Compliance hearing exhibits, 47

School Improvement Plans Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent Cluster Baseline Elementary Eleanor Cox, Principal Booker Arts Magnet Cheryl Carson. Principal Brady Elementary Ada Keown, Principal Carver Magnet Diane Barksdale. Principal Cloverdale Elementary Eredcrick Reids, Principal Fair Park Elementary Samuel Branch. Principal Geyer Spring Elementary [Sonna Hall, Principal Gibbs Magnet Felicia Hobbs, Principal Jefferson Elementary Roberta Mannon, Principal Ring Interdistrict Tyrong Manis. Principal Meadowefiff Elementary Jerry Worm. Principal Romine Interdstrict Lillie Scull, Principal Terry Elementary Nancy Acre, Principal Washington Magnet Gwen Zeigler. Principal Watson Elementary Mike Oliver. Principal Williams Magnet Mary Menking. Principal Wilson Elementary Beverly Jones. Principal i.' t-t * t-i *V I J 'Cva % 00 fi> (0 3 BASELINE FAX PARENT NEWSLETTER September 15, 2000 Dear Parents, Listed below are some examples of questions from the Baseline Report Card that you will receive in your mail from the State Department of Education very soon. Below are the most updated facts about our school and a great time to brag about the progress we are making: BASELINE REPORT CARD card From the Principals Desk Eleanor V.L. Cox Nia*' EngVis)' Art Sc(a'^ [school Name: Teachers: 26 Baseline Elemencary I# Support Staff: l ? 2 Attendance: . (% of average daily attendance
maximum = 100%) 92.sex lEnroUment: 296 ] Developmental Reading Readiness Assessment - % of students in grades K-2 who have developed appropriate reading readiness skills for their grade level: ] Kindergarten: 51.1 x First Grade: 29.6 x Second Grade: 47.11 of PT A Members Last Year: 296 1% of Teachers with Masters Degree: 38 X ] IVolunteer Hours Last Year: 5012 I ] 1% of Teachers with 9 + Years ofTeaching Experience: 477
| DiscipUne & Safety - % of students NOT receiving a reportable discipline sanction: (By stale law discipline sanctions must be reported and include acts involving drugs, assaults, alcohol, weapons or gangs
districtwide, fewer than 2% of i ) our students were involved in these types of offenses.) .022 priorities for our school and are included in our school in4)roveinent School Improvement Plans - the following are m improvement plan
the complete school improvement plan is available in the office and includes specific actions and resources needed for implementation: i . Students at Baseline Elementary School will perform at an acceptable level In :.2. ma thematics. Students at Baseline Elementary School will perform at an acceptable level in 3. reading and writing. All students at Baseline Elementary School will come to school daily and on time (7:50 a.n.), as well as leave on time (2:35 p.m.).Listed below are the scores children made on the Success for All pre and post assessments for last Spring
SUCCESS FOR ALL r Basdire a^AAnd/^ssssnHt 100 80 GO a iSeriesI
:? ay r- 8 aSaies2 I ) I i I 40 1st Qade >^19' Qads ad Qazfe iSaiesI Re 40 50 1 58 iBSaTes2j Rst 81 69 68 i. 11 4th Qacb 40 86 1966-200) Oacte 37 69 0 5* i s a I J These scores above are two of several instruments (tests) that we use to find out how much progress our students have made, and help identify areas of weakness your child needs to improve upon regarding skills. Membership Dues As you can see from our report card we had a 100% paid memberships last year with an increase in membership of 10%. We want to do just as well, if not better, this year. Please send your $3.00 membership by September 20,2000. We are Proud of: Our new staff members who are doing a great job with your children. They are Ms. R. Dukes (PK), Ms. C. Ross and Ms. A. Outlaw (K), Ms. E. McSpadden (2'* grade), Ms. J. Lester (3* grade), and Ms. C. Rich (4* grade). Ms. S. King, Ms. C. Young, Mr. William Blake, Ms. B. Donald, and Ms. M. Humbert are our new paraprofessionals. Mr. Stubblefield who will be moving to Atlanta, Georgia, to continue his studies in advanced biology at Clark University at the end of the month. We wish him well. Ms. Kelsey Tucker who teaches our students art each day. We look forward to our art fair and displaying the beautiful pictures in our hallways each month. Our New PTA Officers
Rev. R. Bowman, Pres., Ms. Griffin, 1 Vice Pres., Mrs. R. Bowman, 2** Vice Pres., Ms. B. Walton, Rec. Secretary, Mrs. R. Martin, Ms. C. Koehler, Parliamentarian, Ms. D. Jordan, Council RepSchool Baseline Elementary School School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 1 Reading and Writing Literacy Supporting Data
* SAT9 - Grade 5 Total Reading: 10% at or above the 50th percentile
20% of African-American females at or above the 50th percentile
0% of African-American males and Caucasian females at or above the 50th percentile
no Caucasian males tested. * State Benchmark Exam - Grade 4 Literacy: 22% performing at or above the proficient level
23% of Afican-Americans at or above proficient
8% of males at or above proficient. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 2 Reading: 11.1 % at or above the proficient level. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 3 Reading: 19% at or above the proficient level. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 4 Reading: 15% at or above the proficient level. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 5 Reading: 10.8 % at or above the proficient level. * Developmental Reading Assessment - Kindergarten
51.1% at or above the proficient level. * Developmental Reading Assessment - Grade 1
29.6% at or above the proficient level. * Developmental Reading Assessment - Grade 2: 47.1% at or above the proficient level. Goal(s)
* 65% of Baseline Elementary School students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50th percentile in reading on the SAT9. * 100% of Baseline Elementary School students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 4 literacy on the State Benchmark Exam. * 90% of Baseline Elementary School students in grades 2 through 5 in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the proficient level in Reading of the Achievement Level Test. * 90% of Baseline Elementary School students in grades Kindergarten through 2 in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the proficient level on the Developmental Reading Assessment.One-Year Benchmark(s): * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School students shall improve 14% points the percentage of students performing at or above the 50th percentile on the grade 5 SAT9 Total Reading test. In 1999-2000, Baseline Elementary School students shall improve 8 points so that 30% will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Exam in grade 4 literacy. In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 2 students shall improve 8.9% so that 20% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 3 students shall improve 8.1% so that 27.1% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 4 students shall improve 7.5% so that 22.5% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 5 students shall improve 8.9% so that 19.7% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School Kindergarten students shall improve 5% so that 56.1% will be at or above the proficient level on the Developmental Reading Assessment. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 1 students shall improve 7% so that 36.6% will be at or above the proficient level on the Developmental Reading Assessment. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 2 students shall improve 5.3% so that 52.4% will be at or above the proficient level on the Developmental Reading Assessment.School Baseline Elementary School School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Intervention Reading - Success for All Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget Provide additional Success for All training for staff. Continue implementation of Success for All reading program Pre-K - Sth. Align ELLA/ DRA with SFA for instruction. Provide ELLA training for staff. Eleanor Cox Eleanor Cox Mary Jane McDonald Leon Adams Eleanor Cox August 9, 2000 - May 31, 2001 $11,000 for SFA training SFA provided training staff $11,000 August 21, 2000 -May 31,2001 August 21, 2000 -May 31, 2001 August 21, 2000 -May 31,2001 $3,000 for SFA materials 16 classroom teachers ISFA Facilitator. Pat Price Pat Busbea Pat Busbea Ann Freeman $3,000 $3000Intervention Success for All Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget Conduct SFA Family Support meetings. Sharra Hampton Mary Jane McDonald August 21, 2000 -May 21.2001 SFA Family Support Manual Family Support In-Service November 30, 2000 Provide Open Parent Forum Meetings. Cathy Koehler Eleanor Cox Aug. 15,2000 Nov. 14-17, 2000 Feb. 20-22, 2001 April 23-26, 2001 Eddie McCoy $100 Provide Homework Without Tears Workshop for parents. Host Parent to Parent meetings. Cathy Koehler Eleanor Cox September 28, 2000 Eddie McCoy $25 Kelli McPhearson Cathy Koehler Oct. 24-26, 2000 Jan. 22-25, 2001 Parent Center Professional Collection $50School Baseline Elementary School School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 1 Mathematics Supporting Data
* SAT9 - Grade 5 Total Mathematics: 13% at or above the 50th percentile
20% of African-American females at or above the 50th percentile
33% of Caucasian females at or above the 50th percentile
0% of African-American males at or above the 50th percentile
no Caucasian males tested. * State Benchmark Exam - Grade 4 Mathematics: 11% performing at or above the proficient level
87% of those not performing at the proficient level are African-Americans
100% of the males. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 2 Mathematics: 0% at or above the proficient level. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 3 Mathematics: 31.9% at or above the proficient level. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 4 Mathematics
15% at or above the proficient level. * Achievement Level Test - Grade 5 Mathematics: 5.5% at or above the proficient level. Goal(s): 65% of Baseline Elementary School students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50% percentile in mathematics on the SAT9. 100% of Baseline Elementary School students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 4 mathematics on the State Benchmark Exam. 90% of Baseline Elementary School students at grades 2 though 5 shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the Achievement Level Test.One-Year Benchmark(s): * In 1999-2000, Baseline Elementary School students exceeded the 12.5% growth points set for students performing at or above the 50th percentile on the grade 5 SAT9 Total Mathematics test. 23% of total females tested at or above the 50th percentile. 0% of total males tested at or above the 50th percentile. In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary students shall improve 9% points the percent of students performing at or above the 50th percentile on the grade 5 SAT9 Total Mathematics test. 16% of total males shall perform at or above the 50th percentile on the grade 5 SAT9 Total Mathematics test. * In 1999-2000, Baseline Elementary School students shall improve 9% points so that at least 20% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the State Benchmark Examination in grade 4 mathematics. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 2 students shall improve 10% so that 10% wilt be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 3 students shall improve 6.9% so that 37.9% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 4 students shall improve 8.5% so that 23.5% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test. * In 2000-2001, Baseline Elementary School grade 5 students shall improve 9.5% so that 15% will be at or above proficient level on the Achievement Level Test.School Baseline Elementary School School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Intervention Mathematics Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget Provide staff development on using literature to teach mathematics. Continue implementation of math manipulative strategies grades K-2. Continue implementation of Arithmetic Developed Daily in grades 1-3. Conduct SFA Family Support Meetings. Brenda Thomas Eleanor Cox Brenda Thomas Darryl Sharp Mary Jane McDonald Shana Hampton Mary Jane McDonald August 21, 2000 -May 31,2001 October, 2000 - May 31,2001 August 21,2000 -May 31,2001 August 21, 2000 -May 31,2001 Eddie McCoy Trade Books 10 classroom teachers $500 for manipulatives K-4 Crusade Materials 7 classroom teachers ADD booklets Darryl Sharp Mary Jane McDonald SFA Family Support Manual Family Support In-Service Novemeber 30, 2000 $250 $500Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget Provide Open Parent Forum Meetings. Cathy Koehler Eleanor Cox Aug. 15, 2000 Nov. 14-17, 2000 Feb. 20-22, 2001 April 23-26, 2001 Eddie McCoy PTA $100 Provide Homework Without Tears Workshop for parents. Host Parent to Parent Meetings. Cathy Koehler Eleanor Cox Kelli McPhearson Cathy Koehler September 28, 2000 Eddie McCoy PTA $25 Oct. 24-26, 2000 Jan. 22-25,2001 Parent Center Professional Collection $50School Baseline Elementary School School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 1 Attendance Supporting Data
* In the 1999-2000 school year the average daily attendance was 92.56%. * In the 1999-2000 school year the tardies were approximately 1,790. * In the 1999-2000 school year the early check-outs were approximately 1,074. Goal(s)
* The average daily attendance for Baseline Elementary School students will be 98%. * The tardy and early check-out rates will decrease by 50%. One-Year Benchmark(s)
