2016-17 Campus Improvement Plan

32 Pages·2016·1.06 MB·English

2016-2017

Elementary

Campus Improvement Plan

Thompson Elementary School

Campus Mission Statement
THOMPSON ELEMENTARY IS COMMITTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
WHOLE CHILD THROUGH COMBINED COMMUNITY EFFORTS IN TEACHING
POSITIVE VALUES THROUGH ACADEMICS.

Campus Vision Statement
THOMPSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WILL BE KNOWN AS A SCHOOL OF
CHOICE, OFFERING ADVANCED OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS, TEACHERS
AND STAKEHOLDERS TO FIND SUCCESS IN A GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

Beliefs About Students:
REMEMBER: NO MATTER WHAT RACE, GENDER, OR ABILITY ALL CHILDREN,
IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY, SUPPORT, AND
ENCOURAGEMENT CAN LEARN AND SUCCEED.

To Be Completed by Central Administration
Reviewers: Final Approval Date:

Name Status Name Status Name Status Name Status
2016-2017 Site-Based Decision Making Committee
Roster & Meeting Dates
Committee Members and Roster

Chair Person Dr. Robert Long, III
Teacher Ms. Barbara Salinas (Year 2)

Teacher Ms. Rita Perez (Year 1)
Teacher Ms.  Na’Carol  Dixon  (Year  2)

Teacher Ms. Kierra Lewis (Year 1)
Teacher Ms. Taylor Gilley (Year 1)
Teacher Ms. Janet Clay (Year 1)
Non-Teaching Professional Mrs. Meagan Scott (SSS)
Parent Mr. Herlin Hendry Jr.

Parent Mrs. Tanya White
District Representative Ms.Susan Pelezo
Community Member Ms. Britney Finley
Business Partner Mr. Pablo Salinas

