Planning for School Improvement Viewer

School Year

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

Pattern	ELA	Math	Science
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?	ELL subgroup scores decreased in 1st, 2nd,4th grades 46%-40%-1st Grade 43%-27%-2nd Grade 22%-18%-4th Grade Increased L25, SWD 3rd-5th (ATSI)31%-51% overall Increased overall proficiency 3rd-5th 78%-82% ELA Gains: 78%-82% Lowest 25: 56%-63%	K-5-Overall proficiency increased 83%-87% 4th grade ELL scores decreased (67%-45%) Lowest 25: 49%-67% Gains: 73%-81%	SY24-85% SWD-43% SY25-77% SWD-30%
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?	Increased SWD subgroup-No longer an ATSI school Math overall proficiency and gains in all grade levels. Bi-weekly ESE support meetings, changed ESE support instructional method from pull-out to push-in, identifying SWD students through the improved MTSS process, master scheduling to maximize ESE and coach support, student placements, and responsive adjustments as a result of instructional rounds. Veteran 5th grade math teacher co-teaching with new to PME staff, boot camps, spiral reviews, thoughtfully assigned ALEKS lessons
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.	ELL Subgroup in 1st, 2nd, 4th grades (ELA) and ELL subgroup 4th grade (math). K-2-ELA overall-Three new teachers in 2nd grade and one new teacher in first grade. Newer teachers learning curriculum. 5th grade science proficiency decreased from 85%SY24-77%SY25 3rd Grade ELA Proficiency 79% SY24-78%SY25
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.	ELL subgroup decrease in multiple grade levels (ELA) and 4th grade (math). Science proficiency decreased. ELL Contributing factor: Loss of time due to lengthy transitions. There was a decrease in co-teaching in primary grade levels. Three new teachers in 2nd grade and one new teacher in first grade. Newer teachers lack content knowledge and expertise. (ELL) Science Contributing Factor: Overwhelming focus on math and writing.
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.	All categories above grade state average.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.	3rd Grade overall ELA proficiency 5th Grade science proficiency ELL and ESE Subgroups

SIP - Areas of Focus

Vision:

Pelican Marsh Elementary is a community that honors all learners and works in partnership with parents and community members ensuring students' success.

Mission:

Pelican Marsh Elementary School provides a positive, nurturing environment committed to achieving excellence. All students are challenged to reach their maximum potential through a strong foundation of rigorous instruction and shared practices, enabling them to become successful, life-long learners.

#1 Area of Focus: ELA

Measurable Outcome (Stated as X to Y by When):

By May 30, as determined by FY25 F.A.S.T. ELA results, student proficiency will increase by 3% from 82% to 85%.

Evidence-based Intervention (Strategy): (View Marzano Model)

Helping students process new content.

Action #1

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Monthly spotlights of staff at faculty meetings that focus on best practices related to processing new content.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Monitor lesson plans, collaborative planning conversations, FTEM.

Action #2

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will implement the following strategies during direct instruction. (Summarizing, jigsaw, reciprocal teaching)

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Instructional Rounds, Collaborative Planning, FTEM Targeted feedback

Action #3

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Monitor individual student data analysis during monthly MTSS, PLC, and collaborative planning.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Progress monitoring assessments, unit assessments, iReady diagnostics, quarterly teacher/admin data digs, and formative checks

Action #4

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will implement elements of SWIRL in each lesson. (Speaking, writing, interaction, reading, and listening)

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Progress monitoring assessments, unit assessments, iReady diagnostics, collaborative planning and formative checks

Budget

Funding Source	Function	Object	Project	Budget Narrative	FTE	Amount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

#2 Area of Focus: Math

Measurable Outcome (Stated as X to Y by When):

By May 30, as determined by FY25 F.A.S.T. Math results, the lowest 25% will increase by 3% from 67% to 70%.

Evidence-based Intervention (Strategy): (View Marzano Model)

Helping students revise knowledge.

Action #1

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will provide immediate feedback throughout math lessons.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #2

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will plan for reflection strategies in order for students to monitor their understanding, correct their errors and misconceptions.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #3

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will implement elements of SWIRL in each lesson. (Speaking, writing, interaction, reading, and listening)

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Budget

Funding Source	Function	Object	Project	Budget Narrative	FTE	Amount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

#3a Area of Focus: Subgroup Performance (ATSI and CSI) and/or Science or Social Studies

Measurable Outcome (Stated as X to Y by When):

By May 30, as determined by FY25 NGSSS Science results, student proficiency will increase by 3% from 77% to 80%.

Evidence-based Intervention (Strategy): (View Marzano Model)

Helping students examine reasoning.

Action #1

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will implement elements of SWIRL in each lesson, (Speaking, writing, interaction, reading, and listening) in order to facilitate rigorous, evidence-based classroom discussions about science concepts.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM, Online Progress Learning

Action #2

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will utilize the CER strategy.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #3

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will utilize elaboration strategies in order for students to explain their thinking and reasoning.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Budget

Funding Source	Function	Object	Project	Budget Narrative	FTE	Amount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

#3b Area of Focus: Subgroup Performance (ATSI and CSI) and/or Science or Social Studies

Measurable Outcome (Stated as X to Y by When):

By May 30, as determined by FY25 F.A.S.T. SWD subgroup results, student proficiency will increase by 3% from 51% to 54%.

Evidence-based Intervention (Strategy): (View Marzano Model)

Helping students practice skills, strategies, and processes.

