Planning for School Improvement

Corkscrew Elementary School

School Year
 Back to School List

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
- 4th Cohort ESE Group increase proficiency from FY24 to FY25 32% to 37% (5% increase) - 3rd Grade increased overall achievement - All cohort groups increased overall achievement - 4th Grade advanced cohort when down in overall proficiency from FY24 to FY25 - 1st grade increased from PM1 to PM3 in all subgroups - 57% of our L25% 4th graders did not make a learning gain in FY25 - 60% of our 4th graders made their learning gains in FY25. - 72% of our 5th graders made their learning gains in FY25. - 68% of our L25% 5th graders made their learning gains in FY25.
- All cohort groups increased overall proficiency from FY24 to FY25. - 3rd & 4th Grade ESE cohorts increased their proficiency from FY24 to FY25. - All our Advanced cohorts increased their overall proficiency from FY24 to FY25. - 5th Grade ELL cohort when from 48% to 63% (15% increase) in proficiency from FY24 to FY25. - 73% of our 4th graders made their learning gains for FY25. - 41% of our L25% did not make their learning gains in FY25. - 76% of our 5th graders made their learning gains in FY25. - 65% of our L25% made their learning gains in FY25.
- ESE subgroup increased achievement by 9% from FY24 to FY25. ELL subgroup increased achievement by 20% from FY24 to FY25.
N/A
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
ELA: We decreased our Level 1's in 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade from FY24 to FY25. Our Literacy coach worked with teachers on a heavy focus of scaffolding during Core Instruction to support our struggling learners. She also ensured that our Level 1's had specific interventions in place to support their deficiencies in ELA. Math: 5h Grade overall achievement increased from 66% to 78% from FY24 to FY25. Using data from FY24 to strategically place clusters with teachers using their strengths helped to move the needle on student achievement in 5th Grade Math. We also placed additional ELL support in 5th grade math to ensure students made growth. Science: Our overall achievement went from 66% to 73% from FY24 to FY25. Teachers incorporated hands-on student centered activities at least three times a week. All 5th grade teachers worked on creating daily spiral reviews based on unit assessments to ensure that they were revising low performing standards.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
ELA: 4th and 5th Grade students scoring level 4's & 5's were unable to sustain those levels from FY24 to FY25, 38 out of 113 students or 34% when down to a level 1, 2, or 3. Math: 5th Grade L25% cohort decreased their overall proficiency by 8% from FY24 to FY25. The teacher efficacy struggled to believe that these students could make growth in math.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
ELA: Lowest 25% went from 65% in FY24 to 54% in FY25. Our 5th grade ESE cohort when from 48% to 38% proficient from FY24 to FY25. Overall our 4th grade did not perform overall as well as they did in FY24. Math: 5th Grade 1's & 2's decreased from FY24 to FY25.
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.
3rd, 4th, and 5th grades were above the state average in ELA, Math, and Science. The smallest gap between the state and CES is 4th grade Math. The 4th grade cohort gap between Core and Advanced classes was greater than the other grade levels. An adjustment for the FY26 school year will be to have fluid classroom placements to help move students based on data analysis to increase their proficiency in math.
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
1) Increase Learning Gains in ELA (Both L25% and overall) 2) Increase Learning Gains in SWD students 3) Increase Learning Gains in Math 4) Differentiation within small group instruction to review previously taught content based on data analysis

