North Oconee High School School Improvement Plan 2008-09.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RIDE – Office of Special Populations
Advertisements

Mt. Diablo Unified School District
Central Union High School District Board of Trustees Meeting April 16, 2013.
Pennsylvania’s Continuous Improvement Process. Understanding AYP How much do you know about AYP?
North Arlington Public Schools NJASK Data Presented by: Dennis Kenny, Nicole C. Russo, Elaine Jaume, Marie Griggs & Jennifer Rodriguez.
Office of Accountability, Assessment and Intervention 1 Getting Ready for SIP: Developing the Action Sequences FALL 2006.
DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN Student Achievement Annual Progress Report Lakewood School District # 306.
Rutland High School Technical Review Visit Looking At Results Planning Next Steps Learning About Resources.
JUNE 26, 2012 BOARD MEETING Measures of Academic Progress (MAP)
Scotts valley High school Single Plan for Student Achievement
Southern Regional Education Board HSTW An Integrated and Embedded Approach to Professional Development and School Improvement Using the Six-Step Process.
MELROSE PUBLIC SCHOOLS MELROSE VETERANS MEMORIAL MIDDLE SCHOOL OCTOBER 2013 MCAS Spring 2013 Results.
5-Step Process Clarification The 5-Step Process is for a unit, topic, or “chunk” of information. One form should be used for the unit, topic, etc. The.
Kalaheo High School Home of the Mustangs!. Strive High Data 87.4% Graduation Rate 78% Reading Proficiency (above state median) 45% Math Proficiency (below.
Wayne County High School Interventions for Student Achievement Marlene Griffith Mathematics Department Chair Wayne County High School (912) , ext.
Lansing Central School District District Assessment Results Presentation January 24, 2011 Dr. Stephen L. Grimm, Superintendent District Leadership Team.
1 Student Assessment Report One Goal: Support Student Success West Hempstead UFSD Board of Education Presentation August 20, 2013.
PROGRESS MONITORING OF ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT Baldwin-Whitehall School District 2nd Quarter Data.
Angilee M. Downing, M.Ed. Vision: Educational Excellence For All Students.
Governing Board Meeting September 29, 2011 Annual State of the School Address Mr. R. Hackler, Principal.
North Providence High School Math Department. Grade 9 Interventions Eliminated low level math courses Every year grade 9 Scope & Sequence is revised as.
CRCT Reading Grade 1 CRCT Reading Grade 2 CRCT Reading Grade 3.
Spring 2009 MCAS Results. Dedham Elementary Schools.
High Schools That Work (HSTW) A Collaborative Effort of The Southern Regional Education Board & The Georgia Department of Education.
The PLC Team Learning Process Review Step One: Identify essential (key) learning standards that all students must learn in each content area during each.
Northwest ISD Target Improvement Plan Seven Hills Elementary
Carol Stewart Kennesaw State University. Purpose  To conduct a comprehensive needs assessment of the school that addresses academic areas of math and.
Garrett Elementary Accountability Report Kids are our Business! October 14,
East Longmeadow Public Schools SMART Goals Presented by ELPS Leadership Team.
Somers Public Schools Building and Departmental Goals
GRADE 10 CAPT ACT ADVANCED PLACEMENT SAT “HARTFORD MAGAZINE RECOGNIZED GMHS AS THE SIXTH RANKING HIGH SCHOOL IN HARTFORD COUNTY.” 2011 High School Testing.
Interboro School District Keystones to Opportunity Grant Four Year Overview School Years.
CAHSEE California High School Exit Exam ChipMatt EricCrystal.
Data Overview Faculty Meeting-October 14,2014 Mission Possible: MOTIVATE, EDUCATE, GRADUATE!!!
GRADE 10 CAPT ACT ADVANCED PLACEMENT SAT 2009 High School Testing Report.
5 Year School Improvement Plan By 2015, enable students to demonstrate powerful thinking by systemically solving problems through analyzing.
Somers Public Schools Building and Departmental Goals
Note: In 2009, this survey replaced the NCA/Baldrige Quality Standards Assessment that was administered from Also, 2010 was the first time.
Q2 Benchmark Report1 Lodi Unified School District Benchmark Assessment Results (Mid-Year Student Achievement Monitoring) Prepared by.
Local Control & Accountability Plan Instructional Services Governing Board Presentation June 2, 2016.
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
Conversation about State Report Card November 28, 2016
Bixby High School.
Professional Learning – October 12, 2015
Interboro School District Keystones to Opportunity Grant
January 17, 2017 Board Workshop
Secondary Assessment Transition
Shaler Area School District
Introduction to Teacher Evaluation
WELCOME.
2015 PARCC Results for R.I: Work to do, focus on teaching and learning
Washington Township Public Schools
Measuring College and Career Readiness
Graduation Requirements (as of the start of the school year)
Partnering for Success: Using Research to Improve the Lowest Performing Schools June 26, 2018 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Danvers Public Schools: Our Story
CURRICULUM & INSTRUCTION
College and Career Ready Performance Index, High School, Grades
Mountain Park Elementary School
Superintendent Goals Update MAY 7, 2013
Jayhawkville Central High School
Mountain Park Elementary School
English Learning Meeting June 12th, :00 – 2:15 pm
State Assessment Update
Title 1 Annual Parent Meeting
Plymouth North High School
CSIP/Landtrust
NEWARK CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
Presented to the Springfield School Board of Directors June 17, 2019
Mountain Park Elementary School
Presentation transcript:

