Planning for School Improvement

Lavern Gaynor Elementary School

School Year

Data Analysis - Needs Assessment

PatternELAMathScienceSocial Studies
What trends emerge across grade levels, subgroups, and core content areas?
ELA Proficiency by subgroup -SWD subgroup proficiency – increase in 3rd (FY23 33% to FY24 47%), increase 4th (FY23 7% to FY24 27%), decrease 5th (FY23 28% to FY24 15%) -ELL subgroup proficiency - increase 3rd (FY23 34% to FY24 37%), decrease 4th (FY23 4% to FY24 16%), decrease 5th (FY23 13% to FY24 8%) **proficiency will increase when data for graded students is released - Advanced subgroup Grade 3 – 100%; Grade 4 – 71%; Grade 5 – 71% ELA by Grade Level – SIP Goal was 54% proficient **proficiency will increase when non-graded students are not part of the cohort -KG- SEL – increase (FY23 – 25%; FY24 – 33%) KG IReady – increase (FY23 65% - FY24 – 76%) -First SR- decrease from FY23 – 53% - FY24 – 46% First Grade iReady – decrease from FY23 – 57% - FY24 – 42% -Second SR- decrease from FY23 – 49% - FY24 – 48% Second Grade iReady – decrease from FY23 – 63% - FY24 – 55% -Third- decrease from FY23 – 49% - FY24 – 47% -Fourth - decrease from FY23 – 27% - FY24 – 39% -Fifth - decrease from FY23 – 45% - FY24 – 32%
MATH SIP Goal was 54% proficient **proficiency will increase when data for graded students is released -SWD subgroup proficiency - increase 3rd (FY23 17% to FY24 29%), increase 4th (FY23 13% to FY24 60%), decrease in 5th (FY23 73% to FY24 33%) -ELL subgroup proficiency – increase in 3rd (FY23 28% to FY24 46%), increase in 4th (FY23 3% to FY24 55%), increase in 5th (FY23 27% to FY24 50%) Advanced subgroup Grade 3 – 83%; Grade 4 – 95%; Grade 5 – 100% Math trends by grade level KG – increase from FY23 – 27% - FY24 – 31% Grade 1 - decrease from FY23 – 52% - FY24 – 49% Grade 2 - decrease from FY23 – 57% - FY24 – 51% Grade 3 - increase from FY23 – 45% - FY24 – 53% Grade 4 - increase from FY23 – 39% - FY24 – 69% Grade 5 - decrease from FY23 – 66% - FY24 – 63%
SCIENCE Proficiency SIP Goal was 56% proficient Grade 5 – no change from FY23 – 47% - FY24 – 47% -SWD subgroup proficiency – decrease FY23 36% to FY24 25% -ELL subgroup proficiency –increase FY23 7% to FY24 21%
Which data component showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area?
What data components showed the most improvement? What new actions did your school take in this area? Grade 4 Math – 69% is our highest grade level proficiency score since we opened Grade 5 Math (cohort) increased from FY23 39% to FY24 63% SWD subgroup increased in proficiency in Grade 3 and Grade 4 in both ELA and Math EL subgroup Grade 3-5) increased in proficiency in 6 out of 7 data components (exception is Grade 5 ELA) What new actions did your school take in this area? Grade 4 had a vacancy most of the year. The math coach/resource teacher and the ESE teacher contributed to our success by splitting two math classes into four math classes which reduced the range and intensified the support. Grade 5 proficiency, gains and gains for lowest 25% was a major focus this year. The consistency of a returning teacher, new math coach and a strong after school program all contributed to success.
Which data component showed the lowest performance? Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year's low performance and discuss any trends.
Which data component(s) showed the lowest performance? ELA: • Grade 4 (sitting 5th graders) are at 39% overall proficiency • KG (sitting 1st graders) are at 33% overall proficiency • Grade 5 (sitting 6th graders) are at 32% overall proficiency • Grade 2 (sitting 3rd graders) o ELL - dropped from 53% to 46% and were 12 points below district gains • Grade 1 (sitting 2nd graders) o ALL - dropped from 53% to 46% and are 9 points below district gains • Grade 3 (sitting 4th graders) o ALL - dropped from 49% to 47% and are 5 points below district gains o ELL (sitting 4th graders) - although they increased from 34% to 37%, they are still 2 points below the district gains MATH: • Grade 5 (sitting 6th graders) o ESE – dropped from 73% to 33% and are 41 points below the district gains o ALL – dropped from 68% to 63% and are 3 points below the district gains • Grade 2 (sitting 3rd graders) o ELL – dropped from 54% to 33% and are 20 points below the district gains o ESE – dropped from 54% to 40% and are 13 points below the district gains o ALL – dropped from 57% to 51% and are 6 points below the district gains • Grade 1 (sitting 2nd graders) o ALL – dropped from 52% to 49% and are 4 points below the district gains • Grade KG (sitting 1st graders) o ESE – dropped from 14% to 11% and are 4 points below the district gains SCIENCE: Grade 5 (sitting 6th graders) ESE – dropped from 36% to 25% and are 10 points below the district gains Explain the contributing factor(s) to last year’s low performance and discuss any trends. TRENDS: • All grade levels are below 50% proficiency in ELA. This percentage will increase for grades 3 – 5 when data for graded students is released. However, our goal is that all grade levels are above at least 50% proficiency. • Grade 2 Math decreased in proficiency in all student groupings CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: • The increase in ELL students throughout the year affected proficiency rates. The focus we have put on Fundations with support from our Reading Coach will contribute to increased proficiency rates in upcoming assessment opportunities. • Large classes in grade 4 contributed to the need for much more support at that grade level. One of the two teachers was a new teacher and had a mentor as our Reading Coach was focused on Fundations coaching and grade 3. This teacher will continue to receive assistance and increased ELA coaching throughout the upcoming year to boost capacity. • Grade 2 was comprised of four new teachers who were getting familiar with the new curriculum. The team is strong and willing to work with academic coaches as well as peers to build their capacity in content areas and engagement.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline.
Which data component showed the greatest decline from the prior year? Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline. • Grade 4 ELA (sitting 5th graders) are at 39% overall proficiency – decrease from FY23 – 27% • Grade 5 ELA (sitting 6th graders) are at 32% overall proficiency – decrease from FY23 – 45% • Grade 5 SWD Math –decrease from FY23 – 73% - FY24 33% • Grade 1 ELA decrease from FY23 – 53% – FY24 – 46% • Grade 2 Math decrease from FY23 – 57% - FY24 – 51% (decrease in SWD and ELL as well) Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this decline. **proficiency will increase when data for graded students by grade level is released
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.
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 4 ELA (sitting 5th graders) are at 39% overall proficiency – State – 53%; CCPS 57% • Grade 5 ELA (sitting 6th graders) are at 32% overall proficiency – State – 55%; CCPS 58% • Grade 5 SCIENCE (sitting 6th graders) are At 47% overall proficiency – State – 53%; CCPS 61% Explain the factor(s) that contributed to this gap and any trends. ELA - **proficiency will increase when data for graded students by grade level is released – additional data analysis needed Science trend FY21 47%; FY22 53%; FY23 57%; FY24 55% (47% All Students) Building Capacity with teachers and students as evidenced by EOY scores Grade 2 – 67%; Grade 3 – 75%; Grade 4 – 57%
Rank your highest priorities (maximum of 5) for school improvement in the upcoming school year.
1. ELA Proficiency above 50% for all grades (RAISE criteria) 2. Grade 5 Science Proficiency 3.

