School Name: Coconut Creek hs date: 2011-12 Broward Preliminary sip submission

End of Reading Goals
Mathematics Goals

Please refer to questions below to guide your responses when completing the goal chart. Specific responses are not required for each question on the template.

Guiding Questions to Inform the Problem-Solving Process

Based on 2010 FCAT data, what percentage of students achieved proficiency (FCAT Level 3)? Based on 2010 FCAT data, what percentage of students achieved above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 or 5)? Based on a comparison of 2009 FCAT data and 2010 FCAT data, what was the percent increase or decrease of students maintaining proficiency (FCAT Levels 3, 4, 5)? What are the anticipated barriers to increasing the percentage of students maintaining proficiency (FCAT Level 3) or moving above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 or 5) on the 2011 FCAT? For students scoring FCAT Levels 1 or 2, what strategies will be implemented to provide remediation and increase achievement to proficiency (FCAT Level 3)? For students scoring FCAT Level 3, what strategies will be implemented to maintain proficiency and/or increase achievement to above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 or 5)? For students scoring FCAT Levels 4 or 5, what strategies will be implemented to maintain above proficiency and provide enrichment?

What percentage of students made learning gains? What was the percent increase or decrease of students making learning gains? What are the anticipated barriers to increasing the percentage of students making learning gains? What strategies will be implemented to increase and maintain proficiency for these students? What additional supplemental interventions/remediation will be provided for students not achieving learning gains?

What percentage of students in the lowest 25% made learning gains? What was the percent increase or decrease in the lowest 25% of students making learning gains? What are the anticipated barriers to increasing learning gains in the lowest 25%? What additional supplemental interventions/remediation will be provided for students in the lowest 25% not achieving learning gains?

Which student subgroups did not meet AYP targets? What are the anticipated barriers to increasing the number of subgroups making AYP? What strategies will be used to ensure students make AYP?

What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed a decrease in proficiency? How will the Instructional Focus Calendar be created to address area(s) of improvement (clusters/strands)? How will focus lessons be developed and revised to increase proficiency for these clusters/strands?

In addition to the baseline and mid-year assessment, how often will interim or mini-assessments be administered? How often will teachers and the leadership team (principal, assistant principal, instructional coaches) meet to analyze data, problem solve, and redirect the instructional focus based on the academic needs of students? How often will data chats be held at each of the following levels: teacher/student; teacher/administration?

How will the Problem-solving Model and progress monitoring be utilized to strengthen Response to Intervention (RtI) Tier 1 instruction and differentiation? How will the Problem-solving Model and progress monitoring be utilized to identify students in need of RtI Tier 2 supplemental intervention? How will the Problem-solving Model and ongoing progress monitoring be utilized to identify students in need of RtI Tier 3 intensive intervention?

* When using percentages, include the number of students the percentage represents (e.g. 70% (35)).