North Oconee High School School Improvement Plan

Continuous Improvement Process Analyze the Data ◦ Leadership Team and Departments – Fall ◦ Data is displayed in a various formats. We review it by department as well as across grade levels. ◦ Data analysis for EOCTs, GHSGT, GHSWT, PSAT, AP scores, Math benchmark tests, SAT, ACT ◦ Failure Rates ◦ Target population data ◦ Survey data (parents, students, faculty)

Continuous Improvement Process Analyze the Data (continued) ◦ Some data is located on the shared drive without student identification information (EOCT scores & GHSGT)EOCT ◦ Pivot tables utilized for EOCT data ◦ Still struggling with analyzing SAT data electronically

Continuous Improvement Process Set the Priorities ◦ The faculty as an entire group identifies the priorities based on the data. Identify the Goals ◦ Once priorities are set, the faculty then creates SMART goals (Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Realistic, Timely) Select Strategies ◦ Upon identifying goals, we determined which strategies would benefit students to attain the goals identified. The strategies spread over a 3 year time period.

Continuous Improvement Process Implement the School Improvement Plan ◦ We have been implementing the plan for the past 3 years Assess the Results ◦ Every fall, we review our goals and assess our progress toward attaining the goals. This is first presented and discussed with the leadership team and then the entire faculty.

Continuous Improvement Process Revise the SIP ◦ We revise (minimally) the current School Improvement Plan. We utilize multiple data to determine the changes that need to take place. Generally, it focuses on changes within the strategies used. Manage Change

Goal #1 – The percentage of regular diploma students passing all five portions of the GHSGT prior to graduation will increase to 100% ◦ Complete LFS “refresher” course for all faculty ◦ Began curriculum alignment in core areas ◦ CTAE, Fine Arts & Physical Education worked on instructional activities aligned with GHSGT ◦ ELL presentation to faculty ◦ Inclusion training with general education instructors and inclusion instructors ◦ Review of block schedule & courses to make changes which would enhance academic performance

Goal #1 – The percentage of regular diploma students passing all five portions of the GHSGT prior to graduation will increase to 100% ◦ Began peer LFS walk-through observations ◦ Completed curriculum mapping for all core areas in science, language arts & social studies ◦ Math began reviewing and training for standards based instruction ◦ Began a GHSGT remediation course built into the school day ◦ Worked on transition plans for our special education population with the guidance department ◦ Continued review of the block schedule and ways to implement positive change for learning

Goal #1 – The percentage of regular diploma students passing all five portions of the GHSGT prior to graduation will increase to 100% ◦ Increase number of peer LFS walk-through observations ◦ Departments work in PLC to create goals which focus on instruction within core areas based on data from EOCT, GHSGT, PSAT, SAT and AP information. ◦ From the department goals address the SIP, each individual instructor has a professional goal to meet the department goal. ◦ Continued re-vamping of the curriculum maps as needed within the departments. ◦ Special education training/discussions within departments with the instructors and special education director. ◦ More fully implement the Pyramid of Interventions to identify and support students at risk of failure – particularly the GHSGT

Goal #2 – To increase the proficiency level of all students in the area of writing across the curriculum as measured by the GHSWT, SAT writing averages, and local assessments ◦ English department began working on writing requirements within English ◦ Review requirements for the GHSWT and SAT writing ◦ Began review of local requirements for writing in English classes ◦ Begin curriculum alignment within English

Goal #2 – To increase the proficiency level of all students in the area of writing across the curriculum as measured by the GHSWT, SAT writing averages, and local assessments ◦ English department completed curriculum mapping including consistent writing requirements for each grade level course ◦ Creation of a senior writing rubric for British Literature ◦ Began High School Writing Project (3 instructors from NOHS)

Goal #2 – To increase the proficiency level of all students in the area of writing across the curriculum as measured by the GHSWT, SAT writing averages, and local assessments ◦ English department presented writing strategies for general education classes – completed a survey with the faculty survey ◦ Each department created a writing goals based on the SIP goal ◦ Each instructor has an individual professional goal on achieving the departmental writing goals ◦ Continued work within the English department to review student writing samples and compare assessment horizontally and vertically

Goal #3 – To increase the percentage of students exceeding in mathematics on the state assessment in algebra from 72% to 78% and in geometry from 61% to 65% and to decrease the percentage of students not meeting standards on the state assessment to 3% ◦ Professional development on utilizing technology in math ◦ Professional Learning Community to review and discuss Algebra and Geometry curriculum and student learning ◦ Begin review of the Georgia Math Standards ◦ PLC to continue to review and discuss Algebra and Geometry ◦ Textbook adoption for Math I ◦ Revisit and discuss technology plan ◦ First SMART Board in department ◦ PLC to continue to review and discuss last group of Algebra students and Geometry students ◦ Continually review & discuss Math I curriculum and student needs ◦ POI implementation to help support struggling students in Algebra, Geometry & Math I

Is the SIP working? % of students passing GHSGT EnglishMathScienceSocial Studies Class of %99%96%98% Class of % 99% Class of %100%99%100% Goal #1 – The percentage of regular diploma students passing all five portions of the GHSGT prior to graduation will increase to 100%.

Is the SIP working? SAT Writing Avg.GHSWT Pass Rate % % % TBD100% Goal #2 – To increase the proficiency level of all students in the area of writing across the curriculum as measured by the GHSWT, SAT writing averages, and local assessments.

Is the SIP working? Goal #3 – To increase the percentage of students exceeding in mathematics on the state assessment in algebra from 72% to 78% and in geometry from 61% to 65% and to decrease the percentage of students not meeting standards on the state assessment to 3%. GeometryDoes Not MeetMeets & Exceeds %97% %95% %90% AlgebraDoes Not MeetMeets & Exceeds %95% %91% (All failure students from previous years) 24%76%