School Plan  
   

C. D. FRANKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
1321 FOSTER ST, ASHDOWN, AR 71822

Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

2009-2010


 

Vision: The vision of the Ashdown School District is to unite parents, community, and staff in creating an environment of excellence and pride where students will choose to be successful.

Mission: Committed
Dedicated school
Family
Responding
According to
Needs and
Knowing
Success by

Providing
Research based
Instruction and
Demonstrating
Excellence

 

Grade Span: 2-3 Title I: Title I Schoolwide School Improvement: SI_2

Table of Contents

Priority 1: Literacy
    Goal: By March 31, 2010, there will be a 25% increase in the number of students proficient in our combined and African American populations in multiple choice practical passages and open response using content passages. We also will raise writing scores, particularly in the areas of open response questions and by emphasizing content and style in written response, as measured/evidenced by the comparison of the level of proficiency on 3rd target assessment for 2009-2010.
Priority 2: Mathematics
    Goal: By March 31, 2010, there will be a 10% increase in the number of students proficient in our combined and African American populations in multiple choice and performance in the areas of number and operations and geometry as measured/evidenced by the 3rd target assessment for 2009-2010.
Priority 3: Special Education
    Goal: To remain non-identified as being disproportionate
Priority 4: Wellness and Health
    Goal: Enforce standards regarding physical activity as mandated by the state.
 


Priority 1: To meet or exceed AYP standards developed by Arkansas Department of Education.
Supporting Data:
  1. Benchmark-3RD GRADE LITERACY EXAM.    Report Created:	September
    1, 2009
    
    2007-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:
    
    •	120 Students:44.2% of Combined Population.
    The lowest identified areas for the Combined Population were:  Open
    Response in the content area and Content Passages in Multiple Choice.
    •	36 Students:30.6% of African American.
    The lowest identified areas for African American were:	Open Response in
    the Content area and Content Passages in Multiple Choice.
    •	3   Students:  N/A% of Hispanics.
    •	80 Students:51.3% of Caucasian.
    The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were:  Open Response in the
    Content Area and Content Passages in Multiple Choice.
    •	67 Students:31.3% of Economically Disadvantaged.
    The lowest identified areas for Economically Disadvantaged students were: 
    Open Response in the Content area and Content Passages in Multiple Choice.
    
    •	  . Students:  N/A% of LEP. 
    •	10 Students:0% of Students with Disabilities.
    
    2008-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:
    
    •	101 Students:58.4% of Combined Population.
    The lowest identified areas for the Combined Population were:  Open
    Response in the Content Area and Content Passages in Multiple Choice.
    •	37 Students:43.2% of African American.
    The lowest identified area for African Americans was:  Open Response in
    the Content Area.
    •	2 Students:100% of Hispanics.
    •	62 Students:66.1% of Caucasian Students.
    The lowest identified areas for the Caucasian Population was:  Open
    Response in the Content Area.
    •	63 Students:49.2% of Economically Disadvantaged.
    The lowest identified area for Economically Disadvantaged population was: 
    Open Response in the Content Area.
    •	0 Students:  N/A% of LEP.
    •	12 Students:16.7% of Students with Disabilities.
    
    2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:
    
    115 students: 56% of Combined Population
    The lowest identified areas for the Combined Population were:  Open
    Response and Multiple Choice both in the Content Area.
    
    33 Students:36% of African American.
    The lowest identified areas for African Americans were:  Open Response and
    Multiple Choice both in the Content Area.
    
    78 Students:66% of Caucasian Students.
    The lowest identified areas for the Caucasian Population were:	Open
    Response and Multiple Choice both in the Content Area.
    
    69 Students:46% of Economically Disadvantaged.
    The lowest identified area for Economically Disadvantaged population were:
     Open Response and Multiple Choice both in the Content Area.
    
    TREND DATA:
    
    On an average of 3 years (2007-2009), the lowest identified areas for
    combined and all subgroups were Open Response in the Content Area and
    Content Passages in Multiple Choice.
    
  2. DIBELS and DEVELOPMENTAL READING ASSESSMENT data for CD Franks
    Elementary School 07-08 School Year.
    
    2ND GRADE
    
    52% of the combined population was proficient on the Oral Reading Fluency
    Assessment
    
    76% of the combined population was proficient on the Developmental Reading
    Assessment.
    
    3RD GRADE
    
    49% of the combined population was proficient on the Oral Reading Fluency
    Assessment.
    
    54% of the combined population was proficient on the Developmental Reading
    Assessment.
    
    DIBELS and DEVELOPMENTAL READING ASSESSMENT data for CD Franks Elementary
    School 08-09 School Year.
    
    2nd Grade
    
    52% of the combined population was proficient on the Oral Reading Fluency
    Assessment
    
    62% of the combined population was proficient on the Developmental Reading
    Assessment.
    
    3rd Grade
    
    50% of the combined population was proficient on the Oral Reading Fluency
    Assessment.
    
    61% of the combined population was proficient on the Developmental Reading
    Assessment.
    
  3. NORM REFERENCED TEST-IOWA TEST OF BASIC SKILLS AND SAT 10.
    
    Number Tested and Percent of Students Scoring At/Above 50th Percentile.
    
    2ND GRADE
    
    SPRING 2007
    
    113 students:
    43.4% of the Combined population were proficient for Reading Comprehension
    
    
    SPRING 2008
    
    108 students:
    39.8% of the Combined population were proficient for Reading
    Comprehension.
    
    SPRING 2009
    
    90 students:
    71% of the Combined population were proficient for Reading Comprehension.
    
    3RD GRADE
    
    SPRING 2007
    
    123 Students:
    55.3% of the Combined population were proficient for Reading
    Comprehension.
    
    
  4. AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE
    
    Second and Third grade average daily attendance:
    2007 - 94.6% 
    2008 - 94.5%
    2009 - 93.7
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
     
     
     
Goal By March 31, 2010, there will be a 25% increase in the number of students proficient in our combined and African American populations in multiple choice practical passages and open response using content passages. We also will raise writing scores, particularly in the areas of open response questions and by emphasizing content and style in written response, as measured/evidenced by the comparison of the level of proficiency on 3rd target assessment for 2009-2010.
Benchmark In 2008-09, AYP was not met for combined population and subgroups. In 2009-10, we expect 72% of all student populations to be proficient or advanced by the end of the school year.
Intervention: PHONICS AND WORD STUDY (K-2 and Remedial)-Phonics will include spelling strategies which address class needs based on the DSA assessment taken from WORD JOURNEYS by Kathy Ganske. This is the same program used in Arkansas Reading First and is aligned with the ELA Frameworks and scientifically based reading research. The core phonics program will be comprised of the accumulation of lessons from Arkansas Reading Excellence Project. Teachers will present explicit and systematic phonics instruction through daily lessons with an emphasis on features of the letter naming or within word stages based on the research provided by Kathy Ganske. Students will reproduce words quickly using the letter cards to promote fluency.
Scientific Based Research: (National Reading Panel Report (2000)' {Reading First (2001). WORD JOURNEYS, by Kathy Ganske, published by The Guilford Press NY in 2000. "Classroom Instruction that Works.", Marzano, Robert J., 2001
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan- Instruction will begin with an activity to continue refining students' phonemic awareness abilities and will continue with a focused lesson on a spelling strategy based on the results of the Developmental Spelling Assessment. These lessons will be carried out using letter cards and picture/sound sorts. Students will be given the opportunity weekly to Sort and Classify which is identified by Marzano as an effective instructional strategy. Resources will include, but not limited to, pocket charts, magnetic dry erase boards, student dry erase boards, dry erase markers, and letter cards or magnetic letters. Students needing intervention work on phonetic skills will be provided additional targeted instruction during the small group reading or writing instruction. This component is implemented in such a way to ensure instructional equity for all students. During the year interactive white boards and the accompanying laptop computer will be placed in every classroom.
Action Type: Equity
 
