Los Angeles Unified School District
2016-2017 Single Plan for Student Achievement
ACADEMIC GOAL — MATHEMATICS
LAUSD Goal: / All students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading and mathematics.
I. Indicate all data reviewed to address this Academic Goal:
X / Student Grades / School Accountability Report Card (SARC) / Interim Assessment Blocks (IAB)
X / CELDT / AMAOs / IEP Goals Data / School Quality Improvement Index Report Card / School Experience Survey
X / School Report Card / DIBELS Math / X / Smarter Balanced Assessment Criteria (SBAC) / Publisher’s Assessments
MyData / DIBELS / Interim Comprehensive Assessment (ICA) / Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI)
Other(s):
II. Based upon the data reviewed, summarize the issues affecting student proficiency in mathematics:
A summary of data regarding the performance of students in mathematics at ______Elementary School is as follows:
- 16% of all students, grades 3-5 scored a “Meets” or “Exceeds” on the spring 2015 Smarter Balance Math Test
- 26% of EO and FEP student subgroups scored a “Meets” or “Exceeds” on the spring 2015 Smarter Balance Math Test
- 5% of English Learners scored “Meets” or “Exceeds”on the spring 2015 Smarter Balance Math Test
The LAUSD average for English Learners in elementary schoolsscoring “Meets” or “Exceeds” was 6%
- The % of English Learners scoring “Below” in the SBAC Math Claim“Communicating Reasoning” was 52% in Grade 3, 90% in Grade 4, and 88% in Grade 5.
- The % of English Learners scoring “Below” in the SBAC Math Claim“Problem Solving” was 80% in Grade 3, 86% in Grade 4, and 86% in Grade 5.
- 16% of girls and 15% of boys scored “Meets” or “Exceeds” on the 2015 Smarter Balance Math Test.
- The % of EL students earning a mark of “3” or better in math in grade 5 for 201314 was 70%, down from 77% in 2012-13.
- The % of EL students making progress on the 2013-2014 CELDT was 53%, down from 58% in 2012-2013. The LAUSD average was 59%.
Most students, particularly English Learners, have a difficulttime understanding and following the problem solving process. These students also have difficulty using content and academic vocabulary and explaining their thinking in both oral and written form. English Leaners specifically have a difficult time participatingin group problem solving and performance tasks using key vocabulary. Improving the performance of English Learners in mathematics will be our focus for 2016-2017.
III. State the School’s Measurable Objective*: / Increase the number of English Learner students scoring “Meets” or “Exceeds” on the spring 2017 SBACin mathematics from 5% to 9%.
IV. Focus Areas / Describe the Evidence-based Strategy(ies) selected to achieve the School’s Measurable Objective(s) and the Actions/Tasks the school will use to accomplish the Strategy(ies).
The school’s narrative must identify and address Significant Subgroups’ needs, as applicable. If a purchase is multi-funded, indicate the related funding source(s) and percentage(s)/FTE(s) in the description below. / On what dates will the Actions begin and end?
[mm/dd/yy to mm/dd/yy] / How will the school measure the effectiveness of each Action?
Identify the title/position of staff responsible. / What is the
school buying? / What is the Budget Item No.? / How much does it cost? / What is
the FTE? / What is
the program funding source?
Lesson Planning, Data Analysis, and Professional Development / Teachers will receive professional development in “Three Phase Problem Solving” in order to develop the problem solving and reasoning skills of students, specifically those who are English Learners. Students will also learn how to construct viable arguments and use content and academic vocabulary.Instructional Coach will provide training and will provide demonstration lessons as needed. Trainings to occur outside teachers’ regular assignment.
Instructional Coach will also provide professional development in “Talk Moves” to teachers in order to facilitate the mathematical based discussions skills of all students, including English Learners, using content and academic vocabulary. Trainings to occur at Staff Meetings. / 8/30/15-11/30/16
10/1/16-12/30/16 / Full implementation of strategies will be used to measure effectiveness based on informal observations by administrators. A random sampling of classrooms during math time will be used to measure progress twice (Dec. 2016 and March 2017) during the school year. / Instructional Coach, Elementary
Instructional Coach, Differential
Instructional Coach,
X-Time
Staff Training Rate
Effective Classroom Instruction / Teachers will be released three times this year to plan lessons/ activities and analyze data related to the progress of at-risk students in mathematics, particularly English Learners. Lesson planning will focus on the use of “Three Phase Problem Solving”, “Talk Moves”, Constructive Conversations and Purposeful Groupings, and the use of content and academic vocabulary.
Additional adult support will be used to lower the student to teacher ratio during math instruction in order to provide immediate feedback and remediation to students, particularly English Leaners, regarding the use of content vocabulary, problem solving techniques, and communication.
In order to increase understanding of grade level content vocabulary in mathematics, teachers will develop and use grade level specific word walls with math content vocabulary. Vocabulary will be introduced using previously learned protocols (Marzano). Math journals will be used throughout the year by students to record key learnings and content vocabulary. Visual representations will be used to support English Learners.
Adaptive technology using instructional math software (ALEKS, MIND Institute) will be utilized in the regular classroom to provide an alternative instructional format for students that target specific individual weaknesses in math.
In order to assess progress towards the school’s Measurable Objective, teachers in grades 3-5 will give students a common Mid-Year Assessment in mathematics. Results will be tabulated by Administrator. / Oct. 2016
Jan. 2017
March 2017
8/12/16-6/13/17
9/1/16-6/12/17
Jan. 2016 / Lesson will reflect the use of instructional strategies. A random sampling of classrooms during math problem solving time will be used to measure progress twice (Dec. 2016 and March 2017) during the school year.
Evaluation will be used to assess effectiveness of personnel.
Teachers
Administrators
Coordinator
Teachers will monitor individual student progress.
Teachers
Instructional Coach
Teachers
Coordinator
Administrator / Teacher Release
Teacher Assistants,
Degree Track
SIM
SIM
Interventions Beyond the Regular School Day and Other Supports / Additional time for practice and specific feedback will be provided for struggling math students during an After-School and Saturday Intervention Program. Priority will be given to students who are lowest performing and are English Learners. Two sessions will be provided.
Adaptive technology using instructional math software (ALEKS, MIND Institute) will be utilized in the computer lab to provide an alternative instructional format for students that targets specific individual weaknesses in math. / Oct. 2016-
Dec. 2016
Feb. 2017-
April 2017 / Pre and Post Math Assessment Levels will be used to assess progress
Teachers
Administrators / Tutor Teacher X
Admin. X
SIM
Building Parent Capacity and Partnership to Support the Academic Goal / Parent education in the area of “How to help your child in math problem solving” will be provided at a series of seminars during the fall and winter semesters. Seminars will take place on Saturdays during Math Intervention. All parents will be invited to attend. / Nov. 2016
March 2017 / The number of parents attending will be counted.
Administrators