* In the 2000-2001 school year the average daily attendance will increase to 93.64%. * In the 2000-2001 school year the tardy rate will decrease by 179. In the 2000-2001 school year the early check-out rate will decrease by 107.School Baseline Elementary School School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Intervention Attendance Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline Resources District Budget Title I Budget APIG/Other Budget Attendance secretary will identify students who are habitually absent, tardy or early check-outs and notify parents and Family Support Team. SFA Family Support Team will meet with parents of students who are identified by attendance secretary. Identified students will be placed in the SFA Sunshine Club. Kelli McPhearson August 21,2000 -May 31,2001 AS400 Student Check- In/Check-Out Log Sharra Hampton Mary Jane McDonald Sharra Hampton Cathy Koehler August 21,2000 -May 31, 2001 SFA Family Support Manual Family Support In-Service November 30, 2000 October 24, 2000-May 31, 2001 SFA Sunshine Club GuidelinesObjectives 1. Establish LPAC Committee. 2. Encourage Spanish speaking students in acquiring English language skills. Intervention: Improved Achievement of LEP Students Activities 1.1 Principal, counselor, and designated teachers will be trained to establish an LPAC Committee. 1.2 LPAC Committee will be formed with at least one teacher, the counselor, and the principal. 2.1 Purchase Spanish to English software. Person(s) Responsible Karen Broadnax, ESL Office Eleanor Cox, Principal Eleanor Cox, Principal Timeline August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 Budget $2003. Identify allLEP students. 3.1 Ensure that every student in the school has on file a Home Language Survey, signed and dated by parent. Eleanor Cox, Principal Classroom Teachers August, 2000 - May, 2001 3.2 Refer all students who indicate a language other than English is spoken in the home to the ESL Supervisor for testing. 3.3 Convene LPAC to analyze data and determine placement. 3.4 Obtain documentation of LPAC decision and file in student folder. 3.5 Obtain copy of parent permission or parent denial of ESL program and/or services and file in student folder. Gloria DeLoney, Secretary LPAC Chairperson Classroom Teachers LPAC Chairperson Classroom Teachers August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 20014. Schedule LEP students into appropriate courses or classes. 4.1 Place LEP students clustered with one teacher at each grade level to facilitate communication, professional development, and other compliance issues. Gloria DeLoney, Secretary August, 2000 - May, 2001 4.2 Ensure that all teachers (also counselors, librarians, and other support staff) who are assigned LEP students are informed of their level of English- language proficiency and their identification, as well as the schools responsibilities to provide certain services and to document. 4.3 Inform all staff who are assigned former LEP students and the schools responsibility to monitor and document academic success. LPAC Committee LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 20015. Make sure that all teachers and counselors who serve LEP students are appropriately endorsed or trained. 5.1 Inventory staff to determine who has earned ESL endorsement and what training other staff have had and how much. Eleanor Cox, Principal August, 2000 5.2 Place students, whenever possible, in classrooms where teachers have earned the ESL endorsement to their certificate. 5.3 Alternately, contact the ESL office to ensure that all assigned teachers receive appropriate levels of training. Gloria DeLoney, Secretary LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 5.4 Make sure that all staff understand the OCR requirments, the District policy IHBEA and regulations IHBEA- R, and other information relating to OCR monitoring. Eleanor Cox, Principal Sharra Hampton, Counselor LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 20016. Monitor the acadmic achievement of all identified LEP students. 6.1 Monitor (and document that you have done so in the students permanent record folder) each LEP students interim progress reports each quarter. Classroom Teachers August, 2000 - May, 2001 6.2 Monitor (and document that you did so in the students permanent folder) each LEP students grades each quarter. 6.3 Monitor (and document that you did so) each LEP students scores on District Academic Level Tests, State Benchmark or end-of-course, and the SAT9. Classroom Teachers LPAC Committee Sharra Hampton, Counselor August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 6.4 Monitor (and document) LEP students attendance and drop-out rates. Gloria DeLoney, Secretary August, 2000 - May, 20016.5 Monitor (and document) LEP students participation in co- and extracurricular activities. 6.6 Monitor (and document) LEP students participation in G/T, Pre-AP, AP, University Studies, academic competitions, etc. Sponsors Classroom Teachers August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 20017. Design specfic strategies that may be necessary to improve achievement of LEP students. 7.1 Ensure that all LEP students who are not earning at least Cs' and/or who are not performing at the proficient level on tests has a well-constructed personalized education plan (same as other students, but with attention to language needs.) Eleanor Cox, Principal Classroom Teachers LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 2001 7.2 Provide (and document) the necessary support or compensatory services for students who are not earning at least Cs in their course work, such as re-teaching, tutoring, special classes (PLATO lab courses), mentoring, summer school, enrollment in a Newcomer Center (even though previously rejected), etc. Classroom Teachers LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 2001 7.3 Be sure that LEP students needs are reflected in the schools Mary Jane McDonald, Title I Facilitator August, 2000 - May, 20018. Ensure that teachers of LEP students are appropriately evaluated. 8.1 Train principal in ESL methods (what to look for in evaluating teachers of LEP students.) ESL Office August, 2000 - May, 2001 8.2 Ensure that teachers of LEP students are informed of and trained in the use of strategies that promote academic achievement of LEP students. 8.3 Provide appropriate levels of support and professional development for teachers of LEP students who do not meet expectations. ESL Office ESL Office Eleanor Cox, Principal LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 20019. Communicate frequently with parents of all LEP students. 9.1 Provide in a language that the parent can understand information about the schools programs that are provided to all students (i.e., handbooks, invitations to participate in PT A, information about GT programs, Pre-AP, and AP courses, registration, discipline notices, open houses, etc.) LRSD Eleanor Cox, Principal August, 2000 - May, 2001 9.2 Document all communication with LEP students parents in the students permanent record. 9.3 Hire, whenever possible, people who speak other languages, especially the predominant languages of the schools LEP students, so that they can assist with translations. Classroom Teachers Eleanor Cox, Principal August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 20019.4 Maintain a list of translators to assist in both oral and written communication. 9.5 Encourage and document LEP parent participation in the school. VIPS Classroom Teachers August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001 10. Ensure at least one review each year of LEP students performance to determine program exit and next years placement. 10.1 Establish procedures and timeline for annual reviews (in collaboration with ESL supervisor). 10.2 Once reviews are complete, convene LPAC to consider necessary interventions, placement in next years classes, and/or program exit. LPAC Committee LPAC Committee August, 2000 - May, 2001 August, 2000 - May, 2001Booker Joseph R. Booker Arts Magnet School 2000 - 2001 School Improvement Plan School Name: Booker Arts Magnet School # Teachers: 51 # Support Staff: 22 Attendance: 96.57% (% of average daily attendance
maximum = 100%) Enrollment: 550 Developmental Reading Readiness Assessment - % of students in grades K 2 who have developed appropriate reading readiness skills for their grade level: Kindergarten: 81.0% First Grade: 69,3% Second Grade: 79.8% # of PTA Members Last Year: 622 Volunteer Hours Last Year: 7,710 % of Teachers with Masters Degree: 49% % of Teachers with 9 + Years ofTeaching Experience: 71% Discipline & Safety - % of students NOT receiving a reportable discipline sanction: 99.5% (By state law discipline sanctions must be reported and include acts involving drugs, assaults, alcohol, weapons or gangs
districtwide, fewer than 2% of our students were involved in these types of offenses.) School Improvement Plans - the following are priorities for our school and are included in our school improvement plan
the complete school improvement plan is available in the office and includes specific actions and resources needed for implementation: 1. 2. 3. 4. Improve reading achievement by using the Reading Recovery, Accelerated Reader, and Effective Literacy Programs. Improve math achievement by providing real-life math experiences, additional support to teachers, and instruction targeting math procedures. Improve student behavior by using Character-Centered Teaching and an intervention program for students with office or bus referrals. Improve student attendance by using an incentive program and parental involvement to encourage perfect attendance, as well as an intervention program for frequently absent students.TABLE OF CONTENTS Board of birectors 1 Administration 2 Statement of Commitment 3 ACSIP Steering Committee 4 ACSIP Committee Rosters 5 Introduction 7 Review of Data 10 bescription of School ond Community 12 School Population 14 Services 15 Speciol Events/Extracurricular Activities 15 Belief Statements 18 Mission Statement 19 Reoding and Writing Literacy 20 Mothematics 33 Charocter Education 43 Student Attendance 51 Map of School 59 Bibliography 60 Tables 63Little Rock School District Board of Directors Sue H. Strickland, President Or. Katherine Mitchell, Vice-President H. Baker Kurruss, Secretary Larry Berkley Mike Daugherty Mike Kumpuris Judy Magness 1ADMINISTRATION br. Les Carnine, Superintendent Mrs. Sodie Mitchell, Associote Superintendent for School Services br. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction br. Victor Anderson, Associate Superintendent for Operations Mr. Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services br. Kathy Lease, Assistant Superintendent of Planning, Research, and Evaluation A^rs. Frances Jones, Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Schools br. Cheryl A, Carson, Principal Mrs. Joyce J. Willingham, Assistant Principal 2STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT The staff of Booker Arts Magnet School believes that all students will learn. Throughout the ACSIP self-evaluation process, our belief in our students and our commitment to help them achieve their fullest academic, social, and emotional potential was evident. The carefully selected target areas, interventions, and actions further reflected the mission of our schoolhigh academic standards, the development of creativity, and the fostering of social/emotlonal growth through integration of the elementary curriculum and the fine arts. The staff of Booker Arts Magnet School willingly accepts responsibility for the educational growth of its students. As instructional leader, I am committed to the full implementation of our school improvement plan. Cheryl A. Carson Principal 3BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL ACSIP STEERING COMMITTEE 2000 - 2001 Amy Hallum, Chair Tina Brown Math, Co-Chair Merilyn Burruss Math, Co-Chair Vivian Dooley Character Education, Chair Dixie Fair Data Collection and Disaggregation Darrell Hayden Data Collection and Disaggregation Debbie Hipps Reading, Co-Chair Carolyn Huie Attendance, Chair Vearlon Jeffries Math, Co-Chair Mayrean Johnson Reading, Chair Deborah Ramsey Attendance, Co-Chair Mico Rhines Jan Wolfe Data Collection and Disaggregation Character Education, Co-Chair 4BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL ACSIP TARGET COMAMTTEES 2000 - 2001 Amy Hallum, Steering Committee Chair READING Mayrean Johnson, Chair Debbie Hipps, Co-Chair Erma Armstrong Debra Beene, Parent Rita Bledsoe Sadie Burks, Parent Trish Burns Holly Burrough Bob Dorer Amy Friedman, Parent Omar Hayes Brenda Hipp Brian Kinder Susan Mahnken Michelle McGill Patsy Middleton Carolyn Milton Lisa Roderick, Parent Tammy Sexton Sharon Shelton, Parent Brenda Woods MATHEMATICS Tina Brown, Co-Chair Merilyn Burruss, Co-Chair Vearlon Jeffries, Co- Chair Frances Ash,Parent Carol Ballard, Parent Lawrence Brown Jimmy Calhoun Tina Conley, Parent Virginia Curry Yolanda Davis Susan bay. Parent Dixie Fair Patty Jackson Denna Lehnhoff Mary Lofton Steve McGuire Mary McMorran Ken Milton Julie Post Tom Sarlo 5CHARACTER EDUCATION Vivian Dooley, Chair Jan Wolfe, Co-Chair Lou Alley Carol Ballard, Parent Kimberly Bierbaum Santonio Charleston Santi Farmer, Parent Tammy Gingerich Darrell Hayden Tammy Higdon Alicia Jones Kimberly Lang James Marshall Uvita Scott Rebecca Selsor, Parent Lynne Stansbery Cathy Strong Pam Tank, Parent Tracy Tucker Cindy Weaver, Parent Marcia Williams, Parent ATTENDANCE Carolyn Huie, Chair Deborah Ramsey, Co-Chair Martha Armstrong Susan Blue Denise Clark Joe Cripps Carolyn Croswell Loretta Ellington Denecia House, Parent Margaret Howard, Parent Tisa Manley Louise Mayweather Mi co Rhines Margaret Smith, Parent Lynda Spencer Julia Taylor Bobbie Walls Macheryl Washington Jodi Pullen Larry Quattlebaum Joni Thomas 6INTRODUCTION On January 22,1999, the staff of Booker Arts Magnet School began the ACSIP process by selecting Steering Committee members. Representatives from each grade level, fine arts specialists, and instructional specialists were nominated by their peers and agreed to serve as Steering Committee members during the five-year school improvement planning process. The first Steering Committee meeting was held on March 23,1999 for the purpose of identifying the Steering Committee chairperson, target area chairs and co-chairs, and the persons who would assist in data collection and disaggregation. The Steering Committee also developed a draft of Belief Statements. The second Steering Committee meeting was held on April 6,1999 for purpose of refining the Belief Statements draft and to develop a Mission Statement draft. Both the Belief Statements draft and Mission Statement draft were presented to the Booker Arts Magnet School faculty for their consideration on April 12,1999. The staff approved the proposed Belief Statements and Mission Statement. 7On April 20,1999, the third Steering Committee meeting was held for the purpose of reviewing disaggregated data on student achievement", attendance, suspensions, and the CCOE survey results from the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 school years. Tentative target areas were identified. but the selection of target areas was postponed until after a May 17,1999 technical assistance meeting with Mr. David Watts. On May 17,1999, Mr. David Watts, Field Specialist for the Arkansas Department of Education, met with Steering Committee members during their fourth meeting to provide technical assistance. Mr. Watts suggested that the Steering Committee collect additional data on attendance and ! discipline before finalizing the selection of target areas. The first Steering Committee meeting of the 1999-2000 school year was held on September 21,1999. Additional data on attendance and discipline were examined as suggested by Mr. Watts. The areas of improving reading achievement, improving math achievement, implementing a character education program, and improving student attendance were selected as the four target areas for the ACSIP plan. Target area committees were structured to best address the selected areas. New school improvement 8plan forms were presented to the Steering Committee. The second Steering Committee meeting for the 1999-2000 school year was held on September 29,1999. This meeting was a joint meeting of the CCOE Steering Committee and the ACSIP Steering Committee. Specific instructions about conducting target area committee meetings and completion of the school improvement plan forms were given. The dates of October 4.1999 and October 11,1999 were selected as planning meetings for target area committees. Target area committees consisting of faculty members and parents developed goals, interventions, and strategies to address the four target areas. Preliminary plans were presented to the Campus Leadership Team on October 19,1999 for review and revision. A second technical review by Mr. bavid Watts and other AbE staff members was held on November 3,1999. Suggestions for changes identified during the technical review were shared with target area committees. Revisions were made, resulting in the completion of the ACSIP School Improvement Plan. 9REVIEW OF DATA An analysis of the data collected in the AC SIP process assisted faculty members in the selection of target areas for the school improvement plan at Booker Arts Magnet School. The data included archival, achievement. and perceptual information. The archival data were collected through surveys, school records, and district records. This data Included information on faculty members. students, and parents. Additional archival data on attendance and discipline were examined. Achievement data were gathered from the Stanford 9 test. Grade 4 Benchmark Exam, and Little Rock School District Criterion- Referenced Test. Perceptual data were gathered by surveys. Input from parents, teachers, and students was obtained through these surveys. A review of the data indicated several areas of concern. A review of the achievement data indicated concerns about the disparity between the achievement rates of minority and non-minority students. Further analysis indicated areas of need in Reading Vocabulary and Comprehension, as well as Mathematics Problem Solving and Procedures. An analysis of archival data indicated an increase in the suspension rate of students over the last three-year period. The Third Quarter 10Average Attendance had been variable over the same period. An analysi s of the achievement of chronically absent students indicated that a high percentage of these students were below grade level in achievement. This finding confirmed the faculty's belief that attendance greatly impacts student achievement. An examination of the perceptual data indicated concerns about students treating others with respect and students obeying school rules. This perceptual data was gathered from parents, students, and teachers over the last three years. This review of data caused four target areas to be readily apparent. The following four target areas were selected by the Steering Committee and approved by the faculty for the ACSIP School Improvement Plan