Shannon Welch, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     
Title I - Materials & Supplies: $2500.00

ACTION BUDGET: $2500
Professional Development-On-going, site-based professional development will continue to ensure all teachers have an understanding of a systematic and an explicit approach to high-quality phonics instruction for all students.  Training will be provided for the new teachers on the use of the Palm Pilot in assessing students on DIBELS. All teachers will continue to receive training on the analysis of the data collected by the DIBELS assessments on Mclass home. The contract with Mclasshome will be maintained for this year with Title one funds. A Literacy Facilitator (1.0 FTE) will be also be funded with Title I funds. Salary and benefits will be paid. Teachers will participate in Reading First Sight Based Observation Training (SBOT) where the phonics/word study component will be observed using the Reading First protocol as a rubric to be utilized during the follow-up discussion. Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) and Effective Literacy For 2-3 (ELF) will be available for all beginning teachers or new teachers to the district. Weekly team meetings will be held to allow continued discussion around the instructional sequence and student needs. Training with interactive whiteboards will be given as needed.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Shannon Welch, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Outside Consultants
     
  • Teachers
     
Title I - Purchased Services: $4000.00
Title I - Employee Salaries: $55000.00
Title I - Employee Benefits: $11909.86

ACTION BUDGET: $70909.86
Evaluation Plan-Based on data from DIBELS, NRT and Benchmark, gains were made during the 2008-09 school year to indicate continued use of the plan during the 2009-10 school year. The DSA will be given at the end of the year along with the DIBELS to reassess the effectiveness of the program. The Nonsense Word Fluency (NWF) DIBELS assessment will be utilized for those students still below proficiency. Weekly spelling and dictation test will be given to monitor all students' learning. Teachers will continue to monitor students' progress of spelling strategies as the students transfer their understanding of these strategies into their writing.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Robin Daniels, Educational Facilitator Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2010
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $73409.86
Intervention: FLUENCY. C.D. Franks Elementary School uses the Comprehensive Literacy Approach for fluency instruction. Grades 2 and 3 will provide explicit instruction in fluency as a part of the core reading program. Quick Reads are used daily to provide the opportunity for students to practice oral reading and repeated reading of the same material. Mini-lessons are provided to instruct students on fluency strategies, such as phrasing, tone, using punctuation, and pace.
Scientific Based Research: National Reading Panel Report (2000); THE FLUENT READER (2003); Assessing Reading Fluency. Choate, Connie, WORD JOURNEYS.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan. The Instructional facilitator will be available to model instruction and address any concerns teachers have about implementation of fluency plan. Students identified as not meeting the Benchmark for success will receive additional fluency instruction in small groups in the classroom. Additional practice may be given as homework. Students still identified as not meeting the Benchmark will receive additional fluency instruction in small groups. Any student with an AIP will be remediated for fluency. If the student is still in danger of failure, his/her case will be taken before the RTI Team for further consideration and action. Some third grade students who are accelerated will be in the Targets (gifted and talented) program and will get additional enrichment there. Resources Such as additional books, markers, etc. will be purchased to support children's reading success.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Special Education
 
Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Computers
     
  • Performance Assessments
     
  • Teachers
     
  • Teaching Aids
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Evaluation Plan: Based on data, gains were made during the 2008-2009 school year, so the plan will be continued for this year. The DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency (ORF) task will be administered to all second and third grade students three times a year to identify those students who are on track for reading success as well as those who may be at risk for reading difficulties. This test is a fluency screener and can be given in a short length of time. Benchmarks are assigned. Progress will be monitored using DIBELS ORF task until the student reaches expected levels of performance. Teachers will look at the results at weekly team meetings and assess the results of the testing.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Central Office
     
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: The Literacy Facilitator will provide on-going site based professional development weekly to ensure full implementation of Reading First. Site based observations will be made available as needed. In addition, new teachers will participate in Comprehensive Literacy training such as ELLA/Elf, Reading First and other pertinent conferences that become available to learn about fluency instruction. Professional development resources will be provided as needed.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Outside Consultants
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: VOCABULARY. C. D. Franks Elementary School uses the Comprehensive Literacy Approach to Vocabulary Instruction. Literacy teachers in grades 2 and 3 will provide vocabulary instruction daily. Using the Reading First protocol, each teacher will utilize the explicit procedures agreed upon by the grade level at the Literacy Team Meetings every week. The read aloud and guided reading components provide the opportunity for teachers to highlight vocabulary.
Scientific Based Research: Miller, Debbie, READING WITH MEANING. Stenhouse Publishers, Portland, Maine. 2002. Beck, Isabel L., Margaret G. McKeown and Linda Kucan, BRINGING WORDS TO LIFE:Robust Vocabulary Instruction. The Guilford Press: New York. 2001. BUILDING ACADEMIC VOCABULARY by Marzana. Within Word Study Notebook, Arkansas Reading Excellence Project
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. During guided reading teachers question and monitor students comprehension as it pertains to vocabulary. Direct teaching of vocabulary words from the guided reading is provided as needed. During writing children are encouraged to use previously taught vocabulary words which were placed on the word wall after the direct instructional lesson. Students use these words as they revise to make better word choices. Students identified as not meeting the expectations for success will receive additional vocabulary instruction through small groups. Weekly literacy team meetings will provide an opportunity for teachers to problem solve and work on additional activites. Depending on the recommendations of the literacy staff and the guidelines of reading recovery, some students will receive interventions with a certified teacher and/or a paraprofessional. The instructional facilitator will monitor the level of implementation in classrooms according to the observation protocol.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
 
Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. As with all other components of the Reading First Protocol, on-going site-based professional development will continue to occur to ensure full implementation of the Reading First Protocol. New teachers will also participate in Comprehensive Literacy training such as ELLA and ELF. Teachers will participate in other in-service opportunities as they arise. Resources will be purchased for teachers.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Betty Warren, Third Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     
PD (State-223) - Materials & Supplies: $1500.00
PD (State-223) - Purchased Services: $4500.00

ACTION BUDGET: $6000
EVALUATION PLAN -Based on data, gains were made during the 2008-2009 school year, so the plan will be continued for this year. The DIBELS Word Use Fluency (WUF) assessment will be administered three times a year to all students in grades 2 and 3. This assessment will be given to identify those students who may be at risk for reading difficulties. Anecdotal records will be kept during guided reading about comprehension, especially as it pertains to vocabulary. Vocabulary test will be given bi-weekly from words used during read aloud. Progress will be monitored using the DIBELS WUF task at the beginning and the end of the year. If students do not reach expected levels of performance at the beginning of year, literacy team will meet to decide on interventions. If students do not reach expected levels of performance, the RTI Team will meet to decide further interventions. In addition, state mandated NRT tests and the Benchmark will be administered to those grade levels mandated by state law. Teachers will look at the results at a weekly grade level team meeting and analyze the results of the testing. In addition to mandated test results, C D Franks will give the target (chunk) test to all third grade students. These tests results will be used to diagnose weak areas of student understanding and content knowledge.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Performance Assessments
     