SIP - Areas of Focus

To foster a learning community where students will engage in experiences that develop self-confidence and a love of learning resulting in respectful and responsible citizens
To create a collaborative learning community that inspires success through high quality data-driven instruction, purposeful learning, and amazingly positive experiences for all stakeholders.
In ELA's lowest 25% learning gains, CES will go from 54% to 65% (11% increase) on the 2026 state assessment (PM3) as compared to 2025 state assessment.
(View Marzano Model)
Reviewing Content
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Monthly structured professional learning sessions focused on effective reviewing content strategies.
Person Responsible:
Dar Szarek, Literacy Specialist
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Agendas; Presentation; Plus/Delta Chart
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During Collaborative planning, teachers will plan utilizing the strategies learned from the monthly professional learning sessions on reviewing content.
Person Responsible:
ELA Teachers and Instructional Resource Staff; ESE Inclusion Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative planning and submitted lessons plans to ensure strategies planned aligned to reviewing content.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the planned lessons and strategies aligned to Reviewing Content in ELA.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct weekly grade level swoops and provide specific feedback aligned to reviewing content and SWIRL look fors.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During monthly PLCs the team will analyze student data and best practices.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff, ESE Inclusion Teachers, Administration
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid-Unit, End of Unit Data; PM1 & PM2 Data Analysis; Regrouping of BEAR time interventions
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
In Math's Lowest 25% learning gains, CES will go from 59% to 65% (6% increase) on the 2026 state assessment (PM3) as compared to the 2025 state assessment.
(View Marzano Model)
Reviewing Content
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly structured professional learning activities which focuses on Reviewing Content.
Person Responsible:
Kelly Zwack, Principal, Rachel Callahan, Assistant Principal; Teacher Leaders
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Agendas; Presentation; Plus/Delta Chart
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During Collaborative planning, teachers will plan utilizing the strategies learned from the monthly professional learning sessions on reviewing content.
Person Responsible:
Math Teachers and Instructional Resource Staff; ESE Inclusion Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative planning and submitted lessons plans to ensure strategies planned aligned to reviewing content.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the planned lessons and strategies aligned to Reviewing Content in Math.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct weekly grade level swoops and provide specific feedback aligned to reviewing content and SWIRL look fors.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During monthly PLCs the team will analyze student data and best practices.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff, ESE Inclusion Teachers, Administration
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid-Unit, End of Unit Data; PM1 & PM2 Data Analysis; Regrouping of BEAR time interventions
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
No data to display, enter information below then click the Submit button to the right!
CES Science achievement will increase from 75% to 78% (3% increase) on the 2026 state assessment as compared to the 2025 state assessment.
(View Marzano Model)
Reviewing Content
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly structured professional learning activities which focuses on Reviewing Content.
Person Responsible:
Kelly Zwack, Principal, Rachel Callahan, Assistant Principal; Teacher Leaders
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Agendas; Presentation; Plus/Delta Chart
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During Collaborative planning, teachers will plan utilizing the strategies learned from the monthly professional learning sessions on reviewing content.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers; Kelly Zwack, Principal; Rachel Callahan, Assistant Principal
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative planning and submitted lessons plans to ensure strategies planned aligned to reviewing content.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the planned lessons and strategies aligned to Reviewing Content in Science.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers; Kelly Zwack, Principal; Rachel Callahan, Assistant Principal
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid-Unit, End of Unit Data; PM1 & PM2 Data Analysis; Regrouping of BEAR time interventions
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During monthly PLCs the team will analyze student data and best practices.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff, ESE Inclusion Teachers, Administration
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid-Unit, End of Unit Data; PM1 & PM2 Data Analysis; Regrouping of BEAR time interventions
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!
Positive school culture will be enhanced at Corkscrew Elementary by increasing student recognition of staff and students from 0 to 100% by May 2026.
(View Marzano Model)
Providing Feedback and Celebrating Success
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Positive referrals will be given out to 100% of our students
Person Responsible:
Daniela Parks
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
PBiS Action Team will share data to update the staff during our monthly faculty meetings.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
100% of our staff will be recognized through our weekly staff newsletter (Bear Bulletin).
Person Responsible:
Krista Fusco; Kelly Zwack
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Sharpen the Saw action team and administration will track shoutouts on a spreadsheet to ensure all staff members have been recognized.
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
Joshua Barton Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/24/2024 9/15/2027
Julie Perez Parent Hispanic Non-Migrant Yes Secretary 9/15/2025 9/15/2026
Kelly Zwack Principal White Non-Migrant Yes Principal 9/15/2025
Micheale Bowman Parent White Non-Migrant No SAC Chair 8/30/2024 9/15/2026
Nicholas Lamparelli Community/Business White Non-Migrant No Member 8/30/2024 8/30/2027
Amber Forbes Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 10/31/2024 9/15/2027
Kate O'Connor Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/9/2025 9/15/2028
Monica Brown Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/9/2025 9/15/2028
Lindsey Ventura Parent White Non-Migrant No Member 9/9/2025 9/15/2028
GroupNumber%
Community/Business111.1
Non-instructional Staff00.0
Parent777.8
Principal111.1
Students (required for HS; optional for MS)00.0
Teachers00.0
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.
GroupNumberPercent
District Employee 222.2
Non-District Employee 777.8
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
Black00.06.4
Hispanic112.539.6
Others00.09.6
White787.544.4
Date

Existing Uploads

No Bylaws files have been uploaded yet.