Stephen J. Gerace Elementary School ---------------------

1
Stephen J. GeraceElementary School--------------
-------

• 4th Quarter Report
• 2007
• Were On Our Way!!!

2
District SRI Sums
3
Achievement Goals

• Objective 1 Language Arts
• By June 2007, there will be an increase in the
  percentage of students scoring advanced
  proficient in Language Arts for the 06-07 school
  year as measured by the NJASK3 and 4.
• Baseline 2005-06 Target
  2006-07
• Grade 3 8.6 12.1
• Actual 2007 Results 7.6
• Grade 4 1.7 8.5
• Actual 2007 Results 6.8
• Objective 2 Mathematics
• By June 2007, there will be an increase in the
  percentage of students scoring advanced
  proficient in Mathematics for the 06-07school
  year as measured by the NJASK3 and 4.
• Baseline 2005-06 percentage
  Target 2006-07 percentage
• Grade 3 25.9 33.3
• Actual 2007 Results 37.9
• Grade 4 29.3 40.7
• Actual 2007 Results 57.6
• SJG Target Advanced Proficient Goal 94.6

4
Stephen J Gerace 2007 NJASK Results
5
NJASK 4 Year to Year Comparison
6
NJASK 3 Year to Year Comparison
7
Grade 3 vs. Grade 4 Cohort Comparison
8
Key Accomplishments

• SJG teachers are tops in their field.
  Incorporate Best Practices for Teaching aligned
  with current research. Examples coming from
  Harvey Daniels, Teaching the Best Practice Way.
• SJG teachers keep abreast of the latest trends
  through professional readings conducted on their
  own and during PLCs.
• Faculty Meetings provide time for professional
  development and conversations relating to best
  practices for teaching.
• Implemented active learning protocols in
  school.
• Organized school around professional learning
  communities. Looking to increase this for 07-08
  school year!
• Implemented the Scholastic Reading Inventory and
  tested all students grades 1-5.
• Implement K12 Planet which provides electronic
  access to students grades and homework
  assignments.
• Collected progress report and grade card
  distribution data.
• Re-scheduled school around essentials doubled
  reading instruction, increased language arts and
  math by 50. Blocked reading together to provide
  aligned reading scheduling (all students 1-2, and
  3-5 taught reading at same time. This block
  affords the opportunity to offer flexible
  re-groupings planned for the second quarter.
• Expanded Video presence on Channel 77. Four
  videos were broadcast.
• Improved technology offerings. All computers
  loaded with security software. Media Specialist
  assisted greatly in this area.
• Implemented Home Teams with parents in the
  building. Held parent meetings each quarter.
• Provided professional development training on
  unprecedented scale including, Falling Through
  the Cracks, Differentiated Instruction,
  Cooperative Learning, Technology, NJASK 3-4,
  PLCs.
• Library lunch five days a week for grades 1-5.
• Informal visits to classrooms daily
• Expanded lexile library collection.
• Open forum for district administrators at HSA
  meetings
• Lunch time coffee connection with Principal and
  Superintendent
• Spotlight on Gerace expanded

9
What Actions Have Been Taken During the Fourth
Quarter driven by Third Quarter Results

• Watch and Concerns lists updated, revisited
  weekly
• Lesson plans prepared for staff by MLSP and
  Reading Specialist to assist with recognition of
  best practices for teaching
• Data driven instruction leads to better
  preparedness and recognition of students
  strengths and weaknesses
• PLC meetings Continuing
• Individual teacher meetings with building
  principal to discuss all students and their
  progress
• Building Team Meetings to discuss Benchmark
  results. Question addressed regarding use of
  benchmark for comparative purposes.
• Question posed Why do the three elementary
  schools scores differ so? --- TQM Teams will
  begin to evaluate this question
• Student Management Profiles were developed once
  again to analyze strengths and weaknesses.

10
Student Achievement 3rd Qtr vs. 4th Qtr SRI
Results
11
Student Achievement 1st Qtr vs. 4th Qtr SRI
Results
12
Student Achievement 2nd Qtr vs. 3rd Qtr SRI
Results
13
Student Achievement First Quarter - SRI Results
14
Student AchievementSecond Quarter- SRI Results
15
Student AchievementThird Quarter- SRI Results
16
Student AchievementFourth Quarter- SRI Results
17
What does the data show?SRI

• SRI Fourth Quarter results demonstrate the
  following All Grade levels have shown an
  increase in students performing at a proficient
  or better level
• 40 of Grade One perform at a proficient level
  and 23 perform at an advanced proficient level.
  This means that 63 of Grade One is proficient or
  better.
• 50 of Grade Two perform at a proficient level
  and 36 perform at an advanced proficient level.
  This means that 86 of Grade Two is proficient or
  better.
• 55 of Grade Three perform at a proficient level
  and 27 perform at an advanced proficient level.
  This means that 82 of Grade Three is proficient
  or better.
• 44 of Grade Four perform at a proficient level
  and 42 perform at an advanced proficient level.
  This means that 86 of Grade Four is proficient
  or better.
• 67 of Grade Five perform at a proficient level
  and 28 perform at an advanced proficient level.
  This means that 95 of Grade Five is proficient
  or better.

18
Student Achievement 1st Qtr vs. 2nd Qtr
Benchmark Results
19
Student Achievement 2nd Qtr vs. 3rd Qtr
Benchmark Results
20
Student Achievement 3rd Qtr vs. 4th Qtr
Benchmark Results
21
Pequannock Township Public SchoolsBenchmark
Results Q1 Vs. Q4
22
Student Achievement 1st Qtr vs. 4th Qtr
Benchmark Results
23
Student AchievementFourth Quarter Reading
Benchmarks
24
Student AchievementFourth Quarter Math Benchmarks
25
What does the 4th Qtr Benchmarking show?

