, the attendance rate for the building was 96.1%.
2007, the attendance rate for the building was 95.2%.

Goal

All students will become proficient or advanced, as determined by the Arkansas Benchmark Exam, in math computation and problem solving.

Benchmark

The Combined Population and each Subpop MET the 2009 AYP target of 55.69% scoring Proficient/Advanced with the exception of the Students with Disabilities Subpop, in which 41.67% scored proficient or advanced. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP Target of 64.55% scoring Proficient/Advanced.

Intervention: Math teachers will be trained to develop and/or implement and assess effective research-based math curriculum, strategies and practices.

Scientific Based Research: Making Standards Work: How to Implement Standards-Based Assessment in the Classroom, School, and District" by Douglas B. Reeves, 1997,Center for Performance Assessment, "Problem Solver" by McGraw Hill Creative, "Classroom Instruction that Works, Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement" by Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2004. "Everyday Math" 2006

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

COORDINATION AND INTEGRATION OF PROGRAMS: Holt math and science teachers will participate in local, state, and national science professional development opportunities that are designed to address school improvement goals and increase student achievement (science to national conference, science PD day).
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Linnea Lillquist

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

Teachers
Title Teachers

Title I - Purchased Services:	$5000.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$5000

The Holt staff will be involved in the decision-making process concerning staff development opportunities. The staff will elect a professional development committee to govern the professional development budget.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Mike Mason

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt math teachers will purchase materials and supplies needed to successfully implement a strong standards-based math curriculum (Calculators, Dynamath magazines, math manipulatives, whiteboards, projection screens, etc.).
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Regina Sherwood

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$3870.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$3870

Holt science and math teachers will work together to create an integrated curriculum where possible. Science teachers will purchase materials and supplies that will enhance hands-on learning and demonstrate to students the interrelatedness of math and science (plants, butterfly gardens, dissection organs). Math, Science, and Literacy teachers will also involve their students in hands-on experiences through field trips to the Tulsa Air and Space Museum and an overnight field trip to the Ozark Natural Science Center. Information for the Ozark Natural Science Center trip: All 6th grade students and 6th grade teachers will participate in the two day educational experience at the Ozark Natural Science Center, located at Huntsville. The students and teachers will be led through hands-on educational experiences by the Ozark Natural Science Center staff. After returning from the trip, students will continue to build upon the learning experiences by continuing to research what they studied at the Center. This will increase their research and writing skills in a rigorous and relevant manner. These activities will also increase the desired goal of improved curriculum intergration, especially the intergration of literacy, math, and science skills and knowledge. Additional information about the Ozark Natural Science Center can be found by accessing their website at www.onsc.us
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration

Jennifer Hierholzer

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

Teachers

Title I - Purchased Services:	$20750.00
Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$2195.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$22945

SCHOOLWIDE REFORM STRATEGIES: To assist in their efforts toward continuous improvement in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and student achievement, the Holt science staff will participate in one work day to align curriculum and to evaluate and reflect upon current programs and practices using formative and summative data in order to determine areas for future focus and improvement. Substitute services will be hired and food will be provided.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Principal

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

Teachers

Title I - Purchased Services:	$300.00
Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$50.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$350

SCHOOLWIDE REFORM STRATEGIES: Using state curriculum frameworks and pertinent assessment data, the math curriculum will be continually examined, mapped, and aligned. Holt math teachers, all of whom are highly qualified according to federal standards, will administer formative district-developed math assessments as well as summative state and national math assessments. The results of these assessments will be shared with students and parents and used to determine; 1) areas where the curriculum and instruction need to be improved and 2) which students are in need of interventions.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Chip Martin

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through pre/post testing (STAR Math), quarterly assessments, and local summative assessments and determined that it was effective through comparisons with CRT/NRT assessments (District Course exams, ACTAAP, Target Assessments), in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. EVALUATION RESULTS: 42% of our students scored proficient, or advanced, on the pretest compared to 69%, on the last. In addition, 79% scored proficient or advanced on the ACTAAP Benchmark exam. 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. 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 these results in our 2010/2011 ACSIP plan, and will use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program. Our target is that the combined population will achieve 90% proficiency in total math.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Closing the Achievement Gap (Math): Regular monthly meetings of our (Math) 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 Math 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, which 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: Equity

Chip Martin

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

$32165

Intervention: Holt will conduct a variety of intervention programs for students who need remediation in math.

