Student Achievement Plan for Glen Park Academy for Excellence in Learning

2017-2018 Student Achievement Plan for Glen Park Academy for Excellence in Learning Brandi J. Herrod, Principal Andrew Fentress, Assistant Principal 5002 Madison Street Gary, Indiana 46410

Introduction School and Community Demographics Gary, Indiana is a city located in Lake County, Indiana with a population of 72,424. According to 2016 Census data, the city is comprised on 28 percent of residents under the age of 18. In Gary, 14.5 percent of residents are over the age of 65. Females make up 54 percent of the population, while males account for 46 percent. African-Americans make up 84.8 percent of the population. The next largest group is Caucasians, which comprise 10.7 percent of the population. Latinos, or Hispanics, comprise 5.1 percent of the population. In Gary, 82.7 percent of residents aged 25 and over have a high school diploma. Of those residents with high school diplomas, 12.4 percent hold bachelor s degrees or higher. The average household income in $26,956, with 37.4 percent of residents living below the poverty line. Glen Park Academy for Excellence in Learning is an elementary school that services grades kindergarten through sixth grade and is part of the Gary Community School Corporation. The assessment instruments used at Glen Park Academy are 8 Step Cycle Assessments, Student Learning Objectives Assessments (SLO s), Benchmark Assessments and ISTEP + and IREAD 3. The curriculum used is the 8 Step Instructional Calendars which are located on the schools network shared folder and in the main office. The Gary Community School Corporation located in Gary, Indiana, is a public-school corporation that services over 4,000 students. The Gary Community School Corporation has 1 Early Childhood Center, 7 Elementary Schools, 1 Comprehensive High School, 1 Visual and Performing Arts and High Ability Secondary School and 1 Area Career Center. Glen Park Academy of Excellence in Learning current enrollment is 547 students, 29 teachers, 2 Administrators, 1 School Counselor, 1 Social Worker and 12 support staff members. Mission, Vision Statements Mission of Glen Park Academy Glen Park Academy for Excellence in Learning believes every child can learn. Students will be provided with a rich educational experience of the highest quality that focuses on College and Career Readiness Standards through a rigorous curriculum. We are committed to providing all students with the technological tools needed to be contributing, productive citizens in our rapidly changing society. Revised July 2017 Vision of Glen Park Academy Our vision for Glen Park Academy for Excellence in Learning is to foster a highly regarded, safe and nurturing academic environment that actively serves and improves the community in which it operates. Revised July 2017

Belief Statements We believe in providing students with the highest quality educators and education. We believe in making informed decisions based on what is best for students. We believe children excel in an environment where they feel safe, valued and respected. We believe in challenging students to reach their full potential as confident and responsible thinkers, problem solvers and decision makers. We believe that clear and open communication among students, staff, families and the community develops positive partnerships. Revised July 2017

Data Summary Glen Park Academy ELA/Math % of State % of GPA % of Corporation state and school corporation and school 2016-2017 51.4% 41.2% 16.8% -24.9% +9.8% 2015-2016 51.6 % 53.1% 19.5% -13.8% +18.3% Difference Between Years -0.2% -11.3% -2.7% -11.1% 8.5% Categories % of State % of GPA % of Corporation All Grades state and school ELA 2016-2017 65.2% 26.5% 29.9% -38.7% -3.4% ELA 2015-2016 66.1% 37.8% 36.8% -28.3% +1.0% Difference Between Years -0.9% -11.3% -6.9% -10.4% -2.4% Math 2016-2017 58.5% 14.7% 26.6% -43.6% -11.9% Math 2015-2016 58.9% 15.3% 23.2% -43.6% -7.9% Difference Between Years -0.4% -0.6% +3.4% -0.2% -4.0% corporation and school

