Elko County School District€¦ · Elko County School District Flag View Intermediate School 777 Country Club Drive Elko, Nevada 89801 For Implementation in (2009-2010) School Improvement

Elko County School District

FFllaagg VViieeww IInntteerrmmeeddiiaattee SScchhooooll

777777 CCoouunnttrryy CClluubb DDrriivvee EEllkkoo,, NNeevvaaddaa 8899880011

For Implementation in (2009-2010)

School Improvement Planning Team • ALL Title I schools must have a parent on their SIP team that is NOT a district employee. Indicate this member with an asterisk.

Name of Member Position Name of Member Position Todd Pehrson Principal Susan Berry 5th Grade Teacher DeAnne Glenn Vice-Principal Annie Hicks Music Ginny Hawken 6th Grade Teacher Bobby Steensen Art Michaela Ports 6th Grade Teacher Shelleen Oltmanns 5th Grade Teacher Jessica Lewis 6th Grade Teacher Dawnmarie Stuehling 6th Grade Teacher Margie Lemback 5th Grade Teacher Martina Gonzalez 5th Grade Teacher

School: Flag View Intermediate District: Elko County School District Principal: Todd Pehrson School Year: 2009-2010 Address: 777 Country Club Drive Elko, NV 89801 Phone: 775-738-7236 Email: [email protected]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page #

Part I: Vision of Learning 3 Part II: Inquiry Process: Evidence of Development of the SIP 7

Part III: SIP Goals & Measurable Objectives 9 Part IV: School Improvement Master Plan: Goal 1: Action Plan & Monitoring Plan 11

Goal 2: Action Plan & Monitoring Plan 14 Goal 3: Action Plan & Monitoring Plan 17

Part V: Budget for the overall cost of carrying out the plan 19 Part VI: Evaluation of the SIP 20

Part VII: Other Required Elements of the SIP (All schools) 23 Part VIII: Required Elements for Title I Schools 26 Part IX: Additional Required Elements for Non-Title I Schools 27

Appendix A: School Profile (Accountability Report, Other Data) 28

Part I: VISION FOR LEARNING

District Vision or Mission Statement

Elko County School District promotes a culture of high academic achievement for its students, encourages high performance standards of its employees, and continually strives to maintain a climate in which all students can learn at high levels in every school.

District Goal 1: Student Achievement Utilizing student performance data, the Elko County School District will annually develop a plan for improving student performance in the content areas of math, reading, and writing. Objectives/Quality Indicators 1.1 Curriculum 1.2 Instruction 1.3 Assessment 1.4 Remediation/Enrichment 1.5 School Improvement District Goal 2: Human Resources The Elko County School District will develop and utilize a professional development plan for teachers and administrators that creates the opportunity for participants to refine existing skills and develop new competencies required to be effective school teachers and leaders that support the district’s instructional goals.

Objectives /Quality Indicators 2.1 Recruitment, Hiring & Staffing 2.2 Work Systems 2.3 Performance Review 2.4 Recognition District Goal 3: Support Services & Governance Functions To create an educational environment within each school where parental involvement is welcome. Encourage parental support of the District’s educational goals, the mandates affecting public education as a whole, and our expectations for their participatory role in the education of their children.

Objectives /Quality Indicators 3.1 Parent Involvement 3.2 Student Services 3.3 Student Activities 3.4 Information Technology 3.5 System-wide Operational Support Functions 3.6 Operational Policies & Procedures 3.7 Governing Board Leadership District Goal 4: Fiscal & Facility Management To develop a fiscal plan as well as long-range facility plan that will meet the long-term needs of the district’s students. Objectives /Quality Indicators 4.1 Budget Development 4.2 Financial Management 4.3 Effective Allocation & Use of Resources 4.4 Master Facility and Maintenance Plan

VISION FOR LEARNING (continued)

School Vision or Mission Statement

Teach, Accept, Challenge, and Inspire all Children

School Highlights

-Flag View Intermediate School combines all 5th and 6th graders in the city of Elko. -Flag View Intermediate School is designed to incorporate a middle school philosophy, with students placed in pods. -Teachers utilize a homeroom called Cougar Den to teach character education and organization skills. -All rooms have SMART boards for instructional use. -Flag View Intermediate utilizes a PAWSitive pass for positive behavior. -Flag View Teachers are organized in teams and have common prep times. -Flag View Intermediate incorporates an enrichment/remediation (E/R) time twice weekly. -Students have access to two science labs and two computer labs. -Student service organization was implemented during the first year called “Cougar Pride”. -Celebrations of student achievement in the classroom occur quarterly. -Hosted schoolwide science fair. Many of Flag View students competed at the District level science fair. -Visiting Author, Brandon Mull, invited to talk with Flag View Students -Community in Schools Breakfast Program implemented every morning. -Teacher Resource room availability for teachers to check out and use books of varying topics. - Math Night held to aid students, parents, and their familys to play math games that will help develop skills. -Instructional Aid available to go into classrooms and offer help to struggling students. -Read-In Night to promote literacy and the importance of reading to your children. -Early Out to offer professional development in understanding poverty. -School-wide writing proficiency completed four times/year to identify areas of focus needed for Nevada Writing Exam. -Student Assistant Group- counselor organized group for students in need of help with social skills (gender separated). -Student Assistant Group- Counselor organized group for students experiencing grief, death, or loss. -Student Assistant Group- Counselor organized group for girls focusing on issues specific to gender. -Schoolwide daily SSR to aid students in reading proficiency.

PART II: INQUIRY PROCESS

Comprehensive Needs Assessment Based on a complete analysis of the data, list the key strength and priority concerns in student performance, instructional and remediation practices, and program implementation.

Key Strengths T4S - (As indicated in T4S – Appendix A) 95% of teachers elicit students to be engaged in the academic learning 26% increase in reinforces effort of student and/or provides recognition. 13% increase in monitors and/or adjusts individually or collectively. 13% increase in summative assessments to determine mastery of learning. 20% increase in verbal scaffolding to assist and support student use of academic language. 20% increase in selected concepts that maximize student engagement. 26% increase in standards/objectives communicated to all students. Testing - (As indicated in Assessment Data – Appendix B) 6th grade students exceeded the Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) of 54.6% for students proficient in math. 63% of 6th grade students are proficient in reading, exceeding the AMO of 51.7%. Indicators of School Quality “ISQ” - First Year Data (As indicated in ISQ– Appendix C) Teacher excellence was rated excellent in all areas. Parents support, school leadership, instructional quality and school safety were all rated typical or above.

Priority Concerns Student achievement from the four feeder schools vary greatly. Transitioning from a traditional neighborhood elementary school into one intermediate school with a middle school philosophy may impact student achievement; due to student accountability to more than one teacher and an increase in number of students a teacher has each day. T4S - (As indicated in T4S – Appendix A) The majority of the activities in the classroom are at the lower cognitive level of Bloom’s Taxonomy. 50% teachers are maximizing instructional time. 56% student interaction and/or discussions related to learning. 59% of learning is made relevant to the learners.

Testing - (As indicated in Assessment Data – Appendix B) Only 54% of 5th grade students are proficient in math, in comparison to the 54.6% AMO. Only 47% of 5th grade students are proficient in reading, in comparison to the 51.7% AMO. Only 55% of 5th grade students are proficient in science, as compared to the District average of 56%. Only 39.6% of 5th grade students are proficient in writing, in comparison to the 54.6% AMO. Indicators of School Quality “ISQ” – First Year Data (As indicated in ISQ– Appendix C) Student commitment and resource management.