Scientific Based Research: Everyday Math Program (McGraw-Hill, 2007). Accelerated Math Title 1 Math Teacher Star Math Testing Fast-Fridays for weekly remediation Everyday Math Games

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: We formed ACSIP Leadership Teams and analyzed the test scores from the 2009 administration of the 6th and 7th grade Augmented Benchmark, EOC, and SAT 10 Exams. 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, 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 examined our routines, customs, and norms in order to dig deeper for the root cause why more of our students are not achieving to their full potential. Our 2009 Supporting Data Statements show the discrepancies in achievement, among our various populations. 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: Numbers and Operations, Measurement, and Geometry. We will select Interventions and coordinate our various state and federal funding sources to address these areas. IN addition, we meet in core teaching teams daily, as an entire faculty weekly, and in departmental teams monthly 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. We chart progress in our students assessment folders.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Chip Martin

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

Computers
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt will supplement its regular math instruction by hiring a math teacher, funded by the district, to provide sixth grade students with an additional 125 minutes of math instruction each week.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Principal

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

Administrative Staff
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt math and science teachers will conduct a Pizza Supper and Family Math and Science Night during the school year to foster enthusiasm for these content areas and to encourage greater parental involvement. Title I monies will be used to purchase materials and supplies needed for this activity.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Chip Martin

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers
Teaching Aids
Title Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$1500.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$1500

AIP/IRI: According to the guidelines of ACT 35, each student scoring below proficient will have an AIP created with the involvement of parents, teachers, and counselors. Parent signatures will be required for all AIPs. AIP students will participate in district-funded intervention classes and activities designed to provide POINT-IN TIME REMEDIATION for the development of the skills necessary to pass the various CRT exams. The process for determining students in need of remediation will be the following: 1)Benchmark scores and other pertinent data will be recorded on a spreadsheet for the entire school population. 2) This data will be sorted so that students scoring below proficient will be listed in order of their Benchmark scaled score. 3) Individual student strengths/weaknesses will be reviewed by core teachers, counselor, ESL/Sped teacher (if appropriate), and principal. 4) This team will recommend appropriate interventions. 5) Parents will be notified of these recommendations either in writing or at the fall parent/teacher conferences. 6) The following interventions will be in place for students needing additional math instruction: 125 minutes of additional math instruction (Accelerated Math, Study Links and Learning Games from Everyday Math, and Benchmark Practice) for all 6th grade students. An additional 250 minutes of math instruction will be provided for 7th grade students showing the greatest need(with a Math Interventionist, district-funded). Some students will also receive additional services and instructional assistance from their core math teachers.
Action Type: AIP/IRI

Chip Martin

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

School counselors will provide students with a curriculum in goal setting, high standards, academic excellence, successful test-taking strategies, and good study habits.
Action Type: Collaboration

Jane Corrigan

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

A "GK-12 fellow" from the U. of A. will be available to provide hands-on integrated math and science instruction for students whose teachers have completed the GK-12 training(2 this year).
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Karen Brown

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: 2 Year Plan: During the 2008-2009 School Year we elected to use pre/post testing (STAR Math), CRT/NRT assessments (District Course exams, ACTAAP), quarterly assessments, and local summative assessments as the evaluation tool to determine whether this Intervention/Program was effective in improving student achievement. EVALUATION RESULTS: 58% of our students failed to score proficient or advanced on the pretest compared to 31%, on the last. Students served with more math minutes each week averaged 101 scale score point gains on the ACTAAP Benchmark exam, and 84% scored proficient or advanced. 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 CRT/NRT assessments (District Course exams, ACTAAP) and quarterly assessments. We expect to see a minimum of 80% scoring proficient, or advanced, on the last assessment we administer. We will report the results in our 2010/2011 Plan and use the results to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were reached and to set a standard for future expectations. The evaluation results will be used to impact the decisions we make that affect our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

$1500

Priority 3:

Provide teachers with quality professional development that will promote and enhance learning opportunities for students and for other purposes.