Improve Student Achievement in Reading and Writing Literacy Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics Implement Character Education Increase Student Attendance 11DESCRIPTION OF SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY Booker Arts Magnet School is located in Little Rock, Arkansas. In 1983, the Little Rock School District Board of Directors approved a plan for an arts magnet elementary school. Booker Arts Magnet School operated as a school within a school for two years. In 1986, the Board approved a plan to make Booker Arts Magnet School a full magnet school with grades four through six. In 1987, Booker Arts Magnet School became an elementary school offering its program to kindergarten through sixth grade students in Pulaski County. In 1999, Booker Arts Magnet School was reorganized to serve kindergarten through fifth grade students. Booker Arts Magnet School's location enhances its unique arts magnet theme because of the close proximity,to the Arkansas Arts Center, Museum of Science and Natural History, Decorative Arts Museum, and the surrounding historic Quapaw Quarter of Little Rock. The campus of Booker Arts Magnet School includes one main building. a cafeteria, gymnasium, track, playground, and parking areas. Classrooms are. located in the main building, along with the school office, media center. nurse's office, teachers' lounge, and student restrooms. Fine arts classes, 12gifted class, counselors' offices, and Technology Center are located In the gymnasium area. The building Is a brick structure. All classrooms have central heat/air and are carpeted. Booker Arts Magnet School is handicapped accessible with romps on both exits at the south end of the building. There is also a handicopped lift in the gymnasium area. 13SCHOOL POPULATION There are 552 students currently enrolled at Booker Arts Magnet School with a staff of 27 classroom teachers. The staff also includes a principal, assistant principal, a nurse, two counselors, two technology specialists, a media specialist, a gifted and talented specialist, two art specialists, two music specialists, a music and orchestra specialist, a drama specialist, and two creative movement specialists. The instructional specialists include four Reading Recovery teachers, two math specialists, one resource specialist, one part-time speech therapist, and two curriculum specialists. Support personnel include two secretaries, a library clerk, five supervision aides, four custodians, and six cafeteria workers. The student population has a 50/50 racial composition. It also reflects an equitable sexual, geographic, academic, economic, and cultural composition. The student selections are made by each district's accepted plan. The slots are filled by accepting applications from students in grades kindergarten through five who reside in the Little Rock School District, the North Little Rock School District, and the Pulaski County Special School District. 50% of the student population at Booker Arts Magnet School Is African-American, 44% is European-American, and the remaining percentage is reflective of other ethnic groups such as American Indian, Asian, and Hispanic. 14SERVICES In addition to regular instructional classes
speciol services such os speech therapy, special education/resource, Reading Recovery, math support, Technology Center classes, and gifted and talented services are available for students in grades kindergarten through five. Two full time counselors provide classroom and individual guidance services on a regular basis. SPECIAL EVENTS/EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES A variety of special events are held at Booker Arts Magnet School to enhance the learning process. Field trips are made to the Arkansas Arts Center, Decorative Arts Museum, Little Rock Zoo, Toltec Mounds, University of Arkansas at Little Rock's Art Gallery, and Arkansas State Capitol, the Old State House, Little Rock Library, and various community attractions. Many cultural events at Robinson Auditorium and the UALR Theatre are scheduled throughout the year. Booker Arts Magnet students also attend Little Rock School District fine arts performances. A spelling bee for third through fifth grades is held yearly. Many Booker Arts Magnet School students enter "Reflections", a creative expression competition sponsored by the National PTA, each year. Students 15are encouroged to enter various visuol art competitions yearly. Students are also encouraged to enter other contests throughout the year. Each nine-week grading period ends with a special activity for students achieving the Honor Roll, BUS Roll (Bring Up a Grade), and Good Citizenship. Magic shows, game day, talent shows, and other activities ore provided. An awards assembly is held at the end of each school year. Students receive certificates for their accomplishments. Counselors organize a birthday table each month honoring students. Winter and spring performances are held by the fine arts classes. . These performances reflect activities mastered by students. Each grade level performs at the monthly PTA meetings. Arts Fairs are held in the Fall fall and spring. In the spring, students participate in an "Arts Fest" activity. Various sports events are organized for student involvement. Other clubs and activities at Booker Arts Magnet School include Just Say No, Peer Helpers, BAMBI-Safety Club, Ambassadors, flag monitors, and fire marshals. Booker Arts Magnet School's Parent Teacher Association is very active and provides a good representation of the parent body. The 16membership is 622. The PT A sponsors fine arts performances such as the Tcll-A-Tale Troupe and provides scholarships to students who are unable to attend cultural activities for financial reasons. The PTA also funds student awards for the Honor Roll, BUG Roll, and Good Citizenship. Teachers receive funds from the PTA to purchase indoor recess activities and teaching aids. Parents are also active participants in committees such as the ACSIP Target Area Committees and School Spirit Committee. Parents frequently volunteer their services as tutors, chaperones for field trips, to make teaching materials, to organize class parties, and to assist with the Arts Fest in May. Booker Arts Magnet School's Partners-in-Education are the Arkansas Department of Education's Communications Department, EMOB A, and the University of Arkansas at Little Rock's College of Fine Arts. 171. 2. 3. BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL BELIEF STATEMENTS Every individual can learn. The arts inspire learning and enhance the quality of life. Self-worth allows each Individual to strive for excellence and to develop his/her unique capabilities. 4. Higher expectations coupled with effort stimulate higher levels of performance. 5. Acceptance and utilization of cultural and racial diversity enrich and strengthen the community. 6. Every individual is free to make choices and is responsible for accepting the consequences that follow. 7. The family is the primary influence on most children's lives. Therefore
It is necessary that parents, staff, students, and the community share responsibility for a quality education. 18BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL MISSION STATEMENT The staff of Booker Arts Magnet School believes that every individual can learn. Our mission is to educate all students to higher levels of academic performance, while developing divergent thinking and creativity, and fostering positive growth in social behaviors through an integration of the curriculum and the fine arts. In partnership with parents and the community, we accept the responsibility to teach all students with the goal of enabling them to achieve their ultimate educational potential. 19READING AND WRITING LITERACy NARRATIVE The Reading and Writing Literacy Committee met for the first time on October 4,1999. During this meeting, the committee disaggregated achievement data, identified achievement disparities between subgroups of students, and discussed areas of the reading curriculum in which students were not performing at the "proficient" level. The Reading and Writing Literacy Committee also met on October 11,1999 and November 15,1999. An analysis of the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam data for the 1997-98 and 1998-99 school years indicated that a significantly lower number of minority students scored at or above the "proficient" level than did non-minority students. A significantly higher percentage of black females, white males, white females, and other females scored at or above the "proficient" level during the 1998-99 school year than did students in those subgroups during the 1997-98 school year. However, the percentage of black male students scoring at or above the "proficient" level in 1998-99 dropped from 1997-98. The percentage of other male students scoring at or above the "proficient" level remained the same. In 1997-98, 20% of all students scored at or above the "proficient" level on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. In 1998-99, 397o of all students scored at or above the "proficient" level, an increase of 197o (See Table 1). The Reading and Writing Literacy Committee recognized that two different groups of students were given the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam,, and the analysis of test scores did not indicate individual student achievement growth. However, the results did indicate trends in achievement and identify areas of need within the curriculum that should be oddressed. An analysis of the Grade 5 SAT 9 achievement data also indicated that minority students scored significantly lower than non-minority students. A significantly higher percentage of black females, white males, and other females scored at or above the 50^** percentile on the Total Reading score in 1999-2000 than did students in those subgroups during the 1998-99 school year. However, the percentage of black males, white females, and other males scoring at or above the 50^* percentile on the Total Reading score in 1999-2000 dropped from 1998- 99. A comparison of the Total Reading scores for fifth grade students in the 1997-98,1998-99, and 1999-2000 school years revealed a decrease in the percentage of black male and white female students who scored at or above the 2050*** percentile, an increase in the percentage of white male students who scored at or above the 50^* percentile, and no long-term Increases or decreases in the percentage of black female students who scored at or above the 50^*' percentile. The numbers of other male and other female students were so small that a comparison of the percentage of these students who scored at or above the 50 ,th percentile was not statistically significant. In 1997-98,40% of all students scored at or above the SO^** percentile on the Total Reading score. In 1998-99, 35% of all students scored at or above the 50^* percentile on the Total Reading score, a decrease of 5%. In 1999-2000, 37% of all students scored at or above the 50 ith percentile, an increase of 2% over the previous year (See Table 2). Seventy-two percent of all students scored average or above in Vocabulary in the 1997-98, 1998-99, and the 1999-2000 school years. In 1997-98, 65% of all students scored average or above average in Comprehension. In 1998-99, 76% of all students scored average or above in Comprehension, an increase of 11%. In 1999-2000, 667o of all students scored average or above in Comprehension, a decrease of 12% (See Table 3). Upon analyzing this data, the Reading and Writing Literacy Committee recognized that most of Booker's students were scoring in the second quartile on Vocabulary and Comprehension. Attention should be given to address the needs of the "bubble group" of students. Once again, the committee recognized that three different groups of students were tested these three years and utilized the data to identify curriculum needs. An analysis of the Fourth Quarter Criterion Reference Test administered in 1998-99 indicated the following percentages of curriculum mastery of all students: Second Grade 66%
Third Grade 76%
Fourth Grade 727o
Fifth grade 86%