INQUIRY PROCESS (continued)

Verification of Causes – Root Cause Analysis For each concern, verify the root causes that impact or impede the priority concerns. Identify research-based solutions that address the priority concerns.

Priority Concerns

Root Causes

Solutions

T4S - (As indicated in T4S – Appendix A) The majority of the activities in the classroom are at the lower cognitive level of Bloom’s Taxonomy. 50% teachers are maximizing instructional time. 56% student interaction and/or discussions related to learning. 59% of learning is made relevant to the learners. Testing - (As indicated in Assessment Data – Appendix B) Only 54% of 5th grade students are proficient in Math, in comparison to the 54.6% AMO. Only 47% of 5th grade students are proficient in Reading, in comparison to the 51.7% AMO. Only 55% of 5th grade students are proficient in science, as compared to the District average of 56%.

Lack of training and implementing on a daily basis. Awareness of requirements for maximizing instructional time. Awareness of requirements for student interaction. Lack of experience with specialized curriculum. Student achievement and intervention strategies from the four feeder schools vary greatly. Transitioning from a traditional neighborhood elementary school into one intermediate school with a middle school philosophy may impact student achievement; due to student accountability to more than one teacher and an increase in number of students a teacher has each day.

Utilize Enrichment and Remediation time for interventions. Teachers will meet and be trained in PLC’s in order to maximize student learning. School wide writing assessments will be given. Three assessments, pre, middle, and post will allow us to monitor and maximize student learning in writing. Teachers will plan direct vocabulary instruction in PLC’s and utilize instructional strategies to ensure student retention of academic vocabulary. Efforts will be made to foster connections between reading and writing. A portion of Enrichment and Remediation classes will be devoted to supplemental writing instruction.

Only 39.6% of 5th grade students are proficient in writing, in comparison to the 51.7% AMO. Indicators of School Quality “ISQ” – First Year Data (As indicated in ISQ– Appendix C) Student commitment and resource management.

Lack of alignment of guided and independent practice strategies in relation to the demographic need of the four transitioning schools. Students have demonstrated a difficulty with academic and content area vocabulary. Amount of time staff meets with students. Lack of needs assessment.

Professional Development will be offered to staff by NNRPDP on instructional strategies to improve writing in all areas. Utilized a Concern/Solution format to communicate needs of staff at the conclusion of our first year. Monthly Family Nights will be offered with various themes to encourage parent involvement and their student’s academic success.

Part III: IMPROVEMENT GOALS AND MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES

Convert the top priority concerns into the goal(s) for improvement and incorporate the identified solutions into the action plan.

Goal 1: All students will increase their Reading proficiency.

Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grades 5 and 6 will show an increase in reading scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 1.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 47% to 57% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

Measurable Objective 1.2: 6th Grade – The total population will increase from 68% to 72% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

Goal 2: All students will increase their Writing proficiency.

Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grade 5 will show an increase in writing scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 2.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 40% to 50% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

Goal 3: All students will increase their Math proficiency.

Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grades 5 and 6 will show an increase in math scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 3.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 54% to 64% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets. Measurable Objective 3.2: 6th Grade – The total population will increase from 63% to 67% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets. Goal 4: All students will increase their Science proficiency.

Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grade 5 will show an increase in science scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 4.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 55% to 61% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

Part IV: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MASTER PLAN Action Plan: List the action steps to implement the solutions for each goal, as well as the timeline, resources, and the person(s) responsible.

Monitoring Plan: Identify the data that will be collected to monitor the action steps, as well as the timeline and the person(s) responsible.

Goal 1: All students will increase their Reading proficiency.

Measurable Objective 1.1: Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grades 5 and 6 will show an increase in reading scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 47% to 57% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets. 6th Grade – The total population will increase from 68% to 72% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

ACTION PLAN Action Steps

Timeline

Resources

Person(s) Responsible

1.1 Interdisciplinary Team meetings to level students based on common assessments.

2x Month Teachers Teachers\Admin

1.2 Homework Room\Tutoring 5th and 6th Grade Daily Teachers Teachers\Admin

1.3 Core PLC meetings twice monthly to determine at risk students, interventions, and discuss teaching strategies.

September and throughout the year Teachers Teachers

1.4 Teachers will use information from STAR Reader testing during PLC meetings to focus instruction.

September and throughout the year

Accelerated Reader Software Teachers\Admin

1.5 Faculty Training (RTI, T4S, PLC Structure, Internet Safety etc) Monthly ECSD Staff Teachers\Admin

1.6 Enrichment\Remediation time built into the regular school day. Targeted enrichment and remediation instruction on identified ELA skills

100 Minutes\week Teachers\Staff Teachers

1.7 Sustained Silent Reading time as part of the regular daily schedule.

August throughout the year Teachers Teachers\Admin

1.8 Teachers utilize common prep times to discuss student achievement

August throughout the year Teachers Teachers

1.9 Ruby Payne Poverty Workshop October 6, 2009 NNRPDP

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MASTER PLAN (Continued)

Goal 2: All students will increase their Writing proficiency. Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grade 5 will show an increase in writing scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 2.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 40% to 50% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

ACTION PLAN Action Steps to implement the solutions/strategies

Timeline for implementing action steps

Resources e.g., money, people, facilities to be used for implementation

Person(s) Responsible Who is the person or group who will ensure that each action step is implemented?

2.1 Interdisciplinary Team meetings to level students based on common assessments.

2x Month Teachers Teachers\Admin


2.3 Core PLC meetings twice monthly to determine essential outcomes, assessments, at risk students, interventions, and discuss teaching strategies.


2.4 School Wide Writing Assessments 3x\Year Teachers Teachers\Admin


2.6 Enrichment\Remediation time built into the regular school day. 100 Minutes\week Teachers\Staff Teachers

2.7 Professional Development Training in Writing

August throughout the year NNRPDP Teachers\Admin



2.9 Ruby Payne Poverty Workshop October 6, 2009 NNRPDP FIS Staff

2.1a Specialist teachers reinforcing writing traits by teaching mini lessons each week.

Weekly Specialists Teachers\Admin

2.2a. 5th Grade State Writing Pilot September DOE Teachers\Admin

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT MASTER PLAN (Continued)

Goal 3: All students will increase their Math proficiency. Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grades 5 and 6 will show an increase in math scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 3.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 54% to 64% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets. Measurable Objective 3.2: 6th Grade – The total population will increase from 63% to 67% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

ACTION PLAN

Action Steps

Timeline

Resources


3.1 Interdisciplinary Team meetings to level students based on common assessments. 2x Month Teachers Teachers\Admin


3.3 Core PLC meetings twice monthly to determine essential outcomes, assessments, at risk students, interventions, and discuss teaching strategies.

September and throughout the

year Teachers Teachers

3.4 Instructional Aid utilized to tutor targeted students

September and throughout the

year Instructional Aid Teachers\Admin


3.6 Enrichment\Remediation time built into the regular school day.

100 Minutes\week Teachers\Staff Teachers

3.7 Targeted enrichment and remediation instruction on identified math skills

100 Minutes\week Teachers Teachers\Admin


August throughout the

year Teachers Teachers

3.9 Ruby Payne Poverty Workshop October 6, 2009 NNRPDP FIS Staff

Goal 4: All students will increase their Science proficiency. Students, particularly ESL, Hispanics, IEP and Low SES, in grade 5 will show an increase in science scores as measured by the state CRT and state proficiency exams by the end of the 2009-2010 school year. Measurable Objective 4.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 55% to 61% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

ACTION PLAN Action Steps

Timeline

Resources


4.1 Instructional Aid utilized to tutor targeted students Various Teachers Teachers\Admin


4.3 Core PLC meetings twice monthly to determine essential outcomes, at risk students, interventions, and discuss teaching strategies.