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $6000
Intervention: COMPREHENSION STRATEGY INSTRUCTION-CD Franks will continue to implement the Reading First protocol during the 2009-10 school year.  Each teacher will model comprehension strategies during the read aloud block.  Whole group instruction and small group instruction will be utilized as noted in the Reading First instructional protocol.
Scientific Based Research: (NATIONAL READING PANEL REPORT. (2000). Miller, Debbie, READING WITH MEANING; TEACHING COMPREHENSION IN THE PRIMARY GRADES. Stenhouse Publishers: Portland, Maine. 2002. Beck, Isabel L., Margaret G. McKeown, Linda Kucan, BRINGING WORDS TO LIFE; ROBUST VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION. The Guilford Press. New York, 2001.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
EVALUATION PLAN-Based on the results from the Augmented Benchmark, we will continue the instructional plan for comprehension strategies. As an on-going process throughout the year, the plan will be monitored and adjusted weekly in grade level team meetings with the Instructional Facilitator. DRA's, AR, Target tests (for third grade only) and/or other appropriate assessments will be evaluated, disaggregated and instructional plans made from the results. Other diagnostic assessments will be administered for students to help identify those at risk of reading failure. For example, running records will be used to monitor reading progress for all students. Anecdotal records will also be kept during guided reading. All data will be used to guide interventions for struggling students without causing the loss of additional instruction time. Each year when state mandated test scores come in and are disaggregated, adjustments will be made to those places which are proven weak by the state testing standards.
Action Type: Alignment
 
Brenda Hill, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Outside Consultants
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT-Teachers in second and third grade will participate in professional development such as ELLA, ELF and Reading First to learn about comprehension instruction. Literacy Teachers will observe in other literacy classrooms in order to sharpen their skills. In addition, the literacy facilitator will lead weekly grade level team meetings allowing time to monitor the progress of all students in reading comprehension and adjust the program according to the needs of the students. If more professional development is required, then teachers will attend other workshops.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Brenda Hill, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Outside Consultants
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN-C. D. Franks Elementary will continue implementing the Reading First protocol during the 2009-10 school year. Teachers will use the following strategies: graphic and semantic organizers, answering questions, generating questions, recognizing story structure and genre, making use of prior knowledge and using mental imagery. All students will receive instruction in comprehension and will be monitored for understanding. Students who do not meet the expectations of their grade level curriculum will receive additional instruction in small groups. A half-time certified reading interventionist (.5 FTE) will be funded with Title I funds. Salary and benefits will be paid. A licensed teacher and paraprofessional will be paid with Title 1 funds to conduct night library so that students will have another opportunity for reading. Students who are at risk of not comprehending what they read will be the subject of at least part of the regular grade level meetings with the Instructional Facilitator. An AIP or IRI (Intensive Reading Interventions) plan will be developed for those not proficient on the NRT and Benchmark tests. Interventions could include more targeted lessons and practice in small groups with a highly qualified paraprofessional or a certified interventionist. Art Smart is another program available that benefits students' comprehension abilities. The contract will be renewed for this year. Using this outstanding program, students will attend a play at the Perot Theatre and Artists in Residence will visit the school to further supplement efforts to increase student learning. Students who are proficient or above in comprehension will be given opportunities to use computers to help with projects which will include advanced instruction in comprehension, enrichment activities from Orchard, as well as Targets for third grade accelerated students who qualify for the gifted and talented program. The Instructional Facilitator and the building Principal will monitor the level of implementation in classrooms according to the observation protocol and Classroom Walk-Thru. The Instructional Facilitator will confer with the teacher to discuss how the teacher is implementing reading components, how these components are working and how they are failing and how the teacher can rework the instructional time to make it more fruitful.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Brenda Hill, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     
Title I - Materials & Supplies: $6684.00
Title I - Employee Salaries: $24500.00
Title I - Employee Benefits: $6342.00

ACTION BUDGET: $37526
Total Budget: $37526
Intervention: WRITING INSTRUCTION-C. D. Franks Elementary uses the Comprehensive Literacy Approach to writing instruction along with The Writing Academy curriculum. Writing instruction will include teacher explanation, modeling of all writing skills, guided practice and independent practice.
Scientific Based Research: Dorn, Linda J. and Carla Soffos. SCAFFOLDING YOUNG WRITERS. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse.(2001). Dorn, Linda, Cathy French, S. Graham, MAKING THE WRITING PROCESS WORK; Strategies for Composition and Self-Regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books, 1999. Whitney, Randi. THE WRITING ACADEMY. JLK Publishing, 2005. Auman, Maureen. STEP UP TO WRITING. Boston, MA: Sopris West, 2008.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
EVALUATION PLAN-Based on 08-09 data, gains were made, but additional programs have been put in place to encourage even higher levels of proficiency in students' writing. At the beginning and end of the school year, the second and third grade teachers will do a pre and post-writing prompt to evaluate the growth in each child's writing abilities and in the curriculum itself. In addition, second and third grade teachers will give a writing prompt at the end of each nine weeks to assess the different types of writing. Final assessment will be state mandated Benchmark for third grade. During collaboration of the literacy team, scores will be disaggregated and programs adjusted for strengths and weaknesses. Target testing will be conducted throughout the year in third grade as a progress monitoring tool.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
 
Betty Warren, Third Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Implementation Plan-All students will participate in writing instruction. This year 2nd grade will implement parts of the Writing Academy Curriculum, along with the Reading First mini-lessons as additional resources. Third grade will continue to implement the same programs. Students will conference individually with the teacher every week to help develop their writing skills. Anecdotal records will be kept to monitor progress over time. Students identified as not meeting expectations for success will receive additional writing instruction in small groups. The writing curriculum ensures equity among disparate instructional levels.
Action Type: Equity
 
Betty Warren, Third Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development Plan-New teachers will participate in Comprehensive Literacy training such as ELLA and ELF. Reading First Workshops will be attended. Site-based observations will be done to see modeling of instruction by Reading First teachers. There will be weekly meetings with the instructional facilitator for grades two and three. The instructional facilitator will be funded by Title I funds. Salary and benefits will be paid. Other professional development, such as the Reading Conference, and other workshops which present themselves during the year and are useful for further training in writing instruction.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Betty Warren, Third Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: REMEDIATION PLAN-Student Academic Improvement Plan (AIP) Students on on grade level will be remediated through small group teaching, Accelerated Reading Program, cooperative learning, and other modifications recommended by the RTI team.
Scientific Based Research: (ACT 999 of 1999). Wood, D. J. Bruner, and G. Ross. 1976. The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving. JOURNAL OF CHILD PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY. 17, 2:89-100. Barr, Robert D. and Parrett, William H. , Saving our Students, Saving Our Schools, Pearson Professional development, 2003. Whatever It Takes, Dufour R., 2004,
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan. All students will receive the help of an interventionist in writing, and others recommended by the literacy team and RTI team will receive additional help by one certified interventionist and/or one paraprofessional. All students will be monitored and instructional strategies will be adjusted to accommodate their learning needs.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Equity
 
