ACSIP

School Plan

WOODLAND JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
1 EAST POPLAR,FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703

Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

2009-2010

Woodland Junior High is a community of life-long learners that encourages communication, cooperation and growth. Our community strives for mutual respect, personal responsibility, and academic excellence.

Grade Span: 8-9

Title I: Not Applicable

School Improvement: MS

Table of Contents

Priority 1: IMPROVING LITERACY
    Goal: All students will improve in written expression with additional attention to content and style writing domains.
    Goal: All students will improve in reading comprehension with additional attention to the literacy strand.
Priority 2: IMPROVING MATH
    Goal: All students will improve in mathematics skills with additional attention to number sense, properties and operations mathematics strand.
    Goal: All students will improve in open response mathematics skills questions with additional attention to the measurement strand.
Priority 3: IMPROVING WELLNESS
    Goal: All students will continue to improve their cardiovascular, muscular strength/endurance, and flexibility.
Priority 4: IMPROVING LITERACY AND MATH FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
    Goal: All ELL students will improve literacy and mathematics skills by advancing at least one level of English proficiency.

Priority 1:

IMPROVING LITERACY

Supporting Data:

BENCHMARK-8th GRADE LITERACY EXAM				  
    
Report Created:  Sep 15, 2009			   
   
2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  327 Students: 90% of Combined Students		
	   14 Students: 62% of African American Students	
	   17 Students: 88% of Hispanic Students		
	  278 Students: 91% of Caucasian Students		
	   60 Students: 65% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
 Less Than 10 Students: 67% of LEP Students			
	   28 Students: 50% 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 areas are Literary Passage (OR) and
Content  Passage (OR).	The trend analysis of the open response questions
in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area
Content and Style.

African Americans Subpopulation:  The trend analysis of the open
response and multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading
passages, revealed that the lowest identified areas are Literary Passage
(OR) and Literary Passage.  The trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area 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 areas are Literary Passage (OR) and
Writing (MC).  The trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area 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 areas are Literary Passage (OR) and
Content Passage (OR).  The trend analysis of the open response questions
in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area
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 areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Practical Passage.  The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified area Content and Style.		   
		      
Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The trend analysis of
the open response and multiple-choice questions, in the three types of
reading passages, revealed that the lowest identified areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Writing (MC).	The trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area 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 areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Content Passage (OR).	The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified area Content and Style.

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  313 Students: 87.5% of Combined Students		  
	   13 Students: 46.2% of African American Students	  
	   10 Students: 30% of Hispanic Students		
	  279 Students: 92.5% of Caucasian Students		  
	   60 Students: 55% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
 Less Than 10 Students: 22.2% of LEP Students			  
	   28 Students: 42.9% 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 areas are Literary Passage (OR) and
Practical Passage (OR).  The trend analysis of the open response questions
in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area
Content and Style.

African Americans Subpopulation:  The trend analysis of the open
response and multiple-choice questions, in the three types of reading
passages, revealed that the lowest identified areas are Literary Passage
(OR) and Content Passage (OR).	The trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area 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 areas are Literary Passage (OR) and
Content Passage (MC).  The trend analysis of the open response questions
in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area
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 areas are Literary Passage (OR) and
Content Passage (MC).  The trend analysis of the open response questions
in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified area
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 areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Practical Passage (OR).  The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified area Content and Style.		   
		      
Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The trend analysis of
the open response and multiple-choice questions, in the three types of
reading passages, revealed that the lowest identified areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Practical Passage (OR).  The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified area 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 areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Content Passage (MC).	The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified area Content and Style.

2007-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  290 Students: 87.2% of Combined Students		  
 Less Than 10 Students: 50% of African American Students	
	   14 Students: 71.4% of Hispanic Students		  
	  251 Students: 88.8% of Caucasian Students		  
	   52 Students: 59.6% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
	   12 Students: 75% of LEP Students			
	   29 Students: 41.4% of Students with Disabilities 

The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:  
     Content and Style	      
The lowest identified areas for African Americans were:  
     Content and Style		
The lowest identified areas for Hispanic were:	
     Content and Style	     
The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were:  
     Content and Style	 
The lowest identified areas for Econ. Disadvantaged students were: 
     Style and Content
The lowest identified areas for Limited English Proficiency were: 
     Content and Style			 
The lowest identified areas for Students with Disabilities were:  
     Content and Style

NORM REFERENCED TEST - Reading Comprehension - 8th Grade
Percent and Number Tested of Students Scoring at/above 50th Percentile
Report Completed: September 15, 2009

Population	2007 ITBS	2007 #Tested	2008 SAT 10	2008 #Tested	2009 SAT 10	2009 #Tested
Combined	73.2%	314	73.9%	329	74.4%	341
Africian American	33.3%	6	50.0%	14	54.9%	13
Hispanic	46.7%	15	27.3%	11	34.8%	23
Caucasian	75.5%	269	81.5%	292	78.9%	278
Economically Disadvantaged	48.3%	58	46.3%	67	42.3%	69
Limited English Proficient	52.4%	21	20.0%	10	18.6%	15
Students with Disabilities	15.8%	19	35.5%	31	18.6%	20

ATTENDANCE RATE: 2009, the attendance rate for the building was
96.1%, 2008, the attendance rate for the building was 97.1%, 2007, the
attendance rate for the building was 95.9%.

Goal

All students will improve in written expression with additional attention to content and style writing domains.

Benchmark

The combined population and each subgroup MET the 2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) target of 59.69% scoring Proficient/Advanced. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP target of 67.75% scoring Proficient/Advanced or make AYP through either the "Safe Harbor" or "Growth" models. The status of the school is met standards or achieving.

Intervention: Writing Across the Curriculum The fundamentals for solid writing skills must be identified and practiced. These writing techniques must be re-enforced across all subjects.

Scientific Based Research: Calkins, Lucy. The Art of Teaching Writing. Heinemann. 1986

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Teachers will attend in-service training to develop skills to model and communicate the importance of writing well to all students. Gifted and Talented activities will focus on a curriculum of connection, curriculum of practice, and curriculum of identity.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Special Education

Jamie Highfill, Teacher

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

Administrative Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

To increase parental modeling and communicating the importance of writing well to their children, the school will stress the importance of improving writing fundamentals through monthly and quarterly communications to parents. These communications will be formalized with quarterly advisory meetings with parents, students, and community members. Additionally, the periodic communication activities will include the importance of using web-sites for writing updates and suggested improvements.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Student perceptions about the importance of writing will be formatively evaluated via survey or other tangible assessment tool at the beginning of the school year. At the end of the school year, a post assessment summative will be given to determine the change in student beliefs concerning the importance of writing. Agendas for all meetings will be posted on the Woodland web-site and made available to any parent, teacher or community member. Additionally, meetings dates will be posted in the PTO Newsletter and the web-site.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Counselor

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will use various writing strategies in student writing assignments.
Action Type: Professional Development

Stephanie Hoops, Teacher

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will have in-service available to learn new techniques for teaching classes that contain ELL students. ESL teacher will attend professional ESL conferences to keep up with new research and techniques.
Action Type: Professional Development