and Sixth Grade 84% (See Table 4). An examination of Criterion Reference Test results for the second, third, and fourth quarters indicated areas of need in curriculum and instruction, as well as measuring growth in achievement for individual students. An analysis of the spring 2000 ALT Reading scores indicated that second, third, and fifth grade students at Booker Arts Magnet School scored an average of three points higher on their RIT score than did their peers across the Little Rock School District. Likewise, Booker Arts Magnet School's fourth grade students' average RIT score was two points higher than that of fourth graders across the district. It was the consensus of the Reading and Writing Literacy Committee that improving instruction and addressing areas of need within the curriculum would 21 cause student achievement to increase and disparity to decrease. The committee then began to closely examine the reading and writing programs in use at Booker Arts Magnet to determine whether they appropriately addressed the needs of students. Assessing the success of the reading and writing programs at Booker Arts Magnet School actually began during the 1997-98 school year as a part of an annual review in our school improvement process. At that time, the staff recognized the need to provide as much individualized instruction for our low achieving readers as possible while also challenging readers of all reading levels to read a better quality of literature and to develop a life-long love of reading. A team of staff members (primary teachers, intermediate teachers, reading teachers, a curriculum specialist, and the principal) reviewed professional journals and held discussions with colleagues across the Little Rock School District and the state of Arkansas in an effort to find a way to better meet the needs of the students at Booker Arts Magnet. After much discussion and consultation with Little Rock School District reading supervisors, the team agreed to closely examine three programs for possible implementation at Booker Arts Magnet. These programs were the Accelerated Reader program, the Reading Recovery program, and the Success for All program. Next, the team decided to visit schools to observe implementation of the programs. The principal scheduled visits at three schools identified by Little Rock School District reading specialists as successfully implementing the selected programs. Pulaski Heights Elementary (Accelerated Reader), Romine Interdistrict School (Success for All), and Williams Basic Skills Magnet (Reading Recovery) were visited in the winter and spring of 1997-98. After much discussion, the team came to the consensus that the Accelerated Reader program would challenge all students to enjoy reading better literature, and the Reading Recovery program would allow the staff to better meet the needs of low-achieving readers. The team shared its findings and recommendations with the staff during an April 10,1998 staff meeting. The staff endorsed the recommendations of the team, and planning began for full implementation of both programs during the 1998-99 school year. The two reading teachers began Reading Recovery training in August 1998, and the media specialist and a curriculum specialist attended an Accelerated Reader/Reading Renaissance conference in June 1998. Materials and supplies were purchased and received. Three first grade teachers also began Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) training in August 1998. The ELLA program seemed to work hand-in-hand with the Reading Recovery program to meet the needs of beginning first grade readers. By the end 22 of the 1998-99 school year, first grade teachers and Reading Recovery teachers observed significant progress in reading among first grade students. School-wide, staff members observed students experiencing a renewed interest in reading for recreation as result of the Accelerated Reader program. They observed students selecting more challenging literature and taking pride in passing tests designed to check their comprehension of trade books. Because of the success observed during the first year of implementing the Reading Recovery program, the decision was made to request two additional Reading Recovery teachers and to purchase additional materials for the Reading Recovery program and for the ELLA-trained teachers. All kindergarten through second grade teachers who had not received ELLA training were trained in July and August of 1999. The new Reading Recovery teachers began their three-year training in August 1999. The successes observed during the first year of implementing the Accelerated Reader program led to the purchase of additional books, tests, and computers. These computers were placed in fourth and fifth grade classrooms to facilitate comprehension testing. After the Reading and Writing Literacy Committee examined the reading achievement data and current research, they reached a consensus to continue implementation of the Accelerated Reader and Reading Recovery programs as two interventions for the annual School Improvement Plan and the ACSIP School Improvement Plan. In addition, the committee selected Effective Literacy as a third intervention to improve reading and writing achievement among students at Booker Arts Magnet School. Research indicated that children who do not experience success in reading early in their academic life are at a distinct disadvantage when compared to their peers who read successfully. Dorn, French, and Jones stated that children who do not read successfully by the end of their third grade year find it very difficult to catch up with their peers in later years (Dorn, et al. 1998). In fact, the probability that a poor reader in first grade will remain a poor reader by the end of fourth grade is 88 percent (Juel 1988). Barr and Parrett (1995) emphasized the importance of all children learning to read successfully by the end of third grade. Early intervention is crucial to the success of educationally disadvantaged children. The Reading Recovery program was developed by Marie M. Clay as an alternative to traditional reading programs for educationally disadvantaged and learning-disabled children (Lyons 1991). Reading Recovery is based on the belief that early intervention is critical to preventing reading failures (Dorn, et al. 1998). The Reading Recovery program was designed to accelerate learning so that low- 23 achieving readers could catch up with peers on reading achievement. The Reading Recovery program also helped students to develop reading strategies that facilitated further improvement in their reading abilities (Bracey 1996). A study of twelve widely implemented reading reform programs found that the Reading Recovery program provided student-directed learning experiences for low- achieving readers. Teachers developed individual learning plans for students that were tailored to the students' abilities and academic backgrounds. They utilized adaptive instructional strategies to diagnose learning difficulties. The tutoring sessions also allowed for frequent high quality academic and social interactions among teachers and students. Assessments were directly aligned with the curriculum. Teachers involved parents by having them reinforce skills with their children at home. High expectations were evident throughout the program (Pinnell 1995). Research indicated that reading practice has a direct correlation to reading achievement. Reading practice data and standardized achievement test scores were examined in a study of 4,498 students in grades one through nine. Study results indicated, "Reading practice was found to cause more reading growth for poorer readers than for more advanced readersalthough reading practice improves reading test scores for all ability groups" (Paul 1992). In addition, increases in reading achievement positively impact performance in other subject areas. In a 1993 study, Paul found that "increases in reading ability transferred to increased math performance. The reading fallout ratethe improvement in math caused by reading was a very high 68%" (Paul 1993). The results of recent studies indicated that implementation of the Accelerated Reader program positively impacted student achievement and increased library circulation. A 1998 study in the Cottonwood-Oak Creek School District found significant increases in reading and writing proficiency scores and doubling of the library circulation attributed to the implementation of Accelerated Reader in four elementary and middle schools (Osbourne and Adams 1998). A 1997 study at Grant Elementary School in Muscatine, Iowa indicated that the mean reading comprehension scores increased from the 40^ percentile to the 70^^ percentile, the library circulation increase by 500%, and attendance increased from 92% to 96% as a result of implementation of the Accelerated Reader program (Brooks). Marie M. Clay, the developer of the Reading Recovery program, stated, "For children who learn to write at the same time they learn to read, writing plays a significant part in the early reading process" (Clay 1975). Nationwide, educators 24 have recognized that writing instruction is an essential component of a successful language arts program, born, French, and Jones stated, "Children's cognitive processes are validated and activated during meaningful collaborative writing H (born, et al. 1998). The Reading and Writing Literacy Committee recognized that the improvement of writing skills was essential to the improvement of reading skills. With that in mind, the committee searched for an Intervention that would compliment the other interventions, as well as ELLA and Animated Literacy. Effective Literacy was selected. The Arkansas bepartment of Education Homepage (10-26-98) described Effective Literacy as, "instruction in the reading and writing processes that provides a balance between explicit instruction of skills and strategies and application of this instruction in reading and writing experiences" (AbE 1998). Effective Literacy focused upon the instruction of phonetic skills and strategies, decoding high frequency words, word attack skills, word analysis skills, vocabulary development, and comprehension skills and strategics. The writing process was an essential component of Effective Literacy. Frequent assessments, classroom management and organizational skills, and parental involvement were also components of Effective Literacy (AbE 1998). The Reading and Writing Literacy Committee recognized the need for selecting interventions for improving reading and writing literacy that would match the unique needs of Booker Arts Magnet School's students and compliment existing components of the language arts program. The Accelerated Reader program would challenge readers of all ability levels and at all grade levels to select, comprehend, and enjoy quality literature. The Reading Recovery program would focus primarily on meeting the needs of low-achieving first grade readers on an individual and small group basis. Reading Recovery would also be available to low-achieving readers in kindergarten and second grade. Effective Literacy would focus on improving the reading and writing skills of third and fourth grade students. ELLA would be utilized with kindergarten, first, and second grade students. Animated Literacy would be utilized with kindergarten students. With the implementation of these interventions and the continuation of existing programs, the staff at Booker Arts Magnet School has great expectations for the improvement of reading and writing literacy for all students. 25School Joseph R. Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement In Reading and Writing Literacy Supporting Data: In 1998-99, 397o of students scored at or above the "proficient" level on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. In 1999-00, 377o of students scored at or above the 50^^ percentile on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Reading Total. 7%. of black males, 24% of black females, 75% of white males, 477o of white females, 07 of other males, and 100% of other females scored at or obove the 50^^ percentile on the grade 5 SAT 9 Reading Total. 72% of students scored at or above average on Vocabulary, and 667o of students scored at or above average on Comprehension on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Reading test. In 1998-99, fourth quarter Criterion-Referenced Test Reading results indicated the following percentages of mastery: grade 2, 66%
grade 3, 76%
grade 4,grade 5, 86%
and grade 6, 844. In 1999-00, Spring ALT results indicated the following average RIT scores: grade 2,182
grade 3,194
grade 4, 201
and grade 5, 208. Goal(s): 1007o of Booker Arts Magnet School students will perform at or above the "proficient" level on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. 2665% of Booker Arts Magnet School students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50^^ percentile on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Reading test. One-Year Benchmarks: At least 45% of Booker Arts Magnet School students (an increase of 6 students) will perform at or above the M proficient" level on the Grade 4 Literacy Benchmark Exam. At least the following increases in the percentages and numbers of every subgroup of race and gender of students who perform at or above the 50^^ percentile on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Reading test: Black males Black females White males White females Other males Other females Increase to 12.8% (5.8% increase or 2 students) Increase to 28% (4.9% increase or 2 students) Increase to 77% (2% increase or 1 student) Increase to 48.8% (1.8% increase or 1 student) Increase to 7% (7%. increase or 1 student) Maintain 100% 27School Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement in Reading and Writing Literacy Intervention: Implement Reading Recovery ^7' if- 8WW ^Donation/ Grant/PTA ReSdufees Tlihelind
Personas) 7. Identify second and third grade students with severe reading deficits for Reading Recovery follow-up. 8. Schedule and conduct conferences, as needed, with parents of Reading Recovery students._____ 9. Provide Reading Recovery and Literacy Groups instruction. 10. Conduct monthly planning meetings. 11. Monitor Reading Recovery students progress throughout the year by reviewing weekly Running Records._____________________ 12. Utilize Reading Recovery postassessments to assess progress of identified students. 13. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001 -2002. 5? .ia -i Reading Recovery Teachers Second and Third Grade Teachers Erma Armstrong Brenda Hipp Susan Mahnken Michelle McGill Erma Armstrong Brenda Hipp Susan Mahnken Michelle McGill Reading Recovery Teachers First Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Reading Recovery Teachers Erma Armstrong Brenda Hipp Susan Mahnken Michelle McGill Cheryl Carson Reading Committee 3* '.I-'' 8-21-00 to 10-1-00 9-7-00 to 6-1-01 9-7-00 to 6-1-01 9-7-00 to 6-1-01 9-7-00 to 6-1-01 5-1-01 to 5-31-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 29 #9? % Pat Busbea Pat Busbea A': ^1 -i*:School Improvement Plan School Booker Arts Magnet Year 2000- 2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement In Reading and Writing Literacy Intervention: Implement Reading Recovery J 1^0 BMI A' -- S- 1. Provide Reading Recovery training for Reading Recovery teachers. 2. Purchase materials for Reading Recovery teachers. Cheryl Carson Cheryl Carson Lou Alley Reading Recovery Teachers si 8-12-00 to 6-1-01 7-1-00 to 10-1-00 3@! H 3. Purchase additional books for use with literacy groups. 4. Apply for a grant to purchase content area books for use with literacy groups. 6. Identify first grade students for Reading Recovery with preassessment. 6. Identify first grade students for literacy groups. Cheryl CarSon Lou Alley Reading Recover Teachers Michelle McGill Reading Recover Teachers First Grade Teachers Reading Recovery Teachers First Grade Teachers 7-1-00 to 10-1-00 10-15-00 to 3-01 8-21-00 to 10-1-00 8-21-00 to 10-1-00 $2,000 for materials Pat Busbea Gail Hester $4,000 for books Pat Busbea Gail Hester Linda Austin $4,000 28 $2,000School Improvement Plan School Booker Arts Magnet Year 2000-2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement in Reading and Writing Literacy Intervention: Implement Accelerated Reader wiS
-ri- SSS6 A Aimk O I iMa _ .............-.............