Supporting Data:

State Law - Act 307 of 2007

Goal

Holt will cultivate strong parent/school/community relationships in order to strengthen student achievement.

Benchmark

The Combined Population, and each subgroup, is expected to meet the AYP target calculated by the ADE and included in the NCLB Accountability Workbook.

Benchmark

Holt will organize an active PTO that will be involved in determining and supporting Holt's programs and school improvement goals.

Intervention: Parent Involvement Plan National PTA Standards, 1998

Scientific Based Research: Title: A new wave of evidence. The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Author: Henderson, A., & Mapp, K. Date: 2002 Source: National Center for Family & Community Connections with Schools, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, (http://www.sedl.org/connections/) Abstract Summary: Noting the evidence of families influence on their childrens school achievement is consistent, positive, and convincing, this report examines research on parent and community involvement and the impact on student achievement. Conclusion: The report finds that there is strong and steadily growing evidence that families can improve their childrens academic performance in school and have a major impact on attendance and behavior. Children at risk of failure or poor performance can profit from the extra support that engaged families and communities provide. All students, but especially those in middle and high school, would benefit if schools supported parents in helping children at home and in guiding their educational career. This reports appendix provides a short history of the research in this field over the past 30 years (Contains 96 references.)

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

(PI3) In compliance with ACT 83, the following professional development will be provided; 6 hours of technology, 3 hours of parent involvement for administrators, and 2 hours of parent involvement for teachers. In addition to state requirements, supplemental professional development will be offered in order to enhance opportunties for parents to be involved.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Special Education

Asst. Supt.

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

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Teachers

Title I - Purchased Services:	$800.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$800

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 307 of 2007. Effectiveness will be documented by results of parental involvement survey. The survey materials will be paid for by Title I funds.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

(PI4) The school will maintain a designated area to be used as the Parent Center. Parenting books, magazines and other supplementary materials in various languages, regarding responsible parenting and community resources will be purchased using Title I monies and made available for parents to borrow for review. A bookshelf to house the parent materials will be purchased so that they may be displayed in a prominenet location. Monies may also be used to provide materials for to all parents to keep and reference at home.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jeanne King

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

Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$1500.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$1500

PARENT INVOLVEMENT (1,5): School Parent Compact Statement: Parents and highly qualified teachers collaborate to develop and distribute informational packets for each family, in a language that they can understand, that include: *Parental Involvement Plan *School Calendar *A School-Parent Compact *A system encouraging the home, school, the school's process for resolving parental concerns, and community connections.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Jeanne King

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

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

(PI1,5) Flyers will be sent to all parents, in a language they can understand, inviting them to Holt for parent involvement meetings to welcome parents and students to our school, to foster community connections, provide a description and explanation of the curriculum required by the state and used in the school, including the types of assessments and proficiency levels, as well as how to monitor a child's progress. In addition, parents will be involved in the annual planning of school improvement programs. Summative annual surveys will evaluate the parent involvement activities.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

(PI4) Holt will develop a volunteer resource book including an option for parents to designate how frequently they would participate in the program and include opportunitites for parents to assist from home.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jeanne King

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The district will designate two Parent/Teacher Conferences each school year. Holt will provide a welcome/refreshment center to encourage parent participation. At the end of the year, the district will publish a notice in the local newspaper thanking the parents as a group for attending the conferences. Title I funds will be used to purchase the materials and supplies needed for the refreshment center. The welcome/refreshment center supplements the state required Parent Teacher conferences in order to encourage the participation of high-poverty families by helping them feel welcome at school.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$1000.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$1000

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT YEAR 2: PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT: A bi-annual planning event will be held for the school's data leadership team(including administrators, counselors, teachers, staff, and parents) to review, assess, and revise the school's goals.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers
Title Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt counselors will purchase materials, including career orientation materials, to help students and parents succeed in middle school and in studies and career opportunities beyond middle school.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jane Corrigan