Stephanie Hoops, Teacher

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

Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through a review of student scores on standardized writing assessments. This data was compared to previous years and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. The percent of proficient/advanced combined students improved by 3%. African American students improved by 44%, and Hispanic students improved by 58%. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Review 2010 Benchmark Test Scores. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
EVALUATION RESULTS: The end-of-year review directed us to establishing more intense intervention programs for our students who score below proficient on the Benchmark. We are implementing The Read 180 program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Curt Champion, Counselor

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will receive professional development, Northwest Arkansas Writing Project, for teaching writing and nurturing students values for writing fundamentals.
Action Type: Professional Development

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

In-service speaker(s)* will be provided to present all teachers with training in how to teach writing fundamentals. Training will occur one day in the first quarter of the school year with fourth quarter program assessment as a follow up. *Workshops: Teachers and students will participate in enrichment activities.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

District Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Use varied instructional methodologies, techniques, and resources in the classroom to address the needs of all students, including those with disabilities, IEP's and boys with low literacy scores. (Example: The computerized Accelerated Reader [STAR] Evaluation Test)
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jane Coomes, Special Education Teacher

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Purchase materials and resources for regular education and special education teachers for addressing needs of all students in the classroom, especially, IEP students and boys with low literacy scores.
Action Type: Special Education

Jane Coomes, Special Education Teacher

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Access professional development needs in the targeted areas of pre-referral interventions, positive behavioral supports, integrating students with disabilities into general education classrooms (general curriculum content, modifications, differentiated instruction, multiple intelligences and co-teaching), teacher assistance teams (TAT), conflict resolution and negotiation skills, assertive technology, and learning disabilities to better educate all students, especially special education (IEP).
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Special Education

Jane Coomes, Special Education Teacher

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

Administrative Staff
Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Review the implementation of the professional development plan by assessing its involvement of teachers and its focus on teacher and student needs and outcomes. The review will occur in the fall and spring semesters.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Special Education

Jane Coomes, Special Education Teacher

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Conduct an individualized needs assessment for professional development with teachers to enable them to identify their own needs in relation to the targeted special education areas. Completed surveys will be returned to the listed person responsible.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Special Education

Jane Coomes, Special Education Teacher

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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 will no less than 60 hours of professional development including 6 hours of technology and 2 hours of parental involvement development (3 hours of Parental Involvement for Administrators) and for those who teach Arkansas History, 2 hours of training in that subject. Teachers will have the opportunity to evaluate the benefit of the professional development activities and provide feedback on needed changes.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Administrative Staff
Central Office
Community Leaders
Computers
District Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Public Library
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Participate in ongoing professional development of literacy teaching strategies to train teachers to incorporate additional literacy skill instruction in individual curriculum; for example, pre-ap teaching strategies, Reading Lab (Reading 180), Northwest Arkansas Writing Project.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Jamie Highfill, English Department Chair

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Goal

All students will improve in reading comprehension with additional attention to the literacy strand.

Benchmark

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

Intervention: Reading Across the Curriculum To sustain standards-based, high performing learning environments, students need a solid foundation in reading. This synthesis research supports how to improve standards-based education practices.

Scientific Based Research: Standards in Classroom Practice Research Synthesis. McRel. 2001.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Map instruction in information skills and collaborate to evaluate alignment with district curriculum and state frameworks.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will use open-ended response reading comprehension in individual content area. These lessons will be reviewed by the supervising principal.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration

Anita Lawson, Principal
Allison Houston, Assistant Principal

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Reading level diagnostic programs will be used to establish formatively a baseline of reading skills for identified subgroups (males, ESL/ELL students) and for individual students identified as needing remediation. Subgroups and students will be identified by analyzing existing individual student test data on reading comprehension, vocabulary, etc. and by teacher classroom observation and evaluation of student performance. For students with basic or below basic on the Benchmark Examinations, individual summative student baseline data will be used to establish a Student Academic Improvement Plan for each student. The SAIP is necessary to begin remediation. Together Everyone Achieves More (TEAM) classes are also used to support remediation activities.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair
Jamie Highfill, Literacy Chai

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

Administrative Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will meet on district in-service dates in content area vertical teams to facilitate curriculum teaming in order to develop reading comprehension skills and strategies, vertical alignment of curriculum, and mapping of classroom curriculum with district curriculum and Arkansas State Frameworks.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Jamie Highfill, Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will collectively plan to integrate instruction in reading comprehension strategies into every content area.
Action Type: Collaboration

Jamie Highfill, Department Chair

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Participate in ongoing professional development in education technology training, information skills and library services.
Action Type: Professional Development

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

District Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Participate in school and district level workshops during restructuring days that focus on reading strategies to be used across the curriculum. For example, Reading Lab Strategies (Reading 180).
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Jamie Highfill, Department Chair

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

Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The media specialist will collaborate with new and continuing teachers to provide skills training for accessing and assessing information through on-line catalogs and electronic databases. These skills will then be used by teachers to develop instructional units that implement these literacy skills according to district curriculum and the identified needs of students. Examples include subject-centered research projects in Family and Consumer Sciences, Service Learning, English, Oral Communications, and American History.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Administrative Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teach information literacy skills and strategies in lessons integrated with classroom learning to enable students to find, access, evaluate and use information in any subject area.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Purchase/update computer systems including, but not limited to, CPU, monitor, keyboard, mouse, and cables. These computers will be housed in the library so that students can access innovative programs/technology, such as, STAR Reading, STAR Math, and several online data bases, such as, EBSCOhost Periodical Index, SIRS Reseracher, and the Gale Group Discovering Collection. In addition to the computer systems purchased/updated with Title V funds, several other computer systems will be purchased/updated with district and other grant funds.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Central Office
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Provide access to a rich collection of diverse and up-to-date resources, both print and electronic, through the school library, using the district selection policy.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Central Office
District Staff
Public Library
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Central Office
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Maintain a flexible schedule in the library in order to provide opportunities for independent and group library research projects that are integrated with classroom instruction and that result in student work that shows skills and knowledge in reading comprehension, written expression, content knowledge, and information literacy.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Public Library
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Provide opportunities for a variety of reading experiences for all students (e.g., library instructional units, story times, shared reading experiences, reading motivation program, reading contest, sustained silent reading). The variety of reading experiences will include opportunities that focus on the special interests and needs of identified subgroups (males, ESL/ELL students).
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Administrative Staff
Public Library
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Students and teachers will participate in enrichment activities. Research, reading, and writing activities will be conducted prior to the enrichment activities to prepare students for the activities and experiences.
Action Type: Collaboration

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Administrative Staff
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: During the last months of the 2008-2009 school year, we evaluated this Intervention/Program through weekly student-learning centered lesson plans and determined that it was effective in support of our Reading Across the Curriculum Intervention. The percent of proficient/advanced combined students improved by 3%. African American students improved by 44%, and Hispanic students improved by 58%. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: For the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Review of the 2009 student centered lesson plans. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
EVALUATION RESULTS: The end-of-year review directed us to establishing more intense intervention activities for our basic and below basic students using Read 180 program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Allison Houston, Assistant Pincipal

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Curriculum Mapping The benefits of curriculum maps support the integration of district curriculum. The curriculum maps help teachers see the "big picture" for the school and district. They can see where subjects already come together and where they don't, but maybe should.