Mavis Patillo, Intervention Specialist; Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Plan Evaluation- Every nine weeks a Target test will be given and the results considered at grade level team meetings and RTI meetings. Those students who are at risk for reading difficulties will be given additional diagnostic assessments. Their progress will be monitored using the DIBELS, DRA, and DSA assessment. The NRT and Benchmark Tests will be administered and disaggregated at the end of each year to determine progress of students and to determine what new strategies to use to try to reach reading success.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Mavis Patillo, Interventionist; Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator, Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2010
  • Computers
     
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development-The Instructional Facilitator will hold weekly grade level meetings where AIP and IRI students will be discussed and new strategies learned. The instructional facilitator will then discuss these students with the RTI team. In addition, the Instructional Facilitator will go into the classroom to model the strategy for the classroom teacher. Teachers will attend workshops which present themselves during the year to learn strategies. DIBELS assessment, target testing, classroom observation, and administrative walk-throughs will be used to monitor AIPs, as well as IRIs. The Instructional Facilitator will have grade level, as well as curriculum level meetings on a weekly basis to help with monitoring student progress and teacher use of existing IRI and AIP for students.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Mavis Patillo, Intervention Specialist and Robin Daniels, Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: TITLE I SCHOOL WIDE PROGRAMS
Scientific Based Research: Title I Parent Involvement (retrieved from the web 9/18/07)at http://www.titleI.com/background
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
EVALUATION PLAN-Data will be analyzed from state mandated tests such as the Benchmark and NRT tests. Attendance and grade level achievement will be assessed in order to determine academic achievement for students in levels such as the combined population, African American, Caucasian, economically disadvantaged, students with disabilities, and Hispanic students. Specific strategies will be developed to increase academic achievement among these sub-populations. Scientific based strategies, curriculum aligned with frameworks, instruction and strategies will be designed to help eliminate the achievement gap for under-performing students. The Response to Intervention (RTI)Team will continue to provide timely additional assistance for students who are not showing adequate yearly progress. Point in time remediation will be used to assist students that are not progressing academically. Progress monitoring by the teacher will keep others informed as to the child's academic progression. When state mandated test results are received each year, teachers will look at the results at school wide as well as weekly grade level team meetings and assess the results of instruction. If academic improvement is shown, programs will be continued. If areas of the curriculum seem weak academic plans will be revised in an effort to make every child proficient. In addition to mandated test results, C.D. Franks will target (chunk) test all 3rd grade students 5 times each year. These test results will be used as a progress monitoring tool to diagnose weak areas of student understanding and content knowledge.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Implementation Plan-At the beginning of the school year, Parent Orientation meetings were conducted. Three opportunities were provided to allow for maximum participation. Parents were informed of the Title One status of the school and the federal funds received. Title One money is used to coordinate and integrate services to improve instruction and increase student achievement. They were also informed of school wide policies and procedures and allowed an opportunity to ask questions. A Parent Compact is signed by the Parent at the beginning of the school year or when students are enrolled during the year. As always, instruction will be given by highly qualified teachers according to state mandates. Teachers who are not highly qualified will be required to complete all steps to become highly qualified. Mentoring is provided for each new teacher to the district by assigning a highly effective teacher to work with the new teacher. Paraprofessionals will also be required to become qualified in the appropriate subject area. Specific scientific research based programs such as Reading First will be used to instruct children in literacy. Teachers will be included in the selection of academic assessments, analysis of data, and in the development of overall instructional programs to improve academic achievement. Strategies will be developed in collaboration with Margaret Daniels Primary school in order to facilitate student's emotional and academic transition from early childhood programs to elementary school programs. Having group activities for both schools such as Spring Fling and Body Walk will help the students become socially aware of other children in both schools. In addition, classes such as PE, Art, Music, and computer lab are held by the same teachers in both buildings which will help students become aware of teaching strategies offered in both buildings. Activites will be encouraged to increase parental involvement. Groups such as PTO, Watch Dogs, and school volunteers will be used to increase awareness of instructional programs within the school. In addition, information packets, learning compacts, Meet the Teacher Night, volunteer resource books, parental information packets, and a parent center has been established to help foster parent involvement. Funds will be provided to purchase supplies and equipment for parent involvement activites. In addition to these activities, teachers will be recruited for vacancies, and highly qualified teachers already in the district will be retrained by the use of mentors, effective teacher-driven professional development, and with the development of Professional Learning Communities that let teachers collaborate not only within grade levels, but with teachers who teach similar subjects throughout the district.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development-All professional development will be data-driven and based upon specific interventions such as Reading First, Reading Recovery, and the incorporation of technology into the curriculum.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: A Strong School Leadership Team will be utilized to facilitate the school improvement efforts.
Scientific Based Research: "Whatever It Takes," Professional Learning Communities, Dufour, Rick, Dufour, Rebecca, Eaker, Robert, Karhanek, Gayle. 2004 "Results Now", Schmoker, Mike. 2006
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation- We will utilize the leadership team to promote a community of learners focused on student achievement. Members will include but are not limited to: the Principal, Instructional Facilitators for both math and literacy, the Parent Involvement Coordinator, Counselor, Special Education Teacher, and a Second and Third Grade Teacher with teaching specializations in Math and Literacy. Meetings will be held on a monthly basis with minutes taken and posted and shared with school personnel. All teachers will be given an opportunity to choose to participate in order to ensure equity in building a leadership community. The Committee will consider curriculum needs based on data, teacher grade level concerns, professional development, will review and ensure our compliance to state accreditation policies, will plan for mandated state tests, and will participate in other decisions that require a consensus of school personnel. The Leadership Team will meet teacher concerns by becoming responsible for "Leadership Partners" in a mentoring type relationship with grade level and support staff. Every effort will be made to build a collaborative team that works interdependently to achieve a common goal for which each team member is mutually accountable.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Plan Evaluation- At the end of the year, the school personnel will be given a survey to evaluate the effectiveness of the C.D. Franks leadership team.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development: In-service will be conducted at our campus by members of the leadership team. Select members of the leadership team will attend specific in-services away from school to gather knowledge and bring it back to our campus during our professional development days. The Team will read, discuss and use information from DuFours Professional Learning Communities books. In November, a small group will attend DuFour's Building Common Assessment conference in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, November 16-17, 2009. The information attained in this conference will be used to enrich our knowledge on assessments and to help us align our formative assessments in such a way as to provide more substantial data in order to move instruction to a more individualized approach.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Teresa Wake, Principal and Robin Daniels, Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
Title I - Purchased Services: $4500.00

ACTION BUDGET: $4500
Total Budget: $4500
Intervention: Continue to have an additional teacher at 3rd grade to lower class size
Scientific Based Research: "Class Size", Educational Leadership, December 2006
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
An additional teacher will be funded at 3rd grade in order to maintain low class size. Salary and benefits will be paid from Title IIA funds.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
 
Teresa Wake Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     
Title II-A - Employee Salaries: $32000.00
Title II-A - Employee Benefits: $6928.00

ACTION BUDGET: $38928
Total Budget: $38928
Priority 2: To meet or exceed AYP standards developed by the Arkansas Department of Education.
Supporting Data:
  1. ACSIP CRT Data Source for C. D. FRANKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL	  
         
     Benchmark-3rd Grade Mathematics Exam					
    Report Created: September 1, 2009		
    		   
    2007-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:  
           
       120 Students: 68.3% of Combined 
    The lowest identified areas for the combined population were: Geometry
    Open Response	       
    
