2010 - 2011
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Non-Title Plan
Note: Blank copy is available on www.alsde.edu , e-GAP, Document Library
Central office designee submits required plans to LEA system’s e-GAP Document Library
NAME OF SCHOOL: Valley High SchoolSTREET ADDRESS: 501U S Highway 29 / CITY: Valley / STATE: Alabama / ZIP CODE: 36854
CONTACT: Jim Davidson / TELEPHONE: 334-756-4105 ext 302 / E-MAIL
Identified for School Improvement? No Yes Delay Status Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 or more
ALL PLANS: Submit to LEA for Board approval. Retain the original plan in the LEA. Submit a copy of the plan electronically to your system’s E-GAP Document Library by November 3, 2010.
If using any Federal funding: Submit to LEA for Board approval. Scan PAGE ONE and PAGE TWO to indicate signatures. Submit the plan and signature pages electronically to your system’s
e-GAP Document Library by November 3, 2010.
Made AYP?
YES NO / Made AMAOs (ELL)?
YES
NO
N/A / Career Tech Made AYP?
YES
NO
N/A / Are any federal resources like Title II, III, IV, and VI used to coordinate with and supplement existing services and are not used to provide services that, in the absence of federal funds, would be provided by another fund source?
YES NO / Describe how this plan will be made available to parents and other stakeholders, such as through parent meetings or on Web sites.
NOTE: The Parental Involvement section of this plan must be distributed to all parents.
Valley High School’s administration, faculty, and parents have worked on this continuous improvement plan and are familiar with plan components. The complete plan will be presented to the entire faculty during faculty meetings. The plan will be placed on the school web site so that faculty and all stakeholders may view it. Copies will be available in the main office. Faculty and staff will have a completed copy e-mailed to them. The plan will be presented and discussed at parent meetings. It will be presented to the Board during the October meeting for their approval as well.
*Board Approval: Yes No Board approval received on ______, 2010. Board Signature:
Superintendent Signature: / Date:
LEA Representative Signature:
(responsible for monitoring plan) / Date:
Principal Signature: / Date:
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION TEAM
This plan was developed/or revised during the following time period (e.g. April/May – September 200_): April/May 2010 – September 2010Provide a brief description of the planning process including how teachers will be involved in decisions regarding the use of state academic assessments and other data sources in order to provide information on and to improve the achievement of individual students and the overall instructional program and how parents were involved with faculty and staff in developing and implementing the CIP:
The team is comprised of one representative from each department. In April of 2010, a meeting was held with the current CIP team as well as the previous team. The 09-10 plan was reviewed. Team representatives went to each department to discuss what changes should be made. In May 2010, this changes were discussed by the entire faculty. Committee members met and discussed components to the new plan. With the announcement of our AYP status, committee members again began to discuss additional information and strategies that should be included in this year’s plan.
Instructional
Leadership Team Names
(The Leadership Team must include the principal, faculty [including ELL resource lead teacher if applicable], staff, parents, community stakeholders, and/or students.) / Positions
(Identify position held, e.g., Administration, Faculty, Staff, Grade Level and/or Subject Area, Parents and Community members.) / Signatures
(Indicates participation in the
development of the CIP)
Tana Canon
Matt Wells
Andrew Leak
Wendy Johnson
Dana Wiliford
Doug Blackmon
Carolyn Doss
Lawendy Meadows
Shannon Chandler
Nancy Bryan
Tolandra Harris
Dayle Cook
Sharon Weldon
Jim Davidson
Montray Thompson / Reading Specialist
Social Studies Teacher
Health Teacher
Business Tech Teacher
Physical Education Teacher
Science Teacher
Math Teacher
English Teacher
Fine Arts Teacher
Special Education Teacher
Counselor
Counselor
Administration
Administration
Administration
Part I – SUMMARY OF NEEDS BASED ON A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF DATA
Briefly describe the process your faculty used to conduct the needs assessment (analysis of all data).The CIP tem met together and studied data, identified areas of weaknesses, evaluated effective strategies from the previous plans, and developed activities to positively impact areas of need.
Highly Qualified Teachers (HQT): Describe how staffing decisions ensure that instruction is provided by highly qualified, well-trained teachers and how their assignments most effectively address identified
academic needs.