4.4 Science teachers will utilize hands on science labs and activities.

September and throughout the year Teacher\Science Labs Teachers\Admin


4.6 Enrichment\Remediation time built into the regular school day. 100 Minutes\week Teachers\Staff Teachers

4.7 Sustained Silent Reading time as part of the regular daily schedule.

August throughout the year Teachers Teachers\Admin



4.9 Ruby Payne Poverty Workshop October 6, 2009 NNRPDP

Part V: BUDGET FOR THE OVERALL COST OF CARRYING OUT PLAN

List the funds necessary to carry out the school improvement plan and accomplish the goals.

Goals Total amount needed to

accomplish Goal.

(Amounts for each action step should be listed under

“Resources.”)

Funds available in current school funding that have been specifically set aside for the implementation of the goal.

Funds still needed to implement goal.

Goal 1

Fully funded through site budget


0

Goal 2



0

Goal 3



0

Goal 4



0

Part VI: EVALUATION OF THE SIP

For each measurable objective, identify the data that will be collected to monitor the action steps, as well as the timeline and the person(s) responsible. Measurable Objectives Evaluation Measures

(Monitoring Data & Outcome Indicators to evaluate progress in

achieving the Measurable Objectives.)

Timeline For

collecting data

Person(s) Responsible Who is the person or group

who will ensure that the evaluation is completed?

ELA Measurable Objective 1.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 47% to 57% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets. Measurable Objective 1.2: 6th Grade – The total population will increase from 68% to 72% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets

2010 Nevada Criterion Reference Tests

Spring 2010

Administration Guidance Counselor

Leadership Team

Writing Measurable Objective 2.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 39% to 49% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.

2010 Nevada Writing Proficiency Exam

Spring 2010


Leadership Team

Math Measurable Objective 3.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 54% to 64% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets. Measurable Objective 3.2: 6th Grade – The total population will increase from 63% to 67% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.


Spring 2010


Leadership Team

Science Measurable Objective 4.1: 5th Grade – The total population will increase from 55% to 61% and subgroups will increase according to the appropriate SMART Targets.


Spring 2010


Leadership Team

Part VII: OTHER REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF THE SIP

All schools MUST complete this page.

School Characteristics # % Title I Yes No

Average Daily Attendance 678 95 Eligible X Transiency Rate 45 6 Served X

% enrolled continuously since Count Day Targeted Assisted Incidents of School Violence: Student-to-

Student Schoolwide

Incidents of School Violence: Student-to-Staff Did your school make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)? X What was your school’s AYP Designation?

Exemplary (EX), High Achieving (HA), Watch List (W), Needs Improvement Year 1 (N1), Needs Improvement Year 2 (N2), Needs Improvement Year 1 Hold (N1-H), Needs Improvement Year 2 Hold (N2-H), etc.

W

Dropout Rate (HS) NA Did you appeal your latest AYP designation? Graduation Rate (HS) NA Was your latest appeal granted?

Designated as Persistently Dangerous School? Receiving State Remediation funding? Has a State SST been assigned to your school?

1. What are the policies and practices in place that ensure proficiency of each subgroup in the core academic subjects?

• PLC’s are in place for instructional teams. PLC’s will analyze hard and soft student data for the purposes of identifying at risk students, curriculum gaps, best practices, and possible interventions.

2. List and briefly describe, as appropriate, how the school has incorporated activities of remedial instruction or tutoring before school, after school, during the summer, and/or during any extension of the school year.

• Enrichment and Remediation time is built into the daily schedule.

• Identified students are assigned to homework room during lunch.

• Tutoring is available for students that are assigned.

3. Describe the resources available to the school to carry out the plan.

• Discretionary site budget funds

• District funds

4. Summarize the effectiveness of any appropriations for the school made by the Legislature to improve student academic achievement.

• SB 185 resulted in the reauthorization of an Instructional coach for new teachers.

5. Discuss how the school will utilize Educational Involvement Accords for Parents including the Honor Code and meet all the requirements of the law.

6. If applicable, describe how the school will make its Title III Annual Measurable Achievement Objective (AMAO) targets in English language proficiency (reading, writing, listening, and speaking comprehension).

The following programs will be used to help our English Language Learners make AMAO. 1. Newcomers Program: Basic English skills for students at Level 1 with little or no English

• Focus: Vocabulary- use a lot of real objects, visual aids, etc. Speaking-rhythmic verse; songs; memorizations Reading- basic sight words, alphabet; phonemic awareness; phonics Writing-basic sentences 2. Pull-Out Program: Basic English literacy skills for Level 1 and 2

• Focus: Still focus on speaking, reading, writing, and listening skills to support the language arts program at your site. The use of Rosetta Stone and ELLIS computer programs are very beneficial for students learning basic English.

3. Sheltered English: SIOP instruction given to all students, including ELL, in the regular classroom from the ESL teacher and/or classroom teacher. Applicable for Levels 3-5.

• Focus: This instruction model focuses on learning academic language in the regular classroom while being supported with differentiated instruction and expecting proficiency on state tested standards.

4. ELLIS: A computer software program that teaches English to students beginning at the very basic level and advancing to higher proficiency levels. This program requires headphones and microphones to facilitate speaking, listening, and reading. It is available throughout Elko County School District and accessed from the START menu under ECSD programs. Training is available annually.

Part VIII: REQUIRED ELEMENTS FOR TITLE I SCHOOLS

Title I schools, identified as “Needs Improvement,” MUST complete this page.

1. Describe the required services the school has provided based on the number of years the school has been in need of improvement, (e.g., schools in Year 2 of “Needs Improvement” must identify Year 1 and Year 2 services, and so on).

• Year 1: School Choice.

• Year 2: Supplemental Services.

• Year 3. Corrective Action.

• Year 4. Restructuring.

2. Provide an assurance that the school will not spend less than 10% of their annual Title I allocation for quality professional development.

N/A

3. Describe how the school will provide written notice to parents on the school’s “Needs Improvement” status and/or AMAO status.

N/A

4. Specify how Title I funds will be used to remove school from “Needs Improvement” status.

N/A

5. Describe the school’s teacher mentoring program and how it supports the achievement of the school’s annual goals and objectives.

N/A

Part VIII: REQUIRED ELEMENTS FOR TITLE I SCHOOLS

Title I schools, identified as “Needs Improvement” and are a schoolwide Title I school, MUST complete this page.

6. Describe the school’s strategies to attract high-quality highly qualified teachers to your school.

N/A

7. Describe the school’s strategies to increase parent involvement in accordance with Section 1118 of NCLB, such as family literacy services.

N/A

8. Describe the school’s plans for assisting preschool children in the transition from early childhood programs, such as Head Start, Even Start, Early Reading First, or a state-run preschool program, to local elementary school programs.

N/A

Part IX: REQUIRED ELEMENTS FOR NON-TITLE I SCHOOLS

Non-Title I schools, identified as “Needs Improvement,” MUST complete this page.

1. Describe how and when the school will provide written notice to parents on the school’s “Needs Improvement” status and/or AMAO status.

N/A

2. Describe the school’s teacher mentoring program and how it supports the achievement of the school’s annual goals and objectives.