2016-2017 Meeting Dates
Location Date Meeting Time
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 Wednesday, September 14, 2016 5:00pm-6:30pm
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 Wednesday, October 26, 2016 5:00pm-6:30pm
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:00pm-6:30pm
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 Wednesday, March 29, 2017 5:00pm-6:30pm
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 Wednesday May 24, 2017 5:00pm-6:30pm
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 Wednesday, June 21, 2017 5:00pm-6:30pm
TES-Parent/Community Room 100 (MAKE-UP MEETING DATE) 5:00pm-6:30pm
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
Demographics Staff Demographics: Staff Demographics: Staff Demographics:
(cid:120) Staff is largely African-American (cid:120) Recruiting more teachers that are (cid:120) 95% of teaching staff becoming G/T Certified by
over 56% of staff make-up. traditionally trained in the December of 2016.
(cid:120) 75% of staff is female profession of teaching. (cid:120) 100 % of teaching force being ESL/ELL Certified
(cid:120) Most of the teachers are ACP (cid:120) Bring more diversity to the teacher by May of 2016.
certified ranging from 1-5 Years force. (cid:120) Working with HR to recruit more Vietnamese
of teaching experience. (cid:120) Recruiting more male teachers, as teachers.
Student Demographics: well as more Asian or Vietnamese (cid:120) Working to recruit the student teachers that are
(cid:120) Our diversity of student Teachers campus through the U-STAR Program with
population is a strength with: (cid:120) Teachers certified, trained, and Texas A&M.
33% AA 27% Hispanic 17% proficient in facilitating ESL and
Native American 11% Asian 10% ELL accommodations and Student Demographics:
White 2% Native Hawaiian strategies. (cid:120) Work to provide supports, strategies and
(cid:120) We serve 254 LEP 134 Bilingual (cid:120) Teachers need to be fully Gifted interventions for our African-American Male
students and 116 ESL students. and Talented certified with the full students.
(cid:120) We have a total of 28 students in 30 hours so that they can properly (cid:120) Work with the Counselor to provide supports for
the RTI process: identified students. our Tier III, Homeless, and Behavior challenges.
(cid:120) 24 Strategic/4 Intensive/4 Student Demographics:
Behavior/24 Academic (cid:120) African-Americans still drive the
(cid:120) We a have a 19% mobility rate. majority of our negative discipline
with 86% of the discipline being
driven by 6 total students.
1 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
(cid:120) ISS was utilized a total of 29 days.
Student Achievement 2015 STAAR DATA: 2015 STAAR DATA: 2015 STAAR DATA:
(cid:120) Increased performance in all (cid:120) Decreased performance in the area (cid:120) Decreased performance in the area of 5th Grade
subjects with the exception of of 5th Grade Science from 53% in Science from 53% in 2014 to 47% in 2015.
science. 2014 to 47% in 2015. (cid:120) AA  students’  scores  dropped  in  every  tested  area  
(cid:120) 99% Participation by students in (cid:120) AA  students’  scores  dropped in with the exception of Reading.
all tested areas. every tested area with the (cid:120) Hispanic students scores dropped in Reading
(cid:120) Hispanics increased performance exception of Reading. and Science when comparing 14-15 STAAR.
in the areas of Writing and Math (cid:120) Hispanic students scores dropped (cid:120) Asian students score in Science dropped from
from 14-15. in Reading and Science when 65% in 14 to 56% in 15.
2016 STAAR DATA: comparing 14-15 STAAR. (cid:120) White and Asian students outperforming AA
(cid:120) Increased Overall Student (cid:120) Asian students score in Science and Hispanic students in every testing category.
Performance Index I: from 61% dropped from 65% in 14 to 56% in 2016 STAAR DATA:
to 63%, as well as increased in 15. (cid:120) Saturday Academic Interventions for all 4th and
Student Progress or Index 2: (cid:120) White and Asian students 5th grade students that failed the STAAR in
from 32 to 42. Gains and Gaps outperforming AA and Hispanic previous years. (8:30-12:30)
were closer to begin closed in students in every testing category. (cid:120) Tuesday & Thursday Before or After-school
Index 3 from 28 to 34, and an 2016 STAAR DATA: Interventions for all 2nd-5th Grade students that
increase in regards to Post- (cid:120) Asian and White Students are still are considered (bubble students). Additionally,
Secondary Readiness in Index 4 out performing our AA and all ESL/ELL and SPED students will be required
moving from 12 to 33. Hispanic students in every subject to attend.
(cid:120) An increase in Reading area. (cid:120) ESL/ELL Linguistic Accommodations and
2 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
Performance among students in (cid:120) Students that fail the 3rd Grade Strategies evident in classroom instruction.
Levels 2 & 3. State Assessment are 62% more (SIOP training)
(cid:120) An 27% increase in students likely to fail the 4th and 5th Grade (cid:120) Gifted and Talented Strategies and Identification
scoring at Level II in reading State Assessment. techniques are present in classroom instruction.
moving from 41% to 66%
(cid:120) An increase in Students Scoring
at Level III in Writing from 1% to
11% a 10% increase
(cid:120) 28 students that failed the 5th
Grade Reading and Math STAR
also failed in 3rd and 4th Grade.
(cid:120) 87% Students in grades K-2
perform above average on
district checkpoints and
benchmarks.