Scientific Based Research: Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Mapping the Big Picture: Integrating Curriculum & Assessment K-12. 1997

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Teachers in each content area will contribute to the creation of a curriculum map that is aligned with Arkansas Frameworks and includes opportunities to develop and improve reading comprehension. Examples include the use of subject-focused reading passages in English and history courses and reading problems in math and science courses.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Jamie Highfill, English

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

Administrative Staff
Computers
District Staff
Performance Assessments


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Each curriculum map will be examined to identify opportunities for supporting individual student improvement plans for developing and improving reading comprehension. Examples include the use of subject-focused reading passages English and history courses and reading problems in math and science.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration

Marcia Bogart, Math

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

Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through a review of test data (Mid-Level Benchmark, SAT10, Explore) scores to analyze areas of weakness and address sub skills, content clusters, subtests and subgroups that may need to be addressed in the and determined that it was effective in support of our curriculum mapping process. The percent of proficient/advanced combined students improved by 3%. African American students improved by 44%, and Hispanic students improved by 58%. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Annual review of test data (Mid-Level Benchmark, SAT10, Explore) scores. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
EVALUATION RESULTS: The Benchmark and SAT10 end-of-year review directed us to establishing more intense intervention activities for our basic and below basic students using Read 180 program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Jamie Highfill, English

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Collaborate with parents to develop student AIPs. Any student that scores below proficient on state mandated criterion referenced exams and any other student identified by classroom teachers will have an AIP.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Performance Assessments


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Students will be placed who are identified as at-risk.

Scientific Based Research: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk (CRESPAR) Johns Hopkins University/Howard University Center for the Social Organization of Schools; 2004

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

An alternative learning environment (ALE) with access to services of a school counselor/mental health professional, a nurse, and support services will be provided by the district. The ALE will employ sufficient personnel in the core academic content areas to allow students enough credits for graduation. Any student eligible for special education services will continue to receive services while in the ALE. Students will not be placed in the ALE based on academic problems alone. Students placed, otherwise intelligent and capable, may have one or more of the following characteristics: Disruptive behavior, potential drop out, personal or family problems, recurring absenteeism, transition to or from residential programs or conditions that negatively affect the student's academic progress. (Abuse-physical, mental, sexual-, frequent relocation of residency, homelessness, inadequate emotional support, mental/physical health problems, pregnancy, single parenting) Documentation shall be maintained as to placement decisions. All ALE teachers will receive professional development pursuant to ADE Rules and Regulations. The Alternative Learning Environment will have as its goal to increase attendance of at-risk students and to graduate them. Parent conferences will be required for placement in the program and school personnel will be in frequent contact with parents. The placement conference will include the principal, counselor, teachers, parents, and other appropriate personnel in order to make good decisions about what services will be available while in the ALE. If the student makes significant academic and/or behavioral progress while in the ALE the student may be exited from the program. Exit policies will be developed by the ALE. The ALE will meet all guidelines required by the ADE and state laws.
Action Type: Equity

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Administrative Staff
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Closing the Literacy Achievement Gap: Regular meetings, at least once per semester, of the Literacy ACSIP Leadership Committee will continue to be held. These meetings will focus on building capacity within our school to close the achievement gap. Each meeting agenda will include the following Core Principles: (1) 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. (2) The ongoing monitoring of student progress in order to influence classroom instruction. (3) The utilization of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to make decisions that impact: Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. (4) 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 monitored through the collection of Formative and Summative Data. The 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: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Angela McCutcheon, ACSIP Leadership Co-Chair - Literacy

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 a review of student scores on standardized writing assessments. This data was compared to previous years and determined that it was effective in support of our Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. The percent of proficient/advanced combined students improved by 3%. Economically disadvantaged students improved by 10%. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Review 2009 Benchmark Test Scores. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program. Additionally, a staff committee will be formed to help evaluate academic progress, the amount of parental participation within the school and identification of processes hindering the success of ALE.
EVALUATION RESULTS: The end-of-year staff committee directed us to hire an additional reading specialist and to establish a more intense intervention activities for our basic and below basic students using Read 180 program.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The reduction of the maximum students in a class from 25 to 17 will provide teachers more time to meet individual language arts need of the students and focus more on potentially at-risk students. Currently the state maximum standard is 150 students per teacher, about 25 students per class. Students will be heterogeneous grouped with teachers.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 2:

IMPROVING MATH

Supporting Data:

BENCHMARK-8th GRADE MATHEMATICS EXAM
Report Created:  Sep 15, 2009

2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  341 Students: 82% of Combined Students		
	   13 Students: 39% of African American Students	
	   23 Students: 52% of Hispanic Students		
	  278 Students: 85% of Caucasian Students		
	   60 Students: 52% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
	    9 Students: 27% of LEP Students			
	   28 Students: 45% of Students with Disabilities	

Combined Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the questions in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Algebra (OR). 

African Americans Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based
on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five mathematics
strands revealed weaknesses in Number Operations (OR) and Geometry (OR).

Hispanic Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Number Operations (OR).

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Algebra (OR).

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Algebra (OR).


Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Algebra (OR).


Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Algebra (OR).

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  313 Students: 81.5% of Combined Students		  
	   13 Students: 53.8% of African American Students	  
	   10 Students: 40% of Hispanic Students		
	  279 Students: 85.7% of Caucasian Students		  
	   60 Students: 50% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
	    9 Students: 11.1% of LEP Students			  
	   28 Students: 35.7% of Students with Disabilities	  

Combined Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five mathematics
strands revealed weaknesses in Data Analysis and Probability, Measurement,
and Geometry.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of
the multiple choice questions in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Number and Operations and Measurement.

African Americans Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based
on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the five
mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Geometry.  The
lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Number
and Operations and Algebra.

Hispanic Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five mathematics
strands revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Number and Operations.  The
lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Number
and Operations and Measurement.

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five mathematics
strands revealed weaknesses in Geometry and Measurement.  The lowest
identified areas based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice
questions in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Number
and Operations and Measurement.

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Geometry. 
The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions in the five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in
Number and Operations and Measurement.

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Number and
Operations.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of
the multiple choice questions in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Measurement and Geometry.

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Data
Analysis and Probability.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five mathematics strands
revealed weaknesses in Number and Operations and Measurement.


2007-# Tested &Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 	 
	  290 Students: 75.5% of Combined Students		  
 Less Than 10 Students: 0% of African American Students        
	   14 Students: 42.9% of Hispanic Students		  
	  251 Students: 77.3% of Caucasian Students		  
	   52 Students: 44.2% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
	   12 Students: 58.3% of LEP Students			  
	   29 Students: 24.1% of Students with Disabilities 


The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:  
     Measurement and Number and Operations	   
The lowest identified areas for African Americans were:  
     Measurement and Number and Operations	    
The lowest identified areas for Hispanic were:	
     Measurement and Number and Operations	 
The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were:  
     Measurement and Number and   Operations   
The lowest identified areas for Econ. Disadvantaged students were: 
     Measurement and Numbers and Operations   
The lowest identified areas for Limited English Proficiency were: 
     Measurement and Number and Operations		     
The lowest identified areas for Students with Disabilities were:  
     Measurement and Number and Operations			 


EOC-ALGEBRA EXAM 						  
  
Report Created: Sep 15, 2009
 
2009-# Tested and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  243 Students: 92.6% of Combined Students		  
	   18 Students: 77.8% of African American Students	  
	   13 Students: 53.9% of Hispanic Students		  
	  198 Students: 96.5% of Caucasian Students		  
	   37 Students: 79.3% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
 Less Than 10 Students: 66.7% of LEP Students			  
	   17 Students: 85% of Students with Disabilities	

Combined Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five Algebra strands
revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability (OR) and
Language of Algebra (OR). 

