School Year
 Back to School List

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
- growth in proficiency at all grade levels from SY25. - ESE subgroup increased proficiency % at 6th and 8th grade. -ELL subgroup increased proficiency % at 6th and 8th grade. -Learning gains for 6th grade ELA were below the district average. -Learning gain for 7th grade regular/intensive were below the district average. -Learning gains at 8th grade exceeded the district average at all levels.
- growth in proficiency at all grade levels from SY25 except algebra. - ESE subgroup increased proficiency % at all grade levels. -ELL subgroup increased proficiency % at 6th and 8th grade. -Learning gains at 6th grade accounted for the largest decline in school grade total- below the district average at all levels. -Learning gains at 7th grade were strong. -Learning gains at 8th grade exceeded the district average, expect for Algebra.
- increased proficiency by 12%. - 18% increase in ESE subgroup proficiency rate.
- Maintained 90% proficiency rate. - ESE subgroup decreased proficiency rate by 10%. - ELL subgroup increased proficiency rate by 36%.
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
- 8th grade science saw the largest increase in proficiency rate- 12%. - ESE subgroup performed well, 18% growth in proficiency.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
- Algebra saw the largest decline overall- 6%. - ESE subgroup declined by 12%. - Contributing factors include large number of 7th grade intensive/regular students placed into 1A/1B. - ESE co-teach support was effective, but will need to be expanded for SY26.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
- Overall Math learning gains and bottom quartile learning gains showed the greatest decline, both by double digits. - 6th grade students came to GVM with very high 5th grade scores- a big challenge for the first year advanced teacher to maintain. - Expand ESE support in 6th grade regular/intensive - Increase rigor/grade-level standards based instruction particularly with 6th grade intensive/regular teacher.
Which data component had the greatest gap when compared to the state average? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this gap and any trends. State data can be found here.
- The area with the greatest gap when compared to the state include math learning gains, followed by bottom quartile ELA learning gains. - Grade-level, standards based instruction, regardless of the level of each student needs to be expanded for growth to occur. - Although we saw large gains at 8th grade math, we still lag behind the state.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
-ELA/Math learning gains. -Algebra 1A/1B sudents.

