Otis School Plan 2005/06

Otis Elementary School was a K-5 school with an enrollment of 369 in 2005/06. To review Otis' 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 Components

What Did You Learn from 2004/05 Cycle of Inquiry?

1. Looking at your data what general trends do you see? What does the data tell us about how the focus group did? How much progress did they make? How does this compare to growth of other subgroups? Is the student achievement gap closing?

In looking at cohort groups on the 2003-2005 CST results we see the following growth patterns in English Language Arts: 3rd - negative growth; 4th - no growth; and 5th - no growth. Subsequent grade level review of HMR testing subsets indicated vocabulary as an area of need.

Second grade in the 2nd year of HMR implementation showed 45% ELA growth.

Where 2nd and 3rd grade declined in math in 2004 and showed strong improvement in 2005, 4th and 5th grade progressed in 2004 and maintaince the growth in 2005.

Review of the ethnic groups, we do not have a significant number of low performing in individual groups detect and follow a pattern. ELA results do reveal a serious gap in proficiency for African American (17) and Pacific Islander (5) students overall. Hispanic students (18) seem "in step" with other second language learners (Asian) in ELA, but reveal a gap in math when compared to the same students.

2005 Students scoring below proficiency in ELA range across proficiences in Math for the same testing period. However, proficient ELA students (2004) are clustered across the top three bands in Math (2005) - maintaining a high degree of proficiency across ethnic groups. Students who scored in the ELA advanced group (2005) were universally proficient in Math for the same year. It would appear that proficiency in ELA may be the pivotal insurance of overall proficiency, supporting continued focus on ELA instruction.

2. What evidence/data do you have regarding the level of implementation of the teacher/instructional practice and/or schoolwide practice that you planned in your last Cycle of Inquiry? Include information about what was not implemented as well as what was implemented.

By teacher reports based on grade level study team meetings, we have full implementation of the HMR reading program, and difficulties at upper grades maintaining the math pacing guides.

3. What evidence do you have that your focus on these students has positively impacted their learning?

Our 2004-05 target group - Socio Economically Disadvantaged students demonstrated 12 points growth on the API. Review of the school's API scores over the past five years indicates that SED students have gained 74 points.

4. Is there anything else you learned in examining your data that will inform your revised problem statement?

It is clear from examining last year's data that our SEd students continue to remain our most significant target group for purposes of imforming classroom instruction.

Fall 2005

1. What are your problem statements?

Student Achievement Problem Statements

• Based on a review of both CST and HMR assessments, students have difficulties with reading comprehensionspecifically related to vocabulary development.

Teacher Practice Problem Statements

• Teacher prior to HMR have not had consistent vocabulary instructional practices across garde level need based on materials available and training provided.
2. What are your inquiry questions?

Student Achievement Questions

• Will schooolwide implementation of direct vocabulary instruction improve student performance on vocabulary subtests?

Teacher Practice Questions

• What strategies can teachers use to integrate direct vocabulary instruction with the HMR program?
3. What are your measurable goals?

Student Achievement Goals

• Students will improve their vocabulary proficiency scores by 10% including improvement from all significant subgroups, and target Socio Economic Disadvantaged group.

Teacher Practice Goals

• All teachers will implement direct vocabulary instruction with their classes weekly.
4. What are your major strategies?
• Implementation of Word Wizard.
• Implementation of HMR vocabulary lists.
• SIPPS implementation.

Otis 2004/05 Single School Plan

Otis 2003/04 Single School Plan

Otis

4 Year District API Base Data

Definitions

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.

Single School Plan Home

TOP

Send mail to mikemcmahonausd@yahoo.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: March 7, 2004

Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community.