African Americans Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based
on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five Algebra
strands revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability (OR)
and Language of Algebra (OR).	

Hispanic Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five Algebra strands
revealed weaknesses in and Language of Algebra (OR) and Non-Linear
Functions (OR). 

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five Algebra strands
revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability (OR) and
Language of Algebra (OR). 

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability
(OR) and Language of Algebra (OR). 

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability
(OR) and Language of Algebra (OR). 

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in Data Interpretation and Probability
(OR) and Language of Algebra (OR). 
2008-# Tested and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  241 Students: 94.6% of Combined Students		  
 Less Than 10 Students: 50% of African American Students	
	   13 Students: 76.9% of Hispanic Students		  
	  220 Students: 95.9% of Caucasian Students		  
	   37 Students: 89.2% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
 Less Than 10 Students: 57.1% of LEP Students			  
	   17 Students: 82.4% of Students with Disabilities	  

Combined Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Algebra strands
revealed weaknesses in Solving Equations and Inequalities and Linear
Functions.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions in the five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses
in Language of Algebra and Solving Equations and Inequalities.

African Americans Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based
on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Algebra
strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Algebra and Linear Functions. 
The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the multiple
choice questions in the five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in
Language of Algebra and Solving Equations and Inequalities.

Hispanic Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Algebra strands
revealed weaknesses in Solving Equations and Inequalities and Linear
Functions.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions in the five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses
in Language of Algebra and Linear Functions.

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Algebra strands
revealed weaknesses in Solving Equations and Inequalities and Linear
Functions.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions in the five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses
in Language of Algebra and Solving Equations and Inequalities.

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in Linear Functions and Solving
Equations and Inequalities.  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five Algebra
strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Algebra and Solving Equations
and Inequalities.

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in Linear Functions and Solving
Equations and Inequalities.  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five Algebra
strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Algebra and Solving Equations
and Inequalities.

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five Algebra strands revealed weaknesses in Solving Equations and
Inequalities and Linear Functions.  The lowest identified areas based on
the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five Algebra
strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Algebra and Solving Equations
and Inequalities.

2007-# Tested and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  252 Students: 87.3% of Combined Students		  
 Less Than 10 Students: 62.5% of African American Students	  
	   13 Students: 46.2% of Hispanic Students		  
	  217 Students: 90.8% of Caucasian Students		  
	   49 Students: 57.1% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
	   13 Students: 46.2% of LEP Students			  
	   17 Students: 47.1% of Students with Disabilities	  
The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:  
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Non-Linear Functions
The lowest identified areas for African Americans were:  
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Non-Linear Functions  
The lowest identified areas for Hispanic were:	      
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Language of Algebra    
The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were: 
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Non-Linear Functions 
The lowest identified areas for Econ. Disadvantaged students were:  
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Non-Linear Functions   
The lowest identified areas for Limited English Proficiency were:  
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Language of Algebra 
The lowest identified areas for Students with Disabilities were:  
     Data Interpretation and Probability and Language of Algebra      
	     
EOC-GEOMETRY EXAM						  
    
Report Created:  Sep 15, 2009

2009-# Tested and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  132 Students: 100% of Combined Students		 
	    0 Students: N/A% of African American Students	 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Hispanic Students		 
	  122 Students: 100% of Caucasian Students		 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	 
	    0 Students: N/A% of LEP Students			 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Students with Disabilities	 

Combined Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Language of Geometry. 


Hispanic Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Triangles.

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the response questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Language of Geometry. 

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
Geometry strands revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and
Transformations and Language of Geometry. 

2008-# Tested and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  132 Students: 100% of Combined Students		 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of African American Students	 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Hispanic Students		 
	  115 Students: 100% of Caucasian Students		 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	 
	    0 Students: N/A% of LEP Students			 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Students with Disabilities	 

Combined Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Triangles.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of the
multiple choice questions in the five Geometry strands revealed weaknesses
in Language of Geometry and Relations.

African Americans Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based
on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Geometry
strands revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Language of Geometry.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Language of Geometry and Coordinate
Geometry and Transformations.

Hispanic Subpopulation:	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Language of Geometry.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend
analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Relationships and Coordinate Geometry and
Transformations.

Caucasian Subpopulation:  The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the open response questions in the five Geometry strands
revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and Transformations and
Relationships.	The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of
the multiple choice questions in the five Geometry strands revealed
weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Relationships.

Economically Disadvantaged Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five Geometry strands revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and
Transformations and Triangles.	The lowest identified areas based on the
trend analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five Geometry
strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Geometry and Coordinate
Geometry and Transformations.

Students with Disabilities Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five Geometry strands revealed weaknesses in Coordinate Geometry and
Transformations and Language of Geometry.  The lowest identified areas
based on the trend analysis of the multiple choice questions in the five
Geometry strands revealed weaknesses in Language of Geometry and
Coordinate Geometry and Transformations.


2007-# Tested and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	 
	  152 Students: 99.3% of Combined Students		  
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of African American Students	 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of Hispanic Students		 
	  136 Students: 99.3% of Caucasian Students		  
	   12 Students: 100% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	 
 Less than 10 Students: 100% of LEP Students			 
	   17 Students: 100% of Students with Disabilities

The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:  
     Language of Geometry and Triangles        
The lowest identified areas for African Americans were:  
     Language of Geometry and Triangles     
The lowest identified areas for Hispanic were:	
     Measurement and Coordinate Geometry and Transformations 
The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were: 
     Language of Geometry and Triangles
The lowest identified areas for Econ. Disadvantaged students were:  
     Language of Geometry and Measurement   
The lowest identified areas for Limited English Proficiency were:  
     Language of Geometry and Measurement 
The lowest identified areas for Students with Disabilities were:       
     Language of Geometry and Coordinate Geometry and Transformations

NORM REFERENCED TEST - Math Problem Solving - 8th Grade
Percent and Number Tested of Students Scoring at/above 50th Percentile
Report Completed: September 15, 2009

Population	2007 ITBS	2007 #Tested	2008 SAT 10	2008 #Tested	2009 SAT 10	2009 #Tested
Combined	71.2%	314	83.5%	329	86.8%	341
Africian American	16.7%	6	42.9%	14	38.5%	13
Hispanic	33.3%	15	50.0%	11	60.9%	23
Caucasian	73.1%	269	87.3%	292	90.0%	278
Economically Disadvantaged	44.8%	58	56.1%	67	62.0%	69
Limited English Proficient	57.1%	21	33.3%	10	46.5%	15
Students with Disabilities	15.8%	19	38.7%	31	58.9%	20

ATTENDANCE RATE: 2009, the attendance rate for the building was
96.1%, 2008, the attendance rate for the building was 97.1%, 2007, the
attendance rate for the building was 95.9%.