        36 Students: 52.7% of African American 
      The lowest identified areas for African Americans were: Geometry Open
    Response	       
    
         3 Students: 66.6% of Hispanic
        80 Students: 75.0% of Caucasian 
    The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were:Geometry Open Response	  
           
        67 Students: 59.7% of Econ. Disadvantaged 
    The lowest identified areas for Economically Disadvantaged students were:
    Geometry Open Response	
         . Students:  N/A% of LEP 
        10 Students: 40.0% with Disabilities 
    The lowest identified areas for LEP students were: N/A			  
    
    	 
    2008:-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
          101 Students:82.2% of combined Students
    The lowest identified areas for the combined population were Geometry Open
    Response and Measurement Open Response.
          37 Students:64.9% of African American
    The lowest identified areas for African Americans were: Geometry in Open
    Response and Measurement in Multiple Choice.
           2 Students:100% of Hispanics
          62 Students:91.9% of Caucasian 
    The lowest identified area for Caucasians was: Geometry Open Response.
          63 Students:76.2% of Econ. Disadvantaged
    The lowest identified areas for Econ. Disadvantaged were:  Geometry Open
    Response and Measurement in Multiple Choice.
           0 Students:.% of LEP 
          12 Students:41.7% of Students with Disabilities.
    The lowest identified areas for students with Disabilities were: N/A
    
    2009:-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
          115 Students: 78% of Combined Students
    The lowest identified areas for the combined population were Measurement
    and Data Analysis in Multiple Choice and Geometry and Measurement in Open
    Response.
          33 Students:60% of African American
    The lowest identified areas for African Americans were Measurement and
    Data Analysis in Multiple Choice and Geometry and Measurement in Open
    Response.
           78 Students:85% of Caucasian 
    The lowest identified areas for African Americans were Measurement and
    Data Analysis in Multiple Choice and Geometry and Measurement in Open
    Response.
          69 Students:70% of Econ. Disadvantaged
    The lowest identified areas for African Americans were Measurement and
    Data Analysis in Multiple Choice and Geometry and Measurement in Open
    Response.
          
    
    TREND DATA:
    On an average of 3 years (2007-2009), the lowest identified areas for
    combined and all subgroups were Geometry and Measurement in Open Response.
    
  2.     Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Data Source for C D
    FRANKS Elementary School
    
    NORM REFERENCED TEST
    
    Number Tested and Percent of Students Scoring At/Above 50th Percentile
    
    2nd Grade
    
    In Spring 2007
    113 Students:
    
    39.3% of the Combined population were proficient for Math Problem Solving
    
    In Spring 2008
    108 Students:
    
    48.1% of the Combined population were proficient for Math Problem Solving.
    
    
    In Spring 2009
    91 Students:
    
    63% of the Combined population were proficient for Math Problem Solving.
    
    3rd Grade
    
    In Spring 2007
    123 Students:
    
    61.0% of the Combined population were proficient for Math Problem Solving.
    
  3. Average Daily Attendance.
    
    Second and Third grade average daily attendance: 
    2007 - 94.6% 
    2008 - 94.5%
    2009 - 93.7
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
  4.  
     
     
Goal By March 31, 2010, there will be a 10% increase in the number of students proficient in our combined and African American populations in multiple choice and performance in the areas of number and operations and geometry as measured/evidenced by the 3rd target assessment for 2009-2010.
Benchmark In 2008-09 the combined population and all subgroups met AYP. For the 2009-10 school year, we expect to show a growth increase of 10% by the third target assessment for 2009-2010.
Intervention: GROWING WITH MATHEMATICS, published by McGraw Hill/Wright Group is our current mathematics adoption. It is an activity based, integrated and problem-solving approach to learning mathematics. It is designed to provide significant, carefully sequenced mathematics to all students.
Scientific Based Research: Growing with Mathematics is a standards based curriculum. Volume 38, #1, Jan 2007, "Journal for reasearch and Mathematics Education". Expanding the Notions of impact of K-12 Standards-based Mathematics and Reform Calculus Programs. Smith, John. T, and Star, Jon.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan-After careful disaggregation of the augmented Benchmark assessment results which continue to show a high number of students at the proficient or advanced level, it was determined that Growing with Mathematics will continue to be the program used for math instruction. Each teacher will began their math class with math meeting which includes review of general skills, calendar activities and number sense activities as outlined in the mathematics curriculum. Next, students will be actively involved in problem solving with teachers utilizing Cognitively Guided Instruction strategies. These activities will lead to the whole-group lessons which stress thinking and reasoning skills from Growing with Mathematics from the current topic book incorporating the discussion books, vocabulary, differentiated instructional activities developed for varying learning styles, manipulatives, workbook pages providing practice of newly taught skills and exercises for the maintaining of previously taught skills. Each math lesson is ended with an assessment to check for learning. Interactive boards and accompanying laptop computers have been placed in each classroom for use with instruction.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 
Derenda Henry, Third Grade Mathematics Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development- Disaggregation of the Augmented Benchmark assessment results indicated that the Math Instructional Facilitator should continue to model, demonstrate and encourage teachers as they fully implement Growing with Mathematics. The Math Instructional Facilitator will emphasize any weak areas as evidenced by the disaggregation of data to ensure equity of instruction. The teachers will attend math team meetings one to two times weekly to collaborate on curriculum, disaggregate data, discuss differentiated instruction strategies and Cognitively Guided Instructional strategies. The Augmented Benchmark data also demonstrated the need for continued involvement of the math teachers and the instructional facilitator in Cognitively Guided Instruction training levels 1, 2 or 3 depending on where they are in the 3-year program. CGI training is held during the summer with follow-ups provided periodically during the school year. Cognitively Guided Instruction builds strategies used to teach students to problem solving and reasoning skills. CGI is provided through the Dequeen-Mena Coop at Gilham. The Math Instructional Facilitator and the teachers will attend other relevant mathematics workshops as they become available during the school year. Training for use of the interactive boards and laptop computers will be provided as needed.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Marsha Mueller, Second Grade Mathematics Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Outside Consultants
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Plan Evaluation-After careful disaggregation of the augmented Benchmark assessment results which continue to show a high number of students at the proficient or advanced level, it was determined that the assessment within Growing with Mathematics will continue to be utilized including assessing the lesson, check-ups, performance tasks and multiple choice assessments. Target testing, nine weeks assessment and open-response checks will also be used. The teachers will receive the results of these formative assessments and analyze them for strengths and weaknesses in student performance, instruction and curriculum.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Marsha Mueller, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: Remediation Plan for Students Not Scoring Proficient will include the use of the Academic Improvement Plan (AIP) system and will follow the Response to Intervention (RtI) model.
Scientific Based Research: Academic Improvement Plan. (ACT 999, 1999)Stein, Mary Kay, Margaret Schwan Smith, Marjorie A. Henningsen, Edward A. Silver. IMPLEMENTING STANDARDS-BASED MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTION: A Casebook for Professional Development. Teachers College Press: 2000. O'Shea, Mark. FROM STANDARDS TO SUCCESS. ASCD: 2005.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Program-Math students will be identified as not on grade level through standardized tests, formative assessments and Growing with Mathematics end of topic assessments. Academic Improvement Plans will be created by the Math Instructional Facilitator and classroom teacher for each student not on grade level. The AIP is a way to document remediation for specific students. The Response to Intervention model will be used to monitor the use of interventions within the classroom and in pull-out remediation programs. Interventions will be research based strategies, designed or determined by a problem-solving team that start with assessed weaknesses and systematically encourage progress. Students needing remediation in mathematics will have access to small group intervention time with the classroom teacher focusing on specific AIP weaknesses and current instructional weaknesses which according to the RtI model, are considered Tier 1 interventions. Tier 1 interventions are accessible to everyone with a need. Students who do not respond in a timely manner to this type of intervention will be referred to the RtI team for review. The RtI team will review work samples, academic history, formative assessments and the student’s AIP. If the student is found to not be making adequate progress, they will additionally have access to Tier 2 interventions which are carried out by a highly qualified interventionist outside of the classroom setting for 3 to 4 times weekly for 30 minutes each time to work on the noted weaknesses. During this process, the student will continually be monitored for progress in his/her identified areas of weakness. After a period of 8-10 weeks, each Tier 2 student‘s current data will be reviewed and decisions made to maintain current interventions or move them to Tier 3 interventions which include 5 days of intervention for at least 30 to 45 minutes in addition to classroom instruction. After a 6-8 period, if progress is not noted by the RtI team, the student will be referred to the Special Education department for possible evaluation.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 
Joni Pennington, Second Grade Mathematics Teacher Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2010
  • Computers
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Evaluation Plan-Standardized test scores will detect students who are not succeeding in math. Teachers will also use Growing with Mathematics assessments, Target testing, observation as prescribed by Growing with Mathematics and formative Benchmark assessments. An AIP will be developed for students not succeeding in math. AIP students’ progress will be monitored by observation, diagnostic assessments for specific skills listed on the AIP document and formative assessments. The AIP will be complete when the student demonstrates mastery of the documented skills. The math program will be considered successful when every child is proficient in mathematics.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Jennifer Robinson, Second Grade Mathematics Teacher Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development-During the 2009-10 school year, teachers will continue to meet with the Math Instructional Facilitator to work on analyzing the data used for writing AIP’s and the implementation of the interventions as stated on the AIP. During teaming time, previously researched interventions will be introduced and discussed for possible use in the classroom. Teachers will use their cognitively guided instruction training for remediation as well as general classroom instruction.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Joni Pennington, Second Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: CHARACTER EDUCATION, DRUG AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION- The school counselor will provide services and resources to staff and parents regarding character development and prevention of drug abuse and violence.
Scientific Based Research: Character Education Partnership's Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education by Tom Lickona, PhD. Eric Shops, PhD, and Catherine Lewis, PhD. 2007 Assessing Substance Abuse Prevention Programs for Schools, Jennifer L. Schroeder and Gail E. Johnson, Intervention in School and Clinic v44 n4 p234-240 The Role of Elementary School Counselors in Reducing Bullying by Sheri Bauman, Elementary School Journal v108 n5 p362-365(2008)
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Professional Development-In effort to remain up to date on best practices, the counselor will attend the School Counselors Association Conference, character and career education conferences, and conferences on play therapy.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Mary Wells, Counselor Start: 06/09/2009
End: 07/04/2010
  • Outside Consultants
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Plan Evaluation- Evaluation will take the form of parent, teacher, and student surveys. Specific information regarding office referrals will also be used to evaluate the program's effectiveness.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Mary Wells, Counselor Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/04/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Implementation: The school counselor will visit classrooms twice a month to teach lessons about social and academic success. Character traits will serve as the anchor for these lessons. Conflict resolution skills will be taught in conjunction with ways to stop bullying. Students will hear a series of presentations from the Character Network. These presentations are aimed at raising student awareness of bullying and ways they can choose to be a hero, not a bully. Material from the HRSA program "Stop Bullying Now" will also be utilized throughout the year. Drug Abuse Prevention will be addressed by all teachers during Red Ribbon Week in October and periodically through the year by the counselor as well.
 