SIP - Areas of Focus

Our vision is to foster a lifelong love of learning and achievement for every student by utilizing an ongoing partnership among school, family, and community.
We are committed to maintaining a positive school identity that promotes academic focus, personal safety, and maximum potential where success is recognized and celebrated for all students.
GVM will see an increase in ELA Learning Gains from 68%in SY25 to 73% in SY26 as measured by F.A.S.T. PM 3.
(View Marzano Model)
Using Questions to Help Students Elaborate on Content.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning- focused on planning for a series on HOT, complex questioning to engage students. PL sessions offered throughout the year before school and at lunch focused on student responses, follow-up questioning, and student evidence through integrated skills (SWIRL).
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team, Literacy Coach, PL Staff Facilitators
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring Lesson Plans, Classroom Observations, Gradebook Monitoring, and QB/PM data.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning- weekly common planning sessions will consist of time for teachers to plan, using strategies from PL sessions to use questions to help students elaborate on content.
Person Responsible:
All Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administrative attendance at common planning sessions, Lesson Plan Review, Gradebook Monitoring.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation- teachers will implement planned lessons and strategies aligned to using questions to help students elaborate on content.
Person Responsible:
All Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Lesson Plan Review, Gradebook Monitoring, Classroom Observations, PLC's and Common Planning sessions.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Measuring Impact- During PLC's and common planning, teams will analyze the impact of using questions to help students elaborate on content based off student academic data.
Person Responsible:
All Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administrative Attendance at PLC's and common planning sessions, PM/QB Data, Gradebook Monitoring.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
GVM will see an increase in Math Learning Gains from 63%in SY25 to 73% in SY26 as measured by F.A.S.T. PM 3.
(View Marzano Model)
Using Questions to Help Students Elaborate on Content.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning- focused on planning for a series on HOT, complex questioning to engage students. PL sessions offered throughout the year before school and at lunch focused on student responses, follow-up questioning, and student evidence through integrated skills (SWIRL).
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team, Literacy Coach, PL Staff Facilitators
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring Lesson Plans, Classroom Observations, Gradebook Monitoring, and ALEKS/PM data.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning- weekly common planning sessions will consist of time for teachers to plan, using strategies from PL sessions to use questions to help students elaborate on content.
Person Responsible:
All Math Teachers.
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administrative attendance at common planning sessions, Lesson Plan Review, Gradebook Monitoring.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation- teachers will implement planned lessons and strategies aligned to using questions to help students elaborate on content.
Person Responsible:
All Math Teachers.
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Lesson Plan Review, Gradebook Monitoring, Classroom Observations, PLC's and Common Planning sessions
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Measuring Impact- During PLC's and common planning, teams will analyze the impact of using questions to help students elaborate on content based off student academic data.
Person Responsible:
All Math Teachers.
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administrative Attendance at PLC's and common planning sessions, ALEKS/QB Data, Gradebook Monitoring.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
GVM will see an increase in proficiency rate on the Science State Assessment from 76% in SY25 79% in SY26.
(View Marzano Model)
Using Questions to Help Students Elaborate on Content.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning- focused on planning for a series on HOT, complex questioning to engage students. PL sessions offered throughout the year before school and at lunch focused on student responses, follow-up questioning, and student evidence through integrated skills (SWIRL), along with spiral review from 6th and 7th grade assessed standards.
Person Responsible:
Administrative Team, Literacy Coach, PL Staff Facilitators
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring Lesson Plans, Classroom Observations, Gradebook Monitoring, and QB data
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning- weekly common planning sessions will consist of time for teachers to plan, using strategies from PL sessions to use questions to help students elaborate on content.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administrative attendance at common planning sessions, Lesson Plan Review, Gradebook Monitoring.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation- teachers will implement planned lessons and strategies aligned to using questions to help students elaborate on content.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Lesson Plan Review, Gradebook Monitoring, Classroom Observations, PLC's and Common Planning sessions
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Measuring Impact- During PLC's and common planning, teams will analyze the impact of using questions to help students elaborate on content based off student academic data.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administrative Attendance at PLC's and common planning sessions, QB Data, Gradebook Monitoring.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
No response.
(View Marzano Model)
No response.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
No response.
(View Marzano Model)
No response.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
At least 80% of students will participate in School-Wide Positive Behavior Intervention System (PBIS) reward days that occur once per semester (November and April) as evidenced by the PBIS calendar.
(View Marzano Model)
Using Questions to Help Students Elaborate on Content.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning- Create PBIS committee meeting calendar.
Person Responsible:
PBIS Committee
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
PBIS Meeting Calendar
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation- PBIS committee will create PBIS calendar of events the year.
Person Responsible:
PBIS Committee
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
PBIS Calendar
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Measurable Impact- PBIS committee members will share information with grade-level teams and seek input on PBIS events.
Person Responsible:
PBIS Committee
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Attendance from PBIS events, and staff surveys.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

Schoolwide Program Plan (SWP) Requirements

This section must be completed if the school is implementing a Title I, Part A SWP and opts to use the SIP to satisfy the requirements of the SWP plan, as outlined in the ESSA, Public Law No. 114-95, § 1114(b). This section is not required for non-Title I schools.

Budget Document Uploads

No files uploaded
1.

Provide the methods for dissemination of this SIP, UniSIG budget and SWP to stakeholders (e.g., students, families, school staff and leadership and local businesses and organizations). Please articulate a plan or protocol for how this SIP and progress will be shared and disseminated and to the extent practicable, provided in a language a parent can understand. (ESSA 1114(b)(4))

List the school's webpage* where the SIP is made publicly available.
* A webpage is not sufficient as the sole method of dissemination.

No response.

2.

Describe how the school plans to build positive relationships with parents, families and other community stakeholders to fulfill the school’s mission, support the needs of students and keep parents informed of their child’s progress.

List the school's webpage* where the school's Family Engagement Plan is made publicly available. (ESSA 1116(b-g))
* A webpage is not sufficient as the sole method of dissemination.

No response.

3.

Describe how the school plans to strengthen the academic program in the school, increase the amount and quality of learning time and help provide an enriched and accelerated curriculum. Include the Area of Focus if addressed in Part II of the SIP. (ESSA 1114(b)(7)ii))

No response.

4.

If appropriate and applicable, describe how this plan is developed in coordination and integration with other Federal, State, and local services, resources and programs, such as programs supported under ESSA, violence prevention programs, nutrition programs, housing programs, Head Start programs, adult education programs, career and technical education programs, and schools implementing CSI or TSI activities under section 1111(d). (ESSA 1114(b)(5))

No response.