N/A

Appendix A: Teach For Success

Flag View Intermediate School September 25, 2008 - FALL

Observ

ed Not

Observed Instructional Practices to Engage and Support All Students in Learning 12 25 Facilitation of student conversation 22 15 Teacher-led instruction 29 8 Student seatwork and/or centers with teacher engaged 1 36 Student seatwork and/or centers with teacher disengaged 1 36 Total disengagement

Observ

ed Not

Observed Student Engagement Throughout the Learning

31 6 84%

The teacher must do the following four actions simultaneously in order to have 85% or more of the students engaged throughout the academic learning:

35 2 95% Elicits students to be engaged in the academic learning

32 5 86% Elicits 85% or more of the students to be engaged in the academic learning at the same time

32 5 86% Makes student engagement mandatory for 85% or more of the students throughout the academic learning

31 6 84% Maintains the engagement of 85% or more of the students throughout the academic learning

Observed

Not Observed

24 13 65% Selected Concepts that Maximize Student Engagement

Observed

Not Observed

11 26 30% Identifying similarities and/or differences Summarizing 8 29 22%

6 31 16% Note taking Nonlinguistic representations 10 27 27%

13 24 35% Advance organizer

Level of Cognition

Remember Understand Apply Analyze-Evaluate-Create 35 26 20 13

Observ

ed Not

Observed Instruction Practices Related to Standards, Curriculum, and Students Observe

d % Observed % Not

Observed

25 12 Standard(s)/objective(s) communicated to all students 25 68% 32% 23 14 Learning is made relevant for learners 23 62% 38% 28 9 Key vocabulary emphasized 28 76% 24% 25 12 Instructional/procedural scaffolding to assist and support student understanding 25 68% 32% 19 18 Verbal scaffolding to assist and support student use of academic language 19 51% 49% 22 15 Student interactions and/or discussions related to the learning 22 59% 41% 28 9 Frequently provides specific and immediate feedback to students on their output 28 76% 24% 31 6 All teachers actions related to standard(s)/objective(s) 31 84% 16%

Observ

ed Not

Observed Assessing Student Learning Observe

d % Observed % Not

Observed 7 30 Summative assessment to determine mastery of learning 7 19% 81%

19 18 Formative assessment to determine instructional needs of all students 19 51% 49% 30 7 Monitors and/or adjusts individually or collectively 30 81% 19%

Observed

Not Observed

Creating and Maintaining Effective Learning Environments for Student Learning

Observed % Observed

% Not Observed

33 4 Climate of fairness, caring, and respect is maintained by teacher 33 89% 11% 36 1 Standards for behavior, routines, and transitions are maintained by teacher 36 97% 3% 22 15 Reinforces effort of students and /or provides recognition 22 59% 41% 29 8 Literacy rich environment established 29 78% 22% 20 17 Instructional time maximized 20 54% 46%

Flag View Intermediate School

FEBRUARY 24, 2009 - SPRING

Observed Not

Observed Instructional Practices to Engage and Support All Students in Learning 11 23 Facilitation of student conversation 26 8 Teacher-led instruction 26 8 Student seatwork and/or centers with teacher engaged 1 33 Student seatwork and/or centers with teacher disengaged 0 34 Total disengagement

Observed Not

Observed Student Engagement Throughout the Learning

22 12 65% The teacher must do the following four actions simultaneously in order to have 85% or more of the students engaged throughout the academic learning:

27 7 79% Elicits students to be engaged in the academic learning 26 8 76% Elicits 85% or more of the students to be engaged in the academic learning at the same time 23 11 68% Makes student engagement mandatory for 85% or more of the students throughout the academic learning 22 12 65% Maintains the engagement of 85% or more of the students throughout the academic learning

Observed Not

Observed

29 5 85% Selected Concepts that Maximize Student Engagement Observed Not

Observed 15 19 44% Identifying similarities and/or differences Summarizing 14 20 41%

11 23 32% Note taking Nonlinguistic representations 15 19 44%

14 20 41% Advance organizer

Level of Cognition Remember Understand Apply Analyze-Evaluate-Create

34 31 18 9

Observed Not

Observed Instruction Practices Related to Standards, Curriculum, and Students Observed % Observed % Not Observed 32 2 Standard(s)/objective(s) communicated to all students 32 94% 6% 20 14 Learning is made relevant for learners 20 59% 41% 26 8 Key vocabulary emphasized 26 76% 24%

23 11 Instructional/procedural scaffolding to assist and support student understanding 23 68% 32%

24 10 Verbal scaffolding to assist and support student use of academic language 24 71% 29% 19 15 Student interactions and/or discussions related to the learning 19 56% 44%

27 7 Frequently provides specific and immediate feedback to students on their output 27 79% 21%

31 3 All teachers actions related to standard(s)/objective(s) 31 91% 9%

Observed Not

Observed Assessing Student Learning Observed % Observed % Not Observed 11 23 Summative assessment to determine mastery of learning 11 32% 68% 16 18 Formative assessment to determine instructional needs of all students 16 47% 53% 32 2 Monitors and/or adjusts individually or collectively 32 94% 6%

Observed Not

Observed Creating and Maintaining Effective Learning Environments for Student Learning Observed % Observed % Not Observed

33 1 Climate of fairness, caring, and respect is maintained by teacher 33 97% 3% 31 3 Standards for behavior, routines, and transitions are maintained by teacher 31 91% 9% 29 5 Reinforces effort of students and/or provides recognition 29 85% 15% 31 3 Literacy rich environment established 31 91% 9% 17 17 Instructional time maximized 17 50% 50%

Appendix B: Assessment Data

Nevada AYP Levels of Achievement:

This chart identifies the percentage of students that need to achieve meet or exceed status on state CRTs and HSPE each year for your school to make AYP.

ELEMENTARY MIDDLE HIGH Year ELA Math Year ELA Math Year ELA Math

Baseline 30.00 36.00 Baseline 37.00 32.00 Baseline 73.50 42.80 02-03 30.00 36.00 02-03 37.00 32.00 02-03 73.50 42.80 03-04 27.50 34.50 03-04 37.00 32.00 03-04 73.50 42.80 04-05 39.60 43.3 04-05 39.60 43.33 04-05 77.92 52.33 05-06 39.60 43.3 05-06 39.60 43.33 05-06 77.92 52.33 06-07 39.60 43.3 06-07 39.60 43.33 06-07 77.92 52.33 07-08 51.70 54.6 07-08 51.7 54.6 07-08 82.33 61.87 08-09 51.70 54.6 08-09 51.7 54.6 08-09 82.33 61.87 09-10 63.80 67.20 09-10 68.50 66.00 09-10 86.75 71.40 10-11 63.80 67.20 10-11 68.50 66.00 10-11 86.75 71.40 11-12 75.90 78.10 11-12 79.00 77.33 11-12 91.17 80.93 12-13 88.00 89.00 12-13 89.50 88.67 12-13 95.58 90.47 13-14 100.00 100.00 13-14 100.00 100.00 13-14 100.00 100.00

5TH GRADE WRITING RESULTS

2008 Data results based on combining Grammar #2, Northside, Mountain View and Southside Elementary Schools

Required Percentage Proficient 2006 – 2007 * 39.6% 2007-2008 * 51.7% 2008-2009 * 51.7% 2009-2010 * 63.80%

38.3 40.8 39 39.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

ECSD Flagview

2008 2009

NEVADA WRITING PROFICIENCY EXAMINATION ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY

SCHOOL REPORT TEST: 5th Grade Writing TEST DATE: 01/12/2009 TOTAL No. OF STUDENTS: 350DISTRICT: Elko SCHOOL: Flagview Intermediate REGION: N/AGRADE:5 No. OF STUDENTS TESTED: 349 RUN DATE: 6/3/2009

Emergent/Developing(ED) ApproachesStandard(AS) MeetsStandard(MS) ExceedsStandard(ES) STUDENT POPULATIONS