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

Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$600.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$600

COLLABORATION: Teachers are provided with weekly instructional meeting time in order to plan for the implementation of best practices chosen to help improve student achievement at each student's readiness level. This planning time will be provided during the course of the day. One faculty meeting date a month will be reserved for vertical and horizontal team meetings.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT YEAR 2: PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT (1): Holt will participate in the ADE pilot and offer supplemental educational services to elegible students. An SES provider fair will be hosted and parents will be encouraged to attend and participate in SES.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT YEAR 2: Holt will provide parents a WRITTEN NOTICE REGARDING SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STATUS. The letter will be sent within the appropriate timeframe as required by state and federal law to all students in the building. In addition, Holt will participate in the ADE Pilot and offer SES to eligible students. An SES provider fair will be hosted and Parents will be encouraged to attend and participate in SES.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Mike Mason

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

TRANSITION: Each spring Holt will host an evening for students and parents of rising 6th graders. This orientation session will be designed to familiarize these students and parents with policies, procedures and expectations at the middle school level.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Jane Corrigan

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$200.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$200

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through pre/post testing, and summative annual surveys provided by the district and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement through parent involvement. PROGRAM EVALUATION RESULTS We followed this protocol in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Professional development staff surveys and individualized professional development focus plans. Summative Surveys were returned by 40% of parents. These indicated a 98% approval rating for involvement opportunities offered at Holt. Although only 2% of parents attended meetings, more than 75% of parents attended conferences. For the coming year, our improvement goals are for 100% of staff members to acquire necessary professional development hours, 100% of parents to receive parent information packets, 33% of families will attend family night activities, 25 % will attend orientation, and a 5% increase in the use of school provided parenting materials. We will follow the above protocol in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program for the 2009/2010 school year. 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 these results in our 2010/2011 ACSIP plan, and will use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Liz Bland

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PARENT INVOLVEMENT: Establish and maintain an area in the school that celebrates parent involvement with photos, certificates, and other items that draw attention to our parent participation.

Liz Bland

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

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$135.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$135

PARENT INVOLVEMENT (2): The Parent Involvement Committee will sponsor monthly family events throughout the year with the purpose of supporting family involvement in the school. Research has shown that greater family involvement and participation in school promote higher achievement in their students. Funds will be used to purchase parent educational materials, books for students, motivational speakers, and refreshments.

Jeanne King

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

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$2000.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$2000

PARENT INVOLVEMENT(2): The parent involvement committee will purchase written materials to provide parents with information on how to better support their students in school. The committee will also conduct an evening parenting session for parents of targeted students (students who scored Basic and Below Basic and students who have D's and F's at the end of the first nine weeks) who would benefit from specific interventions designed to result in higher test scores.

Mike Mason

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

Title I - Materials & Supplies:	$1000.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$1000

Total Budget:

$7235

Priority 4:

Students participating in the BMI activity show a need to improve their cardiovascular, muscular strength/endurance, and flexibility activity.

Supporting Data:

Body Mass Index Data 2007: of the 496 student population, 321 students were assessed. Of the students assessed, the following represents the percent of students at risk of overweight and those overweight. Grade 6: Males 33.9%, Females 43.3% Grade 7: Males 40.8%, Females 42.5% In 2007, BMI results for Holt Middle School indicated that 38.2% of the student male population was at risk of being overweight or were overweight. This is an increase of 7.0% indicated from the 2006 BMI screening. In 2007, BMI results for Holt Middle School indicated that 42.8% of the student female population was at risk of being overweight or were overweight. This is an increase of 5.4% indicated from the 2006 BMI screening. In 2008, BMI results for Holt Middle School indicated that 37.9% of the student male population was at risk of being overweight or were overweight. This is a decrease of 0.3% indicated from the 2007 BMI screening. In 2008, BMI results for Holt Middle School indicated that 43.3% of the student female population was at risk of being overweight or were overweight. This is an increase of 0.5% indicated from the 2007 BMI screening. In 2009, BMI results for Holt Middle School indicated that 42.9% of the student male population was at risk of being overweight or were overweight. This is a increase of 5% indicated from the 2008 BMI screening. In 2009, BMI results for Holt Middle School indicated that 34.9% of the student female population was at risk of being overweight or were overweight. This is a decreas of 8.4% indicated from the 2008 BMI screening.
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3030527
http://farmtoschool.org

 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.