CSI, TSI and ATSI Resource Review

Describe the process to review school improvement funding allocations and ensure resources are allocated based on needs. This section must be completed if the school is identified as ATSI, TSI or CSI in addition to completing an Area(s) of Focus identifying interventions and activities within the SIP (ESSA 1111(d)(1)(B)(4) and (d)(2)(C).

No response.

Reading Achievement Initiative for Scholastic Excellence (RAISE)

For the 2025-2026 school year, the criteria includes schools with students in grades three through five where 50 percent or more of its students, in any grade level, score below a level 3 on the most recent statewide English Language Arts (ELA) assessment; or progress monitoring data collected from the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system pursuant to s. 1008.25(9), F.S., shows that 50 percent or more of the students are not on track to pass the statewide, standardized grade 3 ELA assessment for any grade level kindergarten through grade 3; and at least 10 students must be present for both the second and third full-time equivalent (FTE) survey periods and must be enrolled at the time of the statewide, standardized testing.

Include a description of your Area of Focus (Instructional Practice specifically relating to Reading/ELA) for each grade below, how it affects student learning in literacy, and a rationale that explains how it was identified as a critical need from the data reviewed. Data that should be used to determine the critical need should include, at a minimum:

  • The percentage of students below Level 3 on the 2024−2025 statewide, standardized ELA assessment. Identification criteria must include each grade that has 50 percent or more students scoring below Level 3 in grades 3-5 on the statewide, standardized ELA assessment.
  • The percentage of students in kindergarten through grade 3, based on 2024−2025 coordinated screening and progress monitoring system data, who are not on track to score Level 3 or above on the statewide, standardized ELA assessment.
  • Other forms of data that should be considered: formative, progress monitoring and diagnostic assessment data.
1.

Grades K-2: Instructional Practice specifically relating to Reading/ELA

No reponse.
2.

Grades 3-5: Instructional Practice specifically related to Reading/ELA

No reponse.

School Advisory Council (SAC)

NameGroupEthnicityMigrant StatusDistrict EmployeeRoleStart of TermEnd of Term
Ryan Nemeth Principal White Non-Migrant Yes Principal 8/26/2025 8/26/2026
Dan Barone Parent White Non-Migrant No SAC Chair 8/26/2024 8/26/2026
Jackie Glozbier Teachers White Non-Migrant Yes Member 8/26/2024 8/26/2026
Melissa Peters Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 8/26/2024 8/26/2026
Jamie Schofield Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 8/26/2024 8/26/2026
Linda Toledo Teachers Hispanic Non-Migrant Yes Member 8/26/2024 8/26/2026
Kelly Romero Bettridge Community/Business Hispanic Non-Migrant Yes Member 8/26/2024 8/26/2026
Pedro Perez Non-instructional Staff Hispanic Non-Migrant Yes Member 8/29/2025 8/29/2026
Traci Sartori Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/2/2025 9/2/2026
Joshua Costin Parent Others Non-Migrant No Member 9/2/2025 9/2/2026
Britt Oleszczuk Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/2/2025 9/2/2026
Renee King Mathis Parent Black Non-Migrant No Member 9/2/2025 9/2/2026
Tracy Matley Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/2/2025 9/2/2026
Heather Ticoras Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/2/2025 9/2/2026
GroupNumber%
Community/Business17.1
Non-instructional Staff17.1
Parent964.3
Principal17.1
Students (required for HS; optional for MS)00.0
Teachers214.3
The number of non-employees must be at least 51% of the total SAC membership.
NOTE: The Principal is included in the district employee count.
GroupNumberPercent
District Employee 535.7
Non-District Employee 964.3
SAC membership must be representative (within 15%) of the ethnic, racial and socio-economic community served by the school. NOTE: The principal is NOT included in the demographic composition breakdown.
EthnicityNumber% SAC% Students
 00.00.0
Black17.710.7
Hispanic323.131.7
Others17.78.4
White861.549.2
Date & TimeTitleLocationUploaded Files
Monday, September 8, 2025 5:00 PMSY26 SAC Meeting Dates 
Tuesday, September 9, 2025 5:00 PMSeptember SAC Agenda 
Date

Existing Uploads

File Name
2023sacbylaws.pdf