Planning for School Improvement

Golden Gate Elementary School

School Year

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
ELA 3rd grade achievement - 43.6% - Ranked 21 in district ELA 5th grade proficiency - All students tested
Fifth grade math could use improvement in proficiency.
Science proficiency continues to go up each year. +8% from 23/24. We scored over the district. All students tested was 62% and district was 61%.
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
Science showed the most improvement. Having a science coach dedicated to supporting the fifth grade science teacher was one action that had a strong impact on student assessment scores. One teacher taught 3 out of 4 science courses in fifth grade. The same teacher will be teaching 3 classes again for the 2024/2025 school year. District support for this teacher will also be beneficial, as well as for the self-contained fifth grade teacher.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
Third grade went down 12.5% for all students tested in ELA, for proficiency. Second grade also showed only 38% proficiency by STAR Reading PM3. This is 17% below the district average. Subgroup performance, both ELL And ESE in all grade levels for ELA was low - Percentage of students scoring a level 3 or higher. With a high subgroup population, our focus will be to have more students scoring level 3 or above with the support of our resource teachers and coaches.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
Third grade ELA for all students tested in proficiency. Also fifth grade learning gains, 47.5% of students did not make their gain. The factors that contributed to this decline could be the lack of resource support focused on third grade, new teachers to the grade levels,
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.
Second grade ELA STAR PM3 - District was 55% and Golden Gate Elementary was only 38%. The factors that may have contributors
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
1. ELA third grade proficiency 2. Subgroup performance ELA all grade levels (Both ESE and ELL) 3. Second grade proficiency in ELA 4. Meaningful collaborative planning to close the achievement gap 5. Targeted support (in and outside of school) for ELL population

SIP - Areas of Focus

We are stepping up to lead every day by practicing the 7 Habits, collaborating with all stakeholders for support, and challenging one another to achieve excellence.
At Golden Gate Elementary all stakeholders will instill excellence into our students by developing leaders prepared for college, career, and life readiness.
The percent of students meeting proficiency in the area of ELA will increase from 51% to 56% by May 30, 2025.
(View Marzano Model)
Using Questions to Help Students Elaborate on Content.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers/Instructional resource will receive Professional Development monthly on using complex questioning to elaborate on content with students.
Person Responsible:
Annie Boot, Reading coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
School-wide deliberate practice is "using questions to help students elaborate on content." Teacher pre and post conferences, as well as lessons, will demonstrate how students will be using questioning for complex understanding of content. Staff will be monitored for their engagement and comprehension of strategies during the interactive professional learning sessions. Implementation of instruction and questioning will be monitored weekly through swoops.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Collaborative planning focused on using complex questioning will occur weekly with all grade levels/Instructional resource.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Jennifer Scrant, Dena Antonetti, Annie Boot, Rebecca Ghelman.
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will attend collaborative planning and monitor teacher participation and engagement. Monitoring of Collaborative planning and submitted lesson plans weekly to ensure strategies planned for alignment to Using Questions to Help students elaborate on content.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers and support staff will participate in monthly data/MTSS meetings that focus on L25 students
Person Responsible:
School leadership team and Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monthly Formative assessments, FAST and/or Unit Assessment, SSP data, iReady data
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Afterschool program focusing on L25 percentile in ELA.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Jennifer Scrant and teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
A pre-test and post-test will be given to check for student growth.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
Title I Part A5100131254282Resource Teachers1.90$175,983.11
Title I Part A5100730254282Leader In Me membership $5,225.00
Title I Part A6400754254282Guest teachers to cover for teachers participating in Staff development opportunities and instructional rounds. 30 teachers x $160 one day $4,800.00
Title I Part A5900131254282The afterschool program will be offered for 10 weeks. 7 teachers and one Clerical Staff will work 2 days per week, 1.5 hours per day for 10 weeks $11,124.60
Title I Part A7730161254282The afterschool program will be offered for 10 weeks. One Clerical Staff will work 2 days per week, 1.5 hours per day for 10 weeks $1,169.09
Title I Part A5100510254282Miscellaneous genal supplies to support classroom instruction $429.06
The percent of students meeting proficiency in the area of math will increase from 76% to 79% by May 30, 2025.
(View Marzano Model)
Helping Students Practice Skills, Strategies, and Processes.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Professional Learning - Our math coach will plan for and conduct professional learning activities during early release days and Professional learning communities which will focus on Helping students practice skills, strategies and practices.
Person Responsible:
Rebecca Ghelman
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be observed on the use of evidence based strategy, Helping students practice skills, strategies and practices. Staff will also be monitored for engagement during professional learning communities.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: During planning, teachers will focus on how they will provide tasks, problems, questions, multiple representations and opportunities for students to write and speak about their mathematical understanding.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Jennifer Scrant, Dena Antonetti, Annie Boot, Rebecca Ghelman
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of collaborative planning and submitted lesson plans.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation: Teachers will systematically allow for students to practice skills with peers or independently after modeling of the content.
Person Responsible:
Rebecca Ghelman. Math Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration and coaches will conduct weekly grade level swoops and provide feedback to teachers aligned to helping students practice skills, strategies and processes. Administration will also provide thorough and specific feedback during informal and formal observations. Administration will monitor unit assessment and unit data.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich the Submit button to the right!
By the end of the 24/25 year, our ELL subgroup for grades 3-5 will increase from 15% to 25% proficiency.
(View Marzano Model)
Communicating High Expectations for Each Student to Close the Achievement Gap
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: During planning, teachers will include ELL strategies in all content areas.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Jennifer Scrant, Principal and Dena Antonetti. Assistant Principal
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of lesson plans to ensure ELL strategies are being used.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will be provided with professional development on how to incorporate ELL learning strategies into lesson planning.
Person Responsible:
Rebecca Ghelman
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for their engagement during the professional development and monitored for use of the strategies during instructional time.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the planned ELL strategies into lessons in support of ELL learners.
Person Responsible:
Instructional staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will perform weekly swoops to ensure ELL strategies are being used in the classroom. Data will be monitored through unit assessments, student observations, and PM.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then clich the Submit button to the right!
By the end of the 24/25 school year, science proficiency will increase from 77% to 80%.
(View Marzano Model)
Helping Students Practice Skills, Strategies, and Processes.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Planning: During planning, teachers will plan for strategies learning at PLC's to help students practice skills, strategies and processes.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Jennifer Scrant, Rebecca Ghelman and science teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitor collaborative planning and submitted lesson plans.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation: Instructional staff will provide high level instruction such as use of vocabulary, interactive notebooks and hands-on experiments.
Person Responsible:
Instructional staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will monitor during swoops, as well as data through data assessments, PM assessments and grade level challenges.
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 May 2025, our number of participants attending events will increase by 10% as compared to the 23/24 school year.
(View Marzano Model)
Promoting leadership and collaboration with all stakeholders.
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Advertisement: Events will be advertised via Marquee, FB, X, email, text message and newsletter.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Jennifer Scrant, Action team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
-Number of participants will be tracked on a spreadsheet and compared to the 2023-2024 school year.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Implementation of events for parents - The event will be planned and hosted by administration, action team and teacher leaders.
Person Responsible:
Dr, Jennifer Scrant, Staff members. parent leaders.
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
-Number of participants will be tracked on a spreadsheet and compared to the 2023-2024 school year.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
Title I Part A6150510254282Refreshments and supplies will be made available for parents/guardians during workshops/learning opportunities. $952.02
Title I Part A6150390254282Parent Communication: Parent Right to Know, Title I Meeting, Parent/Student/Teacher Compact, Student Newsletter and Event Flyers. $1,394.40
Title I Part A6150519254282Parent involvement ink for communication $265.00