Goal

All students will improve in mathematics skills with additional attention to number sense, properties and operations mathematics strand.

Benchmark

The combined population and each subgroup MET the 2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) target of 55.75% scoring Proficient/Advanced. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP target of 64.6% scoring Proficient/Advanced or make AYP through either the "Safe Harbor" or "Growth" models.

Intervention: Spiraling for increased mathematic skills and understanding. The research indicates that a students knowledge of math is increased if as new material is introduced, old material is reviewed. This ensures that students continually build on previously learned knowledge.

Scientific Based Research: Teaching Secondary Mathematics - Douglas K. Brumbaugh, Jerry L. Ashe, David Rock, Donna E. Ashe; 1997.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Participate in ongoing professional development of math teaching strategies to train teachers to incorporate additional math skill instruction in individual curriculum; for example, pre-ap teaching strategies.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair

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

Central Office
Computers
District Staff
Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Collaboration in math levels to horizontally align to include ESL, GT, Sp.Ed, Pre-AP/Honors, and curriculum standards. The GT activities will have activities to include a curriculum of connection, curriculum of practice, and a curriculum of identity.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through the review of summative standardized test scores, formative classroom assessments, and semester exams and determined that it was effective in support of our spiraling intervention. For the Benchmark the proficiency/advanced percentages improved slightly by 1% for the combined population. The African American students decreased by 15%. The Hispanic students increased by 12%. The economically disadvantaged students increased by 2%. The English Language Proficient students increased by 16%. Students with disabilities increased by 10%. While all subgroups did not show increases, we believe the data show that the interventions are valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Tests will be reviewed for spiraling problems and an annual review of standardized test scores, classroom assessments, and semester exams. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
EVALUATION RESULTS: The end-of-year reviews of our formative assessments and exams directed us to change our approach to interventions Algebra and Math 8 interventions will be scheduled before the regular math class with all students benefiting from this new approach.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Require all math teachers to give spiraling math problems to reinforce previously acquired knowledge on planned chapter tests and quizzes to all students at least once per quarter.
Action Type: Collaboration

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Communicating the importance of achievement tests. Involving all of the key players (business, parents and students) in the schools setting and providing guidelines for communications, will increase overall school activities, not just achievement tests.

Scientific Based Research: A Business Guide to Support Employee & Family Involvement in Education - School Counselor Role in Planning and Integrating Basic Skills. Eric Digest 1994-04-00 by Rick Feller.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Improve teacher, student, and parent communication about the importance of achievement tests. To facilitate this improved communication, a Parent Advisory Council for School Activities will be established and will at least quarterly.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Counselor

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

Computers
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Rewards/Awards for showing academic excellence or improvement on tests (the ACTAAP Mid-Level Benchmark Exam, Algebra EOC, Geometry EOC, or 7th to 9th Grade SAT 10) or curriculum based assessments.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Counselor

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

Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through the use of pre/post tests to ascertain student knowledge level to further focus on the importance of achievement tests and determined that it was effective in support of our communication intervention. For the Benchmark, the proficiency/advanced percentages improved slightly by 1% for the combined population. The African American students decreased by 15%. The Hispanic students increased by 12%. The economically disadvantaged students increased by 2%. The English Language Proficient students increased by 16%. Students with disabilities increased by 10%. While all subgroups did not show increases, we believe the data show that the interventions are valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: using pre/post tests to ascertain student knowledge level to further focus on the importance of achievement tests. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
EVALUATION RESULTS: The end-of-year reviews of our post and pre-test data directed us to change our approach to interventions Algebra and Math 8 interventions will be scheduled before the regular math class with all students benefiting from this new approach.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Tara Elzer, Counselor

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

Administrative Staff
Computers
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Principals, counselors, and teachers will develop agenda items for the Parent Advisory Council to emphasize the importance of achievement tests. The quarterly briefing will focus on Woodland strategies to improve achievement test scores.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Counselor

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

Computers
District Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Increase student performance by improving test taking strategies. Teachers will teach students how to learn, rather than teaching them specific curriculum content or specific skills. Learning strategies teach students way of organizing and using a particular set of skills in order to learn content or accomplish other tasks more effectively and efficiently in school.

Scientific Based Research: Learning Strategies by Daniel Boudah. ERIC Digest (8/1/1999)

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Require all math teachers to give a prepared proactive test including open response and multiple choice to all students simulating formal test parameters at least once per quarter.
Action Type: Collaboration

Marcia Bogart, Math Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Classroom teachers, Special Ed. Teachers, Math Lab & Inclusion Teachers, and other support staff will collaborate to implement differentiated strategies for students with Academic Improvement Plans and/or special needs to create math support based upon student documented weaknesses. The strategies will include the review of released test items by both classroom and special education teachers.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Special Education

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Math learning teams will meet to review student work, share effective teaching and assessment strategies, and align instructional objectives to assist all students to achieve proficiency in appropriate math levels, as needed for formative assessments or on a quarterly basis. In-service days will be used to train teachers in education technology to incorporate math skills in individual curriculum. The additional skills will include the use of the TI-83 in Algebra classes. Needs of highly proficient and advanced math students will be met by vertical collaboration and curriculum planning that will challenge these students and prepare them for calculus by using technology, such as, Geometer's Sketch Pad for Honors Geometry.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through the review of ACTAAP Mid-Level Summative Benchmark and Algebra/Geometry EOC scores and determined that it was effective in support of our increasing student performance intervention. For the Benchmark, the proficiency/advanced percentages improved slightly by 1% for the combined population. The African American students decreased by 15%. The Hispanic students increased by 12%. The economically disadvantaged students increased by 2%. The English Language Proficient students increased by 16%. Students with disabilities increased by 10%. While all subgroups did not show increases, we believe the data show that the interventions are valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the formative programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Reviewing data from ACTAAP Mid-Level Benchmark and Algebra/Geometry EOC scores will be reviewed to show improvement after implementation. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Conclusions: The end-of-year reviews concluded that our students benefited from the up-front planning. (All of Geometry students were proficient or advanced.)
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Marcia Bogart, Math Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: The curriculum will be mapped and aligned. The benefits of curriculum maps support the integration of district curriculum: The curriculum maps help teachers see the "big picture" for that school and district. They can see where subjects already come together and where they don't, but maybe should.

Scientific Based Research: Heidi Hayes Jacob. Mapping the Big Picture: Integrating Curriculum & Assessment K-12. 1997.