Mary Wells, Counselor Start: 06/09/2009
End: 07/04/2009

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT-The school parent coordinator will organize the parental involvement plan, do research about what parents need and want from the school and provide information to the families.
Scientific Based Research: [Cotten, K. and Wikelund, K.R. (2003). Parent Involvement in Education. Retrieved from the Web 2/24/03. http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/3/cu6.html] [Epstein, Joyce, et.al.(2002) School, Family, and Community Partnerships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.] [Dufour, R., Eaker, R.,Professional Learning Communities, 1998. Alexandria, VA:ASCD.] [Langan, Paul. Bullying in Schools. 2003. West Berlin, NJ: Townsend.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan: The school parent coordinator is also the Library Media Specialist and a certified teacher. The school parent coordinator will communicate with families about school programs, involve families as volunteers and audiences, involve families as participants in school decisions, i.e. Community Leadership Team and/or Parental training to provide opportunities for all families to be involved in their children's academic learning activities at home. Four Parent/Teacher Conferences will be held each year. Community resources will include but not be limited to: Southwest Mental Health, Junior Achievement, guest speakers in rooms, police, Rotary and/or Kiwanis activities.  The school parent coordinator will collaborate with PTO when the situation arises. The C.D. Franks Parent Center is located in the lobby of the school. Parent tips, a C.D. Franks Elementary Parent Volunteer Resource Notebook, information packets, periodicals, Library Bookshelf for parental checkout, and assorted brochures are available. In addition, video tapes and DVD's about parenting are located in the media center for use and checkout by parents. At the end of the second semester, the Parent Coordinator holds a reception to honor all those who have volunteered in the school during the school year. This year we will begin to hold Family Night Library. One of these nights per month will be a Parent night featuring a content area to help facilitate parents knowledge of instructional strategies. The District Handbook provides a process for resolving parental concerns. A district wide Community Enrichment Center is located on First Street as a service center for at-risk families. The Community Enrichment Center houses the Parents as Teachers Program and other services for At-risk children, i.e. Homeless Coordinator and HIPPY. The Homeless Coordinator conducts staff awareness, trains attendance clerks to look for signs of homelessness annually, and makes a special effort to address the needs of homeless children. The Homeless Coordinator works with school counselors and other school personnel as well as other agencies to care for the needs of the homeless. These strategies insure equity among the parent/guardian population.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 
Phyllis Veazey, Parent Coordinator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Community Leaders
     
  • Outside Consultants
     
  • School Library
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development-The school parent coordinator will attend workshops that will enhance her knowledge and increase her effectiveness. The school parent coordinator will attend in-service opportunities during the school year.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Phyllis Veazey, Parent Coordinator Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2010
  • School Library
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Plan Evaluation-At the end of the year, the parent coordinator will evaluate the parent program using the following criteria: Increase in number of parents asking for information. Increased interest in volunteering and interest in helping school make decisions. Maintain or increase the number of programs which involve the community interacting with the school.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Phyllis Veazey, Parent Coordinator Start: 06/30/2009
End: 07/01/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: C.D. FRANKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WILL IMPLEMENT PROCEDURES TO SHOW THAT STUDENT WORK IS HIGHLY VALUED AND PUBLICLY CELEBRATED.
Scientific Based Research: What Works In Character Education- A research-driven guide for educators by Marvin Berkowitz, PhD. Character Education Partnership 2006. CEP's Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education by Tom Lickona, PhD., Eric Schaps, PhD., and Catherine Lewis, PhD. Character Education Partnership 2007
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan: Beginning in September of 2009, and continuing throughout the school year, teachers and staff at C.D. Franks will participate in public celebrations of student work on a monthly basis. The first way in which work will be publicly celebrated is by highlighting a different class each month on the bulletin boards near the front entry of the building. Student work will be displayed throughout the month. All pull out teachers will also participate in these displays. The second way student work will be publicly celebrated is by having the counselor visit each classroom and take pictures of students as they are engaged with classroom assignments. These photos will be displayed on the digital frame in the waiting area outside of the principal's office. The third way student work will be publicly celebrated is by the counselor and homeroom teachers assisting students in developing writing samples to share during lunch assemblies. During these assemblies students who have demonstrated positive academic practices will also be acknowledged. These practices will include, but not be limited to, correcting returned work, completing assignments, helping other students with work, demonstration of mastery of grade level skill, and showing improvement on periodic assessment scores. The counselor will send home monthly newsletters in order to allow parents to plan time to participate in the assemblies if they desire to do so.
 