The two lowest areas identified by the 2005-2006 School Health Index
is Module 7: Psychological and Social Service and Module 8 Family and
Community Involvement.

The two lowest areas identified by the 2006-2007 School Health Index is
Module : Health Services

The two lowest areas identified by the 2007-2008 School Health Index is
Module : Counseling, Psychological, and Social services

Goal

Students participating in the BMI activity will show improvement in their cardiovascular, muscular strength/endurance, and flexibility.

Benchmark

The number of students being considered overweight or at risk of being overweight, according to their BMI, will decrease by 1/2% during the 2009-2010 school year when compared with the 2008-2009 school year.

Intervention: Holt Middle School will encourage strategies and activities that promote a non-sedentary lifestyle.

Scientific Based Research: Harvard Prevention Resource Center on Nutrition and Physical Activity. "Planet Earth." 2003-present.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Holt students will participate in a minimum of 150 minutes of physical activity per week. This activity will take place through Holt's physical education program and through physical activities at home.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
Action Type: Wellness

Delonna Williams

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Student BMI assessments will be analyzed annually to determine if the goals of weight reduction are being met. Interventions will be evaluated for their effectiveness based on this formative evaluation.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Mike Mason

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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

Mike Mason

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

Mike Mason

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Encourage participation in family oriented, community-based physical activity program. Holt will conduct a Family Wellness Night where information will be provided on nutrion and exercise. Community resource people will be invited to participate in this educational event for parents, students, and staff. Healthy foods and snacks will be provided.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Mike Mason

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

Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

To assess Holt Middle School's physical education program, parents, students, and faculty members will be invited to participate in a survey.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Mike Mason

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

Computers
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt will provide opportunities to improve the health of our students by: implementing a fitness, wellness and nutrition survey; providing nutrition plans and tips; creating individualized work-out plans; encouraging group work-out sessions; purchasing appropriate exercise equipment; promoting membership in FPS fitness center; and demonstrating proper exercises and use of equipment at the fitness center.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Brandon Craft

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers

Title I - Purchased Services:	$800.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$800

Health brochures, dieting tips, and exercising pamphlets will be on display at the Parent Center in Holt's front lobby.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Brandon Craft

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through BMI screening, and a School Health Index Survey to determine its effectiveness in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, and Professional Development. During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the above protocol 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

Delona Williams

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In compliance with ACT 83, the following professional development will be provided; 6 hours of technology, 3 hours of parent involvement for administrators, and 2 hours of parent involvement for teachers. In addition to state requirements, supplemental professional development will be offered to PE teachers in order to enhance student and staff wellness.
Action Type: Professional Development

Brandon Craft

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

Teachers

Title II-A - Purchased Services:	$435.00

ACTION BUDGET:	$435

Total Budget:

$1235

Intervention: Promote reduction of unhealthy food choices during lunchtime.

Scientific Based Research: http://www.farmtoschool.org/policy.htm

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Holt cafeteria will offer healthy food choices for students and staff by providing appropriate fresh fruit and vegetables everyday. Regular menu items now offer lower fat options and a decrease in the fat content of a la carte items. There is an increase in reimbursable meals for all students regardless of meal status.
Action Type: Wellness

Judy Wiles

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Holt will participate in the Farm to Cafeteria program that provides fresh locally grown produce on district-wide scheduled days.
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
Action Type: Wellness

Judy Wiles

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Mike Mason

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Delona Williams

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 5:

Supporting Data:

Goal

All ELL students will improve in reading, writing, math.

Benchmark

o Benchmark 1: The Combined Population, and each subgroup, is expected to meet the AYP target within the appropriate grade level which is calculated by the ADE and included in the NCLB Accountability Workbook.