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Teachers will contribute to the creation of a curriculum map, both horizontally and vertically, that will ensure students' needs will be addressed through the application of the school's curriculum.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair
Jamie Highfill, Literacy Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will identify grade level correlations between math and science. Teachers will plan and coordinate math and science correlations for specific instructional units and times. Curriculum maps will be examined to identify opportunities for supporting individual student improvement plans.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration

Marcia Bogart, Math Department Chair

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Math teachers will receive training on curriculum mapping, including horizontal and vertical alignment. Teachers will spend one-half day per year researching and developing actions for classroom activities.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Marcia Bogart, Math Department

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Science teachers will receive training on curriculum mapping, including horizontal and vertical alignment. Teachers will spend one-half day per year researching and developing actions for classroom activities.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development

Susan Abram, Science Department

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

District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Parents will be informed of the curriculum mapping process with briefing to parent groups, through the Woodland web-page, or the Woodland Newsletter.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through the review of test data (Mid-Level Benchmark, ITBS) scores to analyze areas of weakness and address sub skills, content clusters, subtest and subgroups that may need to be addressed in the curriculum mapping process and determined that it was effective in support of our curriculum mapping intervention. For the Benchmark, the proficiency/advanced percentages improved slightly by 1% for the combined population. The African American students decreased by 15%. The Hispanic students increased by 12%. The economically disadvantaged students increased by 2%. The English Language Proficient students increased by 16%. Students with disabilities increased by 10%. While all subgroups did not show increases, we believe the data show that the interventions are valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Performing an annual review of test data (Mid-Level Benchmark, ITBS) scores to analyze areas of weakness and address sub skills, content clusters, subtest and subgroups that may need to be addressed in the curriculum mapping process. The annual review and adjustments to the curriculum maps will be made according to gaps noted from the data analysis. Documentation of this annual review, along with the results of the semester reviews, will be submitted to the counselor's office. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Conclusions: The detailed reviews or our Benchmark and ITBS scores directed us to change our approach to interventions Algebra and Math 8 interventions will be scheduled before the regular math class with all students benefiting from this new approach.
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Marcia Bogart, Math Department Chair

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

District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Goal

All students will improve in open response mathematics skills questions with additional attention to the measurement strand.

Benchmark

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

Intervention: Align classroom instruction and assessment to increase student problem solving skills. The principles for an effective school mathematics programs are equity, curriculum, teaching, learning, assessment, and technology. Curriculum and assessment are equal partners to help increase student problem solving skills.

Scientific Based Research: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Principles and Standards for School Mathematics; 2004

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Teachers will collaborate to compile a bank of mathematics problem-solving resources for each math level (ESL, GT, Sp.Ed, 504).
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair

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

Central Office
Computers
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

All teachers will incorporate activities and/or assessments that require the use of problem-solving strategies. Professional development will be offered annually to teachers who need help implementing this type of instruction and assessment.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Central Office
Computers
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Math teachers will instruct and test at higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy and the use of open-ended questions is required. For students with basic or below basic mid-level benchmark scores, Student Academic Improvement Plans will be established and used for remediation. Math Lab and Reading Workshop classes are also used to support remediation activities.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Technology Inclusion

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Head

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

Computers
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year we evaluated this Intervention/Program through evaluating the effectiveness of problem-solving strategies using released items and open-ended math prompts, etc. and determined that it was effective in support of our intervention to increase student skills. For the Benchmark rhe proficiency/advanced percentages improved slightly by 1% for the combined population. The African American students decreased by 15%. The Hispanic students increased by 12%. The economically disadvantaged students increased by 2%. The English Language Proficient students increased by 16%. Students with disabilities increased by 10%. While all subgroups did not show increases, we believe the data show that the interventions are valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Evaluate effectiveness of problem-solving strategies using released items and open-ended math prompts, etc., on a quarterly basis. Share results with parent through grade reports, progress reports, and parent/teacher conferences. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 20010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Conclusions: The end-of-year reviews of our goal to increase our students problem solving skills directed us to change our approach to interventions Algebra and Math 8 interventions will be scheduled before the regular math class with all students benefiting from this new approach.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education

Marcia Bogart, Mathematics Department Chair

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

Computers
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Closing the Math Achievement Gap: Regular meetings, at least once per semester, of the Math ACSIP Leadership Committee will continue to be held. These meetings will focus on building capacity within our school to close the achievement gap. Each meeting agenda will include the following Core Principles: (1) 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. (2) The ongoing monitoring of student progress in order to influence classroom instruction. (3) The utilization of Formative and Summative Assessment Data to make decisions that impact: Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and Professional Development. (4) 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 monitored through the collection of Formative and Summative Data. The 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: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity

Richard Campbell, ACSIP Leadership Co-Chair Mathematics

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Intervention: Parent Involvement Plan Research indicates that schools improve in all academic areas as parent involvement increases.

Scientific Based Research: National Center for Family & Community Connections with Schools, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory: A new wave of evidence. The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Henderson, A., & Mapp, K.; 2002

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

The school will have a designated area to be used as the Parent Center. Parenting books, magazines and other informative material regarding responsible parenting will be available for parents to borrow for review in each building. Parent Center materials, which may include, but not limited to brochures, pamphlets, computers for use on site.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff
Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The building principal will designate one certified staff member to serve as a parent facilitator to organize meaningful training for staff and parents and to undertake efforts to ensure that parental participation is recognized as an asset to the school. The district will pay the parent facilitator a stipend for assuming duties as required by ACT 307 of 2007, ACT 397 of 2009 and Section 1118 of ESEA.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

District Staff
Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Teachers will receive training to enhance understanding of effective parental involvement strategies.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/20/2010

District Staff
Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Administrators will receive training to enhance understanding of effective parent involvement strategies and the importance of setting expectations and creating a climate conducive to parental participation.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff
Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

All parents will receive "Informational Packets".
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff
Outside Consultants


ACTION BUDGET:	$

All parents will be invited to an Open House Night to welcome parents and students to our school and to share expectations for the school year. The school's process for resolving parental concerns will be discussed at this meeting.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Administrators, teachers and parents will develop a volunteer resources book including: a parent interest survey, an option for parents to designate how frequently they would participate in the program, and include opportunities for parents to assist from home.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

"Parent Involvement Meetings" will be held throughout the year to discuss what students will be expected to learn, how they will be assessed and how parents can assist to make a difference in his or her child's education.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Administrators, teachers, and parents will develop a parental involvement plan addressing the diverse needs of the students and their parents to increase the school's ability to provide for the educational success of their children. The Woodland Parent Teacher Organization (PTO) will enlist our parental participation. The plan will be reviewed and updated annually.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The district will designate two Parent/Teacher Conferences each school year. At the end of the school year, the school will publish a notice in the local newspaper thanking the parents as a group for attending the conferences.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

The school will develop cards that include: the school's commitment to parental involvement, the process for resolving parental concerns, and tips for how parents can foster their child's success. School personnel will distribute the cards to the parents of all students in the building.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

District Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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

Anita Lawson, Principal

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


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Tara Elzer, Parent Facilitator

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

All parents and students will meet with a designated teacher/advisor during scheduled times for Career and Academic Planning (CAP) to discuss the future academic needs of individual students and to design a schedule of classes for the following school year to meet the individual needs of each student.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

Administrative Staff


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2008-2009 school year, we surveyed both the parents and students to gain insight on the effectiveness of our parental involvement activities. The parental advisory committee helped evaluate academic progress, the amount of parental participation within the school and identification of barriers that exist to hinder greater participation by parents.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school-year, we will continue to schedule our start-of-the-school activities, parent teacher conferences and student scheduling activities to provide opportunities to interact with the parents.
Conclusions: The end-of-year reviews of our goal to increase parent involvement will be reviewed and compared with our Benchmark and End-of-Course test scores.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Nika Waitsman, PTO President