Categories 3 rd Grade % of State % of GPA % of Corporation state and school ELA 2016-2017 67.0% 26.0% 34.0% -41.0% -8.0% ELA 2015-2016 69.0% 36.8% 45.1% -32.2% -8.3% Difference Between Years -2.0% -10.8% -11.1% -8.8% 0.3% Math 2016-2017 58.5% 14.7% 22.6% -43.8% -7.9% Math 2015-2016 58.9% 15.3% 30.7% -43.6% -15.4% Difference Between Years -0.4% -0.6% -8.1% -0.2% 7.8% Subcategories of ELA 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Literature and Vocabulary 39.66% 28.89% -10.77% Non-Fiction, Vocabulary 37.07% 30.0% -7.07% and Media Genres, Writing Process, 37.07% 27.78% -9.27% Research Writing Conventions of Standard English Writing 37.93% 32.22% -5.71% Subcategories of Math 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Number Sense 12.07% 13.33% +1.26% Computation 9.48% 17.78% +8.3% Algebraic Thinking and 10.34% 16.67% +6.33% Data Analysis Geometry and 11.21% 14.44% +3.23% Measurement Mathematical Process 12.07% 14.44% +2.37% corporation and school

Categories 4 th Grade % of State % of GPA % of Corporation state and school ELA 2016-2017 65.9% 21.0% 27.9% -44.9% -6.9% ELA 2015-2016 68.2% Data Not Available Difference Between Years Math 2016-2017 61.9% 13.33% 21% -48.57-40.9% Math 2015-2016 62.4% Data Not Available Difference Between Years 0.5% Subcategories of ELA 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Literature and Vocabulary 40.79% 28.0% -12.79% Non-Fiction, Vocabulary 36.84% 26.6% -10.24% and Media Genres, Writing Process, 47.37% 24.0% -23.37% Research Writing Conventions of Standard English Writing 46.05% 22.67% -23.38% Subcategories of Math 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Number Sense 12.0% 14.67% +2.67% Computation 12.0% 14.67% +2.67% Algebraic Thinking and 13.33% 20.0% +6.67% Data Analysis Geometry and 13.33% 13.33% 0.0% Measurement Mathematical Process 12.0% 6.67% -5.33% corporation and school

Categories 5 th Grade % of State % of GPA % of Corporation state and school ELA 2016-2017 62.4% 18.0% 26.0% -44.4% -8.0% ELA 2015-2016 63.4% Data Not Available Difference Between Years corporation and school Math 2016-2017 65.8% 10.13% 31.0% -55.6% -20.87% Math 2015-2016 65.6% Data Not Available Difference Between Years 0.2% Subcategories of ELA 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Literature and Vocabulary 21.21% 27.85% +6.64% Non-Fiction, Vocabulary 25.25% 18.99% -6.26% and Media Genres, Writing Process, 25.25% 25.32% 0.0% Research Writing Conventions of Standard English Writing 25.25% 20.25% -5.0% Subcategories of Math 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Number Sense 17.17% 12.66% -4.51% Computation 20.20% 11.39% -8.81% Algebraic Thinking and 16.16% 13.92% -2.24% Data Analysis Geometry and 14.14% 12.66% -1.48% Measurement Mathematical Process 15.15% 13.92% -1.23%

Categories 6 th Grade % of State % of GPA % of Corporation state and school ELA 2016-2017 66.5% 16.0% 29.2% -50.5% -13.2% ELA 2015-2016 66.3% Data Not Available Difference Between Years 0.2% Math 2016-2017 59.6% 9.76% 18.5% -49.84% -8.74% Math 2015-2016 59.8% Data Not Available Difference Between Years -0.2% Subcategories of ELA 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Literature and Vocabulary 39.47% 24.39% -15.08% Non-Fiction, Vocabulary 44.47% 18.29% -26.18% and Media Genres, Writing Process, 48.68% 21.95% -26.73% Research Writing Conventions of Standard English Writing 46.05% 20.73% -25.32% Subcategories of Math 2015-2016 2016-2017 Difference between the years Number Sense 22.97% 9.76% -13.21% Computation 22.97% 8.54% -14.43% Algebraic Thinking and 24.32% 9.76% -14.56% Data Analysis Geometry and 24.32% 8.54% -15.78% Measurement Mathematical Process 24.32% 10.98% -13.34% corporation and school