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.
The SIP is shared with SAC for input and updates are provided quarterly. It is also posted on the school’s website and a copy is kept in the main office for stakeholders to access and review when requested.
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.
Every year the school develops a Parent and Family Engagement Policy/Plan (PFEP) with feedback from parents. This plan is sent home to all parents in understandable format and translated, in a language the parents can understand. The Parent and Family Engagement plan is posted on the school website and shared via social media.
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))
Golden Gate will offer an after school program focused on ELA and math.
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))
Collier County Schools provide a systematic and strategic approach to providing services through the District Strategic Plan and the K-12 Comprehensive Reading Plan. The goals and objectives of each program and department are aligned with these overarching district plans. Title I Parts A, C, D, UniSIG, Title II, Part A, and Title IV are managed out of the same department. They share administrative staff so that oversight, coordination, budgeting, staffing, and monitoring are efficiently coordinated. Informal communications and monthly administrative meetings are held to discuss program needs, issues, and coordinate efforts. Leadership staff of the Title I Parts A, C, D, Title II, Title III, Title IV, Head Start/VPK, and Title IX programs meet monthly to coordinate efforts and receive joint staff development for improving their services. Teaching & Learning (T&L) department meetings include academic program coordinators, including IDEA, and Head Start. Title IX, LEA, Title I Parts A and C coordinate services to identify and assist homeless children, assist with registration, and provide support services. Title I and District jointly fund the Homeless Liaison to support homeless students in all schools. Title I Parts A and C and Title III funds are coordinated to provide at-risk students with supplemental instructional support and resources. Title II, Part A and IDEA fund exam reimbursements to ensure staff meet certification requirements.

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

Based on the 23-24 FAST assessment data; 50% of kindergarten scored below the 40th percentile in ELA, 55% of First grade scored below 40th percentile and 61% of second grade scored below 40th percentile in ELA. Professional development will be provided to instructional staff in alignment to questioning. The DIRIP program will be used to add an additional allocation for a reading interventionist. Impact Cycles, led by both the reading coach and math coach will occur with teachers needing support.
2.

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

65% of third grade scoring below 40th percentile