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 3:

IMPROVING WELLNESS

Supporting Data:

BMI Results - 8th Males

Year	Number	Healthy or Underweight	At Risk for Overweight	Overweight
2009	162	75.30%	17.90%	6.80%
2008	149	69.10%	20.80%	10.10%
2007	160	66.30%	14.40%	19.40%
2006	157	63.10%	21.00%	15.90%
2005	138	70.30%	18.80%	10.90%
2004	127	66.10%	19.60%	14.10%

BMI Results - 8th Females

Year	Number	Healthy or Underweight	At Risk for Overweight	Overweight
2009	151	72.80%	18.50%	8.60%
2008	130	73.80%	14.60%	11.50%
2007	122	82.00%	9.80%	8.20%
2006	125	69.60%	12.00%	18.40%
2005	123	79.70%	10.00%	7.30%
2004	119	82.30%	9.20%	8.40%

BMI Results - 9th Males

Year	Number	Healthy or Underweight	At Risk for Overweight	Overweight
2007	149	68.50%	17.40%	14.10%
2006	134	66.40%	17.20%	16.40%
2005	121	69.50%	14.90%	15.70%
2004	110	69.00%	15.40%	15.50%

BMI Results - 9th Females

Year	Number	Healthy or Underweight	At Risk for Overweight	Overweight
2007	118	72.90%	16.10%	11.00%
2006	118	74.60%	13.60%	11.90%
2005	95	77.90%	13.70%	8.40%
2004	69	78.20%	14.40%	7.90%

The current BMI results show that the percent of overweight males and females reduced more than 3%. Additionally, the percentage of "at risk" males decreased by 3%, while the females increased by 4%.
National Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS):2005 The percentage of 9-12 grade students that did not participate in any vigorous or moderate physical activity has not significantly changed since 1999.
The number of students who attended physical education classes on one or more days in an average week when they were in school has not significantly changed since 1995.
The number of students who watched television on an average school day for three or more hours per day has significantly decreased (5.6%) since 1999.
Free/Reduced Rate:In 2007-08 the percentage of free and reduced lunch was 21%.In 2006-07 the percentage of free and reduced lunch was 18%. In 2005-06 the percentage of free and reduced lunch was 19%.
The two lowest areas indicated by the School Health Index Survey in 2007-08 were: Module 5 School Health Services and Module 8 Family and Community Involvement. The two lowest areas indicated by the School Health Index Survey in 2006-07 were: Module 5 School Health Services and Module 7 Health Promotion for Staff. The two lowest areas indicated by the School Health Index Survey in 2005-06 were: Mondule 5 School Health Services and Module 8 Family and Community Involvement.

Goal

All students will continue to improve their cardiovascular, muscular strength/endurance, and flexibility.

Benchmark

The number of students being considered overweight or at risk of 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: Woodland will encourage strategies and activities that encourage a non-sedentary lifestyle.

Scientific Based Research: Lets Get Physical Promotion and Education Strategies by Dr. Hal Wechsler, 2003 http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/menu/NNEC/Files/2003/LetsGetPhysical.pdf

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Encourage participation in extracurricular program that supports physical activity, i.e. walking challenge, personal fitness class, bowling, volleyball, aerobics
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Molly Lloyd

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
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Molly Lloyd

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

Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Develop an informational brochure about asthma to help parents and students better understand asthma triggers.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Wellness

Molly Lloyd

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

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

A committee of parents and teachers will review the process and results of the wellness activities.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Molly Lloyd

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

Administrative Staff
Community Leaders
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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: Wellness

Anita Lawson

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

Anita Lawson

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

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

Anita Lawson

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: Student BMI assessments will be analyzed annually to determine the percentage of students decreasing in the categories of at risk of overweight or overweight. Interventions will be evaluated for their effectiveness based on this data. To further access Woodland Junior High School's wellness program, physical education program, parents, students, and faculty members will be invited to participate in a survey.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to continue educating our students on wellness activities through the physical education and career orientation classes. Additionally, parents will be solicited for comments on methods to continue our trends toward more healthy students.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness

Anita Lawson

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

Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Increase awareness and knowledge of the benefits of sound nutritional practices for lifelong health and wellness.
Action Type: Parental Engagement

Molly Lloyd

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

Administrative Staff
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Priority 4:

IMPROVING LITERACY AND MATH FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

Supporting Data:

BENCHMARK-8th GRADE LITERACY EXAM
Report Created:  Sep 15, 2009 
   
2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:   
    
	  327 Students: 90% of Combined Students		
	   14 Students: 62% of African American Students	
	   17 Students: 88% of Hispanic Students		
	  278 Students: 91% of Caucasian Students		
	   60 Students: 65% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
 Less Than 10 Students: 67% of LEP Students			
	   28 Students: 50% of Students with Disabilities	

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The trend analysis of
the open response and multiple-choice questions, in the three types of
reading passages, revealed that the lowest identified areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Writing (MC).	The trend analysis of the open response
questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest identified
area Content and Style.

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:   
     
	  313 Students: 87.5% of Combined Students		  
	   13 Students: 46.2% of African American Students	  
	   10 Students: 30% of Hispanic Students		
	  279 Students: 92.5% of Caucasian Students		  
	   60 Students: 55% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
 Less Than 10 Students: 22.2% of LEP Students			  
	   28 Students: 42.9% of Students with Disabilities	  

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The trend analysis of
the open response and multiple-choice questions, in the three types of
reading passages, revealed that the lowest identified areas are Literary
Passage (OR) and Practical Passage (OR).  The trend analysis of the open
response questions in the five writing domains revealed that the lowest
identified area Content and Style.

2007-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:   
     
	  290 Students: 87.2% of Combined Students		  
 Less Than 10 Students: 50% of African American Students	
	   14 Students: 71.4% of Hispanic Students		  
	  251 Students: 88.8% of Caucasian Students		  
	   52 Students: 59.6% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
	   12 Students: 75% of LEP Students			
	   29 Students: 41.4% of Students with Disabilities 

The lowest identified areas for Limited English Proficiency were: 
     Content and Style

BENCHMARK-8th GRADE MATHEMATICS EXAM
Report Created:  Sep 15, 2009

2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:   
     
	  341 Students: 82% of Combined Students		
	   13 Students: 39% of African American Students	
	   23 Students: 52% of Hispanic Students		
	  278 Students: 85% of Caucasian Students		
	   60 Students: 52% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
	    9 Students: 27% of LEP Students			
	   28 Students: 45% of Students with Disabilities	

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the response questions in the five
mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Geometry (OR) and Algebra (OR).

2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:   
     
	  313 Students: 81.5% of Combined Students		  
	   13 Students: 53.8% of African American Students	  
	   10 Students: 40% of Hispanic Students		
	  279 Students: 85.7% of Caucasian Students		  
	   60 Students: 50% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	
	    9 Students: 11.1% of LEP Students			  
	   28 Students: 35.7% of Students with Disabilities	  

Limited English Proficient Subpopulation:  The lowest identified
areas based on the trend analysis of the open response questions in the
five mathematics strands revealed weaknesses in Measurement and Number and
Operations.  The lowest identified areas based on the trend analysis of
the multiple choice questions in the five mathematics strands revealed
weaknesses in Measurement and Geometry.