Intervention: Improving English Language Learners literacy and math skills through Title III federal funding support.

Scientific Based Research:

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT: After reviewing data from the past 3 years, it has been determined that district ESL efforts have been effective in increasing the student achievement of ESL students. A new district ESL and Professional Development Director has been employed to facilitate these continuing efforts. In response to the increasing ESL enrollment in K-2, the district will facilitate increased early literacy interventions district-wide with DIBELS monitoring.

Mike Mason

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

An ELL full time (1.0 FTE)certified teacher will be hired to provide additional support for ELL students toward language acquisition proficiencies. This teacher will enhance the established ELL program within the district by increasing the students access to services.
Action Type: Equity

Mike Mason

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through formative Rosetta Stone reports, and summative ELDA, CRT, NRT testing and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. EVALUATION RESULTS: 6-8 LEP increased from 60% P/A to 70.7% P/A on the Benchmark (08-09) in Literacy, and 69% P/A to 81.8% P/A in Math. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement. During the 2009-2010 school year, we plan to follow the same protocol in evaluating and adjusting the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program. In addition, we will implement Target Assessments aligned with state standards and developed by the NWAESC. 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 these results in our 2010/2011 ACSIP plan, and will use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.

Deborah Karnes

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Classroom teachers, administrators, ESL teachers, Title III teachers, instructional assistants, parents and the Director of Federal Programs will attend professional meetings and conferences on the local, state, and national level. These conferences will be on interventions that are research based. The Homeless Coordinator, Special Ed personnel, and others will be included when appropriate. Outside resources/presenters will be brought into the district. Funds will be used to assist teachers and paraprofessionals in becoming "High Qualified." This will include using funds to pay for the ARKTESOL Conference, GLAD training, and the ESL Academy tuition and fees. This year the focus for professional development will be curriculum alignment and improvement of literacy instruction. Private school personnel will be included in district staff development initiatives.

Mike Mason

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Planning Team

Classification	Name	Position	Committee
Classroom Teacher	Andrew Chance	Language Arts	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Anna Howard	Parent/Title I Reading	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Audra Corbitt	Language Arts	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Barbara Brannan	Science	Math
Classroom Teacher	Barry Hart	Performing Arts	Parent Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Brandon Craft	Physical Education	Wellness
Classroom Teacher	Carol Gales	Self-contained	Math
Classroom Teacher	Charles Brickey	Sped Pullout	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Chip Martin	Math	Math
Classroom Teacher	Crystal Watson	Social Studies	Math
Classroom Teacher	Deborah Karnes	ESL	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Delona Williams	PE	Wellness
Classroom Teacher	Jan Paul	Language Arts	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Janice Ferguson	Title 1	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jeanne King	GT	Parent Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Jennifer Hierholzer	Science	Math
Classroom Teacher	Kacie Travis	Math	Math
Classroom Teacher	Karen Brown	Science	Math
Classroom Teacher	Karla Bonnell	Sped Inclusion	Math
Classroom Teacher	Kimberly Weller	Social Studies	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Lee King	Art	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Linnea Lillquist	Math	Math
Classroom Teacher	Liz Bland	Technology	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Makayla Brown	Language Arts	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Pat Storey	Language Arts	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Regina Sherwood	Math	Math
Classroom Teacher	Stacey Decker	Sped Inclusion	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Suzanna Clark	Language Arts	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Tammy Toomey	Title 1 Math	Math
District-Level Professional	Kristen Scanlon	Federal Programs Coordinator	Literacy, Math, Parent Involvement
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Charrisce Worman	Speech/Language Pathologist	Literacy
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Dianne Gann	Math Coach	Math
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Jane Corrigan	Counselor	Parent Involvement
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Kim Nix	Sped Designee	Literacy
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Linda Kime	Counselor	Parental Involvement
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Pam Skipper	Media Specialist	Literacy
Parent	Ruth Mobley	Science	Math
Principal	Mike Mason	Principal	Steering Committee
Principal	Richard Guthrie	Principal	Literacy