12 School Culture and Student Attendance: Student Voice & Input: Student Voice & Input:
3 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
Climate (cid:120) Came close to meeting goal of (cid:120) Create a  forum  for  students’  voice   (cid:120) Establishing  a  Student  Senate  or  Principals’  
97% during the 1st and 2nd to be heard and their feedback to Forum that will meet every 9weeks for student
9weeks (96.9% and 96.5%) be relevant to the conversation. feedback.
Staff Attendance: Student Attendance: Student Attendance:
(cid:120) August and January were our (cid:120) Attendance remained at: 96% did (cid:120) Schedule regular meeting and interventions for
best months for staff attendance. not met goal 97% the 30 students that have historically had 30 plus
(cid:120) Teams did a great job of covering (cid:120) 3,817 student tardies in 15-16 tardies. Track their grades and academic
and splitting classrooms Staff Attendance: performance as well.
whenever  a  sub  did  not  “pick- (cid:120) 47% of staff tardy 6 or more days (cid:120) Regularly meet with teacher and share tardy
up”  or  “show”  for  an  assigned   during the 15-16 school year data with the classroom teacher and make phone
job. (cid:120) Sept. 47 absences calls and parent contacts to students who
(cid:120) 76% of substitutes attended and (cid:120) Oct. 59 absences become chronically late.
covered the classroom (cid:120) Nov. 41 absences Staff Attendance:
Student Discipline: (cid:120) Jan. 30 absences (cid:120) Collaboratively develop incentives for staff
(cid:120) The campus is in year 4 for the (cid:120) Feb. 67 absences incentives.
CHAMPS program. (cid:120) Mar. 27 absences (cid:120) Align goal-setting conversations around
(cid:120) The campus implemented the (cid:120) April 40 absences attendance and tardy data.
district’s  discipline  framework  in   (cid:120) May 42 absences (cid:120) Elimination for the 5-minute grace period for
January of 2016 *#’s  doesn’t  include  PD  or  Staff   morning arrival.
(cid:120) Teachers were provided with Development Student Discipline:
step-by-step system for reporting (cid:120) Student Discipline: (cid:120) Put systems and routines in place in large group
and tracking data. (cid:120) An increase in Reported and areas, restrooms, and transition locations as most
4 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
Staff Engagement Survey: Documented behavioral incidents of the misbehavior occurs in these locations
(cid:120) Principal clearly communicated from the 3-year trend analysis: according to the data collected.
his expectations for job (cid:120) 2014-77 reported referrals (cid:120) Provide additionally funding and professional
performance. (cid:120) 2015-76 reported referrals development for CHAMPS initiatives, and
(cid:120) Principal effectively (cid:120) 2016-94 reported referrals Capturing  Kid’s  Hearts.
communicate important issues (cid:120) 6 Students drove 86% of the (cid:120) Move to all grade-levels being self-contained to
that affect staff members school-wide discipline ensure consistency in regards to classroom
(cid:120) Principal encourages (cid:120) Kinder 16 days for OSS culture and behavior expectations. Also self-
collaboration within and across (cid:120) 1st Grade 18 days for OSS contained classrooms will foster positive
teams in the school. (cid:120) 2nd Grade 23 days for OSS behavior supports by allowing teachers to build
(cid:120) Principal identifies opportunities (cid:120) 3rd Grade 32 days for OSS productive relationships with students.
for professional growth and (cid:120) 4th Grade 28 days for OSS Staff Engagement Survey:
development. (cid:120) 5th Grade 37 days for OSS (cid:120) The continuation of the Campus Faculty
(cid:120) Staff members are recognized for (cid:120) ISS was utilized a total of 29 days. Advisory Committee (where staff members will
good work at campus level. Staff Engagement Survey: have a grade level/ dept. member that will allow
(cid:120) 14 Staff members anonymously them to report anomalously to the forum to the
visited Human Resources to vent campus leadership.
their issues with the campus (cid:120) Assign a Leadership Team member to take over
principal in June, 2016. the Teacher of the Month and Para of the Month
(cid:120) Staff viewed that principal was not Recognition programs for acknowledgement at
consistent when addressing every faculty meeting.
problems and or issues. 35% of (cid:120) Saved the PAWsitives to be passed out at the
5 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
staff members survey. beginning of every faculty meeting when we do
(cid:120) 34% of staff members surveyed “Good  Things”.
stated that they did not receive (cid:120) Create a survey for staff (AUGUST), so that they
recognition for their provide us with feedback on what recognition
accomplishments. looks  like,  feels  like….  etc….
(cid:120) 34% of staff members surveyed (cid:120) Make sure Staff Birthday List is acknowledged
stated that they did not feel and a prize or gift is provided on the respective
appreciated for their work. date.
(cid:120) 30% of staff members surveyed
feel that the principal did not fairly
implement policies at Thompson.

Staff Quality/ (cid:120) 97% of faculty and staff attended (cid:120) Great attendance of district staff (cid:120) Working to obtain 85% Adult proficiency in the
Professional both PLC Faculty and Grade development but little follow- craft of the technical core (teaching and learning)
Development Level meetings on a regular and through or implementation. which is the absolute requirement for achieving
consistent basis. (cid:120) 91% of teaching force have 1-5 widespread proficiency among All Children.
(cid:120) 86% of Staff attended Learning years of teaching experience (cid:120) 95% of teaching staff becoming G/T Certified by
Fairs 1, 2, and 3 (cid:120) Results from Development Walks December of 2016.
(cid:120) 83% of staff attended the SPED #2 and #3 revealed a lack of (cid:120) 100 % of teaching force being ESL/ELL Certified
Co-Teach Developmental evidence regarding: Gradual by May of 2016.
Sessions Hosted by Stetson and Release/ Accommodations/ (cid:120) Leadership Team will engage in book study over
Associates. Modifications/Student the  book  “Leading  Change”  by:  Kotter.
6 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
(cid:120) Data Teams were implemented Conversation/Questioning/Student (cid:120) Consistency in protocols, process, and norms for
with regular and on-going Learner Standards. Full-Day Instructional Planning days.
meetings (cid:120) Teachers need to understand how (cid:120) Focus on teachers being able to construct the
to unpack the TEKS to access what appropriate Student Learning Targets, then also
students know. Based on being able to develop activities and assessments
Developmental Walks #2 & #3. that are in alignment with the student learning
(cid:120) Teachers need support in gaining target.
an understanding of the variety of (cid:120) SIOP training for all faculty and staff
ways to assess student learning. (cid:120) NCI Training for all Team Leaders, Leadership
(cid:120) Teachers need to understand how Team, and SPED Staff
to adapt and modify instruction (cid:120) CPR Training for all Team Leaders, Leadership
based on data from formal and Team Members, and SPED as well as for Parents
informal assessments. enrolled at Thompson.