2007-# Tested &Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:	  
     
	  290 Students: 75.5% of Combined Students		  
 Less Than 10 Students: 0% of African American Students        
	   14 Students: 42.9% of Hispanic Students		  
	  251 Students: 77.3% of Caucasian Students		  
	   52 Students: 44.2% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students	  
	   12 Students: 58.3% of LEP Students			  
	   29 Students: 24.1% of Students with Disabilities 

The lowest identified areas for Limited English Proficiency were: 
     Measurement and Number and Operations

English Language Development Assessment (ELDA)
Report Completed: October 20, 2009
(Total Students Less Than 10)

Proficiency Level	Listening	Speaking	Reading	Writing	Comprehension	Composite
5	25%	38%	25%	38%	25%	13%
4	38%	25%	13%	38%	13%	25%
3	13%	13%	38%	0%	38%	38%
2	13%	25%	0%	13%	0%	0%
1	13%	0%	25%	13%	25%	25%

ATTENDANCE RATE: 2009, the attendance rate for the building was
96.1%, 2008, the attendance rate for the building was 97.1%, 2007, the
attendance rate for the building was 95.9%.

Goal

All ELL students will improve literacy and mathematics skills by advancing at least one level of English proficiency.

Benchmark

The combined population and each subgroup MET the 2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Literacy target of 59.69% and the Math target of 55.75% scoring Proficient/Advanced. It is expected that each of these populations will meet, or exceed, the 2010 AYP Literacy target of 67.75% and the Math target of 64.6% scoring Proficient/Advanced or make AYP through either the "Safe Harbor" or "Growth" models.

Intervention: Increase ELL student performance by improving test taking strategies. Teachers will teach students how to learn, rather than teaching them specific curriculum content or specific skills. Learning strategies teach students way of organizing and using a particular set of skills in order to learn content or accomplish other tasks more effectively and efficiently in school.

Scientific Based Research: Scientific Based Research: Learning Strategies by Daniel Boudah. ERIC Digest (8/1/1999)

Actions

Person Responsible

Timeline

Resources

Source of Funds

Tracy Miller, Library Media Specialist

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

Administrative Staff
Public Library
School Library
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Stephanie Hoops, Teacher

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

Administrative Staff
Outside Consultants
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Classroom teachers, ELL Teachers, Special Ed. Teachers, Math Lab & Inclusion Teachers, and other support staff will collaborate to implement differentiated strategies for students with Academic Improvement Plans and/or special needs to create math support based upon student documented weaknesses. The strategies will include the review of released test items by both classroom and special education teachers.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Special Education

Anita Lawson, Principal

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

District Staff
Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Stephanie Hoops, Teacher

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

Outside Consultants
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

PROGRAM EVALUATION: At the conclusion of the 2009-2010 school year we will evaluate this Intervention/Program through the review of summative standardized test scores, formative classroom assessments, and semester exams and determined that it was effective in support of our test taking strategies intervention. We believe the evidence shows that it is valuable in terms of supporting our efforts to increase student achievement.
Needs Assessments: During the 2009-2010 school year we plan to use the following protocol in evaluating, and adjusting, the programs, processes, and activities that make up the action descriptions within this intervention/program: Tests will be reviewed to identify test taking strategies to improve standardized test scores, classroom assessments, and semester exams. We will use this data/information to determine whether the objectives of this Intervention/Program were achieved and whether it has been successful in attaining the anticipated participant outcome objectives. We will report the results, in our 2010/2011 ACSIP Plan, and use those evaluation results in making decisions that impact our future instructional program.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Program Evaluation

Stephanie Hoops, Teacher

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

Performance Assessments
Teachers


ACTION BUDGET:	$

Total Budget:

Planning Team

Classification	Name	Position	Committee
Classroom Teacher	Angela McCutcheon	English Teacher	ACSIP Leadership Co-Chair - Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Beau Patrick	Physical Education Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Becky Knight	Special Education Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Bobbi Nash	Vocational Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Bobby Crockett	Physical Education Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Caleb Pond	Teacher	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Chris McClure	English Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Cincy Mathis	English Teacher	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Debbie Harris	Science Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Denice Nelson	English Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Elizabeth Bonner	Science Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Erin Lefler	Spanish Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Gail Johnson-Hogan	Special Education Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Jackie Reynolds	Speech Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	James Kunzlemann	Art Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jamie Highfill	English Teacher	ACSIP Leadership
Classroom Teacher	Jane Coomes	Special Education Teacher	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Jeanette Dunsworth	Vocational Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Jeff Boogaart	Social Studies Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Jeff Seiter	Vocational Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Jennifer Taylor	Science Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	John Stiefer	ScienceTeacher	ACSIP Leadership
Classroom Teacher	Joseph Betz	Social Studies Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Joseph McClung	Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Judy Allen	French Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Judy Gardner	Special Education Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Julianne Lewis	English Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Julie Agler	Physical Education Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Kent Ariola	History Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Kymbrly Barron	Spanish Teacher	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Lauren Elan	French/German Teacher	Literacy
Classroom Teacher	Lindsey Asbury	Gifted and Talented Teacher	ACSIP Leadership
Classroom Teacher	Lou Petrone	Mathematics Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Marcia Bogart	Mathematics Teacher	ACSIP Leadership
Classroom Teacher	Marilyn Bauer	Physical Education/Technology	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Michelle Price	Math Teacher	Parental Involvement
Classroom Teacher	Nat Thomas	Mathematics Teacher	ACSIP Leadership Chair
Classroom Teacher	Reese Neal	English Teacher	English
Classroom Teacher	Richard Campbell	Science Teacher	ACSIP Leadership Co-Chair Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Rick Ternes	Health Teacher	Wellness
Classroom Teacher	Robert Blot	Mathematics Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Sharla Keen-Mills	English Teacher	English
Classroom Teacher	Shay Hopper	Social Studies Teacher	Wellness
Classroom Teacher	Stephanie Hoops	ESL Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Susan Abram	Science Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Terri Speer	Special Education Teacher	Mathematics
Classroom Teacher	Tom Clark	Social Studies Teacher	Literacy
District-Level Professional	Christie Jay	Federal Programs Coordinator	ACSIP Leadership
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Allison Houston	Assistant Principal	Literacy
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Beverly Smith	Special Education	Literacy
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Curt Champion	Counselor	Literacy
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Molly Lloyd	Nurse	Wellness Chair
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Sean Dugan	Speech	Literacy
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Tara Elzer	Counselor	Parental Involvement
Non-Classroom Professional Staff	Tracy Miller	Media Specialist	Parental Involvement
Parent	Jan Davidson	Parent	Mathematics
Parent	Jan Douglas	Parent	Wellness
Parent	Nika Waitsman	Parent	Wellness
Parent	Nika Waitsman	PTO President	ACSIP Leadership
Parent	Patty Sullivan	Parent	Wellness
Parent	Sheri Brooks	Parent	Wellness
Parent	Susan Baker	Parent	Literacy
Principal	Anita Lawson	Principal	Title V