Action #1

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will implement elements of SWIRL in each lesson. (Speaking, writing, interaction, reading, and listening)

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, White, ESE Support Team

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #2

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will model explicitly how to think about critical content.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, White, ESE Support Team

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #3

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will provide practice opportunities to encounter a task, problem, or process in a different context in order to transfer skills and refine knowledge.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, White, ESE Support Team

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Budget

Funding Source	Function	Object	Project	Budget Narrative	FTE	Amount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

#3c Area of Focus: Subgroup Performance (ATSI and CSI) and/or Science or Social Studies

Measurable Outcome (Stated as X to Y by When):

By May 30, as determined by FY25 F.A.S.T. third grade ELA results, student proficiency will increase by 3% from 78% to 81%.

Evidence-based Intervention (Strategy): (View Marzano Model)

Helping students to process new content.

Action #1

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Teachers will implement elements of SWIRL in each lesson. (Speaking, writing, interaction, reading, and listening)

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #2

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

During weekly collaborative planning, teachers will identify the taxonomy level of the targeted standard and plan rigorous activities accordingly.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Action #3

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

During each lesson, teachers will implement high-yield strategies (summarization, reciprocal teaching, jigsaw, white-boards, technology response platforms) to monitor individual student understanding.

Person Responsible:

Merhar, Lehner, Cassilly

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Collaborative Planning, FTEM

Budget

Funding Source	Function	Object	Project	Budget Narrative	FTE	Amount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!

#4 Area of Focus: Positive Culture and Environment

Measurable Outcome (Stated as X to Y by When):

By May 2026, PME will increase the total number of clubs that incorporate service learning that gives back to the Pelican community from 5 to 15.

Evidence-based Intervention (Strategy): (View Marzano Model)

Establishing and Maintaining Effective Relationships in a Student Centered Classroom.

Action #1

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Students will participate in a monthly student club.

Person Responsible:

PME Instructional Staff and Action Committee Leaders

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Student participation monthly in clubs.

Action #2

Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:

Students will choose their club and service project.

Person Responsible:

PME Instructional Staff and Action Committee Leaders

Progress Monitoring Evidence:

Student participation monthly in clubs.

Budget

Funding Source	Function	Object	Project	Budget Narrative	FTE	Amount
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

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.

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.

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.

A. Area of Focus Description and Rationale

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.

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

No reponse.

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

No reponse.

B. Measurable Outcomes

State the specific measurable outcome the school plans to achieve for each grade below. This should be a data-based, objective outcome. Include prior year data and a measurable outcome for each of the following:

Each grade K -3, using the coordinated screening and progress monitoring system, where 50 percent or more of the students are not on track to pass the statewide ELA assessment;
Each grade 3-5 where 50 percent or more of its students scored below a Level 3 on the most recent statewide, standardized ELA assessment; and
Grade 6 measurable outcomes may be included, as applicable.

Grades K-2 Measurable Outcomes

No reponse.

Grades 3-5 Measurable Outcomes

No reponse.

C. Monitoring

Monitoring

Describe how the school’s Area(s) of Focus will be monitored for the desired outcomes. Include a description of how ongoing monitoring will impact student achievement outcomes.

No reponse.

Person Responsible for Monitoring Outcome

Enter the name of the person responsible for monitoring this outcome.

No reponse.

D. Evidence-based Practices/Programs

Description

Describe the evidence-based practices/programs being implemented to achieve the measurable outcomes in each grade and describe how the identified practices/programs will be monitored. The term "evidence-based" means demonstrating a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes as provided in 20 U.S.C. §7801(21)(A)(i). Florida’s definition limits evidence-based practices/programs to only those with strong, moderate or promising levels of evidence.

Do the identified evidence-based practices/programs meet Florida’s definition of evidence-based (strong, moderate or promising)?
Do the evidence-based practices/programs align with the district’s K-12 Comprehensive Evidence-based Reading Plan?
Do the evidence-based practices/programs align to the B.E.S.T. ELA Standards?

No reponse.

Rationale

Explain the rationale for selecting practices/programs. Describe the resources/criteria used for selecting the practices/programs.

Do the evidence-based practices/programs address the identified need?
Do the identified evidence-based practices/programs show proven record of effectiveness for the target population?

No reponse.

E. Action Steps to Implement

List the action steps that will be taken to address the school’s Area(s) of Focus. To address the area of focus, identify 2 to 3 action steps and explain in detail for each of the categories below:

Literacy Leadership
Literacy Coaching
Assessment
Professional Learning

Step	Action	Person Responsible for Monitoring
No Action Step found.

School Advisory Council (SAC)

Membership

Name	Group	Ethnicity	Migrant Status	District Employee	Role	Start of Term	End of Term
No Council member found!

Group	Number	%
Community/Business	0	0.0
Non-instructional Staff	0	0.0
Parent	0	0.0
Principal	0	0.0
Students (required for HS; optional for MS)	0	0.0
Teachers	0	0.0

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.

Group	Number	Percent
District Employee	0	0.0
Non-District Employee	0	0.0

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.

Ethnicity	Number	% SAC	% Students
	0	0.0	0.0
Black	0	0.0	2.8
Hispanic	0	0.0	24.6
Others	0	0.0	9.4
White	0	0.0	63.1

Member Name:
Group:
Ethnicity:
Migrant Status:
District Employee:
Role:
Start of Term:
End of Term: