Washington School Plan 2004/05

Washington Elementary School was a K-5 school with an enrollment of 316 in 2004/05. To review Washington'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 Components

Fall 2004

1. What are your problem statements?

Student Achievement Problem Statements

Although Washington had shown steady growth in student academic achievement for the previous years, as measured by the API, we a drop in proficiency on the California Standards Tests in 2004. Cluster scores for English Language Arts show that Reading Comprehension and Writing Conventions are consistently the lowest for all grade levels. Despite data indicating that an average of 61% read fluently, comprehension continues to be a concern.

A significantly higher percentage of African-American and Hispanic students score below grade level proficiency in reading than any other ethnic group. We identify and serve those students most at risk in reading, with support from additional Title I teachers working with them in small groups to teach needed skills in context (including decoding, fluency and comprehension). Therefore, the target population for classroom teachers will be the "stategic" Title I students who are below grade but not necessarily receiving additional support.

Teacher Practice Problem Statements

Title I services, our main intervention for struggling readers, do not provide adequate time to meet the variety of student needs. Strategies used to teach comprehension skills need to be further developed by classroom teachers to meet the varying needs of low performing readers. In addition to Houghton Mifflin Reading, teachers have been trained in Reader's Workshop but not all teachers are implementing the elements of Reader's Workshop with the same level of consistency. Writing is a recognized weakness of the Houghton Mifflin Reading adoption and teachers stuggle to include this important component of literacy of the English Language Arts curriculum.

We also have students who are particularly low in word analysis and vocabulary and are not adequately fluent; we need to implement Read Naturally through Title I program to address their fluency and vocabulary issues as well as provide time for Reader's Workshop.

2. What are your inquiry questions?

Student Achievement Questions

• Are "strategic" Title I students making progress in reading comprehension and writing based upon our student-teacher data forms and district assessment?
• Are those students who use "Read Naturally" showing growth within the program assessment?

Teacher Practice Questions

• How consistently are classroom teachers implementing the components of Reader's Workshop in the context of Universal Access, as a way to address the literacy needs of student who are struggling with reading comprehension, as shown by student teacher data forms?
• How effectively are Title I teachers supporting of decoding, fluency, and comprehension skills in the context of reading leveled text, as shown by district assessments and running records?
3. What are your measurable goals?

Student Achievement Goals

• Using the California Standards Tests for English Language Arts, Title I students will make the expected score gains at each grade level to meet the Adequater Yearly Progress goals specified by NCLB leigislation.

Teacher Practice Goals

• In addition to implementing Houghton Mifflin Reading, teachers will consistently implement Reader's Workshop for targeted students to meet the reading standards. Measurement tools will include student-teacher data forms, and student work.
4. What are your major strategies?
1. Improve the collection, organization, accessiblity and use of diagnostic data to guide instruction.
2. Implementa professional development model that helps teachers utilize adopted instructional materials, use research-based instructional strategies and differentiate instruction to meet the varied needs of all students.
3. Provide a system of support for students during regular and after school hours.
4. Create meaningful parent and community involvement program which supports increased student achievement.

Washington 2003/04 Single School Plan

3 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: February 8, 2005

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.