1. Purchase additional Accelerated Reader books, targeting K-2 students.________________ 2. Purchase additional test discs to accompany new Accelerated Reader books, targeting K-2 students._____ 3. Provide Accelerated Reading training for K-5 teachers. 4. Solicit volunteers to assist with STAR assessments. 5. Utilize STAR Assessment pre-test to place students on appropriate reading levels.__________________ 6. Increase circulation of books by having students set goals for reading. Cheryl Carson Lou Alley Patricia Bums Cheryl Carson Lou Alley Patricia Bums Cheryl Carson Patricia Burns Patricia Burns Patricia Bums First - Fifth Grade Teachers 2:^ 7-1-00 to 10-1-00 7-1-00 to 10-1-00 8-12-00 to 12-15-00 8-21-00 to 10-15-00 8-21-00 to 9-15-00 8-21-00 to 9-15-00 J $5,000 for books Gail Hester $1,500 for test discs Gail Hester Lloyd Harris Perma-Bound Books ViPS Lynne Stansbery $5,000 30 $1,500School Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement in Reading and Writing Literacy Intervention: Implement Accelerated Reader Mil' 4^^ 1 .-aMj
* : * ' i IB w 7. Reinforce student participation by maintaining Accelerated Reader bulletin boards._________________ 8. Provide Accelerated Reader awards on a quarterly basis. 9. Monitor students progress throughout the year by reviewing monthly Accelerated Reader reports. 10. Utilize STAR Assessment posttest to assess student progress towards completion of goal._______ 11. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation: make adjustments for 2001 -2002._______ Reading Committee Cheryl Carson Lou Alley Reading Committee Cheryl Carson Reading Committee Cheryl Carson Patricia Bums Cheryl Carson Reading Committee 11-1-00 to 6-1-01 10-26-00 to 6-1-01 9-30-00 to 6-1-01 5-12-01 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 VIPS 31 $1,500 for awards Gail Hester Accelerated Reader Reports Lynne Stansbery $1,500School Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement in Reading and Writing Literacy Intervention: Implement Effective Literacy M 1. Provide Effective Literacy Training for third and fourth grade teachers. 2. Purchase sets of levelized books for classroom use. 3. Provide instruction utilizing Effective Literacy. 4. Provide curriculum mapping inservice to K-Fifth grade teachers. 5. Monitor students progress throughout the year by reviewing LRSD criterion-referenced test results.________________________ 6. Utilize the fourth grade benchmark exam to assess student mastery of benchmarks.___________________ 7. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002.________ Per8on(8) Responsibly f Cheryl Carson Cheryl Carson Lou Alley Third and Fourth Grade Teachers Third and Fourth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Gail Hester Carolyn Huie Mico Rhines Cheryl Carson Third and Fourth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Third and Fourth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Reading Committee Timeline
^ w 8-9-00 to 6-1-01 7-1-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 6-5-00 to 8-15-00 1-10-00 to 6-1-01 4-10-01 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 12 Resources -tiirii. TMir Staff Development $4,000 for books Pat Busbea Gail Hester PRE PRE PRE 5 j'V'' $4,000MATHEMATICS NARRATIVE The first Mathematics Committee meeting was held on October 4,1999. The committee examined disaggregated achievement data from several sources, identified achievement disparities between subgroups of students, and discussed areas of the mathematics curriculum in which students were not performing at the *1 proficient" level. The Mathematics Committee also met on October 11,1999 and November 18,1999. An analysis of the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam data for the 1997-98 and 1998-99 school years indicated that a significantly lower number of minority students scored at or above the "proficient" level than did non-minority students. A significantly higher percentage of white males, white females, and other females scored at or above the "proficient" level during the 1998-99 school year than did students in those subgroups during the 1997-98 school year. However, the percentage of black males, black females, and other males scoring at or above the "proficient" level in 1998-99 dropped from 1997-98. Thus, the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students increased in 1998-99. In 1997-98,17 % of all students scored at or above the "proficient" level on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam. In 1998-99, 24% of all students scored at or above the "proficient" level, an increase of 7% (See Table 5). As in the area of reading achievement, the Mathematics Committee recognized that the test data was gathered from two different groups of students and did not indicate individual student growth. However, the analysis of data indicated areas of need within the curriculum and instructional methodology. An analysis of the Grade 5 SAT 9 achievement data also indicated that a significantly higher percentage of black females, white males, and other females scored at or above the 50^** percentile on the Total Math score in 1999-2000 than did students in those subgroups during the 1998-99 school year. While not statistically significant, a higher percentage of white females scored at or above the 50^** percentile on the Total Math score in 1999-2000 than did the white females in 1998-99. The achievement rate of black male students remained the same for 1999-2000, and the percentage of other male students scoring at or above the 50^^ percentile on the Total Math score dropped. A comparison of the Total Math scores for fifth grade students in 1997-98,1998-99, and 1999-2000 school years revealed a decrease in the percentage of black male students who 33 scored at or above the 50^** percentile and an increase in the percentage of black female, white male, and white female students who scored at or above the 50^*' percentile. The numbers of other male and other female students were so small that a comparison of the percentage of these students who scored at or above the 50^^ percentile would not be statistically significant. In 1997-98, 20% of all students scored at or above the 50^ percentile on the Total Math score. In 1998- 99,18% of all students scored at or above the 50^*' percentile on the Total Math score. In 1999-2000, 31% of all students scored at or above the 50^^ percentile, an increase of 13% (See Table 6). In 1997-98,73% of all students scored average or above on Problem Solving. Sixty-three percent of all students scored average . or above on Problem Solving in 1998-99, a decrease of 10%. In 1999-2000, 667o of all students scored average or above on Problem Solving, an increase of 37o. In 1997-98, 36% of all students scored average or above on Procedures. In 1998-99, 38% of all students scored average or above on Procedures, an increase of 27o. An increase of 6% occurred in 1999-2000, with 447o of all students scoring average or above on Procedures (See Table 7). Further examination of this data indicated that most of Booker's students were scoring in the second quartile in Problem Solving. Once again, attention should be given to address the needs of this "bubble" group of students. While the SAT 9 data from the 1998-99 and 1999- 2000 school years measured the achievement of two different groups of students, it also provided valuable information needed to address curriculum and instructional needs. An analysis of the Fourth Quarter Criterion Reference Test administered in 1998-99 indicated the following percentages of curriculum mastery for all students: Second Grade 87%
Third Grade 75%
Fourth Grade 18%
Fifth Grade 55%.
and Sixth Grade 54% (See Table 8). An analysis of the Spring 2000 ALT Math scores indicated that second grade students at Booker Arts Magnet School scored an average of four points higher on their RIT scores than did their peers across the Little Rock School District. Likewise, Booker Arts Magnet School's third and fifth grade students' average RIT scores were two points higher than that of third and fifth graders across the district. Fourth grade students at Booker Arts Magnet School scored an average of one point higher on their RIT score than did fourth graders across the district. It was the consensus of the Mathematics Committee that improving instruction and addressing areas of need within the curriculum would cause student 34 achievement to increase and disparity to decrease. First, the Mathematics Committee examined the existing mathematics program at Booker Arts Magnet School to determine what could be done to increase its effectiveness. The committee members felt that the increase in enrollment of primary students and the Little Rock School District adoption of the TERC mathematics program during the 1999-2000 school year necessitated providing additional support to the classroom teachers. Next, they brainstormed strategies that would provide additional support to classroom teachers. The committee suggested that the part- time mathematics teacher's position be increased to a full-time position. The principal requested that the Magnet Review Committee increase the math teaching positions at Booker Arts Magnet School to two full-time positions. The Magnet Review Committee approved the increase in math teaching positions. The committee then reviewed current research to identify interventions that would positively impact student achievement in the area of mathematics. Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde reviewed successful mathematics programs across the nation and reported their findings in "Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in America's Schools". They found that successful mathematics programs, "frequently utilized manipulatives, concrete materials, and real-world situations for optimal learning. These are the contexts that make understanding of mathematical ideas possible and provide a bridge to the more abstract symbolism that has maximal power and usefulness
(Zemelman, et al. 1998). They further observed, "The need to make decisions based on numerical information permeates society and provides motivation for working with real data", making a strong statement in favor of utilizing more meaningful, real-life problems in mathematics instruction (Zemelman, et al. 1998) The Mathematics Committee surveyed the research concerning the instruction of math procedures in an effort to develop an intervention to address this need. They found that current research in mathematics emphasized the need to focus primarily on problem solving and the development of problem-solving strategies rather than the memorization of facts when providing instruction to students. Issacs and Carroll cautioned educators, "We must remember that successful education involves both basic skill and higher-order processes" (Issacs and Carroll 1999). They further stated, "Helping students make connections between school mathematics and the real world, helping students develop conceptual understanding as well as procedural skills, helping students learn to explain their thinking and to understand others' explanationscan be achieved 35through a program that also leads to fact mastery" (Issacs and Carroll 1999). Rathmell agreed, "...teaching children thinking strategies facilitates their learning and retention of basic facts" (Rathmell 1978). Researchers offered several suggestions for implementing facts-based instruction. Issacs and Carroll recommended asking students to solve a problem without telling them how to solve it (Issacs and Carroll 1999). Carpenter recommended direct modeling (Carpenter, et al., 1993). Oral or mental counting strategies were recommended by several researchers (Resnick 1983, Carpenter and Moser 1984, Baroody and Ginsburg 1986, Siegler and Jenkins 1989). Thornton and Smith recommended asking children to share their problem-solving strategies with each other (Thornton and Smith 1988). Brownlee and Chazal found that delaying drills resulted in better understanding and less need for drill (Brownlee and Chazal 1935). The Mathematics Committee recognized that children enter kindergarten with varying degrees of proficiency in mathematics. This knowledge, coupled with the desire to provide the most relevant learning experiences in mathematics by using real-life experiences, prompted the committee to consider the various ways parents could reinforce mathematics instruction In the classroom by involving children in mathematical experiences at home. The committee then reviewed current research about utilizing parents as resources in mathematics instruction. Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde suggested having a Parents' Night as a means of informing parents about changes in the mathematics curriculum or program. They also suggested the Parents' Night as a means of helping parents to create materials to work with their children at home and to help them recognize materials they have already have available in their home to work with their children (Zemelman, et al. 1998). They stated, "Parents and the home environment of children of all ages can provide the richness of materials and opportunities for latent mathematical thinking to flourish" (Zemelman, et al. 1998). While parents might first feel reluctant to assist their children in mathematical practices at home, Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde recommend that educators encourage parents to serve as resources to the school. They stated, "In general, parents need only the desire to involve their children in talking and thinking about the meaningful and relevant mathematics they encounter each day" (Zemelman, et al. 1998). They further suggest, "Perhaps the best way for parents to help their children with mathematics is to send the clear message through their words and actions that mathematics is all around us, it is a vital part of our lives, and it is understandable with some effort. Let's do it together
it can be fun" (Zemelman, et al. 1998). 36The Mathematics Committee selected providing real-life math experiences, providing additional support for classroom instruction, and providing more effective instruction in the area of math procedures as interventions for improving student achievement in mathematics. The committee recognized the important role that parents play in their child's education and planned to utilize them as resources in mathematics instruction. 37School Joseph R. Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 2: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics Supporting Data: In 1998-99,17% of students scored at or above the "proficient" level on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam. In 1999-00, 317o of students scored at or above the 50*^ percentile of the Grade 5 SAT 9 Mathematics Total. 14% of black males, 207o of black females, 63% of white males, 31% of white females, 507o of other males, and 100% of other females scored at or above the 50^^ percentile on the grade 5 SAT 9 Mathematics Total. 66 4 of students scored at or above average on Problem Solving, and 44% of students scored at or above average on Procedures on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Mathematics test. In 1998-99, fourth quarter Criterion-Referenced Test Mathematics results indicated the following percentages of mastery, grade 2, 87%
grade 3, 75%
grade 4,187o
grade 5, 55%
and grade 6, 54%. In 1999-00, Spring ALT results indicated the following average RIT scores: grade 2,185
grade 3,195
grade 4, 203
and grade 5, 210. Gool(s): lOOYo of Booker Arts Magnet School students will perform at or above the "proficient" level on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam. 3865% of Booker Arts Magnet School students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50^ percentile on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Mathematics test. One-Year Benchmarks: At least 32% of Booker Arts Magnet School students (an increase of 8 students) will perform at or above the M proficient" level on the Grade 4 Mathematics Benchmark Exam. At least the following increases in the percentages and numbers of every subgroup of race and gender of students who perform at or above the 50^ percentile on the Grade 5 SAT 9 Mathematics test
Black males Black females White males White females Other males Other females Increase to 19.1% (5.1% increase or 2 students) Increase to 24.5% (4.5% increase or 2 students) Increase to 63.2% (0.2% increase or 1 student) Increase to 34.4% (3.4% increase or 1 student) Increase to 51.5% (1.5% increase or 1 student) Maintain 100% 39School Booker Arts Magnet Priority 2: Improve Achievement in Mathematics School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Provide Real-Life Math Experiences 3: : Actions
Persqn(s) 1. Utilize 100 Days of Math activities. 2. Utilize Math Learning Logs. 3. Integrate math benchmarks into fine arts activities
example-Business Unit in Visual Art. 4. Conduct various math-oriented community service projects
example-St. Judes Math-a-thon and Pennies for Pasta. 5. Involve students in running school bookstore and Accelerated Reader store. 6. Involve fifth grade GT students in holiday crafts business unit. 7. Conduct math-related field trips to businesses in the communityexample-banks, retail stores, factories. Reap^n^blev * E- K-First Grade Teachers K-Fifth Grade Teachers Fine Arts Specialists Merilyn Burruss Tina Brown Patsy Middleton Reading Committee Carolyn Huie Ken Milton K-Fifth Grade Teachers Timeline 8-24-00 to 6-1-01 8-24-01 to 6-1-02 8-24-00 to 6-1-01 8-24-00 to 6-1-01 8-24-00 to 6-1-01 8-24-00 to 6-1-01 8-24-2000 to 6-1-2001 40 Staff Development Donations VIPS $250 Materials for crafts $750 for Transportation Lee Ann Matson Dtetfict Business s ' Donation/. 6f&nVPTA Budget : Donations $250 $750School Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 2: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics Intervention: Provide Real-Life Math Experiences -'***. i*f Aft- s*
' '.AV . - ' 8. Monitor student progress throughout the year by utilizing LRSD criterion-referenced tests._________ 9. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002, f^rsoh(s) R^spPhsibie Cheryl Carson Second - Fifth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Math Committee nmelirie 1-10-01 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 41 ResPdrces "i fi' PRE w ->8: k-.vakg IBUBlnes^ Dotifttlon/ SrajigRrA
?