Mary Wells, Counselor Start: 06/09/2009
End: 07/04/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development: The counselor will attend the Arkansas School Counselor Convention.
 
Mary Wells, Counselor Start: 06/09/2009
End: 07/04/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Plan Evaluation: The plan will be evaluated through the use of parent, teacher, and student surveys.
 
Mary Wells, Counselor Start: 06/09/2009
End: 07/04/2010

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Priority 3: The Arkansas Department of Education - Special Education - has not identified the Ashdown School District as being disproportionate in the number of African American students with disabilities in comparison to the district's total population of African American students. Our goal is to maintain proportionality.
Supporting Data:
  1. The Special Education focus monitoring Data from the 2006-07 school year indicates that the difference between the representation of African-American in the district’s overall school population ( 42.15%) and the representation of African American students in special education (31.25 ) meets the benchmark indicating that the district is proportionally similar in composition. This reduction has occurred due to the implementation of sound procedures and practices including the implementation of research-based interventions within the classrooms.
  2. The Special Education Focused Monitoring/ACSIP data from 2007-08 school year indicates that the difference between the representation of African-American in the district's overall school population (31.73%)and the representation of African-American students in Special Education (39.60%) meets the benchmark indicating that the district is proportionally similar in composition. This is the second year the district has met the benchmark. This reduction has occurred due to the implementation of sound procedures and practices including the implementation of research-based interventions within the classroom and the RTI strategies/interventions provided by certified and classified interventionists. The use of VI-B funds will continue to be used by the district to meet the needs of all students, with and without disabilities.
  3. The Special Education Focused Monitoring/ACSIP data from 2008-09 school year indicates that the difference between the representation of African-American in the district's overall school population (30.56%)and the representation of African-American students in Special Education (35.03%) meets the benchmark indicating that the district is proportionally similar in composition. This is the second year the district has met the benchmark. This reduction has been maintained due to the implementation of sound procedures and practices including the implementation of research-based interventions within the classroom and the RTI strategies/interventions provided by certified and classified interventionists. The use of VI-B funds will continue to be used by the district to meet the needs of all students, with and without disabilities.
  4. Domain 7 of the School Self assessment also indicates that 100% of the schools within the district have intervention or at-risk teams in addition to pre-referral procedures.
Goal To remain non-identified as being disproportionate
Benchmark To continue to be within one standard deviation of the state benchmark
Intervention: Technology Inclusions-Orchard, a software program, has been purchased to be used during computer lab and class time. This year the assessment piece will be purchased.
Scientific Based Research: Orchard for Arkansas. (2003). Saint Louis, MO: Siboney Learning Group. www.orchardsoftware.co.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN-The Orchard program will continue to be utilized during the 2009-2010 school year. This year, the assessment piece will be purchased to assure that students are working on their individual levels. Students will be given an initial assessment and assignments will be made according to their individual needs. When students are finished with a lesson pertaining to a skill, a post-test will be taken.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Jan Ueckert, Special Education Director Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Computers
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Title Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT-Professional development will be provided to all teachers so that they can maximize their use of the program to differentiate their students' instruction.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
EVALUATION PLAN-The effectiveness of the program will be determined based on the number of entries, progress reports, report cards, Benchmark and NRT scores. The summative evaluation will include administrative reports to ensure that students and teachers are using the program. This information is computer generated and is implemented in such a way as to insure instructional equity for all students. The teachers will review the leveled assessments from the pre and post test data to determine if the program is effective in meeting individual student needs and to make plans for the future.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 
Ashton Parson, Third Grade Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: Provide academic support to address the needs of the at-risk students in grades 2-3 who have been identified as at-risk based on norm-referenced tests, criterion-referenced tests, and district literacy and math assessments.
Scientific Based Research: When Kids Can't Read - What Teachers Can Do, K. Beers, Heineman, 2003; Classrooms That Work: They Can All Read and Write, R. Allington, P. Cunningham, Longman, 1999
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN-An Interventionist will be provided, using VI-B Special Education funds to assist in the regular 2nd and 3rd grade classrooms. The Interventionist will provide supplemental instruction to targeted students. Students will be identified as not on grade level through a variety of assessments and an AIP will be written for each child. The AIP will recommend remediation for the student ranging from small group reteaching to pull-out by an Interventionist. The supplemental instruction will include interventions aligned with current reading and math curriculum which may include Reading First task cards, SRA Reading programs, Leveled Language Interventions, the Barton Method, Orchard software and Growing with Mathematics differentiated instruction components. Additional materials such as workbooks will be provided as necessary. Parents will be notified in writing when a student falls behind. Teachers and parents will collaborate to find appropriate interventions. Teachers will refer students to the RtI team after all resources have been exhausted and the team will implement further intervention. If these interventions fail, a referral to special education may be recommended.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 
Mavis Patillo, Math Instructional Facilitator and Robin Daniels, Literacy Instructional Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     
  • Title Teachers
     
Special Ed. IDEA: $23100.00

ACTION BUDGET: $23100
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT-Training for writing the AIP, differentiating instruction in the math and literacy classroom and implementation of specific interventions will be carried out during weekly team meetings in math and literacy.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Robin Daniels, Literacy Facilitator, Mavis Patillo, Math Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
EVALUATION PLAN-Student needs will be determined by beginning of the year benchmarks in literacy and math and the Targets pre-test. AIP's and IRI's will be used the summarize the weaknesses of the students. Progress monitoring will be carried out regularly to check for growth. Data will be collected on the identified students receiving interventions using the end of the year benchmarks in literacy and math, along with NRT's and other standardized assessments in a written report to be reviewed by building level teams. This data will be used to make decisions regarding the effectiveness of the Interventionist.
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 
Robin Daniels, Literacy Facilitator and Mavis Patillo, Math Facilitator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $23100
Intervention: To utilize Response to Intervention in 2nd and 3rd grades.
Scientific Based Research: Preferral, Teacher Assistance Teams and Child Study Teams, Addendum #1, January 1997-May 2002, Special Education Resource Center, Middletown, CT, 06457
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation Plan: There is currently a Response to Intervention team in place at C.D. Franks. The team collaborates at least once monthly with additional meetings as needed. A procedures manual is available and minutes are kept from each meeting. The team is made up of Interventionists, Literacy and Math Curriculum Facilitators, Principal, Regular Classroom Teachers and the School Counselor. The team meets to analyze student data, monitors the progress of all students and looks specifically at students who are not making progress. This insures instructional equity for all students. The goal of the committee is to make pro-active decisions on how to efficiently and effectively meet the individual student's needs. A list of interventions has been developed with the assistance of the Curriculum Facilitators that meet the specific skills needs of students. The interventions can be utilized within the regular classroom setting, the computer lab and/or pull-out tutorials with interventionists.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 
Mavis Patillo, Math Interventionist Coordinator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional development: Professional Development explaining the procedures and the purpose of the team is done at the beginning of the year. The Response to Intervention Team will attend relevant professional development as available during the school year. The Interventionist will attend any relevant professional development opportunities which may present themselves during the school year.
Action Type: Professional Development
 