SIP - Areas of Focus

Vision: Where We Want to Be Through high quality education and leadership opportunities, the students of Lavern Gaynor Elementary will create a splash as they learn, lead, and serve in school and their community.
Mission - How We Get There At LGE We belong, we learn, we grow, we lead. Together we succeed.
Increase overall Reading Proficiency from 50% to 54% by May 31, 2025.
(View Marzano Model)
Organizing Students to Interact with Content
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly professional learning and peer observation opportunities which focus on Organizing Students to Interact with Content
Person Responsible:
Dr. Susan Jordan, Principal; Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC; Ms. Jaci Piesto, Literacy Coach; Ms. Linda DeLuca, Math/Science Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for engagement and understanding of the interactive professional learning sessions.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During Collaborative Planning, teachers will plan for tasks, activities, assignments and feedback that utilizes strategies learning during our professional learning.
Person Responsible:
ELA Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative Planning and submitted lesson plans will ensure strategies, tasks, activities, assignments and feedback are aligned to our professional learning.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the planned lessons and strategies aligned to Organizing Students to Interact with Content in ELA.
Person Responsible:
Instructional Staff
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct weekly walkthroughs to provide specific feedback aligned to Organizing Students to Interact with Content.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During monthly MTSS Data PLCs, teachers will analyze student data, plan for interventions and share best practices.
Person Responsible:
Ms. Arpaia, APC; Ms. Piesto, Literacy Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid and End of Module assessments, exit tickets, student work with feedback and progress monitoring assessments will be shared and used to plan for instruction.
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
Title I Part A5100131254282Resource Teachers1.20$97,311.99
Title I Part A6400730254282Leader in Me Membership fees $5,225.00
Title I Part A6400133254282Professional Development for Teachers outside of contract time to support school initiatives in literacy, differentiation, math, science and student engagement. $3,848.25
Title I Part A5900133254282After School Power UP Program - Fall (6 weeks) and Spring (8 weeks) program for small group instruction in reading, math and science for students in the lowest quartiles or bubble students. $12,275.42
Title I Part A7730160254282After School Power UP Program - Fall (6 weeks) and Spring (8 weeks) program for small group instruction in reading, math and science for students in the lowest quartiles or bubble students. $2,301.64
Title I Part A5100510254282Instructional Resources $2,966.27
Title I Part A6300133254282Curriculum Writing $1,063.83
Title I Part A7800795254282Student Transportation for After School Program $1,260.00
Title I Part A5100369254282Classkick software $2,999.00
Title I Part A5100519254282Technology supplies to support classroom instruction: ink $550.00
Title I Part A6150510254282Parent Involvement Supplies for parent events $785.41
Title I Part A6150519254282Ink for Printing Parent Events $350.00
Title I Part A6150370254282Postage $150.00
Title I Part A6150390254282Printing Services $500.00
Increase overall Math Proficiency from 70% to 73% by May 31, 2025.
(View Marzano Model)
Organizing Students to Interact with Content
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly professional learning and peer observation opportunities which focus on Organizing Students to Interact with Content
Person Responsible:
Dr. Susan Jordan, Principal; Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC; Ms. Linda DeLuca, Math/Science Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for engagement and understanding of the interactive professional learning sessions.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During Collaborative Planning, teachers will plan for tasks, activities, assignments and feedback that utilizes strategies learned during our professional learning.
Person Responsible:
Math Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative Planning and submitted lesson plans will ensure strategies, tasks, activities, assignments and feedback are aligned to our professional learning.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the planned lessons and strategies aligned to Organizing Students to Interact with Content in Math
Person Responsible:
Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC; Ms. Linda DeLuca, Math Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct weekly walkthroughs to provide specific feedback aligned to Organizing Students to Interact with Content.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
After assessments, teachers will analyze student data, plan for interventions and share best practices.
Person Responsible:
Math teachers, Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC; Ms. Linda DeLuca, Math Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Dr. Susan Jordan, Principal; Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC
Budget
Funding SourceFunctionObjectProjectBudget NarrativeFTEAmount
Title I Part A6400131254282Content Area Coach, Math0.50$54,845.90
Title I Part A5100131254282Teacher, Resource $26,292.90
Increase overall Science Proficiency from 55% to 58% by May 31, 2025.
(View Marzano Model)
Organizing Students to Interact with Content
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct monthly professional learning and peer observation opportunities that focus on Organizing Students to Interact with Content
Person Responsible:
Dr. Susan Jordan, Principal; Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC; Ms. Linda DeLuca, Math/Science Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for engagement and understanding of the interactive professional learning sessions.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
During Collaborative Planning, using the 5E model, teachers will plan for tasks, activities, assignments, and feedback that utilize strategies learned during our professional learning.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers, Mrs. Linda DeLuca, Science Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of Collaborative Planning and submitted lesson plans will ensure strategies, tasks, activities, assignments and feedback are aligned to our professional learning.
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Teachers will implement the 5E model of instruction with a focus on task alignment to the NGSSS and purposeful integration of close reading strategies with the science text.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Administration will conduct weekly walkthroughs to provide specific feedback aligned to Organizing Students to Interact with Content.
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
After assessments, teachers will analyze student data, plan for interventions and share best practices.
Person Responsible:
Science Teachers, Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC, Ms. Linda DeLuca, Science Coach
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Mid and End of Unit assessments, exit tickets, student work with feedback and progress monitoring assessments will be shared and used to plan for instruction.
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!
LGE will support student success strategies as we increase the number of positive referrals from 153 positive referrals in FY24 to 300 positive referrals by June 2025.
(View Marzano Model)
Leader in Me, PBIS and CCPS Blueprint for Success Strategies
Action #1
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Plan for and conduct ongoing professional learning and faculty meeting discussions with a focus on Leader in Me and PBIS Focus.
Person Responsible:
Dr. Susan Jordan, Principal; Ms. Didi Arpaia, APC; Ms. Nelson, counselor
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Staff will be monitored for engagement and understanding of the interactive professional learning sessions.
Action #2
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Action Teams will meet to support the implementation of our Positive Referral wall of fame and the related “sh”elebrations
Person Responsible:
Culture Action Team Ms. Nelson, school counselor
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Monitoring of positive referrals and the impact on classroom and office referrals will be reported to staff monthly
Action #3
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Staff will develop a school-wide tracker to display and celebrate positive referral recipients.
Person Responsible:
Culture Action Team
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Positive Referral School Wide Tracker
Action #4
Action Steps to implement evidence-based strategy:
Data will be reported monthly by our counselor. Monthly celebrations for positive referral recipients and staff that write positive referrals during the month.
Person Responsible:
Ms. Nelson, Counselor
Progress Monitoring Evidence:
Trends related to PBIS and discipline data will be monitored and discussed in Action Team and staff meetings.
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.
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))
Teachers at Lavern Gaynor Elementary will have regular opportunities for collaboration and professional learning communities to share effective teaching practices and discuss strategies for increasing student feedback and response to instruction. We will use a variety of formative and summative assessments to track student progress and provide students with specific feedback related to the standard, learning goals and units of instruction. Teachers will engage in data-informed instructional decision-making using progress monitoring and assessment data to identify areas of improvement and adjust instructional strategies. A multi-tiered system of support is in place to provide students with effective interventions and identify students who may require additional educational services or are a member of an underperforming subgroup. This might include before or after-school programs, additional interventions, enrichment opportunities and academic clubs that focus on specific subjects or skills. We will actively involve families in the academic program by providing workshops on supporting learning at home, understanding curriculum, and our Leader in Me initiative.
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