Numberof Students Number % Number % Number % Number %

ALL STUDENTS 349 44 12.6 167 47.9 121 34.7 17 4.9

Gender Females 173 10 5.8 83 48.0 66 38.2 14 8.1

Males 175 33 18.9 84 48.0 55 31.4 3 1.7

RACE/ETHNICITY

American Indian/Alaskan Native 20 2 10.0 11 55.0 7 35.0 0 0.0

Asian or Pacific Islander 5 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

Black, not of Hispanic origin 8 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

Hispanic 122 17 13.9 70 57.4 34 27.9 1 0.8

White 193 22 11.4 83 43.0 73 37.8 15 7.8

SPECIAL POPULATIONS

Free/Reduced Lunch Status 149 29 19.5 84 56.4 34 22.8 2 1.3

Non-Free/Reduced Lunch Status 200 15 7.5 83 41.5 87 43.5 15 7.5

IEP 45 19 42.2 23 51.1 3 6.7 0 0.0

Non-IEP Status 304 25 8.2 144 47.4 118 38.8 17 5.6

LEP Status 66 16 24.2 42 63.6 8 12.1 0 0.0

504 Status 0 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

Migrant Status 0 *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***

SMART TARGETS – (Specific, measurable, agreed upon, realistic and time-based.)

07/08-08/09 Test Data Comparison

Green - Smart Target Met Yellow - Growth but did not meet Smart Target Red - Decline WRITING - GRADE 5

SMART TARGET First Year School data

Subgroup Results (07-08) SMART Target

Goal Indicates Results (08-09) Growth

N (07-08)

(07-08) # of Proficient Students

(07-08) % scoring in top two quartiles on post test

(% of students needing to score proficient to meet criteria)


Priority √

N (08-09)



Meet Green

Did not meet Target Yellow

Regression Red

Am. Indian 10% 10% √ 20 7 35% 35%

Asian / P.I. 10% 10% 0%

Black 10% 10% 0%

Hispanic 10% 10% √ 122 35 29% 29%

White 10% 10% 193 88 46% 46%

F/R 10% 10% 149 36 24% 24%

IEP 10% 10% √ 45 3 7% 7%

LEP 10% 10% √ 66 8 12% 12%

Migrant N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Total 10% 10% √ 349 138 40% 40%

CRT’s MATH

Mathematics Content Strands and Abilities

“2008” data results based on combining Grammar #2, Northside, Mountain View and Southside Elementary Schools

Math Content Clusters

Standard 1 C1 – Numbers and Operations Standards 2 C2 – Algebra and Functions Standards 3 and 4 C3 – Measurement and Geometry Standard 5 C4 – Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability

Math Ability Levels

A1 – Conceptual Understanding A2 – Procedural Knowledge A3 – Problem Solving

5th Grade CRT’s

Mathematics

Required Percentage Proficient 2006- 2007 * 43.3% 2007-2008 *54.6% 2008-2009 * 54.6% 2009-2010 * 67.2%

1st Year State Data

60 56 6154

0102030405060708090

100

ECSD Flagview

2008 2009

Traveling True Cohort MathDestination-Flagview

50%

58%55%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percent Proficient 3rd (0607) Percent Proficient 4th (0708) Percent Proficient 5th (0809)

Grade Level

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient

08-09 School opened so no Cohort data available


07/08-08/09 Test Data Comparison Green - Smart Target Met Yellow - Growth but did not meet Smart Target Red - Decline

CRT'S - GRADE 5 SMART TARGET - MATH

First Year School data Subgroup Results (07-08) SMART

Target Goal Indicates Results (08-09) Growth

N (07-08)





Priority √

N (08-09)



Meet Green


Regression Red

Am. Indian 10% 10% √ 20 8 40% 40%

Asian / P.I. 10% 10% 0%

Black 10% 10% 0%

Hispanic 10% 10% √ 125 48 38% 38%

White 10% 10% 193 125 65% 65%

F/R 10% 10% 153 57 37% 37%

IEP 10% 10% √ 45 4 9% 9%

LEP 10% 10% √ 67 11 16% 16%


Total 10% 10% √ 351 190 54% 54%

FLAGVIEW INTERMEDIATE ITEM ANALYSIS - GRADE 5 MATH

Math Content Clusters Standard 1_ C1 – Numbers and Operations Standard 2_ C2 – Algebra and Functions Standards 3 and 4 _C3 – Measurement and Geometry Standard 5_C4 – Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability

Math Ability Levels A1 - Conceptual Understanding A2 - Procedural Knowledge A3 - Problem Solving

Item Type Content Ability DOK Standard State District Flagview 22 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.1.0 0.89 0.89 0.88 44 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.1.0 0.86 0.85 0.82 4 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.2.0 0.84 0.81 0.81 3 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.1.0 0.67 0.68 0.71 31 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.2.0 0.54 0.39 0.36 5 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.7.0 0.91 0.89 0.88 29 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.7.0 0.75 0.75 0.72 13 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.5.0 0.69 0.68 0.7 30 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.7.0 0.74 0.73 0.7 43 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.2.0 0.71 0.68 0.66 32 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.5.0 0.59 0.57 0.55 33 MC C1 A3 D1 1.5.8.0 0.79 0.78 0.77 17 CR C1 A3 D2 1.5.7.0 0.85 0.66 0.64 40 MC C1 A3 D1 1.5.7.0 0.71 0.65 0.62 14 MC C1 A3 D2 1.5.8.0 0.52 0.48 0.5 9 MC C2 A1 D1 2.4.1.0 0.74 0.71 0.66 46 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.3.0 0.86 0.84 0.81 21 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.2.0 0.83 0.81 0.79 18 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.2.0 0.78 0.78 0.77 10 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.2.0 0.64 0.55 0.52 27 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.2.0 0.6 0.48 0.45 39 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.2.0 0.54 0.43 0.45 19 MC C2 A3 D2 2.4.1.0 0.58 0.54 0.53 38 MC C2 A3 D1 2.4.1.0 0.59 0.58 0.53

11 MC C3 A1 D1 3.5.6.0 0.92 0.92 0.91 20 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.2.0 0.85 0.83 0.82 41 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.2.0 0.78 0.78 0.78 28 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.3.0 0.73 0.74 0.73 1 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.1.0 0.78 0.72 0.66 6 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.3.0 0.63 0.63 0.65 35 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.6.0 0.59 0.54 0.55 45 MC C3 A1 D1 4.5.1.0 0.66 0.51 0.51 16 MC C3 A2 D2 4.5.9.0 0.92 0.91 0.91 7 MC C3 A2 D1 3.5.1.0 0.76 0.77 0.74 26 MC C3 A2 D1 3.5.6.0 0.75 0.75 0.72 12 MC C3 A2 D1 4.5.2.0 0.46 0.42 0.37 24 MC C3 A3 D1 4.5.4.0 0.76 0.7 0.7 2 MC C3 A3 D2 3.5.4.0 0.73 0.69 0.69 34 MC C3 A3 D2 3.5.3.0 0.73 0.71 0.68 47 MC C3 A3 D2 4.5.3.0 0.51 0.43 0.42 25 MC C3 A3 D2 4.5.9.0 0.36 0.3 0.28 8 MC C4 A1 D2 5.5.3.0 0.79 0.76 0.72 23 MC C4 A2 D1 5.5.2.0 0.77 0.78 0.74 42 MC C4 A2 D2 5.5.1.0 0.6 0.62 0.6 48 MC C4 A2 D2 5.5.4.0 0.59 0.55 0.54 37 CR C4 A3 D2 5.5.4.0 1.07 1.02 1 36 MC C4 A3 D2 5.5.3.0 0.52 0.49 0.46 15 MC C4 A3 D1 5.5.4.0 0.5 0.43 0.43

