Planning for School Improvement

Gulfview Middle School

School Year

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 SY23 except 6th grade. - ESE subgroup increased proficiency % at 7th grade only. -ELL subgroup increased proficiency % at 7th grade only. - Both subgroups showed gains from PM1 to PM3 except 8th grade. -Learning gains at 6th grade advanced were far below the pace of 7th and 8th grade.
- growth in proficiency at all grade levels from SY23 except 8th grade. - ESE subgroup increased proficiency % at 7th and 8th grade. -ELL subgroup increased proficiency % at 6th and 7th grade only.
- increased proficiency by 3%. - slight increase in ESE subgroup proficiency of 2%.
- increased proficiency rate by 14%. - ESE subgroup increased proficiency rate by 22%. - ELL subgroup increased proficiency rate by 24%.
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
- We outperformed all other middle schools with our Civics data, not only overall proficiency, but growth in every subgroup- by double digits. - ESE co-teaching played a major role, along with differentiated instruction by our Civics teachers.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
- Although we saw growth in 8th grade science, it was the area that saw the smallest growth, - The ESE/ELL subgroups also performed the weakest in 8th grade science. - 8th grade Math saw an overall decline as well. - Contributing factors for science: Increase rigor with an emphasis on grade level standards and text at the advance level, along with an emphasis on vocabulary at the regular level. - Expand ESE support in 8th grade science. - Increase rigor/grade-level standards based instruction at 8th grade.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
- Although we saw growth in 8th grade science, it was the area that saw the smallest growth, - The ESE/ELL subgroups also performed the weakest in 8th grade science. - 8th grade Math saw an overall decline as well. - Contributing factors for science: Increase rigor with an emphasis on grade level standards and text at the advance level, along with an emphasis on vocabulary at the regular level. - Expand ESE support in 8th grade science. - Increase rigor/grade-level standards based instruction at 8th grade.
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 was 8th grade math. - Grade-level, standards based instruction, regardless of the level of each student.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
1. ESE/ELL instruction at all grades 2. Student-centered classrooms (more student talk) 3. Standards driven instruction at all levels 4. Differentiation strategies 5. Progress monitoring

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.
If we continue to increase teacher's knowledge, understanding, and implementation of ELA B.E.S.T. standards and F.A.S.T. Assessments by utilizing rigorous, data driven instruction, then we will see proficiency rates increase from 74% in SY24 to 77% in SY25.
(View Marzano Model)
Helping Students Process New Content- evidence (formative data) demonstrates students can summarize and generate conclusions about the new content during interactions with other students.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
1. Weekly meetings with Academic Coaches/Department Chairs to review student data, including Intensive Reding data from Lexia and new writing program. 2. Quarterly meetings with teachers to discuss their progress monitoring assessment data, along with student progress in Lexia. 3. Administrative meetings with students for course failure. 4. Monitoring of academic and non-academic data during weekly MTSS meetings, academic coaching meetings, and administrative meetings. 5. Meet weekly with ELL contact to monitor LY and LF data. 6. Continuous review of lesson plans to ensure use of standards-based tasks and high-quality instruction. 7. Continuous classroom observations to ensure use of standards-based tasks and high-quality instruction. 8. Administrative review of lesson plans to ensure effective ELL strategies are used with fidelity.
Person Responsible:
Ryan Nemeth/Eileen Swords
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
1. Weekly meetings with Academic Coaches/Department Chairs to review student data, including Intensive Reding data from Lexia and new writing program. 2. Quarterly meetings with teachers to discuss their progress monitoring assessment data, along with student progress in Lexia. 3. Administrative meetings with students for course failure. 4. Monitoring of academic and non-academic data during weekly MTSS meetings, academic coaching meetings, and administrative meetings. 5. Meet weekly with ELL contact to monitor LY and LF data. 6. Continuous review of lesson plans to ensure use of standards-based tasks and high-quality instruction. 7. Continuous classroom observations to ensure use of standards-based tasks and high-quality instruction. 8. Administrative review of lesson plans to ensure effective ELL strategies are used with fidelity.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich the Submit button to the right!
If we continue to increase teacher's knowledge, understanding, and implementation of Math B.E.S.T. standards and F.A.S.T. Assessments by utilizing rigorous, data driven instruction, then we will see proficiency rates increase from 85% in SY24 to 88% in SY25.
(View Marzano Model)
Helping Students Process New Content- evidence (formative data) demonstrates students can summarize and generate conclusions about the new content during interactions with other students.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
1. Monitor Lesson Plans each week 2. Classroom observations using FTEM, or the Math instructional walk-through tool 3. Targeted scheduling of academic resource support 4. Administrators and Department Chair will review work samples to ensure growth, or mastery of the standards 5. Review student data at weekly administration, MTSS, and academic coaching meetings
Person Responsible:
Jocelyn Schafer/Kerry Garrett
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring 1. Weekly meetings with Math Department Chair to review student data 2. Quarterly meetings with teachers to discuss their progress monitoring assessment data. 3. Administration meetings with students for course failure 4. Monitoring of academic and non-academic data during weekly MTSS meetings 5. Meet weekly with case managers to monitor SWD data
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich the Submit button to the right!
If we continue to increase teacher's knowledge, understanding, and implementation of Science standards and the SSA by utilizing rigorous, data driven instruction, then we will see proficiency rates increase from 63% in SY24 to 68% in SY25.
(View Marzano Model)
Helping Students Process New Content- evidence (formative data) demonstrates students can summarize and generate conclusions about the new content during interactions with other students.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
1. Monitor Lesson Plans each week to ensure the pairing of strong instructional strategies with standards-based task. 2. Classroom observations using FTEM, focusing on student-centered learning, working within groups to interact with content. 3. Targeted scheduling of ESE support 4. Administrators and Department Chair will review work samples to ensure growth, or mastery of the standards. 5. Review student data at weekly administration, MTSS, and academic coaching meetings. 6. Continuous work with Case Managers to ensure teachers are addressing IEP goals. 7. Continuous work with inclusion and general education teachers on effective co-teaching strategies to meet the needs of their students. 8. Monthly PD opportunities.
Person Responsible:
Ryan Nemeth/Sylvie Certa
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
1. Weekly meetings with Scienc Department Chair to review student data 2. Quarterly meetings with teachers to discuss their progress monitoring assessment data. 3. Administration meetings with students for course failure 4. Monitoring of academic and non-academic data during weekly MTSS meetings 5. Meet weekly with case managers to monitor SWD data 6. Meet weekly with APC and ELL Contact to review ELL data
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich 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 clich 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 clich the Submit button to the right!
Positive Behavior Intervention System (PBIS) reward days will occur once per semester (November and April) as evidenced by the PBIS calendar.
(View Marzano Model)
Helping Students Process New Content- evidence (formative data) demonstrates students can summarize and generate conclusions about the new content during interactions with other students.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
1. The PBIS committee and leadership team will identify criteria to attend the events 2. Grade Level teams will work collaboratively on the details of each event.
Person Responsible:
Team Leaders
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Quarterly event calendar, student data
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich 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 2024-2025 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 2023−2024 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 2023−2024 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.