Ruby Bridges Single School Plan 2006/07

Ruby Bridges Elementary School was a K-5 school with an enrollment of 510 in 2006/07 that opened in September, 2006. This school was formed when three elementary schools (Lognfellow, Miller and Woodstock) were consolidated,

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 2005/06 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?

Since Ruby Bridges is a new school, this is a baseline year for data collection. Thus, we looked at composite data for current students who attended the three schools that were combined to form Ruby Bridges.

ANNUAL MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES CHART (AMO)

English-Language Arts: According to the CST-ELA, proficiency in English-Language Arts is 44%. There is a gap between the proficiencies of our highest performing groups – Filipino (59%) and White (52%) and our lowest performing groups – African American (36%) and Hispanic (33%). It is significant that the two highest performing groups represent 28% of our students and the two lowest performing groups represent 49% of our students. Forty-two percent (42%) of our socio-economically disadvantaged students were proficient in ELA; these students comprise over 70% of our population. Further, 31% of our students are designated as English learners, and 46% of this subgroup was proficient.

Mathematics: Overall proficiency in mathematics is 55%. There is a wider gap between the proficiencies of our highest performing groups – English Learners (67%) and Filipino (64%) and our lowest performing groups – African American (40%) and Asian (27%). It is noteworthy that the Hispanic subgroup performed lowest in Language Arts, yet it was at 60% proficiency in math.

MOVEMENT CHART (2005-2006): This data represents 101 current students in Grades 4 & 5who were tested two consecutive years on the CST-ELA. Over the two years, 51 of these students remained at the same level of proficiency; 34 increased one or more levels, and 16 dropped one or more levels. In most subgroups, there were too few students to draw conclusions.

In mathematics, 102 current students in Grades 4 & 5 were tested two consecutive years on the CST-ELA. Over the two years, 52 of these students remained at the same level of proficiency; 28 increased one or more levels, and 22 dropped one or more levels. From this data, it appears that growth in language arts exceeded growth in mathematics.

OTHER SIGNIFICANT INFORMATION:

This year, 161 students were identified as in need for Title I services, based on Multiple Measures.

Over 70% of our students in Grade K-5 qualify for free and reduced lunch. Approximately 33% are English Learners.

We have a highly transient student population, due in large part to the fact that approximately 10% of our students live in transitional housing and 20% are from Coast Guard or other military families.

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.

We did not have a Cycle of Inquiry last year. However, classroom walk-throughs by the principal and the Title I instructional coach provide evidence of the following:

Consistent implementation of the core curriculum in language arts and mathematics and meaningful collaboration among teachers.

Use of the Strategic Instructional Model (SIM) by teachers who were previously trained at Woodstock School.

Use of elements of Calendar Math by the majority of primary grade teachers.

Effective pull-out programs for English learners and Title I students.

Fall 2006

1. What are your problem statements?

Problem Statements

More than half of our students (56%) are not proficient in reading/language arts, as measured by the CST. A significant achievement gap exists between the highest and lowest performing subgroups in the academic focus area, as well as in mathematics. It is a formidable challenge to address the range of academic needs in each classroom. Because we are new, we have yet to implement school-wide long-term professional development on effective teaching strategies. This achievement gap exists within the context of a new school in the process of building a climate and culture that is conducive to learning.

Demographics: 500 students

31 % English Learners

70% Free & Reduced Lunch

32% African American

19% White

17% Hispanic/Latino

10% in Transitional Housing

9% Filipino

20% of classroom teachers are in their first or second year of teaching

2. What are your inquiry questions?

Student Achievement Questions

Through on-going analysis of local formative assessment data in language arts (AIMSWeb, HMR theme skills tests, phonics decoding), will we see gains in all subgroups, in particular, the lowest performing groups as we implement the ExCEL framework for leveled reading instruction? Which concepts and skills need further reinforcement?

Teacher Practice Questions

How do teacher differentiate reading instruction within the context of the ExCEL framework and school support programs? What additional steps are necessary to address the concepts and skills that need further reinforcement?

3. What are your measurable goals?

To increase the percent of students who are proficient in the CST-ELA by 5% overall.

To close the gap on the CST-ELA between highest and lowest performing significant subgroups by 5%, while increasing the percent of proficient students.

To increase by 5% the number of students who receive a proficient score on the district assessment tool determined by each grade level team for ExCEL.

To reduce the number of student office referrals from October to June by 10%.

To increase differentiation of reading instruction

4. What are your major strategies?

Implement ExCEL framework for reading in Grades 1-5 to differentiate instruction for all students, from Far Below Basic to Advanced proficiency levels.

Continue to implement researched-based programs to support students in reading, including Corrective Reading, Reading Mastery, Strategic Instructional Model (SIM) strategies.

Work collaboratively with staff and families to create a positive, safe and productive school climate.

Since Ruby Bridges was formed as a result to merge three schools, here are the links to those 2005/06 Single School Plans.

Longfellow 2005/06 Single School Plan

Miller 2005/06 Single School Plan

Woodstock 2005/06 Single School Plan

Single School Plan Home

TOP

Send mail to mikemcmahonausd@yahoo.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: March 7, 2007

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.