Mavis Patillo, Math Interventionist Coordinator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Evaluation Plan: The Response to Intervention Team will meet at least one time monthly to discuss at-risk students. Interventions will be developed according to the individual needs of the students using AIP's and other assessments. Progress will be monitored through on-going math and literacy assessments that are aligned to the frameworks. Students' performance on the Augmented Benchmark will also be used to determine the effectiveness of the team. Materials will be purchased to assist with tracking the progress of these students. An end of year report showing the number of students referred will be compiled. This report will also include the number of students referred to special education at the building level. A follow-up plan will be developed for students that were not referred for special education that may still be at-risk.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education
 
Mavis Patillo, Math Interventionist Coordinator Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Priority 4: CD Franks Elementary school is committed to improving the overall health of our students. We will involve teachers, parents, students, and the community to develop an ongoing process that will encourage physical activity, provide more nutritious foods, and encourage students to develop life-long healthy habits.
Supporting Data:
  1. BMI index for 2008 - 2009 2nd grade students showed the following: 53.3% of 2nd grade males healthy, 16.4% overweight,31.1% obese. 44.2% of 2nd grade females healthy, 25.6% overweight, and 30.2% obese.
Goal Enforce standards regarding physical activity as mandated by the state.
Benchmark To improve student BMI index and to improve knowledge about overall health and safety on each campus.
Intervention: Act 1220 of 2003 requires schools to screen some students for obesity using the BMI. (Body Mass Index) C. D. Franks will report these results to the state and parents to inform them if there is a health risk based on BMI. The ACHI (Arkansas Center for Health Improvement) then generates a report to the district.
Scientific Based Research: During the 06-07 school year, the report showed that 41.2% of 2nd graders were at risk for overweight or were overweight. 3rd Grade was shown to be at 33.3% at risk for overweight or were overweight. Results for the 07-08 school year are not yet available.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Implementation: C.D. Franks Elementary will provide at least 150 minutes of physical activity per week for all students. At least 60 minutes of this time will be scheduled physical education time. Each student has P.E. one time a week for a total of sixty minutes. The remaining minutes will be used from recess time both in the morning recess (from 7:30-7:50) and during lunch recess(20 minutes per day. The physical education instructor will emphasize healthy life styles and nutrition during physical activity time. In collaboration with our local University of Arkansas Extension Office, the 4-H Assistant will come to classes and teach a health related curriculum based on Arkansas frameworks. Also in collaboration with the University of Arkansas C.D. Franks will host a Body Walk and the related week long curriculum later in the year so that children will have a better understanding of how their bodies work. Teachers and staff with continue to meet state requirements by not providing food or snacks as a reward for student achievement. CD Franks Elementary will designate 9 days for functions such as Behavior Bashes, parties, or celebrations where snacks, drinks, etc. can be provided for the students. These dates will be determined early in the school year and set forth on the calendar. Efforts will be made to provide healthy snacks and drinks during these events. C D Franks Elementary currently has a Physical Education instructor who is not fully qualified. The teacher is working toward completion of requirements allowing her to become fully qualified. She is on track to meet these requirements within the time allowed by the state.
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
Action Type: Wellness
 
Teresa Wake, Principal Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Professional Development- Members of C.D. Franks staff will be sent to wellness in-service during the summer to further develop goals and strategies to improve overall school wellness. The cafeteria manager will attend in-services about nutrition.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
Action Type: Wellness
 
Amy Silva (nurse) and Stacy Adams (cafeteria manager) Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Administrative Staff
     
  • Central Office
     
  • District Staff
     
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Evaluation of Wellness Program- Assessment of student physical improvement will be a part of the PE Curriculum. The PE teacher will check for endurance and stamina at intervals. The health and physical education curriculum will be aligned with state frameworks. Whether the students have increased stamina and the BMI index will be used to evaluate whether the programs instituted are being successful.
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Wellness
 
Gerina Ritter, Physical Education Teacher Start: 07/01/2009
End: 06/30/2010
  • Teachers
     

ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0

  • Planning Team

     

    Classification Name Position Committee
    Classroom Teacher Amy Madden Art Math Committee
    Classroom Teacher Betty Warren Third Grade Literacy Teacher Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Brenda Hill Second Grade Literacy Teacher Steering/Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Brenda Williams Third Grade Math Teacher Math committee
    Classroom Teacher Derenda Henry Third Grade Math Teacher Math Committee
    Classroom Teacher Donna Gabbard Music Teacher Literacy
    Classroom Teacher Frances Hamburg Third Grade Math Teacher Steering/Math Committee
    Classroom Teacher Gerina Ritter Physical Education Teacher Math Committee
    Classroom Teacher Jennifer Hopkins Speech Pathologist Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Jennifer Robinson Second Grade Math Teacher Math
    Classroom Teacher Joni Pennington Second Grade Math Teacher Math Committee
    Classroom Teacher Julie Backus Third Grade Literacy Teacher Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Loretta Price Reading Recovery Teacher Literacy/Title I Advisory Committee
    Classroom Teacher Marsha Mueller 2nd Grade Math Teacher Math
    Classroom Teacher Pam Wells Second Grade Literacy Teacher Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Phyllis Veazey Librarian Steering/Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Robin Daniels Literacy Facilitator Steering Committee/Title 1 Advisory Committee
    Classroom Teacher Shannon Welch Second Grade Literacy Teacher Steering/Literacy Committee
    Classroom Teacher Tyna Armstrong Resource Room-Literacy Literacy Committee
    District-Level Professional Carolyn Henderson Community Relations Title I Advisory Committee
    District-Level Professional Jan Ueckert Special Education Director Federal Programs
    District-Level Professional Jo Walker K-12 Math Coordinator Math
    District-Level Professional Judy Dowdy Curriculum Coordinator Federal Programs/Title I Advisory Committee, Steering Committee
    District-Level Professional Mavis Patillo Interventionist/Math Facilitator Steering/math
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Amy Silva Nurse Steering/Math Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Audrey Jones Secretary Literacy Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Barbara Montgomery Custodian Math Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Diana Blankenship Paraprofessinal Interventionist
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Doris Burris Custodian Math Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Ernestine Nelson Paraprofessional Literacy
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Jackie Richard Custodian Math Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Mary Wells Counselor Sterring committee Chairperson/Title 1 Advisory committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Randy White Therapist Title I Advisory Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Sharlotte Wright Attendance Clerk Math Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Sheri Gross Classroom Manager Math Committee
    Non-Classroom Professional Staff Timolin Gaines Impact Lab Technician Math Committee
    Parent Ronda Pounds Member Title I Advisory Committee
    Parent Whitney Gordon Member Literacy Committee
    Principal Teresa Wake Principal Steering/Title I Advisory Committee
  •