Curriculum, Instruction (cid:120) Grade  Level  PLC’s  Meeting   (cid:120) Focus on teachers being able to (cid:120) Consistency in protocols, process, and norms for
& Assessment every 10 days. construct the appropriate Student Full-Day Instructional Planning days. Use Title
(cid:120) Istation/Think through Math/ are Learning Targets, then also being (6119) to cover the costs of the substitutes on
used as a diagnostic tool and is able to develop activities and respective full planning days.
scheduled through our assessments that are in alignment (cid:120) T-TESS goal-setting aligned with student
Technology Lab during the with the student learning target. assessment outcomes and growth.
students PALM or outclass time (cid:120) Teachers having the ability to (cid:120) Focus on teachers being able to construct the
period. appropriately construct appropriate Student Learning Targets, then also
7 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)
2016-2017 SCHOOL YEAR COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Data Sources Reviewed:
(cid:120) STAAR DATA (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) TELPAS Data (2013-2014,2014-2015,2015-2016) CASE Folders and Data, SISD Manning
Table for TES, AESOP & KRONOS Student/Staff Attendance, T-TESS Data, Developmental Walkthrough Data, CEL Targeted
Feedback Data, CEL Coaching Data, Thompson Engagement Survey, Staff Engagement Survey, Parent Engagement Surveys,
Technology Inventory, IStation Data, Think Through Math, SBEC Certifications of staff, Volunteer Lops, DRA Progress tracking,
K12Insight Surveys, Instructional Lesson Plans “Children  At-Risk”  School  Rankings  (14-15 & 15-16), TELPAS Data, STAAR Data,
District Benchmark and Checkpoint Data, eLearn, Eduphoria, STAAR CHART Data, New and Novice Teachers (Mentors and
Buddies). Textbook Audit Results, Safeguard indicators and results for 2015-2016, Code Blue (Teacher in Need of Assistance Analysis),
RTI and CSSP Student data quarterly, Digital Coach, Data Team Agendas, all PLC Agendas.
Area Reviewed Summary of Strengths Summary of Needs Priorities
What were the identified What were the identified needs? What are the priorities for the campus,
strengths? including how federal and state program funds
will be used?
(cid:120) All  PLC’s  Focused  around data. assessments that are aligned with being able to develop activities and assessments
(cid:120) A Needs Assessment being taken the TEK in question. that are in alignment with the student learning
at every meeting. (cid:120) Teachers having the skill set to target.
(cid:120) Data Teams Meeting every two appropriately collaborate and (cid:120) PLC meetings immediately after the checkpoints,
weeks to review campus data. develop lesson plans consistently. and benchmarks have been scored for charting,
(cid:120) Instructional Plans turned in for (cid:120) Understanding how to facilitate tracking, refining lesson plans, and development
review  two  weeks’  prior  for   the gradual release process with of a plan for re-teaching.
coaching feedback. fidelity and producing student (cid:120) Campus Instructional Rounds implemented
(cid:120) Targeted feedback cycle for outcomes. every 9 weeks for feedback and support reasons.
coaching (CEL) (cid:120) 73% of teaching staff stated that (cid:120) The campus is going school-wide self-contained
(cid:120) T-TESS Dimensions for they do not have enough time to to provide teachers with more time to deliver
conversations. teach the curriculum to our content and activities while refining their
(cid:120) The Data Wall in the PLC for students due to the schedule. gradual release practices.
Assessment and student
tracking.
(cid:120) Curriculum Calendars Posted
outside of every grade-level
gateway.
(cid:120) Videoing of Lessons and then
reviewing and providing peer to
peer feedback on instruction.
(cid:120)
8 2016-2017 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Summary-Draft #3-(Updated: 8-24-16)