lonsdale elementary school open house 2013 welcome!!!
TRANSCRIPT
LONSDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLOPEN HOUSE 2013
WELCOME!!!WELCOME!!!
Currently, Lonsdale Elementary School is classified as a school in the “Typical” Range
Schools in this range scored within a point range of 50-70
OUR GOAL IS TO BE A COMMENDED SCHOOL!!!
Educator Evaluation System
School Classification Breakdown
SCHOOL TitleI
TargetsPassed
Classifica-tion
TotalPoints/100
Points From
% PROF/30
SUBGROUP
GAPS/30
PROG TO 2017
TARGET/5
% INDISTINCT
ION/10
STUDENT
GROWTH/25
HSGRADUATIO
N/20
HS SCALED SCORE CHANGE
/5
Central Elementary
12/12
Typical 55.50
18.00 21.00 3.00 3.50 10.00
Lincoln Middle School
9/14 Typical 53.00
15.00 16.50 3.00 3.50 15.00
Lincoln High School
13/13
Typical 64.67
16.00 18.00 8.00 3.00 NA 16.67 3.00
Lonsdale Elementary
9/12 Typical 56.50
17.00 19.50 2.00 3.00 15.00
Northern Elementary
Y 12/12
Typical 61.17
16.00 19.50 6.00 3.00 16.67
Saylesville Elementary
12/14
Typical 51.67
17.00 18.00 2.00 3.00 11.67
RIDE Systems under RTTT
Teacher Leadership
•EPSS (Educator Performance Support System)
All Teachers
•Data Team Work
•Susan Mischler, Colleen Boisvert, Tracy Hastings, Jeannine Magliocco
•ELA Curriculum Alignment to the Common Core
•Barbara Berleth, Kimberly Cole, Debra Lyons, Dana Miga, Susan Mischler
•SS Curriculum Alignment to the Common Core
•Diane Avery
Educator Evaluation System
Research has shown that one of the most important school-based factors influencing a student’s achievement is the quality of his or her teacher (RIDE website, 2012).
Continuous feedback aligned with teacher standards
Teacher Professional Growth Plans and Student Learning Objectives will drive the work teachers do (data and needs based)
The online EPSS (Educator Performance Support System) will capture all critical information associated with teacher and administrator evaluations and streamline the process for both educators and evaluators. The EPSS will provide access to all forms, components, and scoring features required for implementation, as well as guidance to support the evaluation process (RIDE website, 2012).
Percentage of Lonsdale Students Achieving Proficiency or Above Over the Past 5 Years
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Reading Mathematics Writing
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
Longitudinal Reading Proficiency by Grade
Reading Proficiency: 2010-2011 2011-2012
2012-2013Lonsdale School 85 % 86%
73%
Beginning of Grade 3 86 % 85% 65%
Beginning of Grade 4 91 % 88% *74%
Beginning of Grade 5 81 % 83% 83%
Longitudinal Mathematics Proficiency by Grade
Math Proficiency:
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Lonsdale School 75 % 82% 66%
Beginning of Grade 3 68 % 82% 56% Beginning of Grade 4 87 % 83% 83%
Beginning of Grade 5 71 % 83% *63%
Longitudinal Writing Proficiency—Grade 5
Writing Proficiency:
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013Lonsdale School 61% 62% 74% (grade 5)
Lincoln Elementary Schools Writing Scores 2011-2012 2012-2013
Central 68% 86% Lonsdale 62% 74% Northern 61% 63% Saylesville 69% 71%
Reading Proficiency Across Elementary Schools in Lincoln
Grade Central Lonsdale Northern Saylesville
3 74% 65% 71% 71% 4 86% 74% 72% 75% 5 86% 83% 75% 85% 6 (Teaching Year) 88% 89% 82%
85%
Percentage Of Students Proficient Or Proficient With Distinction
Grade Central Lonsdale Northern Saylesville
3 12% 13% 7% 94 2% 2% 8% 10% 5 6% 5% 8% 8% 6 3% 0% 3% 7%
Percentage Of Students Substantially Below Proficiency
Mathematics Proficiency Across Elementary Schools in Lincoln
Percentage Of Students Proficient Or Proficient With Distinction
Grade Central Lonsdale Northern Saylesville
3 71% 56% 74% 77% 4 80% 83% 73% 65% 5 85% 63% 69% 74% 6 80% 81% 74% 85%
Percentage Of Students Substantially Below Proficiency
Grade Central Lonsdale Northern Saylesville
3 13% 21% 7% 7% 4 8% 6% 14% 15% 5 9% 12% 15% 14% 6 10% 13% 14% 19%
Lonsdale Elementary Subgroups (IEP and SES (Supplemental Education Services))
IEP Grade Number of Students Reading Proficiency Math Proficiency
3 8 25% N/A
4 1 N/A N/A 5 3 N/A 33%
SES Grade Number of Students Reading Proficiency Math Proficiency
3 31 42% 38% 4 15 67% 73% 5 15 73% 47%
Timeline of Action
February 8, 20132012 NECAP Results released
Results communicatedTo faculty
Principal performs preliminary analysis
February 25through March 12Item Analysis withGrade level teams begins during common planning time
March 13Grade level team meeting—grade level teams meet to brainstorm interventions based on item analysis results and begin implementation
March 21SIT meets and develops action plans
Implementation
Grade 3 Findings from Item Analysis
Reading Findings
Academic Vocabulary Analysis and
interpretation weak Reading the questions Inference of Idiomatic
Expression Developing constructive
responses using details from the passage
Math Findings
Completion of items Fractions (equal parts of a
whole) Using key words to choose
operation (“How many more…?”)