6th Grade CRT’s

Mathematics


1st Year State Data

70 71 7463

0102030405060708090

100

ECSD Flagview

2008 2009

Traveling True Cohort MathDestination-Flagview

45%

66%63%

65%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percent Proficient 3rd (0506) Percent Proficient 4th (0607) Percent Proficient 5th (0708) Percent Proficient 6th (0809)

Grade Level

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient




CRT'S - GRADE 6 SMART TARGET - MATH



N (07-08)





Priority √

N (08-09)



Meet Green


Regression Red

Am. Indian 10% 10% √ 16 9 57% 57% Asian / P.I. 10% 10% 0% Black 10% 10% 0% Hispanic 10% 10% √ 111 57 51% 51% White 10% 10% 221 155 70% 70% F/R 10% 10% 131 56 43% 43% IEP 10% 10% √ 40 5 13% 13% LEP 10% 10% √ 39 12 31% 31% Migrant N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 10% 10% √ 359 226 63% 63%

FLAGVIEW INTERMEDIATE ITEM ANALYSIS - GRADE 6 MATH

Math Content Clusters Standard 1_ C1 – Numbers and Operations Standard 2_ C2 – Algebra and Functions Standards 3 and 4 _C3 – Measurement and Geometry Standard 5_C4 – Data Analysis, Statistics and Probability

Math Ability Levels A1 - Conceptual Understanding A2 - Procedural Knowledge A3 - Problem Solving

Item Type Content Ability DOK Standard State District Flagview 9 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.2.0 0.42 0.4 0.37 46 MC C1 A1 D2 1.6.3.0 0.39 0.41 0.4 19 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.8.0 0.4 0.41 0.41 2 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.5.0 0.74 0.77 0.72 42 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.1.0 0.65 0.75 0.72 27 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.2.0 0.9 0.93 0.95 14 MC C1 A2 D1 1.6.7.0 0.49 0.38 0.39 49 MC C1 A2 D1 1.6.3.0 0.41 0.45 0.4 24 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.6.0 0.58 0.6 0.55 37 MC C1 A2 D1 1.6.2.0 0.57 0.59 0.59 45 MC C1 A2 D1 1.6.7.0 0.71 0.77 0.75 13 MC C1 A2 D1 1.6.8.0 0.75 0.8 0.82 47 MC C1 A3 D2 1.6.8.0 0.31 0.31 0.3 1 MC C1 A3 D1 1.6.7.0 0.65 0.68 0.64 11 MC C1 A3 D2 1.6.6.0 0.69 0.7 0.7 29 MC C2 A1 D2 2.6.1.0 0.64 0.65 0.61 6 MC C2 A1 D1 2.6.4.0 0.81 0.78 0.74 31 MC C2 A2 D1 2.6.2.0 0.56 0.56 0.52 7 MC C2 A2 D2 2.6.1.0 0.83 0.83 0.82 4 MC C2 A2 D1 2.6.2.0 0.84 0.91 0.9 15 MC C2 A3 D1 2.6.2.0 0.25 0.18 0.18 52 MC C2 A3 D2 2.6.1.0 0.46 0.5 0.49 21 MC C2 A3 D2 2.6.4.0 0.61 0.68 0.65 41 MC C2 A3 D1 2.6.4.0 0.67 0.7 0.66 43 MC C2 A3 D2 2.6.1.0 0.67 0.7 0.69

40 CR C2 A3 D3 2.6.1.0 1.77 1.8 1.77 38 MC C3 A1 D2 3.6.1.0 0.21 0.19 0.18 25 MC C3 A1 D1 3.6.2.0 0.34 0.37 0.34 53 MC C3 A1 D1 4.6.1.0 0.48 0.55 0.53 35 MC C3 A1 D1 4.6.3.0 0.72 0.75 0.67 34 MC C3 A1 D1 3.6.5.0 0.71 0.68 0.7 23 MC C3 A1 D1 3.6.3.0 0.79 0.75 0.73 48 MC C3 A2 D1 4.6.3.0 0.58 0.57 0.48 22 MC C3 A2 D1 3.6.5.0 0.7 0.69 0.7 30 MC C3 A2 D1 4.6.6.0 0.66 0.73 0.71 32 MC C3 A2 D1 4.6.2.0 0.77 0.77 0.71 18 MC C3 A2 D1 4.6.1.0 0.68 0.76 0.73 26 MC C3 A2 D1 3.6.4.0 0.86 0.88 0.87 3 MC C3 A2 D1 3.6.3.0 0.92 0.92 0.9 36 MC C3 A3 D2 3.6.4.0 0.23 0.21 0.23 16 MC C3 A3 D2 4.6.2.0 0.34 0.32 0.3 50 MC C3 A3 D2 3.6.3.0 0.54 0.59 0.58 10 MC C3 A3 D1 3.6.6.0 0.63 0.64 0.64 17 CR C3 A3 D1 4.6.3.0 1.13 1.15 0.97 20 MC C4 A1 D2 5.6.1.0 0.71 0.71 0.7 8 MC C4 A1 D1 5.6.2.0 0.8 0.77 0.76 12 MC C4 A2 D1 5.6.4.0 0.46 0.36 0.29 28 MC C4 A2 D1 5.6.2.0 0.49 0.4 0.36 39 MC C4 A2 D1 5.6.5.0 0.42 0.43 0.43 54 MC C4 A2 D1 5.6.1.0 0.58 0.62 0.57 51 MC C4 A3 D2 5.6.6.0 0.51 0.51 0.46 44 MC C4 A3 D2 5.6.3.0 0.61 0.61 0.58 33 CR C4 A3 D3 5.6.3.0 0.87 0.88 0.89 5 MC C4 A3 D1 5.6.3.0 0.96 0.97 0.96

CRT’s READING

2008 Data results based on combining Grammar #2, Northside, Mountain View and Southside Elementary Schools

Reading Content Clusters Standard 1 C1 – Word Analysis and Skills (Standard 1) Standards 2 and 3 C2 – Comprehend, Interpret, and Evaluate LiteratureStandards 2 and 4 C3 – Comprehend, Interpret, and Evaluate Informational Texts

Reading Ability Levels A1 – Form an Initial Understanding A2 – Develop an Interpretation A3 – Demonstrate a Critical Stance

There are three types of passages used on the Language Arts CRT: Literary Text – is writing that is read for enjoyment, entertainment or inspiration. The text may include short stories, literary essays, poems, historical fiction, fables, folk tales, plays, or excerpts from novels. If excerpts are selected, they must have a discernable beginning, middle, and end. The passages should reflect a variety of themes appropriate for and interesting to students at the designated grade level. Informational Text – is writing that is read for a purpose and is similar to what students see in textbooks every day. It is read in order to solve problems, raise questions, provide information, or present new ideas. Informational passages may be drawn from magazines, newspaper articles, diaries, editorials, essays, biographies, and autobiographies. These selections should have readily identifiable key concepts and relevant supporting details. Informational passages should include a variety of grade-appropriate information sources, both primary and secondary Functional Text – is writing that is encountered in everyday life both inside and outside of the classroom. It includes consumer materials, how-to instructions, advertisements, and tables and graphic presentations of text.