yj-.A-gy^^7j ,5*
" lSchool Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 2: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics Intervention: Provide Additional Support for Classroom Instruction fl*'. * * AciUdhs :V SV fX 1. Purchase and utilize new math software. 2. Provide curriculum mapping inservice to K-Fifth Grade teachers. 3. Utilize Vertical Teaming to close curriculum gaps while planning daily lessons. 4. Utilize parents as tutors when needed. 5. Provide workshops for parents. 6. Monitor student progress throughout the year by utilizing LRSD criterion-referenced tests. 7. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002. ^MpiSnsIhla Lou Alley Cheryl Carson Lynda Spencer Patsy Middleton Cheryl Carson Gall Hester Carolyn Huie MIco Rhines Lou Alley Math Specialists K-Fifth Grade Teachers K-Fifth Grade Teachers Math Committee Cheryl Carson Second-Fifth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Math Committee llihdlne 7-1-00 to 6-1-01 6-5-00 to 8-15-00 8-9-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 September 20000 March 2001 9-15-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 42 : RewuixeB n $3,666 for software Gail Hester PRE staff Development PRE VIPS poo for materials Gail Hester PRE w 9 kJ ' $3,000 $100School Improvement Plan School Booker Arts Magnet Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 2: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics intervention: Provide More Effective Instruction in the Area of Math Procedures .-I Actions >1*.: A

P6rsdh{s). Timeline SMI DlStrtct ^4^ Business DpnatiohZ 1. Form a committee to examine student achievement data in the area of math procedures.______________ 2. Disaggregate and analyze 1999-2000 SAT 9, CRT, ALT. and Grade 4 Benchmark Exam results to identify areas of need.___________ 3. Write a plan to improve instruction in the areas of computation, number facts, and rounding.______________ 4. Begin implementation of the plan to improve achievement in math procedures. Cheryl Carson Math Committee 4.
jiixXi 8-9-00 to 10-4-00 8-9-00 to 10-1-00 gg PRE :fiUd(}ei 5I-: GranVPTA budget 5. Utilize weekly Jostens lab reports to monitor student achievement in math procedures. 6. Monitor student progress throughout the year by utilizing LRSD criterion-referenced tests. 7. Conduct sum native evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002, Cheryl Carson Math Committee K-Fifth Grade Teachers Math Specialists Cheryl Carson First - Fifth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Second-Fifth Grade Teachers Cheryl Carson Math Committee 8-9-00 to 10-1-00 10-1-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 1-10-01 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 43 Math Department Patsy Middleton PRECHARACTER EDUCATION NARRATIVE The Character Education Committee had its first meeting on October 4, 1999. During this meeting, the committee disaggregated suspension data, examined attendance and achievement data of suspended students, and discussed areas of concern identified by parents, students, and teachers on the School Climate Survey. The committee also identified the criteria for a student to be considered at-risk" for developing behavior problems during a school year. "At- risk" was defined as having one or more office referrals during a school year. The Character Education Committee also met on December 13,1999, March 7, 2000, and April 13, 2000. An analysis of the suspension data for the 1996-97,1997-98, and 1998-99 school years indicated an increase in the number of students suspended and a decrease in the total number of suspensions over the three-year period. In 1996- 97, 23 students were suspended for a total of 70 suspensions. In 1997-98, 25 students were suspended for a total of 64 suspensions. In 1998-99, 33 students were suspended for a total of 51 suspensions. However, in 1999-2000, only 14 students were suspended for a total of 15 suspensions. (See Table 9). The data analysis also revealed a decrease in the average number of suspensions per suspended student over the four-year period. In 1996-97, the average number of suspensions per suspended student was 3.4. The number dropped to 2.5 in 1997- 98. In 1998-99, the average number of suspensions per suspended student dropped to 1.5. In 1999-2000, the average number of suspensions per student dropped to 1.1 (See Table 10). Additionally, the committee examined suspension rates for the 1996-97,1997-98,1998-99, and 1999-2000 school years. In 1996- 97, 3.8% of students received suspensions. The number increased to 4.3% in the 1997.98 school year. In 1998-99, 5.4% of students received at least one suspension. In 1999-2000, 2.6% of students received at least one suspension. (See Table 11). This comparison revealed a slight increase in the suspension rate over the first three years and a significant decrease in the fourth year. The Character Education Committee examined attendance and achievement data for each student suspended during the 1996-97,1997-98, and 1998-99 school years. This analysis indicated that 100% of students who had been suspended and who were excessively absent were below grade level. In addition, the Character Education Committee examined School Climate Survey results for the same three-year period
1996-97,1997-98, and 1998-99. 44The following common areas of concern for parents, students, and teachers were identified
"Students treat other students with respect", "Students treat teachers with respect", "Students take care of and respect their own property and that of other students", and "Most students obey the rules". School Climate Survey results for the 1999-2000 school year indicated that "Students show concern and respect for each other" were among the top concerns of students and teachers. The Character Education Committee was pleased that school-wide interventions had resulted in a decrease in the total number of suspensions and a decrease in the average number of suspensions per suspended student over the three-year period. However, the increase in the number of students receiving suspensions (from 23 to 33) during the same time period was identified as an area of concern. The examination of attendance, achievement, and suspension data also indicated another major area of concern. School Climate Survey results from the 1996-97,1997-98,1998-99 and 1999-2000 school years also consistently identified the areas of mutual respect among students, respect for teachers, and compliance with school rules as common concerns among parents, students, and teachers. The committee examined the overall program at Booker Arts Magnet School to determine how to address areas of concern related to school climate and how to continue the trend of decreasing student suspensions. The Character Education Committee then began to examine current research on modifying student behavior and working with "at-risk" children. Research confirmed the impact of student behavior on the climate of a school. Langlois and Zales stated, "...controlling behavior is the first requirement for creating an environment in which instruction could occur" (Langlois and Zales 1991). Lipsitz described successful schools for young adolescents as being, "environments that promote social development. They assume social development to include a multitude of characteristics
self-discipline, industriousness, respect for authority, perserverance, patience, honesty" (Lipsitz 1984). Societal changes over the last few decades have caused schools to have to reevaluate traditional methods for controlling student behavior. These societal changes have also greatly influenced children. Astin reported, "over the last two decades, adolescents have become more concerned for their own personal well-being and less concerned for the well-being of others" (Astin 1987). Lickona defined character education as, "the deliberate effort to cultivate virtue" (Lickona 1999). He further stated, "To be effective, character education 45 must be comprehensive, intentionally making use of every phase of school life as an opportunity to develop good character" (Lickona 1999). The Character Education committee concurred with Lickona and began looking at character education programs in use across the nation. They began with the premise that they would either select or create a character education program for Booker Arts Magnet. One committee member was enrolled in a graduate course on character education at University of Central Arkansas and shared information gathered from her coursework. The committee also received feedback from two staff members who had attended a Character-Centered Teaching workshop in December 1998. The committee also requested to make site visits at schools that were successfully implementing character education programs. The principal contacted Margaret Crank at the Arkansas Department of Education and asked her to recommend successful programs to visit. Site visits were made to Gardner Primary School in Hot Springs on February 28, 2000 and Lakewood Elementary in North Little Rock on March 1, 2000. The committee quickly reached consensus to implement Character-Centered Teaching beginning in the 2000-2001 school year. The Character Education Committee also felt that additional materials needed to be purchased to support the implementation of Character-Centered Teaching. As a result, increasing the amount of character education materials available to teachers was identified as another intervention. Additionally, the Character Education Committee felt that some direct intervention needed to take place with students identified as at-risk for developing behavior problems. Targeting at-risk students with an intervention program became another intervention for the reduction of suspensions and the improvement of school climate. The Character Education Committee identified tasks to be completed prior to the beginning of the 2000-2001 school year and worked to complete those tasks in July and August 2000. The committee has also requested to have the opportunity to visit Gardner Primary School again at the beginning of the 2000- 2001 school year. 46School Joseph R. Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 3: Implement Character Education Supporting Dota: In 1996-97, 23 students were suspended for a total of 79 suspensions. In 1997-98, 26 students were suspended for a total of 64 suspensions. In 1998-99, 33 students were suspended for a total of 51 suspensions. In 1999-2000,14 students were suspended for a total of 15 suspensions. In 1996-97, the average number of suspensions per suspended student was 3.4. In 1997-98, the average number decreased to 2.5 suspensions per suspended student. In 1998-99, the average number of suspensions per suspended student dropped to 1.5. In 1999-2000, the average number of suspensions per suspended student dropped to 1.1. In 1998-99, 65% of students who were suspended received more than one suspension. In 1999-2000,7% of students who were suspended received more than one suspension. In 1998-97, 3.8% of Booker Arts Magnet School students received suspensions. In 1997-98, the number increased to 4.3% of students receiving suspensions. In 1998-99, 5.4% of students received at least one suspension. In 1999-2000, 2.6% of students received at least one suspension. In the 1996-97,1997-98, and 1998-99 school years, 100% of students who were chronically absent and who had been suspended from school were below grade level in achievement. 47CCOE survey results for the 1996-97,1997-98, and 1998-99 school years indicated that Students treat other students with respect", "Students treat teachers with respect", "Students take care of and respect their own property and that of other students", and Most students obey the rules" were areas of concern for parents, students, and teachers. Goals: At least 987o of Booker Arts Magnet School's students will be suspension free. At least 95% of Booker Arts Magnet School's suspended students will receive only one suspension per year. One-Year Benchmarks: At least 97.5% of Booker Arts Magnet School students will be suspension-free (an increase of 1 student) during the 2000-2001 school year. At least 93.5% of Booker Arts Magnet School's suspended students (an increase of 1 student) will receive only one suspension during the 2000-2001 school year. 48School Booker Arts Magnet Priority 3: Implement Character Education School improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Target At-Risk Students with Intervention Program .f- 'S' 4 Rertori(si) jllmellhe Resources p'L a. 1. Identify at-risk students. ri'? i * 4 '"S. 2. Involve at-risk students in a mentoring group/club. 3. Provide counselor intervention for at- risk students. 4. Maintain close communication with parents of at-risk students. 5. Develop individual behavior plans for at-risk students, if necessary. 6. Provide incentives for at-risk students exhibiting appropriate behavior. 7. Monitor at-risk students progress on a quarterly basis utilizing referral forms. 8. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation: make adjustments for 2001-2002. Joyce Willingham Cheryl Carson Vivian Dooley Tammy Gingerich Vivian Dooley Tammy Gingerich Joyce Willingham Vivian Dooley Tammy Gingerich K-Fifth Grade Teachers Counselors Character Education Committee Joyce Willingham Cheryl Carson Cheryl Carson Character Education Committee 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 10-4-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 10-23-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 49 Parents Incentives Dr. Linda Watson ,ie^ . 2^ as ppnatlon/ ^rant/FIA .lU. DonationsSchool Booker Arts Magnet Priority 3
Implement Character Education School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Implement Character-Centered Teaching I?
