School Year
 Back to School List

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
Grade 5 ELA ESE Performance - 31.3% as compared to 30.4% for district. Smallest gap across grade levels. LY: Grades 3 and 4 students who are LY performed higher than district. Grade 3: LOE 40% compared to district 30.3%, Grade 4: LOE 60% compared to district 21% Lowest 25% - no movement with 58% of students making learning gains in the low 25.
Grade 5 Math ESE Performance - 46.9% as compared to 45.1% for district. LY: Grades 3 and 4 students who are LY performed significantly higher than district. Grade 3: LOE 80% compared to district 48.5%, Grade 4: LOE 60% compared to district 42.3% Learning Gains - slight decrease by 3% overall
LY Subgroup: 4/9 students scoring level 3 or higher ESE Subgroup: 13/32 students scoring level 3 or higher
No state scores to report. Continue to implement the SS curriculum materials and time in master schedule to teach with fidelity.
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
Grade 5 Science - LOE was 8% higher than prior year FY24 (increased from 75% to 83%). New Actions: District science support provided to LOE in Semester 1 and Semester 2 to review mid-unit assessments and discuss best practices for using assessments as teaching tools, Classroom Observation Walk-Throughs Peer Support with District, Data tracking, use of consistent ELA strategies in science content area, instructional coaching support in grade 5 to include use of DBQ's with an increased focus on non-fiction text strategies
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
Reading Lowest 25% Learning Gains - evidence indicates we had 58% of students in our lowest 25% in reading making learning gains. Need for continued adjustments during planning to discuss how to best teach students who are ESE with exceptional needs while maintaining high quality instruction.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
Math Learning Gains - evidence indicates we decreased by 3% from FY24 (80%) to FY25 (77%). Factors: limited support given during math block, staffing changes/leaves, adjustments needed during math planning to discuss differentiation for students.
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.
Grade 5 Science - State percentage of students scoring achievement level 3 or higher was 55% as compared to LOE percentage of student scoring level 3 or higher at 83%. Greatest gap as compared to the state with a difference of 28%. LOE was 8% higher than prior year FY24. (83% from 75%). Contributions to significant increase in scores include: ELA strategies consistent in science and ELA (SOS, CER, DBQ's), consistent science notebooks, tracking of data, starting with the "Big Idea" - identifying the progression steps of each grade level content with students - use this as a quick review snapshot.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
1.) Math Learning Gains (evidence indicates a slight decline - the only component 1/8 that decreased for this school year FY24 (80%) to FY25 (77%) 2.) Reading Lowest 25% Gains (evidence indicates no movement from FY24 (58%) to FY25 (58%) 3.) Math Lowest 25% Gains (evidence indicates slight increase from FY24 (59%) to FY25 (61%)

SIP - Areas of Focus

Laurel Oak Elementary will engage in habits that will encourage all stakeholders to lead and act responsibly in school and in their community.
Laurel Oak Elementary will create a safe learning environment where every student can be leaders at school and in their community.
ELA achievement learning gains for the low 25% on the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking PM3 will increase from 58% to 61% by May 2026.
(View Marzano Model)
Identifying Critical Content from the standards
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly structured professional learning activities which focus on planning critical content for the low 25%.
Person Responsible:
Mr. Davison, Literacy Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for their engagement during activities embedded in professional learning activities.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During collaborative planning teachers will identify the critical content and plan lessons that differentiate for the low 25%.
Person Responsible:
ELA teachers, Instructional Resource Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitor collaborative planning and posted lesson plans to ensure they include embedded strategies for the low 25%.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will monitor student's understanding of the critical content and implement planned differentiated activities.
Person Responsible:
All instructional staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct grade level swoops and provide timely feedback for adjustments aligned to identifying critical content from the standards
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During monthly MTSS meetings grade level teams will analyze student data and make adjustments to planning for the lowest 25% and highest performing learners.
Person Responsible:
All Instructional Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Tier 2 and Tier 3 data will indicate the achievement gap is closing. Mid-unit and end of unit data will be reviewed to steer appropriate adjustments in lesson planning documentation.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
Math achievement learning gains for the low 25% on the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking will increase from 61% to 64%.
(View Marzano Model)
Identifying Critical Content from the Standards
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly structured professional learning activities which focus on Identifying Critical Content from the Standards
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff, Teacher Leaders; Tom Davison, Literacy Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for their engagement during activities embedded in professional learning activities.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During collaborative planning teachers will identify the critical content and plan lessons that differentiate for the low 25% and include strategies learned from previous professional learning sessions.
Person Responsible:
Math Teachers and Instructional Resource Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative Planning and submitted lesson plans to ensure strategies planned for align to helping student identify critical content in the lesson.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will monitor student's understanding of the critical content and implement planned lessons with differentiated activities.
Person Responsible:
Math Teachers and Instructional Resource Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct grade level swoops and provide timely feedback for adjustments aligned to identifying critical content from the standards
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During monthly PLC/MTSS meetings grade level teams will analyze student data and make adjustments to planning for the lowest 25% and highest performing learners.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Resource Staff, Math Teachers, and Mrs. Anderson, Principal
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Tier 1 and 2 data will indicate the achievement gap is closing. Mid-unit and end of unit data will be reviewed to steer appropriate adjustments in lesson planning documentation.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
Science achievement on the Florida Assessment of Student Thinking PM3 will maintain 83% or higher by May 2026.
(View Marzano Model)
Identifying Critical Content from the Standards
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly structured professional learning activities which focus on Identifying Critical Content from the standards.
Person Responsible:
Mr. Davison, Literacy Coach and Teacher Leaders, Instructional Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for engagement and understanding of the strategies presented during learning sessions.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During science collaborative planning, teachers will plan by beginning with the end in mind and using strategies to help students identify critical content from the standards
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers and Instructional Resource Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of science collaborative planning and submitted lesson plans to include specific strategies that align to identifying critical content from the standards
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During PLC's, the team will analyze student data and share best practices specifically related to the new science adopted materials
Person Responsible:
Science teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid-unit and end of unit assessment data, student evidence samples, etc.
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!
Staff Voice indicator will increase from 84% to 85% on the Leader in Me Measurable Results assessment survey completed by all staff members by May 31st, 2026.
(View Marzano Model)
Promoting teacher leadership and collaboration
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Every professional development training held at LOE will be led by at least one teacher leader
Person Responsible:
All Instructional Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Teacher leader will submit planning agenda for training that directly aligns with school improvement goals.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
100% of staff members will serve on at least one Action Team
Person Responsible:
All LOE Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
See, Do, Get planning agendas will be submitted and attendance documentation will be recorded.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Quarterly staff appreciation events will be held on campus
Person Responsible:
Staff Morale and Engagement Team, LOE Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff engagement increases during collaborative plannings, after school activities, PLC meetings, and LOE fundraising events.
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
Christina Anderson Principal White Non-Migrant Yes Principal 8/27/2025 8/27/2026
Bobbi Jo Edwards Community/Business White Non-Migrant No Member 8/28/2025 8/28/2026
Michelle Cady Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/8/2025 9/8/2026
Monique Negron Teachers White Non-Migrant Yes Member 9/8/2025 9/8/2026
Rashi Saluja Parent Others Non-Migrant No Member 9/8/2025 9/8/2026
Catherine Flynn Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/8/2025 9/8/2026
Marion Jervis Parent Black Non-Migrant No Member 9/8/2025 9/8/2026
Mercedes Benitez Non-instructional Staff Hispanic Non-Migrant Yes Member 9/9/2025 9/9/2026
GroupNumber%
Community/Business112.5
Non-instructional Staff112.5
Parent450.0
Principal112.5
Students (required for HS; optional for MS)00.0
Teachers112.5
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 337.5
Non-District Employee 562.5
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
Black114.32.7
Hispanic114.318.1
Others114.310.8
White457.168.5
Date & TimeTitleLocationUploaded Files
Tuesday, September 16, 2025 7:30 AM LOE Media Center
Date

Existing Uploads

No Bylaws files have been uploaded yet.