Root Cause Analysis We conducted a root cause analysis to determine why our student s performance was extremely low. Instructional practices were not effective due to the lack of professional development for teachers. Teachers did not seek professional development opportunities. Teachers were not knowledgeable of professional development opportunities related to content or pedagogy due to lack of self-motivation. Also, the leadership of the school failed to offer the appropriate professional development for teachers. The root cause analysis also determined that the culture and climate of the school does not promote student positive behavior interventions, attendance concerns and the lack of a consistent discipline system. Positive behavior interventions, attendance concerns and the lack of a consistent discipline were not effective due to the incontinences of administration in the planning and implementation of systems of organizational management. Administration was time crunched with other responsibilities which caused a prioritizing issue. Teachers were not consistent with recording student attendance in the student database system. This process was not adequately monitored by administration due to the completion of other demands of the school. Conclusions Due to the lack of parental workshops, PTA, and a welcoming environment, parental involvement and participation was low. This lack of involvement hindered growth in multiple areas of the school such as increased test scores, parent volunteers, and overall parent involvement. Although technology was available to teachers and students, there was a lack of proper training of what technology use in the classroom looked like. The lack of understanding technology and fear of using something new made teachers revert to their past practices. Therefore, technological strategies were not fully incorporated within the classroom, which has the potential to almost instantly grasp the attention of the student. At times the safety and disciplined learning environment suffered due to the lack of teacher buy in when it came to various behavior management approaches offered. Teachers also lacked classroom management skills as well as the motivation to implement with fidelity, positive reinforcement and consequences within the classroom. The lack of classroom management forced the administrator to discipline students for infractions that could have been avoided if proper classroom procedures, expectations, and policies within the classroom was put in place. The leadership within the school failed to offer the appropriate professional development. Also, most teachers failed to actively seek out professional development workshops that could have greatly improved their classroom s learning environment.

Student Achievement Goals and Objectives SMART Goal 1: By Spring 2018, Glen Park Academy students in grades 3-4 will achieve an increase in language arts (literacy) performance by 20 percentage points as measured by ISTEP +. Objective 1a: Implement the 8 Step Instructional Process SMART Goal 2: By Spring 2018, Glen Park Academy students in grades 5-6 will achieve an increase in language arts (literacy) performance by 30 percentage points as measured by ISTEP +. Objective 2a: Implement the 8 Step Instructional Process SMART Goal 3: By Spring 2018, Glen Park Academy students in grades 3-4 will achieve an increase in mathematics (numeracy) performance by 35 percentage points as measured by ISTEP +. Objective 3a: Implement the 8 Step Instructional Process SMART Goal 4: By Spring 2018, Glen Park Academy students in grades 5-6 will achieve an increase in mathematics (numeracy) performance by 35 percentage points as measured by ISTEP +. Objective 4a: Implement the 8 Step Instructional Process Smart Goal 5: By Spring 2018, Glen Park Academy will improve the schools climate and culture by increasing the number of positive behavior supports by 100 percent, increase the staff and students attendance rate by 5 percentage points, decrease the number of discipline referrals and suspensions by 25 percent as measured by student and staff behavior incentives, SunGard monthly attendance and discipline reports. Objective 5a: Implement behavior incentives at least monthly Objective 5b: Develop and Implement an attendance policy for staff and students. Objective 5c: Implement with fidelity the discipline plan

Specific Areas Where Improvement is Needed Immediately Improvement of instruction- According to our state assessment pass rate our data indicated that our instruction is not rigorous enough to achieve a passing rate. Increase Student Learning- Student achievement suffered because of the lack of rigor within the classroom. To improve this, the building administrators will focus on weekly walk through, protector in service workshops, and give positive and negative feedback to teachers. Increase pass rate of state standardize test- Our overall letter grade was an F (51%). Although our growth rate was high our pass rate in some areas was below a 15%. Improve culture and climate- Our students seem to not value education. Also, most of our teachers are not motivated to teach or take ownership of student failure. Professional Development- Teachers struggle with incorporating technology, 8 STEPS, Smekens, and rigor within the classroom. Implementation of Technology in instruction and learning- Teachers were not trained well on technology. Therefore, they were unable to successfully use technology in small groups or during rotations Leadership- Administrators need to delegate work to other members within the school. This is a great way to develop leaders within the school. Also, administrators would benefit and grow from leadership workshops. Student Supports- Glen Park Academy would like to implement more of a PBIS approach, positive reinforcement rewards, and monthly incentive

