|
|
Franklin School Plan 2006/07Franklin Elementary School was a K-5 school with an enrollment of 285 in 2006/07. To review Franklin's state Academic Performance Index scores since 2000 click here. Disclaimer: Single School Plan were hand typed and transcribed from source documents. Please pardon the typos as the webmaster is a poor typist. While an effort was made to spell acronyms, here is a reference guide for those acronyms.Single School Plan ComponentsWhat Did You Learn from 2005/06 Cycle of Inquiry?
All subgroups of Franklin’s students improved in ELA with the exception of our Hispanic population. We improved our Annual Measurable Objective score to exceed our goal (75.1 in 04-05 to 84.3 in 05-06) Our SED subgroup scores improved. According to subgroup data, our SED students’ growth improved more than our traditionally higher performing white subgroup (84.6 in 04-05 to 88.3 in 05-06), but not as well as our EL students (35.3 in 04-05 to 68.0 in 05-06). This would indicate progress towards closing the achievement gap. Teacher self-assessments indicate that students retained vocabulary when it was reinforced through the Instructional Sequence strategy and reviewed again in homework. Teachers tried to develop vocabulary assessments, and many varieties of assessments emerged, but they were not used consistently across grade levels. Walk-throughs and student response on the yard, indicated that teachers were using the Word Wizard vocabulary program. Teachers still struggle with how to differentiate instruction during Universal Access time, and specifically how to assess, word analysis and comprehension for identified low-performing students. The CST indicates that in ELA, students moved from 17% at the Basic level to 9.3%, 6% of our students were Below Basic in 2005 as compared to 2.6% in 2006, and students moved from 2%Far Below Basic to 0%. Teachers would like to continue to target our SED population, understanding it is still a need to be addressed, though this subgroup has made substantial progress. (Please refer to the CST ELA & Math by ELL Designation Chart and the CST ELA Writing Strategies by ELL Designation Chart). Teachers would also like to include our ELL population this year, as our data indicates they struggle with reading comprehension and writing proficiency. (Please refer to the AMO Math Chart and the CST Math Movement Chart-Matched Student Set). Our data also indicates that math is an area to focus staff development this year. Fall 2006
Problem Statements Student Achievement Problems Franklin’s Spring 2006 California Standards Test in English Language Arts still indicates a discrepancy between Socio-economically disadvantaged (SED 60.5) and Non-SED students (Non-SED 91) achievement. Although our SED’s made substantial growth last year (SED: 10.5,), our SED students are still not achieving as well as our Non-SED population. Franklin’s Spring 2006 CST in Math still indicates a discrepancy between SED students (SED 63.2) and Non-SED (Non-SED 86) achievement. Franklin’s Spring 2006 CST in ELA still indicates a discrepancy between EL student (EL:59.1) and non-EL (Non-EL 87) achievement. Further, 79% of non-EL students are proficient or advanced in writing strategies compared to 69.5% of EL students. Franklin’s Spring 2006 CST in Math still indicates a discrepancy between EL student (EL:63.6) and Non-EL student (Non-EL:94 ) achievement. Teacher Practice Problems Franklin teachers are using direct instruction, including Step Up to Writing, to improve organizational skills and writing quality for identified low-performing students. Teachers need to identify grade level rubrics for assessing writing. Franklin teachers are working to improve/support conceptual understanding of math by increasing the correct/efficient use of math vocabulary. Franklin School will provide additional writing support for ELL studentsStudent Achievement Questions To what degree are non-proficient writers improving their writing strategies? As measured by: HMR Summative and Skills TestsGrade level rubrics Writing Skills Checklists CST To what degree are students demonstrating conceptual understanding of math through the command of math vocabulary? As measured by: Math Unit Tests1-1 Math Interviews Teacher Quizzes Math Summative Tests CST Teacher Practice Questions How consistently are teachers using direct instruction (including Step Up to Writing), for writing? How will teachers collaborate schoolwide to identify key vocabulary terms and devise a strategy for schoolwide instruction? As measured by: Self AssessmentObservation and other measures as developed Student Achievement Goals Franklin’s Socio-Economically Disadvantaged students will increase English Language Arts scores on the California Standards Test by 6 points to exceed our Annual Measurable Objective target. Franklin’s SED students will increase Math scores on the CST by 6 points to exceed our Annual Measurable Objective target. Franklin’s EL students will increase ELA and Math scores on the CST by 6 points to exceed our Annual Measurable Objective target. As measured by: Franklin’s Annual Measurable Objective ChartTeacher Practice Goals Teachers will use direct instruction to teach writing (including the Step Up to Writing program), 2-3 times per week.
Teachers will choose 1-2 focus students for targeted instruction in writing. As measured by: HMR dataWriting rubrics Summative Math Tests Teacher Observation
Franklin 2005/06 Single School Plan Franklin 2004/05 Single School Plan Franklin 2003/04 Single School Plan Franklin
4 Year District API Base DataDefinitions School Mobility Percent - Represents the percentage of students attending the school for the first time. Parent Education Average - The average of all responses where "1" represents "Not a high school graduate", "2" represents "High School Graduate", "3" represents "Some College", "4" represents "College Graduate" and "5" represents "Graduate School". School Classification Index - A mathematically computed index using other non academic API components to create indicator of similar demographics and school environment to be used for similar school rankings. Disclaimer: All data has been hand created. If there are questions about the validity of the data, please contact the webmaster.
Send mail to mikemcmahonausd@yahoo.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
|