Certified staff has been hired to ensure that there is highly qualified staff in every core academic area and in reading. Collaboration and pull-out services are used to ensure that all special education students receive
instruction from highly qualified teachers.
Number and percentage of Non-HQT:
100% of our teachers are highly qualified. / Number and percentage of Classes Taught by Non-HQT:
0% of our teachers are NON-highly qualified.
Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE):
Strengths:
Over 99% of our 2010 Seniors passed the reading and math section of the grad exams. 100% of our 2010
seniors were eligible for some type of diploma option. 91% of 2010 Juniors have passed the Biology portion
of the exam. 75% of the Free/Reduced lunch students scored a level 3 or 4 on the math portion of the grad exam. 71% of the Free/Reduced students scored a level 3 or 4 on the reading. / Weaknesses:
40% of Juniors must still pass the reading portion of the grad exam. 37% must pass the math portion.
100% of students must pass the math and reading portion of the exam to meet the state grad requirements. 64% of Black students scored a level 3 or 4 on the reading portion.
Alabama Reading and Mathematics Test (ARMT):
Strengths:
72% of 2010 8th graders from Burns scored Level 3 or 4 in reading. 66% of them scored a level 3 or 4 in math.
72% of the 09-10 Free/Reduced 8th grade students scored a level 3 or 4 in reading. / Weaknesses:
28% of the 2010 8th graders partially met state standards in reading, and 34% in math. 54% of the 09-10 8th graders scored level 3 or 4 on the math portion.
Alabama Science Assessment:
Strengths:
60% of the students taking the ASA for the first time scored a level 3 or 4. / Weaknesses: Over 60% of the students did not meet state standards in the areas of acids and bases.
Stanford 10:
Strengths:
09-10 Free/Reduced students scored in the 34 percentile which was higher than the 08-09 31 percentile
in reading. Black students increased from the 29 to the 34.
90-10 Reduced lunch 8th graders scored overall in the 49 percentile. / Weaknesses:
While poverty students and Black students showed an increase in the percentile ranking, both were at the 34 percentile.
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS):
Strengths:
Elementary schools are increasing in LNF, NWF, PSF, and ORF each year. / Weaknesses:
Intensive students are not making enough progress each year.
Part I - continued - Directions - Summary of Data: Indicate data sources used during planning by identifying strengths and weaknesses or program gaps. If your school did not review a particular data source, please write N/A. School improvement goals should address program gaps (weaknesses) as they relate to student achievement or AYP categories such as graduation rate or other academic indicators. Close attention should be given to the proficiency index. Please include all disaggregated subgroups including those with less than forty students. Additionally, please report data pertaining to the Response to Instruction (RtI) framework, include data used to determine the type of support provided to students (i.e.: universal screening results, benchmark testing, progress monitoring, etc.)
Alabama Direct Assessment of Writing (ADAW):
Strengths:
In TOTAL, 72% of 10th graders were proficient, scoring a level 3 or 4 in narrative, expository, and persuasive. / Weaknesses:
54% of 10th graders scored a level 2 in the area of grammar usage.
ACCESS for English Language Learners (ELLs):
Strengths:
Our one ELL student was successful in earning all credits on her advanced diploma four year plan.
Software is available to assist teachers in ELL instruction. Our school has an ACCESS lab and in offering classes in
several different foreign languages. / Weaknesses:
EducateAL or other Professional Evaluation Profile Information:
Strengths:
Administration’s review of EducateAL reports show a strength in the area of content knowledge with the majority of teachers scoring at the integrating level. / Weaknesses:
Administration’s review of evaluations show a weakness in the area of classroom management with the majority of new teachers scoring in the applying level.
Additional Data Sources: (e.g., Alabama Alternate Assessment [AAA], School Technology Plan Data)
Strengths:
Students earned a Level 3 in science, reading, and math. / Weaknesses:
The lowest score was in the area of reading.
Local Data (e.g., LEA, school, and grade-level assessments, surveys, program-specific assessments, other RtI data):
Strengths:
Burns provided VHS with a list of at-risk students in the area of reading. Parent participation was strong in the
education and health fair, Back-to-School night, Academic Awards program, athletic club, and band boosters.
Benchmark tests are being created in the area of mathematics.
Credit Recovery Program allowed 8 Seniors to graduate instead of being retained. / Weaknesses:
Pacing charts and guides with a focus on AHSGE standards are needed in each content area.