5th Grade CRT’s

Reading


1st Year State Data

49 49 49 47

0102030405060708090

100

ECSD Flagview

2008 2009

Traveling True Cohort ReadingDestination- FLAGVIEW ELEMENTARY

55% 56%50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percent Proficient 3rd (0607) Percent Proficient 4th (0708) Percent Proficient 5th (0809)

Grade Level

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient




CRT'S - GRADE 5 SMART TARGET - READING



N (07-08)





Priority √

N (08-09)



Meet Green


Regression Red

Am. Indian 10% 10% √ 20 8 40% 40%

Asian / P.I. 10% 10% 0%

Black 10% 10% 0%

Hispanic 10% 10% √ 125 35 28% 28%

White 10% 10% 193 110 57% 57%

F/R 10% 10% 153 47 31% 31%

IEP 10% 10% √ 45 2 4% 4%

LEP 10% 10% √ 67 4 6% 6%


Total 10% 10% √ 351 165 47% 47%

FLAGVIEW INTERMEDIATE ITEM ANALYSIS - GRADE 5 READING

Reading Content Clusters Standard 1 - C1 – Word Analysis and Skills (Standard 1) Standards 2 and 3 - C2 – Comprehend, Interpret, and Evaluate Literature Standards 2 and 4 - C3 – Comprehend, Interpret, and Evaluate Informational Texts


Item Type Content Ability DOK Standard Description State District Flagview 25 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.3.0 Informational 0.72 0.7 0.68 12 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.3.0 Informational 0.72 0.69 0.67 44 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.3.0 Literary 0.49 0.45 0.46 31 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.2.0 Literary 0.35 0.34 0.29 19 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.5.0 Functional 0.87 0.86 0.85 38 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.5.0 Functional 0.8 0.81 0.81 11 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.5.0 Informational 0.81 0.81 0.77 43 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.5.0 Literary 0.78 0.78 0.75 30 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.5.0 Literary 0.47 0.48 0.45 2 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.3.3 Literary 0.87 0.89 0.88 1 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.3.3 Literary 0.82 0.82 0.8 26 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.3.3 Literary 0.72 0.75 0.72 28 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.3.3 Literary 0.66 0.62 0.62 40 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.3.3 Literary 0.62 0.63 0.6 3 MC C2 A2 D2 3.5.2.0 Literary 0.88 0.89 0.87 5 MC C2 A2 D2 3.5.2.0 Literary 0.87 0.87 0.86 39 MC C2 A2 D2 3.5.5.0 Literary 0.69 0.72 0.66 41 MC C2 A2 D2 3.5.2.0 Literary 0.68 0.68 0.62 4 MC C2 A2 D2 3.5.2.0 Literary 0.59 0.58 0.56 27 MC C2 A2 D2 3.5.1.0 Literary 0.52 0.49 0.48 32 CR C2 A3 D2 3.5.2.0 Literary 1.06 0.95 0.88 42 MC C2 A3 D2 3.5.2.0 Literary 0.74 0.71 0.69 6 MC C2 A3 D3 3.5.4.0 Literary 0.64 0.63 0.6 29 MC C2 A3 D2 3.5.4.0 Literary 0.54 0.54 0.55 34 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Functional 0.82 0.83 0.81

8 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Informational 0.8 0.8 0.77 7 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Informational 0.71 0.72 0.7 33 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Functional 0.71 0.71 0.68 15 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Functional 0.64 0.63 0.6 17 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Functional 0.65 0.62 0.6 16 MC C3 A1 D1 2.5.3.4 Functional 0.52 0.46 0.43 36 MC C3 A2 D1 4.5.1.0 Functional 0.77 0.72 0.73 35 MC C3 A2 D2 4.5.1.0 Functional 0.72 0.71 0.7 37 MC C3 A2 D2 2.5.3.4 Functional 0.69 0.7 0.7 9 MC C3 A2 D2 2.5.3.4 Informational 0.72 0.62 0.61 18 MC C3 A2 D2 4.5.1.0 Functional 0.62 0.59 0.57 21 MC C3 A2 D1 4.5.1.0 Informational 0.62 0.56 0.56 20 MC C3 A2 D2 4.5.4.0 Informational 0.55 0.55 0.5 22 MC C3 A2 D2 2.5.3.4 Informational 0.47 0.45 0.47 13 CR C3 A3 D3 4.5.4.0 Informational 1.34 1.25 1.17 14 MC C3 A3 D2 4.5.5.0 Functional 0.77 0.74 0.73 10 MC C3 A3 D2 4.5.4.0 Informational 0.71 0.73 0.71 24 MC C3 A3 D2 4.5.4.0 Informational 0.68 0.68 0.7 23 MC C3 A3 D2 4.5.4.0 Informational 0.69 0.7 0.69

6th Grade CRT’s

Reading


1st Year State Data

69 72 68 68

0102030405060708090

100

ECSD Flagview

2008 2009

Traveling True Cohort ReadingDestination-FLAGVIEW

77%80%

64%

94%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Percent Proficient 3rd (0506) Percent Proficient 4th (0607) Percent Proficient 5th (0708) Percent Proficient 6th (0809)

Grade Level

Perc

ent P

rofic

ient




CRT'S - GRADE 6 SMART TARGET - READING



N (07-08)





Priority √

N (08-09)



Meet Green


Regression Red

Am. Indian 10% 10% √ 16 7 44% 44%

Asian / P.I. 10% 10% 0%

Black 10% 10% 0%

Hispanic 10% 10% √ 111 61 55% 55%

White 10% 10% 222 173 78% 78%

F/R 10% 10% 131 63 48% 48%

IEP 10% 10% √ 41 6 15% 15%

LEP 10% 10% √ 39 12 31% 31%


Total 10% 10% √ 360 245 68% 68%

FLAGVIEW INTERMEDIATE ITEM ANALYSIS - GRADE 6 READING

Reading Content Clusters Standard 1 - C1 – Word Analysis and Skills (Standard 1) Standards 2 and 3 - C2 – Comprehend, Interpret, and Evaluate Literature Standards 2 and 4 - C3 – Comprehend, Interpret, and Evaluate Informational Texts


Item Type Content Ability DOK Standard Description State District Flagview 38 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.3.0 Informational 0.78 0.81 0.81 18 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.3.0 Persuasive 0.7 0.72 0.7 31 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.5.0 Literary 0.64 0.58 0.57 45 MC C1 A1 D2 1.6.5.0 Literary 0.47 0.51 0.51 50 MC C1 A1 D1 1.6.3.0 Informational 0.47 0.45 0.43 24 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.5.0 Persuasive 0.78 0.83 0.81 12 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.5.0 Functional 0.75 0.79 0.78 51 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.5.0 Informational 0.63 0.7 0.72 19 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.5.0 Persuasive 0.61 0.69 0.66 25 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.5.0 Persuasive 0.62 0.65 0.66 30 MC C1 A2 D2 1.6.5.0 Literary 0.56 0.63 0.66 1 MC C2 A1 D1 2.6.3.3 Literary 0.9 0.94 0.93 41 MC C2 A1 D1 2.6.3.3 Literary 0.72 0.83 0.82 43 MC C2 A1 D1 2.6.3.3 Literary 0.7 0.78 0.77 26 MC C2 A1 D1 2.6.3.3 Literary 0.66 0.69 0.69 5 MC C2 A2 D2 3.6.1.0 Literary 0.91 0.94 0.93 40 MC C2 A2 D1 3.6.1.0 Literary 0.75 0.85 0.85 2 MC C2 A2 D2 3.6.1.0 Literary 0.8 0.81 0.8 3 MC C2 A2 D1 3.6.1.0 Literary 0.81 0.77 0.76 4 MC C2 A2 D2 3.6.6.0 Literary 0.72 0.74 0.7 42 MC C2 A2 D2 3.6.1.0 Literary 0.62 0.7 0.69 27 MC C2 A2 D2 3.6.6.0 Literary 0.64 0.69 0.65 32 CR C2 A3 D2 3.6.1.0 Literary 1.07 0.98 1.02 28 MC C2 A3 D2 3.6.4.0 Literary 0.73 0.76 0.73 29 MC C2 A3 D2 3.6.2.0 Literary 0.66 0.73 0.73 44 MC C2 A3 D2 3.6.1.0 Literary 0.66 0.74 0.73