.J_-k w < Adildjii t is-.. vM- s/- 1. Develop plan for implementing Character-Centered Teaching. 2. Present plan to staff. 3. Enlist parental support. 4. Enlist community support. 5. Implement plan. 6. Monitor implementation of plan. 7. Conduct summative evaluation of plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002.. F^raph(si Character Education Committee Character Education Committee Character Education Committee Character Education Committee Cheryl Carson Character Education Committee Cheryl Carson Character Education Committee Cheryl Carson Character Education Committee .Onieilite/ BS Resources r=^- 1 6-15-00 to 8-9-00 8-9-00 to 8-15-00 8-15-00 to 6-1-01 8-15-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 50 SSi Business i Donation/ Orartt/hTA -<Wn' sA-vSchool Booker Arts Magnet Priority 3: Implement Character Education School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Increase Amount of Character Education Materials .. Acuphs % BySiridsS Resources fiWonW- IWJ!".' AespBiwiBie. . 's'* 'cs* 1. Examine caxaiogs for Cnaracier of ( Mi Education materials. 2. Implement Internet search for Character Education materials. 3. Select and purchase Character Education materials. 4. Inservice faculty on the use of Character Education materials. 5. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002. Character Education Committee Character Education Committee Character Education Committee Cheryl Carson Lou Alley Character Education Committee Cheryl Carson Character Education Committee t Jr 6-15-00 to 10-1-00 6-15-00 to 10-1-00 6-15-00 to 10-1-00 8-9-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 51 S' / .2S_5. J? Dr. Bonnie Lesley Dr. Bonnie Lesley $5,000 for materials Gail Hester ... Donation/ z^ratftfMtA ii $5,000STUOENT ATTENDANCE NARRATIVE The Student Attendance Committee held its first meeting on October 4,1999. During this meeting, the committee examined attendance data for all students, achievement data for excessively absent students, achievement and attendance data for suspended students, and attendance data for staff. The Student Attendance Committee also identified the criteria for a student to be considered excessively absent during a school year. "Excessively absent" was defined as being absent 16 or more days during a school year. These absences could be excused absences, uncxcused absences, or a combination of both kinds of absences. The Student Attendance Committee also met on October 11,1999 and November 29, 1999. An analysis of attendance data indicated that 13% of students were excessively absent in 1996-97,11 % of students were excessively absent in 1997-98, and 8% of students were excessively absent in 1998-99 (See Table 12). The Average Daily Attendance for 1996-97 was 578.5 students. The Average Daily Attendance in 1997-98 was 593.6 students. In 1998-99, the Average Daily Attendance was 606.4 students (See Table 13). The percentage of student attendance during the third quarter of 1996-97 was 96.29%. The Third Quarter Average Attendance for 1997-98 was 95.06%. In 1998-99, the Third Quarter Average Attendance was 96.18%. In 1999- 2000, the Third Quarter average attendance was 96.57%. The average Third Quarter average attendance for these years was 96.03. (See Table 12). An examination of the achievement levels of currently enrolled students that were excessively absent during the 1996-97,1997-98, and/or 1998-99 school years indicated that 28% of the students were at or above grade level in achievement. Seventy-two percent of currently enrolled students who were excessively absent one or more of these years were below grade level in achievement. Early Prevention of School Failure scores, SAT 9 Basic Battery scores. Little Rock School District Criterion- Referenced Test scores, and Grade 4 Benchmark Exam scores were utilized to assess achievement. Analysis of the attendance, achievement, and suspension data indicated that 100% of suspended students who were excessively absent were below grade level in achievement. The Student Attendance committee also analyzed data on staff attendance for the 1997-98 and 1998-99 school years. Data for the 1996- 97 school year was not available. The attendance rate was based on the number of sick leave and personal leave days taken per staff member compared to the number of contracted workdays. The analysis for the two- year period indicated a consistent rate of attendance among staff members95% for both the 1997-98 and 1998-99 school years. The data was disaggregated by grade level, subject area, and position to determine whether patterns of absenteeism existed. In summary, the Student Attendance Committee was concerned about the percentage of students who were excessively absent while also recognizing that this percentage had declined each year. The committee felt that improving the attendance of excessively absent students would positively impact their student achievement. The committee also decided to refer the matter of improving staff attendance to the building level and district level administrators for their consideration. The Student Attendance Committee next began to closely examine components of Booker Arts Magnet Schools attendance program to determine how the existing program might be improved to increase student attendance. In order to identify interventions that would most likely be successful in improving student attendance, research was reviewed. The survey of research confirmed the impact of student attendance on academic achievement. Hegner stated, "The success of the educational process depends on the presence of pupils in the classroom, continuity of instruction, class participation, and well-planned instructional activities under the guidance of a competent insti^uctor" (Hegner 1987). Ediger concurred, "When students are tardy or absent.. .sequential learning cannot occur, subject matter and skills cannot be developed, and much student talent is wasted" (Ediger 1987). Ratigan and Kube stated, "Students who are absent from class miss out on significant educational opportunities.. .Absenteeism costs billions of dollars due to lost instructional time" (Ratigan and Kube 1991). Research confirmed that a correlation does exist between student attendance and academic achievement. A study conducted at North Scott High School in Eldridge, Iowa revealed that classroom teachers recognized that their students' academic achievement improved due to increased daily attendance (Ratigan and Kube 1991). Research identified two elements that were common to programs successful in encouraging student attendance. Bolos and Lincoln agreed with 53Kubc and Ratigan that parental involvement was essential to the success of attendance programs (Bolos and Lincoln 1983, Kube and Ratigan 1991). The use of incentives to improve student attendance was determined to be successful according to Bolos, Lincoln, and Goldman (Bolos and Lincoln 1983, Goldman 1989). Goldman reported another significant result of implementing a program to increase student attendance, "Aside from the obvious benefits of having the kids in school consistently, the notion of heightened awareness about attendance has spread into a more general attitude of improved scholastic achievement" (Goldman 1989). The Student Attendance Committee selected targeting chronic absentees with an intervention program, providing incentives to students to encourage perfect attendance, and involving parents in encouraging perfect attendance as interventions for improving student attendance. It was the consensus of the committee that students have to be present to maximize learning. Kube and Ratigan summed up the observations of the Student Attendance Committee by saying, "With absenteeism down, learning can only go up!" (Kube and Ratigan 1991). 54School Joseph R, Booker Arts Magnet School Improvement Plan Year 2000-2001 Priority 4: Increase Student Attendance Supporting Data: In 1996-97,137o of students (78 of 603) were excessively absent (absent 16 or more days). In 1997-98,11% of students (66 of 597) were excessively absent. In 1998-99, 8% (46 of 606) students were excessively absent. 28% of currently enrolled students who were excessively absent during the 1996-97,1997-98, and/or 1998-99 school years are at or above grade level in achievement. 72% of currently enrolled students who were excessively absent one or more of the three previous years are below grade level in achievement. The daily average attendance for 1996-97 was 578.5, for 1997-98 was 593.57, and for 1998-99 was 606.37, The Third Quarter Average Attendance for 1996-97 was 96.29%, for 1997-98 was 95.06%, and for 1998-99 was 96.18%, and for 1999-00 was 96.57. The four-year average was 96.03%. 6oal(s): The average daily attendance rate of Booker Arts Magnet School students will be at least 984. At least 95% of Booker Arts Magnet School students will attend school regularly. 55One-Year Benchmarks: The average daily attendance rate of Booker Arts Magnet School students will increase by at least 0.16 percent (an increase to 96.73%) during the 2000-2001 school year as measured by Third Quarter Average Attendance. At least 92.3% of Booker Arts Magnet School students (an increase of 2 students) will attend school regularly by accumulating no more than 15 absences during the 2000-2001 school year. 56School Booker Arts Magnet Priority 4: Increase Student Attendance School Improvement Plan Year 2000 - 2001 Intervention: Target Students Who are Excessively Absent with Intervention Program TT-T * hRj < % * _ FjfteXiW)./, ? J V ^nmellrte 1. Identify students who are excessively absent. Cheryl Carson Tisa Manley 'fr.W> District
2. Identify bubble students (those students who are in danger of being excessively absent.) _______ 3. Provide individual counseling sessions with identified students. Cheryl Carson Tisa Manley 4.Initiate parent contact each time identified student is absent. Vivian Dooley Tammy Gingerich Tisa Manley 5. Provide rewards on a frequent basis for identified students who improve attendance._____________ 6. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make' adjustments for 2001 -2002. Attendance Committee Cheryl Carson Attendance Committee 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 8-21-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 Burliness IdUdgU' -I vt ?PuS'. ... Dbhationz,: ..Orantil.TA i 57 Donations DonationsSchool Improvement Plan School Booker Arts Magnet School Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 4: Increase Student Attendance Intervention: Provide Incentives to Encourage Perfect Attendance S?'T 'i i' 3 % tt.: Sr ti- 1. Recognize students and staff monthly with a perfect attendance bulletin board._________________ 2. Provide monthly perfect attendance incentives by grade levels._______________________ 3. Solicit student input in the selection of quarterly school-wide perfect attendance incentives. 4. Provide quarterly school-wide perfect attendance incentives. i /rtV rS: V H: n> Attendance Committee K-Fifth Grade Teachers Attendance Committee Attendance Committee 5. Conduct summative evaluations of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001-2002.________ Cheryl Carson Attendance Committee 10-2-00 to 6-1-01 10-2-00 to 6-1-01 10-20-00 to 6-1-01 10-20-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 *< T 1 Z . VIPS 58 Survey $500 for incentives $500 Business. DondtidhA OranVPTA DonationsSchool improvement Plan School Booker Arts Magnet Year 2000 - 2001 Priority 4: Increase Student Attendance Intervention: Involve Parents in Encouraging Perfect Attendance ^.t 11*! s 1' B Pd^on(a| heapoiisibla Timeline it'y. ResOUrcies Business I*' 1. Inform parents of the impact of attendance on achievement via PTA meetings, newsletters, and memos. 2. Provide incentives to parents to attend student performances and parent conferences. 3. Design logo promoting good attendance to be placed on all communication to parents. 4. Provide information to parents about alternate means of transportation
example-bus and taxi. 5. Utilize school directory for carpool information. 6. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation
make adjustments for 2001 -2002. Cheryl Carson Attendance Committee PTA Ken Milton Attendance Committee Cheryl Carson Attendance Committee Parents Cheryl Carson Attendance Committee 10-19-00 to 6-1-01 11-18-00 to 6-1-01 11-1-00 to 6-1-01 11-1-00 to 6-2-01 8-5-00 to 6-1-01 6-1-01 to 6-15-01 Donations PTA $50 - Cards Directory- PTA Budget W iS'-'
59 $50 Donatioh/ Grdht/PTA , Donations PTAN Hr>2> t w --5 ^0/ '-J -tk 1 1 1 Sx ff^ -h r e e 4D(, to S t mill . ^-Mlll ' tl 11
'S>- St'dfcujalL /I2. UO 1 III Ifi8 lb'l J03 ID^I IDi> IDS IDZ IDI 1 r s PraLibrOJ </// j w Hid p-> tint Main Hill bO 310 3/Z Libnjr^ ^o't 311 - > , bJ ffAilujay 1.0^ zdg f4alli^ay' J9<- 3dS y 7 z)s c 2)3> Sor Son s/aewxIR rou^d r-3o 2DS^ ZDI -------< 1J)Z. R C t 3C>% 3o^ 30/ 3d3 5I d e. u) a K 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 8, 9. BIBLIOGRAPHY Arkansas State Department of Education. 1998. Effective Literacy." Available: http: www.arkedu.state.ar.us. Astin, A., K. Green, and W. Zorn. 1987. The American Freshman: 20 Year Trends. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Higher Education Research Institute. Baroody, A. and H. Ginsburg. 1986. "The Relationship between Initial Meaning and Mechanical Knowledge of Arithmetic." In J. Hievert, ed. Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Barr, R., and W. Parrett. 1995. Hope at Last for At-Risk Youth. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Bracey, G. 1995. Reading Recovery: Is it Effective? Is it Cost- Effective?" Phi Delta Kappan 76: 493-494. Brooks, P. 1993. Research Summary: Accelerated Reader. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Advantage Learning Systems. Brownell. W. and C. Chazal. 1935. The Effects of Premature Drill in Third Grade Arithmetic." Journal of Educational Research 29:17-28. Carpenter, T, E. Ansell, M. Franke, E. Fennema, and L. Weisbeck. 1993. "Models of Problem Solving: A Study of Kindergarten Children's Problem-Solving Processes." Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 24: 428-441. Carpenter, T. and J. Moser. 1984. The Acquisition of Addition and Subtraction Concepts in Grades One through Three." Journal For Research in Mathematics Education 15: 179-202. Clay, M. 1975. What Did I Write?. Auckland, NZ: Heinemann. 6110. Dorn, L, C. french, and T. Jones. 1998. Apprenticeship in Literacy: Transitions Across Reading and Writing. York, ME: Stenhouse. 11. Ediger, M. 1987. School Dropouts, Absenteeism, and Tardiness." Viewpoints 87