• In Grade 3, 85 are proficient or better in
  Language Arts and 85 are proficient or better in
  math
• In Grade 4, 84 are proficient or better in
  Language Arts and 81 are proficient or better in
  math
• In Grade 5, 76 are proficient or better in
  Language Arts and 46 are proficient or better in
  math
• Geraces fourth quarter math benchmark results
  are not where we would have like to have been.
  Building Teams analyzed results and discussed the
  following
• Math benchmarks are not cumulative therefore
  quarter to quarter analysis makes it difficult to
  target specific questions
• Perhaps the benchmark tests created need to be
  reevaluated from building to building for
  curriculum alignment

26
2007-2008 Actions

• Lexile ranges will continue to be narrowed based
  on SRI results.
• MLSP and Reading Specialist are continuing to
  revisit our watch and concern lists daily.
• PLC meetings will continue to be utilized to
  review data, analyze student actions and plan
  accordingly-Recommendation is made for this to
  increase next year.
• Professional development offerings highly
  recommended for all staff specifically on the
  Writing Workshop model
• MLSP and Reading Specialist will meet each week
  for one hour with building principal to review
  data and action plans.
• We will continue to build on the data by
  targeting questions on the benchmarking tests
  that indicate weaknesses. The results are used
  to collaborate with classroom teachers for lesson
  co-teaching and planning.
• Continued review of all the data, Benchmarking,
  SRI and grade distribution being placed in
  conversation with advanced proficient
  performance. Is there a trend or correlation?
• NJ ASK Scores must improve- We have to analyze
  this thoroughly for the question to be answered-
  Language Arts?

27
Student Achievement Performance Profiles

• Student Grades
• Grade distributions by school, grades, and
  teacher
• Failure rates by school, grades, and teacher
• Progress report failure rates by school, grades,
  and teacher
• SRI
• Benchmarking

28
Student AchievementFourth Quarter Grade
Distribution
29
Student AchievementSecond Quarter Grade
Distribution
30
Student Achievement Grade Distribution Fourth
Quarter
31
Student Achievement Grade Distribution - Third
Quarter
32
Student Achievement Grade Distribution-Second
Quarter
33
Student AchievementGrade Distribution First
Quarter
34
What Are We Doing With The Data?Fourth Quarter
Actions as a result of Third Quarter Data
Analysis(Differences in Programming-Implementatio
n)

• Students in grades 1-2 and 3-5 continue to be
  grouped according to their Lexile range. MLSP
  teacher is again teaching a grade 1/2 lexile
  group in order to reduce the class sizes at this
  level.
• Building Principal meets with individual grade
  levels to review data and incorporate strategies
  to assist. (Provided Strategies That Work
  Book- all staff will use common language for
  reading instruction
• Continuing to purchase Lexile Libraries for all
  grades
• Reading Specialist and MLSP teacher are piloting
  a 3rd grade Math/Literacy group to improve
  identified weaknesses that are common to both
  math and reading comprehension
• Met with Elementary Principals to discuss data
  from three schools- where we are, where we need
  to go
• Continue to utilize K12 Planet
• Media Specialist Aide updates our webpage as
  needed
• MLSP teacher provided staff development on Family
  Math
• Incorporate Evaluation System that aligns with
  Five Year Plan and addresses Best Practices for
  teaching
• Reading Specialist continues lessons based out of
  Strategies That Work. This encompasses
  suggestions from the Comprehension Tool Kit.
  Monitor, activate, ask questions, infer,
  determine importance and synthesize are
  strategies our students are continuing to
  practice. Teachers are continuing to develop
  essential questioning techniques.
• Gerace staff continuing to establish clear
  understanding that inferential thinking helps
  readers to predict, surface themes and draw
  conclusions.
• Informal visits to classrooms daily

35
What Are We Doing With The Data?Third Actions as
a result of Second Quarter Data Analysis
(Differences in Programming-Implementation)

• Grades 3-4 are incorporating open ended math
  questions into their math instruction focusing on
  identifying strategies and communication your
  answers into words
• Grades 2-5 continue using spicy words for all
  students and incorporate activities using these
  words daily. Activities include using them in a
  sentence, defining and spelling.
• Best Practice teaching is reflected in formal and
  informal observations
• All teaching directly aligned to CCCS.
• Grade level teachers meet frequently to align
  plans with best practices for teaching and each
  other
• Gerace staff on board for review and
  implementation of formalized writing program
• Continued monitoring of best practices for
  teaching
• Continued monitoring of active lessons
• Weekly lesson plan review-lessons targeting data
  driven instruction
• Professional Development Activities-
• Falling Through The Cracks, SRI, Benchmarking,
  Report Cards, Data Driven Instruction, and NJASK
  overview

36
How do we plan to use the data?

• Implementation Teams have been formed for TQM,
  Scheduling, Accelerated Reader, and Writing.
  Teachers at all grade levels have volunteered to
  work collaboratively on these teams.
• Staff development is being planned for August to
  implement the new Writing Workshop model
• NJ ASK Analysis is imperative to understanding
  Gerace student performance not improving at the
  level we had anticipated
• TQM Teams and PLCs will be instrumental in this
  analysis
• Specific data analysis must be used to drive our
  instruction
• Teacher accountability-cohort analysis
• Reframing the role of MLSP
• Reading Specialist to continue role as building
  liaison and team leader for every grade level
• Special Education Cohort analysis must continue.
  2007 Scores indicate continued collaboration with
  Director of Special Services is needed