Our Progress Monitoring data, needs analysis and formative assessments during the 2023-2024 school year show an urgent need to increase the number of students that are proficient in ELA. The RAISE status indicated that less than 50% of our students are reading on grade level. RAISE data (ALL students) indicates the percent of students scoring below grade level and is as follows: KG 58% below; Grade 1 – 56% below; Grade 2 42% below. We will plan for and implement evidence-based interventions to improved student achievement in Reading. Teachers will plan for tasks, activities and assignments with feedback that utilizes student grouping and engagement strategies learned during our professional development. With a strategic focus on instruction and intervention, differentiated instruction and intervention time is built into the master schedule. Each student will have a plan for growth and improvement including tiered intervention, strategic skills groups and enrichment.
2.

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

Our Progress Monitoring data, needs analysis and formative assessments during the 2023-2024 school year show an urgent need to increase the number of students that are proficient in ELA. The RAISE status indicated that less than 50% of our students are reading on grade level. RAISE data (ALL students) indicates the percent of students scoring below grade level and is as follows: Grade 3 49% below; Grade 4 53% below and Grade 5 69% below. We will plan for and implement evidence-based interventions to improved student achievement in Reading. Teachers will plan for tasks, activities and assignments with feedback that utilizes student grouping and engagement strategies learned during our professional development. With a strategic focus on instruction and intervention, differentiated instruction and intervention time is built into the master schedule. Each student will have a plan for growth and improvement including tiered intervention, strategic skills groups and enrichment.