13. 12. Goldman, J. 1989. "Learn to Earn! Growing Number of Schools Offer Cash, Prizes to Spur Students." The School Administrator 46:12-14. M 13. Hegner, M. 1987. Absenteeism PreventionA Model for Intervention. NASSP Bulletin 71:125-126. 14. Issacs, A. and W. Carroll. 1999. Strategies for Basic-facts Instruction." Teaching Children Mathematics 5: 1-17. 15. Juel, C. 1988. Learning to Read and Write: A Longitudinal Study of fifty-four Children from first Through fourth Grade." Journal of Educational Psychology 80: 437-447. 16. Kube, B., and G. Ratigan. 1991. All Present and Accounted for." The American School Board Journal 178: 22-23. 17. Langlois, D. and C. Zales. 1991. Anatomy of a Top Teacher. The American School Board Journal 178: 44-46. 18. Lickona, T. 1999. Religion and Character." Phi Delta Kappan 81: 21-27. 19. Lipsitz, J. 1984. Successful Schools for Young Adolescents. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. w 20. Lyons, C. 1991. Reading Recovery. Questions Classroom Teachers Ask. The Reading Teacher 31: 384-408. 21. Osbourne, P. and E. Adams, 1998. Research Summary: Accelerated Reader. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Advantage Learning Systems. 22.Paul, T. 1992. National Research Study and Theory of Reading Practices. Madison, WI: The Institute for Academic Excellence. 6223. Paul, T. 1993. National Study of LiteratureBased Reading: How Literature-Based Reading Improves Both Reading and Math Ability. Madison, WI: The Institute for Academic Excellence. 24. Pinnell, G. 1995. Reading Recovery: A Review of Research: Educational Report #23, Special Topics Issue. Columbus, Ohio. Martha L. King Language and Literacy Center. 25. Rathmell, E. 1978. "Using Thinking Strategies to Teach the Basic Facts." In Developing Computational Skills. 1978 Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston, VA: Nation Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 26. Ratigan, &. and B. Kube. 1991. "Developing a Student Attendance Policy that Works." ERS Spectrum 91: 37-41. 27. Resnick, L 1983. "A Developmental Theory of Number Understanding." In H. Ginsburg, ed. The Development of Mathematical Thinking. New York, NY: Academic Press. 28. Siegler, R. and E. Jenkins. 1989. How Children Discover New Strategies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 29. Thornton, C. and P. Smith. 1988. Action Research: Strategies for Learning Subtraction Facts." Arithmetic Teacher 35: 8-12. 30. Zemelman, S., H. Daniels, and A. Hyde. 1998. Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in America's Schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. 63BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Fourth Grade Literacy Benchmark Exam 1997-1999 Table 1 1997-98 1998-99 BM BF WM WF OM OF 15% 4% 35% 30% 0% 33% 0% 35% 58% 63% 0% 100% Total 20% 39% BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Fifth Grade Students Scoring At or Above the 50^^ Percentile in SAT 9 Total Reading Scores 1997-2000 Table 2 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 BM BF WM WF OM OF 16% 27% 43% 61% 100% 67% 15% 15% 50% 62% 100% 33% 7% 24% 75% 47% 07o 100% Total 40% 35% 37% 64BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Fifth Grade Students Scoring At or Above Average in SAT 9 Reading Vocabulary and Comprehension Tabic 3 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Vocabulary Comprehension 65% 72% 66%> BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Mastery on Fourth Quarter Criterion-Referenced Reading Test 1998 -1999 Table 4 Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth 66% 727o 867o 847o 65BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced on Fourth Grade Mathematics Benchmark Exam 1997-1999 Tabic 5 1997-98 1998-99 BM BF WF OF 10% 5% 30% 20% 100% 33% 57a 0% 5Z7a 38% Q7a 100% Total 17% 39% BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Fifth Grade Students Scoring At or Above the 50^^ Percentile in SAT 9 Total Math Scores 1997-2000 Table 6 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 8M BF WM WF OM OF 14% 47., 337o 23% 100% Z57a 14% 4% 33% 237o 1007o Z57a 147o 207o 63% 317o 50% 1007o Total 18% 18% 31% 66BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Students Scoring At or Above Average In SAT 9 Math Problem Solving and Procedures 1997 - 2000 Table 7 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 Problem Solving Procedures 73% 36% 637o 38% 66%, 44% BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Mastery on Fourth Quarter Criterion-Referenced Math Test 1998 -1999 Table 8 Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth 87% 75% 187o 557o 547o 67BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Number of Students Suspended and Number of Suspensions 1996 - 2000 Table 9 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 Number Of Students Suspended Number Of Suspensions 23 79 26 64 33 51 14 15 BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Average Number of Suspensions Per Suspended Students 1996 - 2000 Table 10 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 Average Number of Suspensions 3.4 2.5 1.5 1.1 BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Students Receiving at Least One Suspension Table 11 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 Percentage of Students 3.8 4.3 5.4 2.6 68BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Percentage of Students Absent 16 or More Days 1996 -1999 Tabic 12 1996 - 97 1997 - 98 1998 -99 137o 117o 8% BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Average Daily Attendance 1996 - 1999 Table 13 1996 - 97 1997 - 98 1998 - 99 578.50 593.57 606.37 BOOKER ARTS MAGNET SCHOOL Third Quarter Average Attendance 1996 - 2000 Table 14 1996 - 97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 96.29% 95.06% 96.18% 96.57 69BradyL i I 4 II I te .- >1 ' I "d i*i 4 Ir* !-*JE i^S w I Saaaia^MBjglMiMBMMaftMWMMMMII M IM jL'i^iyrc^ ^EPCQ<iscfKoo. (0X50:^00: I 27zs s-tiuknts, staff, aru I coTn/nz/Tiii^ of I Braxiy E^Cementary SofiooC(iave. I fi-i^fL. e?(pc.ctations. bc-Cicx^c^ tfiat ad students can Become. i successful Cife Cong Ceamers. fwj p Ek*' [iW? L
-^ K| .9 >1 I ft * ft ^i k IStudent Test Results Test Type: Stanford Achievement Grade 5 Testing Category: Math Average Scale Score: 650 Median National Percentile: 16 Average NCE Score: 33 Students Tested: 39 Students Not Tested 9 Percent of students scoring in each group 1-25 62 26-50 21 51-75 15 76-99 3LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BRADY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2000-2001 PRIORITY 1
To improve student achievement in literacy. SUPPORTING DATA: State Grade 4 Benchmark ACTAAP Exam SAT 9 Grade 5 Total Reading LRSD Grades 2-5 ALT 19% proficient or above 29% above 50* percentile proficient or above GOAL
Grade 4 Benchmark ACTAAP Exam SAT 9 Grade 5 Reading LRSD Grades 2-5 ALT 100% proficient or above 65% at or above 50* percentile 100% proficient or above BENCHMARK
Grade 4 Benchmark ACTAAP 8 points 8.1% or 4 students from basic and below to proficient and advanced. SAT 9 Grade 5 Reading 7 points *27% or 11 students from lowest quartile to 2^ and 3*^ quartile. *9% or 4 students from 2* to 3"* quartile. *13% or 5 students from 3"* quartile to highest quartile. LRSD Grade 2-5 ALT INTERVENTION: Success for All Reading Program, Professional Development for teacher Pre-Kindergarten - 5* grades, tutors (peer, after school, volunteers), Family Math-Science-Literacy Nights, Parent Center. Math Investigation In Service for 4* and 5* Grade Parents. _______________________________________________________________BRADY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN ACTIONS PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE (STARTING ENDING DATES) SOURCES OF FUNDING District Title 1 RESOURCES 1. Develop an individual education plan for students basic and below,__________ 2. Provide professional development for certified staff in SFA implementation and refresher classes.__________ 3. Provide three Family Math-Science-Literacy Night activities for parents and students._____________ 4. Recruit tutors (peer, volunteers) to assist students.________________ 5. Conduct weekly Family Support Meetings.________ 6. Monitor and adjust plans as needed to ensure increased student achievement. _______ Ada Keown
Classroom teachers
Aimee Littrell Speech teacher_______ Veta Flanagan Judy Milam August - September 2000 August 2000 - January 2001 N/A N/A APIG OTHER N/A SAT-9 Test Scores ALT Test Scores $13,05 5.00 John Hopkins University Memphis Colette Bell Veta Flanagan Ada Keown Verna Scrubbs Susan Crosby Ada Keown________ Family Support Team Ada Keown Campus Leadership Team February 2001 - April 2001 September 2000 - Ongoing September 2000 - Ongoing September 2000 - Ongoing N/A N/A N/A $300.0 0 N/A N/A N/A i N/A N/A N/A IRC VIPs Office Special Education Department PRE Department
ALT teacher made test
Report cards.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BRADY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2000-2001 PRIORITY 2: To improve student achievement in mathematics SUPPORTING DATA: State Grade 4 Benchmark ACTAAP Exam SAT 9 Grade 5 Total Mathematics LRSD Grade 2-5 ALT Mathematics 6% proficient or above 20% above 50*** percentile proficient or above GOAL: Grade 4 Benchmark ACTAAP Exam SAT 9 Grade 5 Mathematics LRSD Grades 2-5 ALT Mathematics 100% proficient or above 65% at or above 50*** percentile 100% proficient or above BENCHMARK: Grade 4 Benchmark Mathematics SAT 9 Grade 5 Mathematics 9 points 8 points 9.4% or 5 students from basic and below to proficient or above *43% or 18 students form lowest quartile to 2* and 3* quartile. *3% or 1 student from 2* to 3*^ quartile. 25% or 10 students from 3*^ to highest quartile. LRSD Grades 2-5 ALT Mathematics INTERVENTION
Professional Development for teachers in Pre-Kindergarten, provide tutors (peer, after school, volunteers). Family Math-Science-Literacy Nights, Parent Center.____________________________________________ACTIONS 1. Select a committee of teacher to explore professional development that would meet the needs of Brady students._________ 2. Develop an individual education plan for students basic and below.__________ 3. Invite District math Specialist to in-service tutors for students basic and below.__________________ 4. Design take-home materials for the parent center in coordination with the District Math Curriculum. BRADY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE Ada Keown Campus Leadership Team Mary Wood Colette Bell Ann Harrod Eva Young Ada Keown Colette Bell Becky Hight TIMELINE (STARTING ENDING DATES) October 2000 August 2000 August 2000 January 2001 - Ongoing SOURCES OF FUNDING RESOURCES District TMel $300.00 APIG OTHER LRSD Staff Developmen PRE Department Math Department IRC Math Department IRC PRE Department Math Department PRE DepartmentLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BRADY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2000-2001 PRIORITY 3
To improve parental/community involvement. SUPPORTING DATA: 1999 - 2000 VIPS Hours Statistics shows Brady had 979 Vt volunteer hours from March 1,1999 - February 28, 2000. GOAL: Brady Elementary will show an increase in parental involvement by 20%. BENCHMARK: 100% of Brady parents will be actively involved in our school activities. Intervention increase parental contact time through expanded participation in academics and/or school activities. INTERVENTION: Family Math/Science Literacy Night, Parent Center - Volunteer tutors. Grandparents Day Fall carnival, PTA Open House, Field Day, PTA Program__________________________________________________________ACTIONS 1. Conduct a preschool parent meeting for PreKindergarten and Kindergarten.____________ 2. Provide PTA Programs with performances by students._________________ 3. Enlist parents and community volunteers as resources speakers._______ 4. Schedule special events: Science Fair Book Fair Juice on the Curve Open House Chess club PTA Program Fall Carnival Field Day Career Day SECME Club________ 5. Schedule parent inservices on the Benchmark Exam. BRADY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE Pre-Kindergarten and Kindergarten
Ms. Daniel
and Ms. Keown Ms. Crosby Classroom Teachers PTA Board_____________ PTA Board Campus Leadership Team Brady staff Daniel, Young, Scrubbs, and Clifford TIMELINE (STARTING ENDING DATES) August 2000 October 2000 - Ongoing August 2000 September 2000 - May 2000 February 2001 SOURCES OF FUNDING RESOURCES Diitrict $50.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A Title 1 APIG OTHER Parents/T eachers/Counse N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A PTA Board VIPS Office Parents Resource PRECarver ACARVER MAGNET SCHOOL Fax:501-3242421 Sep 2b DU li:3b K. Ul/Ul School Name: Carver Monnet Elementary School Number of Teachers: 44 Number of Support Staff: 26 Attendance: (% of average daily attendance: maximum = 100%) 96 7 Enrollment: 514 Developmental Reading Readiness Assessment - Percent of students in grades K - 2 who have developed appropriate reoding readiness skills for their grade level: Kindergarten: 100% First 6rade: 79% Second Grade: 80% Percent of PTA members last year: 590 Volunteer hours last year: 10,344 Percent of teachers with Masters Degree: 50% Percent of teachers with 9* years of teaching experience: 61V Discipline and Safety - Percent of students NOT receiving o reportable discipline sanction: 100% (By state low, discipline sanctions must be reported and include acts involving drugs, ossoults, alcohol, weapons or gongs.) School Improvement Pions - The following ore priorities for our school and ore included in our School Improvement Plan. The complete School Improvement Plan is ovoiloble in the office and Includes specific actions and resources needed for implementation. MISSION Carver is a school where children come firSt! Caring Staff, parents and community work together to insure a quality academic ond social education for oil students. Our five priorities for school improvement ore: 1. To increase student achievement in reoding/writing literacy. 2. To increase student achievement in mathematics. 3. To improve student discipline. 4. To improve student and Stoff attendance. 5. To increase the number of personal professional development hours.I I. n. Purpose, Core Beliefs, Vision, Mission and Coals School and Community History ( m. Change at Carver IV. ACSIP Priority Team Structure V. /ACSIP Targets I Activities VI. The Plan A. Reading ! Writing Literacy B. Mathematics C. Discipline D. Attendance E. Professional Development it VC.I 4- La / a IVtUIIIZ ft A (V)U^IIC- I I 4. C-!...! Purpose for being here: All children should leave Carver with a sense of value. Core Beliefs 1. 2. 3. 4. All children are teachable and lovable, and it is our job as professionals to find and implement ways each child learns academically and behaviorally. All children learn better in a loving, nurturing, accepting and structured environment. All children and parents should take ownership and personal responsibility for becoming life-long learners. We believe that lead management is necessary and facilitates movement toward the development of a quality school. Shared Vision Carver Magnet Elementary School will be a school characterized by: ( Effective teams composed of staff, students, and parents Enriched, diverse, spacious, functional, learning environment Capable students of good character Enriched, personalized, state-of-the-art educational program that meets both the cognitive and affective needs of all stakeholders Producing results of high quality Mission Statement Carver is a school where children come first! Caring staff, parents and community work together to insure a quality academic and social education for oil students. Coals: / 1. High expectations: Teachers enthusiastically accept the challenge to teach all students believing that all will learn through active participation in a process-focused curriculum. 2. Monitoring and Assessment: The staff at Carver will strive to improve student performance and reduce achievement disparity through instructional programs, staff development, and multiple assessment techniques. 3. School Climate: Carver radiates a safe, healthy, orderly purposeful atmosphere, conducive to learning, and free from the threat of physical harm. It will have a full enrollment and cohesiveness among diverse groups. 4. Parent and Community Involvement: Parents and other members of the community are involved in significant roles that support the accomplishment of the Carver vision.I C.rl- H r.r. / In 1924, the block citizens of east Little Rock established a four-room school and named it to honor Dr. George Washington Carver, a world-famous inventor, educator, and scientist. Today's east Little Rock's George Washington Carver Magnet Elementary, built in 1988, has evolved into a beautiful facility with twenty - four classrooms and eleven specialty areas. The foresight of the founders and the relevance to our theme of mathematics and science education allowed us to keep the name in honor of Dr. Carver who dedicated his life to serving mankind. Carver Magnet Elementary is located in a lower socioeconomic, predominately black community in the industrial section of east Little Rock. The process of restructuring the original Carver Elementary to the present Carver Magnet Elementary has been a challenging yet rewarding experience for all of those involved. The "old" Carver Elementary located on Apperson gained a reputation as the most difficult school to desegregate in Little Rock School Disdrict. An old neglected school building, high susp
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.