6 MC C2 A3 D3 3.6.4.0 Literary 0.55 0.56 0.52 9 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Functional 0.82 0.85 0.83 46 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.68 0.79 0.82 15 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Persuasive 0.65 0.74 0.73 35 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.67 0.72 0.69 21 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Persuasive 0.63 0.71 0.68 7 MC C3 A1 D1 4.6.5.0 Functional 0.62 0.66 0.67 8 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Functional 0.62 0.65 0.63 22 MC C3 A1 D1 2.6.3.4 Persuasive 0.6 0.59 0.59 36 MC C3 A2 D2 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.77 0.82 0.79 16 MC C3 A2 D1 4.6.1.0 Persuasive 0.66 0.69 0.71 20 MC C3 A2 D2 4.6.5.0 Persuasive 0.64 0.7 0.71 34 MC C3 A2 D2 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.64 0.7 0.7 17 MC C3 A2 D2 2.6.3.4 Persuasive 0.65 0.7 0.66 10 MC C3 A2 D2 4.6.1.0 Functional 0.57 0.61 0.58 33 MC C3 A2 D2 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.47 0.5 0.5 14 MC C3 A2 D2 4.6.5.0 Persuasive 0.5 0.52 0.48 47 MC C3 A2 D2 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.39 0.44 0.44 13 CR C3 A3 D2 2.6.3.4 Functional 1.48 1.41 1.41 39 CR C3 A3 D2 4.6.5.0 Informational 1.18 1.18 1.23 37 MC C3 A3 D2 4.6.5.0 Informational 0.75 0.78 0.77 49 MC C3 A3 D3 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.58 0.66 0.65 11 MC C3 A3 D2 4.6.5.0 Functional 0.61 0.67 0.64 48 MC C3 A3 D2 2.6.3.4 Informational 0.62 0.63 0.61 23 MC C3 A3 D2 4.6.5.0 Persuasive 0.52 0.56 0.57

CRT’s Science

2008 Data results based on combining

Grammar #2, Northside, Mountain View and Southside Elementary Schools

Science Content Clusters Standard 1 C1 – Physical Science Standard 2 C2 – Life/Environmental Science Standards 3 and 4 C3 – Earth/Space/Environmental Science Standard 5 C4 – Scientific Investigation

Science Ability Levels A1 – Fundamental Principles A2 – Conceptual Understanding A3 – Practical Reasoning

5th Grade CRT’s

Science

1st Year State Data

58 5651 55

0102030405060708090

100

ECSD Flagview

2008 2009



CRT'S - GRADE 5 SMART TARGET - SCIENCE

First Year School data

Subgroup Results (07-08) SMART Target

Goal Indicates Results (08-09) Growth

N (07-08)





Priority √

N (08-09)



Meet Green


Regression Red

Am. Indian 10% 10% √ 20 9 45% 45%

Asian / P.I. 10% 10% 0%

Black 10% 10% 0%

Hispanic 10% 10% √ 124 42 34% 34%

White 10% 10% 193 129 67% 67%

F/R 10% 10% 152 53 35% 35%

IEP 10% 10% √ 44 4 9% 9%

LEP 10% 10% √ 66 6 9% 9%


Total 10% 10% √ 350 193 55% 55%

FLAGVIEW INTERMEDIATE ITEM ANALYSIS - GRADE 5 SCIENCE

Science Content Clusters Standard 1_ C1 – Physical Science_ Standard 2 _C2 – Life/Environmental Science Standards 3 and 4_ C3 – Earth/Space/Environmental Science Standard 5_C4 – Scientific Investigation

Science Ability Levels A1 – Fundamental Principles A2 – Conceptual Understanding A3 – Practical Reasoning

Item Type Content Ability DOK Standard State District Flagview 36 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.1.1 0.46 0.52 0.51 30 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.2.3 0.65 0.59 0.58 18 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.1.5 0.75 0.73 0.69 34 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.3.5 0.69 0.69 0.71 22 MC C1 A1 D1 1.5.2.5 0.88 0.88 0.86 26 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.3.1 0.39 0.41 0.39 4 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.1.1 0.5 0.47 0.45 15 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.2.5 0.57 0.62 0.57 43 MC C1 A2 D1 1.5.3.5 0.66 0.62 0.59 8 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.1.3 0.71 0.7 0.63 39 MC C1 A2 D2 1.5.2.2 0.67 0.65 0.65 6 MC C1 A3 D2 1.5.1.2 0.6 0.58 0.55 20 CR C1 A3 D2 1.5.1.5 1.28 1.2 1.06 37 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.3.1 0.44 0.53 0.53 19 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.2.2 0.66 0.7 0.67 40 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.2.1 0.68 0.67 0.67 9 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.1.5 0.72 0.69 0.7 3 MC C2 A1 D1 2.5.2.2 0.69 0.73 0.78 14 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.1.4 0.54 0.52 0.5 5 MC C2 A2 D2 2.5.3.1 0.5 0.55 0.56 23 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.3.2 0.59 0.57 0.57 10 MC C2 A2 D2 2.5.3.2 0.68 0.67 0.65 27 MC C2 A2 D1 2.5.3.5 0.72 0.74 0.72

31 MC C2 A2 D2 2.5.4.1 0.82 0.82 0.77 17 MC C2 A3 D2 2.5.4.2 0.62 0.68 0.64 45 MC C2 A3 D2 2.5.3.2 0.77 0.82 0.81 2 MC C3 A1 D1 3.5.2.2 0.62 0.53 0.49 42 MC C3 A1 D1 3.5.1.1 0.69 0.69 0.7 28 MC C3 A1 D1 3.5.2.2 0.66 0.71 0.71 21 MC C3 A1 D1 3.5.1.2 0.73 0.72 0.72 32 MC C3 A1 D1 3.5.3.2 0.74 0.75 0.76 12 MC C3 A2 D2 3.5.1.4 0.57 0.52 0.48 13 MC C3 A2 D2 3.5.3.3 0.6 0.66 0.66 44 MC C3 A2 D2 3.5.3.5 0.69 0.69 0.7 38 MC C3 A2 D1 3.5.2.2 0.7 0.73 0.71 7 MC C3 A2 D2 3.5.1.4 0.75 0.8 0.79 25 MC C3 A3 D2 3.5.2.5 0.58 0.61 0.59 35 CR C3 A3 D3 3.5.1.4 1.41 1.29 1.21 11 MC C4 A1 D1 4.5.1.1 0.71 0.65 0.62 46 MC C4 A1 D1 4.5.1.5 0.68 0.72 0.72 1 MC C4 A1 D1 4.5.1.4 0.92 0.91 0.89 41 MC C4 A2 D1 4.5.2.2 0.53 0.54 0.52 33 MC C4 A2 D2 4.5.1.4 0.65 0.63 0.6 29 MC C4 A2 D1 4.5.1.3 0.64 0.6 0.61 16 MC C4 A2 D2 4.5.1.4 0.83 0.81 0.79 24 MC C4 A2 D2 4.5.1.4 0.87 0.86 0.86

Appendix C: ISQ Data

Documents

Elko County School District€¦ · Elko County School District Flag View Intermediate School 777 Country Club Drive Elko, Nevada 89801 For Implementation in (2009-2010) School Improvement