MATHEMATICS GOALS			Problem-Solving Process to Increase Student Achievement
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:			Anticipated Barrier	Strategy	Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy	Evaluation Tool
1. Students achieving proficiency (FCAT Level 3) in mathematics Mathematics Goal #1:			1.1. Inadequate use of data and its interpretation	1.1. Collaboration during PLC Meetings Increase the number of data chats with students Use updated data results to steer curriculum and instruction Refer to Virtual Counselor after each assessment for student data. PLCs Data-Chats	1.1. Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head	1.1. CWTs, Observations, PLCs recorded minutes	1.1. Mini BATs, BAT, Algebra and Geometry EOC Tests
Students will have the same level of proficiency in our school as that of the District level based upon NGSSS	2011 Current Level of Performance:*	2012 Expected Level of Performance:*
	Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.	Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.
			1.2. Inability to create measurable learning objectives.	1.2. Peer observation-Shared Best Strategies Modeled activities within or across disciplines Collaboration during Professional Learning Communities Referencing the NGSSS IFC (school wide and district wide) PLCs Data-Chats	1.2. Assistant Principal, Math Coach, Department Head, Model Teachers	1.2. CWTs, Observations, PLC’s recorded minutes	1.2. Lesson Plans Common Board Configuration
			1.3. Lack of direct and explicit instruction to deliver curriculum.	1.3. Attend District workshops Participating in District online-courses Collaborate on creating well planned, organized and appropriately paced lessons PLCs Data-Chats	1.3. Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head	1.3. CWT’s, Observations, Teacher data chats	1.3. Lesson Plans
			1.4 Inconsistent use of ESOL/literacy strategies to scaffold instruction.	1.4 In-service teachers on updated ESOL strategies Expand classroom libraries Use literature to show real-world mathematical situations Referencing the ESOL Math IFC (school wide and district wide) PLCs Data-Chats	1.4 Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head, Reading Coach	1.4 CWT’s, Observations	1.4 Lesson Plans Student grouped by ELL Level within classroom.
			1.5 Inconsistent use of rigorous higher order questioning strategies.	1.5 Peer observation Common planning Professional Learning Communities PLCs Data-Chats	1.5 Assistant Principal, Math Coach, Department Head	1.5 CWT’s, Observations	1.5 Mini BATs, BAT, Algebra and Geometry EOC
			1.6 Unfamiliarity with the newly adopted textbooks and the NGSSSS.	1.6 District curriculum Summer Training In-house Professional Development conducted by teachers who attended the Summer Trainings Referencing the NGSSS IFC (school wide and core) PLCs Data-Chats	1.6 Math Coach, Model Teachers	1.6 Observations, Student work, student portfolio	1.6 Lesson Plans Teacher textbook Review
			1.7 Unfamiliarity with the testing platform of the new EOC Algebra Course	1.7 District Support Extended Learning Opportunities for students taking Algebra EOC tests Class openers for students taking both Geometry and Algebra EOC tests PLCs Data-Chats	1.7 Math Coach, District Personnel	1.7 Observations	1.7 End of Course Exam Data
			1.8 Inconsistent use of Differentiated Instructional Strategies	1.8 Increase use of technology during instruction and presentation Model teaching within or across disciplines Provide staff development on how to implement the effective use of cooperative grouping Referencing the NGSSS Instructional Focus Calendar (School0wide and Core IFC). PLCs Data-Chats	1.8 Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head	1.8 CWTs, Observations, PLCs Recorded minutes	1.8 Mini BATS, BAT, Algebra and Geometry EOCs
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:			Anticipated Barrier	Strategy	Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy	Evaluation Tool
2. Students achieving above proficiency (FCAT Levels 4 and 5) in mathematics Mathematics Goal #2:			2.1. Inability to create measurable learning objectives	2.1. Teachers will attend a professional development on how to create measurable objectives PLCs Data-Chats	2.1. Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head	2.1. CWTs, Observations, PLCs recorded minutes.	2.1. Lesson Plan
The goal is to keep the same level of proficiency as that of the District Level in the EOC Algebra and Geometry exams.	2011 Current Level of Performance:*	2012 Expected Level of Performance:*
	Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.	Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.
			2.2. Lack of Direct and explicit instruction to deliver curriculum	2.2. Attend District workshops and/or participate in District online mathematics courses. Collaborate on creating well planned, organized, and appropriately paced lessons PLCs Data-Chats	2.2. Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head	2.2. CWTs, Observations, PLCs recorded minutes	2.2. Mini BATs, BAT, Algebra and Geometry EOC Exams Lesson Plans