According to our PST guidelines we need 15 problem solving teams to adequately address the identified students.
At the Spring CIP walk-through, classroom groups noted a lack of student engagement.
Career and Technical Education Program Data Reports:
Strengths:
Our CTC facility has opened up spaces in their afternoon programs to help increase student participation in some of their programs.
CT students earned 24 postsecondary credits. / Weaknesses:
Some programs at the CTC have long waiting lists while others run very low enrollment.
Information Technology was removed from CT.
Only 3 CT teachers have more than 3 years teaching experience.
System: Chambers County May 19, 2010
School: Valley High School
Part I – Continued (CULTURE RELATED DATA):School Demographic Information related to student discipline (e.g. total office referrals, long- and short-term suspensions, expulsions, alternative school placements, School Incidence Report (SIR) data, student attendance).
Strengths:
Number of fights at VHS reduced from 117 in 08-09 to 29 in 09-10. Student Office referrals reduced by over 25% from previous year. / Weaknesses:
During 09-10 school year, we had 5,335 unexcused absences.
School Demographic Information related to drop-out information and graduation rate data.
Strengths:
Credit Recovery program continues to be utilized allowing students to regain lost credits.
Graduation rate increased by 7%. / Weaknesses:
Over 90% of our drop-outs failed at least one freshman level class.
School Demographic Information related to teacher attendance, teacher turnover, or challenges associated with a high percent of new and/or inexperienced faculty.
Strengths:
There are only 3 true first year teachers at Valley High. / Weaknesses:
22% of our certified staff are new to our campus.
School Demographic Information related to student attendance, patterns of student tardiness, early checkouts, late enrollments, high number of transfers, and/or transiency including migratory moves (if
applicable).
Strengths:
The focus of credit loss is on quality of seat time and not quantity of seat time. / Weaknesses:
95% of teachers state that student absences is the main cause of failures in their class.
School Perception Information related to parent perceptions and parent needs including information about literacy and education levels.
Strengths:
97% of parents participating in a survey were pleased with the problem solving abilities in place during the 09-10
school year. / Weaknesses:
8% of parents do not see this school as a good place to send their children.
School Perception Information related to student PRIDE data.
Strengths:
Students feel safe in the classrooms. Students feelings of safety on campus increased from the 08-09 school year from 52% to 80%. / Weaknesses:
According to PRIDE results, 72% students feel less safe in the parking lots.
School Process Information related to an analysis of existing curricula focused on helping English Language Learners (ELLs) work toward attaining proficiency in annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs).
Strengths:
The school has purchased the Rosetta Stone software in anticipation of future enrollees. / Weaknesses:
With the anticipation of more EL students, funding for teacher training in this area will be difficult.
School Process Information related to an analysis of existing personnel focused on helping English Language Learners (ELLs) work toward attaining proficiency in annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs).
Strengths:
ELL student is in her Sophomore year taking advanced classes. / Weaknesses:
The system has no ELL instructor.
School Process Information uncovered by an analysis of curriculum alignment, instructional materials, instructional strategies, reform strategies, and/or extended learning opportunities.
Strengths:
The school offers after school and summer remediation and tutoring to help prepare students for the AHSGE.
Teachers focus on the GE standards related to their subject area and focus on reading skills related to their subject
area. / Weaknesses:
Attendance in after school tutoring and summer remediation is low. Session averages were less
than 10.
Part II - GOAL TO ADDRESS ACADEMIC NEEDS – All components to support improving academic achievement, INCLUDING SCHOOL CULTURE AND RtI CONSIDERATIONS, should be related to the weaknesses identified in the data summary. DUPLICATE PAGES AS NEEDED TO ADDRESS PRIORITIZED GOALS INCLUDING SACS DISTRICT GOALS, IF APPLICABLE. Use the SMART Goals format to address areas of need.
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT GOAL (SHOULD ADDRESS IDENTIFIED WEAKNESSES AND GAPS):Valley High School will increase the percent of juniors passing the reading portion of the grad exam from 75 to 92 percent during the 2010-2011 school year.
Data Results on which goal is based:
As of Spring 2010 testing 25% of Juniors still needed to pass the reading portion of the grad exam. Students cannot graduate unless they pass the reading portion of the grad exam.