Benchmarks for Progress Benchmark Area: Language Arts and Mathematics Benchmark, including Measure(s) of Benchmark Frequency: Progress Implementation of short cycle Improved scores from test on a three week or assessment to assessment quarterly basis Benchmark Area: Climate and Culture Benchmark, including Measure(s) of Benchmark Frequency: Monthly review of incentive implementation data attendance rates and referral and suspension data Benchmark Area: Leadership Benchmark, including Frequency: Semi Annual Stakeholder Surveys Review the completion of professional development Progress Data is trending in the appropriate direction Measure(s) of Benchmark Progress Data is showing progress, improvement and/or completion Benchmark Assessment Instrument: Cycle Assessments PIVOT Benchmark Assessment Instrument: Ticket collection reports Benchmark Assessment Instrument: Surveys Professional Development Spreadsheet Progress Notes Toward Meeting Benchmark: Progress Notes Toward Meeting Benchmark: Progress Notes Toward Meeting Benchmark:

Benchmark Area: Effective Instruction Benchmark, including Measure(s) of Benchmark Frequency: Progress Weekly Lesson Plan Feedback Data showing effective PDSA Feedback (every 3 instruction weeks) Increase of academic Walk Thru- Weekly performance on Cycle Observations 2-4 Times a year assessments ISTEP + Data IREAD 3 Data PIVOT Data Benchmark Area: Student Supports Benchmark, including Measure(s) of Benchmark Frequency: Monthly Student Social Quarterly Awards Ceremonies Progress Data from discipline referrals Academic data Benchmark Assessment Instrument: Formative Ratings Walk Thru Data Cycle Assessments PIVOT Assessments Benchmark Assessment Instrument: Report Cards SunGard Reports Progress Notes Toward Meeting Benchmark: Progress Notes Toward Meeting Benchmark:

Academic Honors Diploma and Core 40 (as applicable) Elementary School Not Applicable

Proposed Interventions (Strategies and Activities) Intervention Area: Language Arts Strategy 1: 90-minute Literacy/Writing Block daily Activity 1a: Small Reading Groups Activity 1b: Smekens model for writer s workshop Intervention Area: Mathematics Strategy 2: 90-Math and SST (Science, Social Studies, Technology block) daily Activity 2a: Implement online interactive Math practice via Coach Digital Activity 2b: Integrating science and social studies content into mathematical instruction Intervention Area: Culture and Climate Strategy 3a: Review student academic and behavior data to determine eligibility for incentives Activity 3a: Conduct student socials and other incentives Strategy 3b: Create grade level attendance goals for staff and students Activity 3b: Distribute awards to grade levels that achieve the goals Strategy 3c: Monitor the discipline expectations of the school Activity 3c: Implement a discipline committee that will regular report discipline data and use the data to make informed decisions

Professional Development Emphasizes improvement of student learning and performance Smekens Readers and Writers Workshops National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Conference Supports research-based, sustainable school improvement efforts Content Specific Teacher Lead Professional Development at Staff Meetings Content Specific Administrator lead professional development during PLC and staff meetings District Specific Professional Development for Teachers and Administration Aligns with the core principles of professional development Content Specific Teacher Lead Professional Development at Staff Meetings Content Specific Administrator lead professional development during PLC and staff meetings District Specific Professional Development for Teachers and Administration Smekens Readers and Writers Workshops National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Conference Includes methods to improve the cultural competency of teachers, administrators, staff, parents and students Content Specific Teacher Lead Professional Development at Staff Meetings Content Specific Administrator lead professional development during PLC and staff meetings District Specific Professional Development for Teachers and Administration