			2.3 Inconsistent use of rigorous higher order questioning strategies.	2.3 Peer observation Common Planning PLCs Data-Chats	2.3 Assistant Principals, Math Coach, Department Head, Model Teachers	2.3 CWTs, Observations	2.3 Lesson Plans Teacher textbook review NGSSS Instructional Focus Calendar
			2.4 Unfamiliarity with newly adopted textbooks and the NGSSS	2.4 District curriculum Summer Training In-house Professional Development facilitated by trained teacher PLCs Data-Chats	2.4 Math Coach	2.4 CWTs, Observations	2.4 Lesson Plans Teacher textbook reviews NGSSS IFC
			2.5 Unfamiliarity with the platform of the new EOC Algebra and Geometry	2.5 District support Extend Learning Opportunities for student taking the Algebra and Geometry EOC text. Class openers for students taking both the Algebra and Geometry EOC test PLCs Data-Chats	2.5 Assistant Principals Math Coach Department Head	2.5 CWTs, Observations, PLC’s, recorded minutes	2.5 End of Course Exam
			2.6 Need to use more technology while implementing lessons in classroom.	2.6 In-house Professional Development facilitated by teachers who attended the district workshop for technology training PLCs Data-Chats	2.6 Math Department Head Math Coach Technologically-able teachers	2.6 Observations, PLCs, Best Practice Lesson Studies	2.6 Technology-based lesson plans Electronic Student Portfolio
Based on the analysis of student achievement data, and reference to “Guiding Questions”, identify and define areas in need of improvement for the following group:			Anticipated Barrier	Strategy	Person or Position Responsible for Monitoring	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Strategy	Evaluation Tool
3. Percentage of students making Learning Gains in mathematics Mathematics Goal #3:			3.1. Inadequate use of data and its interpretation	3.1. Collaboration during Professional Learning Communities Increase the number of data chats with students Use data results to steer curriculum and instruction PLCs Data-Chats	3.1. Assistant Principals, Math coach, Department Head	3.1. CWT's, Peer Observations, PLC’s recorded minutes	3.1. Mini BATS, BAT Algebra and Geometry EOC Tests
By June, 2012 74 % of students will show Learning Gains on the 10th Grade EOC test.	2011 Current Level of Performance:*	2012 Expected Level of Performance:*
	Enter numerical data for current level of performance in this box.	Enter numerical data for expected level of performance in this box.
			3.2. Inability to create measurable learning objectives	3.2. Peer observation- Share Best Practices Modeled activities within or across disciplines Collaboration during Professional Learning Communities PLCs Data-Chats	3.2. Assistant Principals, Math coach, Department Head	3.2. CWT's, Peer Observations, PLC’s	3.2. Lesson Plans
			3.3. Lack of direct and explicit instruction to deliver curriculum	3.3. Attend District workshops Participating in District on-line courses Collaborate on creating well planned, organized and appropriately paced lessons PLCs Data-Chats	3.3. Assistant Principals, Math coach, Department Head	3.3. CWT's, Peer Observations, PLC’s recorded minutes	3.3. Mini BATS, BAT, FCAT
			3.4. Inconsistent use of rigorous higher order questioning strategies	3.4. Peer observation Common planning Meet in small Professional Learning Communities to discuss effective implementation of high order thinking strategies. PLCs Data-Chats	3.4. Assistant Principals, Math coach, Department Head	3.4. CWT's, Peer Observations, PLC’s recorded minutes	3.4 Mini BATS, Classroom tests
			3.5. Unfamiliarity with the newly adopted textbooks and the Next Generation Sunshine State Standards	3.5. District curriculum Summer Training In-house Professional Development facilitated by teacher who attended the District Summer Training PLCs Data-Chats	3.5. Math Coach	3.5. CWT's, Peer Observations, PLC’s recorded minutes	3.5. Lesson Plans
			3.6. Inconsistent use of Differentiated Instructional Strategies	3.6. Increase use of technology during instruction and assignment of a variety of student activities Modeled teaching within and across disciplines Provide staff development on how to implement the effective use of cooperative grouping PLCs Data-Chats	3.6. Increase use of technology during instruction and assignment of a variety of student activities Modeled teaching within and across disciplines Provide staff development on how to implement the effective use of cooperative grouping	3.6. CWT's, Peer Observations, PLC’s recorded minutes	3.6. Mini BATS, BAT, Algebra and Geometry EOC Test.
			3.7 Unfamiliarity with the platform of the new End of Course Algebra test	3.7. District support Extended Learning Opportunities for students taking Algebra End of Course test