Equivalence Line plots vs. graphs—how
to read Area of a shape using
manipulatives Depth of Knowledge—
multi-step difficult problems
Grade 4 Findings from Item Analysis
Reading Findings Homophones Analysis and
Interpretation Response to
Informational Text Prefixes Poem comparison
Math Findings
Place value Mathematics
Vocabulary Fluency with
subtraction, multiplication
Equivalence Depth of Knowledge
—multi-step word problems
Grade 5 Findings from Item Analysis
Reading Findings
Constructed responses—supporting with evidence from the text
Vocabulary—using context to determine meanings of unknown words
Fact vs. Opinion Understanding the prompt
for a constructed response. Analysis and Interpretation
Math Findings
Following directions Fractions---reducing to
lowest terms Algebraic expressions
(relationships between the operations)
Equivalence Key words to help create
algebraic expressions Fractions—reducing to
lowest terms
Additional ACTIONS the
school will take
Face to Face meetings with parents of students who achieved 1’s or 2’s
Ramp up program Summer--the start of NECAP
Highlights in “SPOTS” and on listserv for parent intervention
PLC s to focus on these areas of need (Text Complexity is the next topic)
Reward students for hard work and effort during testing
ACTION PLANS--Developed in both Reading and Math
Use Envisions program more regularly to expose students to problems with higher depth of knowledge (“quick checks’)
Academic and test words “word walls”—highlight them in directions Key words “word walls” and consistency of its use during instruction Continue with Student Learning Objectives in Math---Fluency focus More consistent focus on equivalence—work at a more concrete level to
scaffold for the abstract balancing of equations Provide more consistent opportunities to solve problems at higher levels
that are “like” problems that were solved during instruction Explicitly embed those skills that were deficient into math instruction or
morning work (for example, counting and making change in grade 2) Continue practicing responses to literary and informational text with the
TEEC format—write the acronym on their written work Provide more opportunities for students to compare two texts (such as
poems) More explicit work with morphemic parts of words (prefix, suffix—
meaning) Build stamina for reading lengthier passages Consistently require students to read the questions before reading a
passage. Explicitly teach inference of idiomatic expressions Reading and writing about various text structures such as fact vs. opinion
and cause/effect to embed understanding of these important comprehension
Students will take released items from the test in June. Students will practice with multiple choice tests in June and in
September.
Science NECAP
Proficiency Levels
oStudents in grade 4 take Science NECAP in the Spring of their fourth grade year
oStudents are tested for their understanding of Grade Span Expectations
oScience NECAP will be taken until the spring of 2016
Science Initiatives in Place in Response to NECAP Data
Scientist Notebook Revised Scope and Sequence ~includes Kit-based Inquiry
Science Common Inquiry tasks being implemented at grade 4 Study Island TEEC Writing Consultant and Professional Development Increased district and school-based support in Science Action plan to be developed in Science
Time and people….
Grade Level and Faculty meeting times devoted to topics focused on teaching and learning (e.g., intervention block planning, Looking at Student Work, data analysis)
Common Planning Time (3x/week) School Improvement Team Lonsdale Parents and Teachers PBIS (1x/month) PLC (1x/month during faculty meeting) Intervention Blocks~built intoMaster schedule (common preps and Intervention blocks) September Ramp-up—9/4—9/20 Face to Face meetings with Parents
PBIS (Positive Behavior Intervention Supports)
PPaws and Path to a Reward
• Principal’s Award
• Keys to Kindness
• Paw Raffle
•Student Leadership—PBIS Leadership Team and 5th grade Leadership Team (Service, Fun, and Spirit)
• Community Meetings
Parents—Important Partners in a Child’s Education
When parents get connected to the school, children do
better. Research shows children whose parents areinvolved get better grades, do better on tests, andhave fewer discipline problems at school by more
than 50 percentParent Outreach•Face to face meetings with parents•Listserv•Lonsdale Spots•Website•SIT•LPT•Volunteers (BCI check required)
Earn Your Parent Paw!
On our way from Typical…..
…to Commended!