Cultural Competency Component of Student Achievement Plan The entire program at Glen Park Academy is moving toward providing opportunities for all students to succeed. Initiating various staff development plans and organizational structures will bridge the educational gap of disadvantaged students of low academic performance. The establishment of adult role models is a best practice for the traditionally underserved population. The implementation of an extended day program where teachers or college education majors to assist students with their studies will aid with increasing student achievement. Technology will be available to students who may not have it at home. Bus transportation will be provided as well. This program addresses particularly the needs of students who may not have the home resources available. Support for Students Our school provides an inclusive learning environment for students with special needs. Special education teachers and resource teachers provide educational service in the general education setting. Each of these plans requires continual training and annual updating. Teachers meet in professional learning communities to assess student progress. Statutes and Rules to be Waived Not Applicable

Three-Year Timeline SMART Goal 1: By Spring 2021, Glen Park Academy students in grades 3-6 will achieve a performance rate of 85% in language arts (literacy) as measured by ISTEP +. Objective 1a: Implement the 8 Step Instructional Process Funding Measure(s) of Objective Progress: Person(s) Responsible: Timeline: Amount and Source Learning Log Data Teachers 2018-2021 General Walk Thru Data and Admin Fund Observation Data PDSA Data Strategy 1a: 90-minute Literacy/Writing and Math Block Funding Measure(s) of Strategy Progress: Person(s) Responsible: Timeline: Amount and Source Lesson Plans Teachers 2018-2021 General Walk Thru Data and Admin Fund Observation Data PDSA Data Activity 1a: Small Reading Groups Brief Description of Activity, including how Activity Addresses Improvement Needs: Person(s) Teachers will have a 90- minute Literacy/Writing Block daily which 70 minutes is Literacy and 20 minutes is a Smekens Writers Workshop. Responsible: Timeline: Classroom teachers Certified staff (Art, Music, Physical Education) two special education resource teachers Funding Amount and Source 2018-2021 General Fund Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan

SMART Goal 2: By Spring 2021, Glen Park Academy students in grades 3-6 will achieve a performance rate of 85% in Mathematics (numeracy) as measured by ISTEP +. Objective 2a: Implement the 8 Step Instructional Process Funding Measure(s) of Objective Progress: Person(s) Responsible: Timeline: Amount and Source Learning Log Data Teachers 2018-2021 General Walk Thru Data and Admin Fund Observation Data PDSA Data Strategy 2a: 90-minute Math Block Measure(s) of Strategy Progress: Lesson Plans Walk Thru Data Observation Data PDSA Data Person(s) Responsible: Timeline: Teachers and Admin Funding Amount and Source 2018-2021 General Fund Activity 2a: Implement online interactive Math practice via Coach Digital Brief Description of Activity, including how Activity Addresses Improvement Needs: Person(s) Responsible: Timeline: Funding Amount and Source Teachers will have a 90 Classroom 2018-2021 General min Math and SST teachers Fund (Science, Social Studies, Certified Technology block) daily staff (Art, which 60 minutes of Music, Math and 30 minutes of Physical Education) SST. Special Education two special Resource teachers and education Intervention Specialist resource will use Pull-Out teachers service for students that are academically identified as performing in the low score ranges of assessments. Coach Digital will be the tools used for the SST portion of the block. Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan

SMART Goal 3: By Spring 2021, Glen Park Academy will improve the schools climate and culture by increasing the staff and students attendance rate by 5 percentage points Objective 3a: Develop and Implement an attendance policy for staff and students. Measure(s) of Objective Progress: Monthly Attendance reports Project Rebuild Referrals Measure(s) of Strategy Progress: Monthly Reports of goals achieved Person(s) Responsible: Timeline: Admin, Social Worker Funding Amount and Source 2018-2021 General Fund Strategy 3a: Create grade level attendance goals for staff and students Funding Person(s) Amount and Responsible: Timeline: Source Admin, Social Worker 2018-2021 General Fund Activity 3a: Distribute awards to grade levels that achieve the goals Brief Description of Activity, including how Activity Addresses Improvement Needs: Person(s) Funding Amount and Source Build morale and initiative Responsible: Timeline: Admin, Social Worker 2018-2021 General Fund Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan Briefly Describe Process to be Used to Ensure Implementation, Review, and Revision over 3-Year Period: Periodic Monitoring Leadership meetings discussing progress Annual review of School Improvement Plan