Planning for School Improvement

Lake Park Elementary School

School Year

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
-3rd and 4th grade rank 10th in district -5th ranked 1st in proficiency and low 25% gains (2nd in gains) -Making gains has declined since FY21 -Low 25% gains flatlined in low 60's -2nd ESE proficiency shows a decline over years compared to grades K and 1st -3rd ESE decline both FY23 and Cohort & ELL decline Cohort -4th proficiency for all and ESE had big declines -4th ESE did not show strong growth from PM1 to PM3 -iReady proficiency higher in primary grades compared to FAST -Kinder has lowest ELL proficiency primary grades (decline from FY23)
-Math proficiency & Gains highest in 5 years -Low 25% gains increased 8 points -5th ranked 1st in district -3rd ranked 3rd -All grades maintained or increased proficiency -2nd grade ELL low proficiency and Cohort flatline -1st grade strong ELL proficiency growth -4th big decline in ESE proficiency (including Cohort) 22nd in the district -4th low growth for Low 25% -5th 2nd in district for gains and Low 25% gains -5th 94.3% students made a gain
-Ranked 1st in district -ESE proficiency declined compared to FY23 -ELL proficiency increased
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
Overall Math showed the most improvement, especially when looking at Low 25% gains. We were very targeted with both the who and when push in support was scheduled. We stared work around what Productive Struggle looks like in math and how to rescue students' thinking and not their answers. Use of district resources and ALEKS in grade 4th and 5th to support both skill development and fact fluency. Also spent time in vertical articulation PLCs to build capacity across grade levels.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
ELA Low 25% gains and our ESE subgroup proficiency, especially in grade 4 is our area of concern. Saw gaps in foundational skills and phonics that needed a strong intervention plan to support. High number of ESE and Low 25% student clustered together, adding a behavior and management layer. Stamina and student accountability during lessons was a concern for students where the on grade level work was above their independent and instructional levels. Need for more scaffolding instructional strategies. There is a need to target advanced phonics skills in the intermediate grade levels to support struggling students, along with vocabulary development, using a systematic approach across grade levels.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
Reading making gains showed a 5 point decline from the FY22 school year. With the implementation of the new assessment, we saw the amount of stamina needed greatly increase as the test went from two days down to one. There seemed to be a decline across the district as 5th grade dropped 15% compared to FY22, yet remained first in the district.
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.
Greatest positive gap between LPE and the state was in the area of 5th Grade Math where we out performed the state +37%.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
-ELA Gains (Targeted Subgroup Support) -ELA Low 25% Gains -Building of Student Accountability during lessons -Plan for Productive Struggle - Build reading stamina

SIP - Areas of Focus

Success for every student, every day.
To create a collaborative learning community that inspires success, through high quality data driven instruction, purposeful learning, and amazingly positive experiences for all stakeholders.
As a result of teachers communicating high expectations for each student, the percentage of students in our low 25% making a gain in the area of ELA will increase from 60% to 63% by June 2025, measured by the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking (F.A.S.T.).
(View Marzano Model)
Communicating High Expectations for Each Student to Close the Achievement Gap During the ELA block, instructional staff will systematically engage students in opportunities for productive struggle, risk taking, drawing conclusions, providing evidence, and individual accountability for participating during the lesson, allowing for students to perform at their highest level of academic success.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Students will engage in planned productive struggle opportunities during each lesson.
Person Responsible:
ELA Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will use targeted probing questions to rescue student thinking and not answers, observed during a lesson observation. Weekly collaborative planning time will be used to develop and plan for targeted opportunities during each lesson. The Literacy Coach will review and provide feedback during weekly meeting.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will design and implement Scaffolding Strategies to help students learn new content.
Person Responsible:
ELA Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will record planned scaffolding strategies in lesson plans, along with discussing the effectiveness of past strategies and the development of new strategies during weekly collaborative planning. The Literacy Coach will review and provide feedback during weekly meeting.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Students will be held accountable for drawing conclusions and providing evidence of their thinking through lesson task participation and engagement activities.
Person Responsible:
ELA Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Weekly lesson plans include accountability measures and success criteria to demonstrate student participation opportunities, as well as formative assessment data collection. Posted student work will also serve as evidence of student thinking and engagement during lessons. Use of WIG and data tracking to help students monitor and reflect on their own learning.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich the Submit button to the right!
When teachers set and communicate high expectations for each student, the percentage of students in the low 25% making gains in the area of Math will increase from 76% to 78% by May 2025, measured by the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking (F.A.S.T.).
(View Marzano Model)
Communicating High Expectations for Each Student to Close the Achievement Gap During the Math block, instructional staff will set and communicate high expectations for each student, through opportunities for productive struggle, risk taking, drawing conclusions, providing evidence, and individual accountability for participating during the lesson, allowing for students to perform at their highest level of academic success.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Students will engage in planned productive struggle opportunities during each lesson.
Person Responsible:
MATH Teacher
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will use targeted probing questions or will rephrase questions to rescue student thinking and not answers, observed during a lesson observation. Weekly collaborative planning time will be used to develop and plan for targeted opportunities during each lesson.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will design and implement Scaffolding Strategies to help students learn new content.
Person Responsible:
MATH Teacher
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will record planned scaffolding strategies in lesson plans, along with discussing the effectiveness of past strategies and the development of new strategies during weekly collaborative planning.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Students will be held accountable for drawing conclusions and providing evidence of their thinking through lesson task participation and engagement activities.
Person Responsible:
MATH Teacher
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Weekly lesson plans include accountability measures and success criteria to demonstrate student participation opportunities, as well as formative assessment data collection. Posted student work will also serve as evidence of student thinking and engagement during lessons. Use of exit tickets and data tracking to help students monitor and reflect on their own learning.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich the Submit button to the right!
As a result of teachers setting and communicating high expectations for each student, the percentage of students with disabilities in grade 5 meeting proficiency in the area of science will increase from 53% to 60% by May 2025, measured by the Florida Statewide Science Assessment.
(View Marzano Model)
Communicating High Expectations for Each Student to Close the Achievement Gap During the science block, instructional staff will teachers will set and communicate high expectations for each student, through opportunities for productive struggle, risk taking, drawing conclusions, providing evidence, and individual accountability for participating during the lesson, allowing for students to perform at their highest level of academic success.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will design and implement Scaffolding Strategies to help students learn new content.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teachers will record planned scaffolding strategies in lesson plans, along with discussing the effectiveness of past strategies and the development of new strategies during weekly collaborative planning and planning with instructional support.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Students will be held accountable for drawing conclusions and providing evidence of their thinking through lesson task participation and engagement activities.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Weekly lesson plans include accountability measures and success criteria to demonstrate student opportunities for drawing conclusions and providing evidence of their thinking and reasoning, as well as formative assessment data collection. Science note booking and posted student work will also serve as evidence of student thinking and engagement during planned lessons tasks. Use of exit tickets and data tracking to help students monitor and reflect on their own learning.
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!
By June 2025, the number of leadership opportunities available to students, both in and outside of the classroom, will increase from 6 to 45 opportunities.
(View Marzano Model)
Communicating High Expectations for Each Student to Close the Achievement Gap Students will be provided authentic opportunities to practice leadership skills, build confidence, and make meaningful contribution both in school and beyond.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Each semester all staff members will create one leadership opportunity for students.
Person Responsible:
All Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will record their leadership role and the number of students achieving that role in a schoolwide teams document
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
All schoolwide events will allow for at least one student leadership role.
Person Responsible:
Leadership Team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Leadership will record the leadership role and the number of students achieving that role in a schoolwide teams document. This will be done following each schoolwide event.
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.