Home Page | ACSIP Data Sources | Work On Your ACSIP | Reports | Federal/State Budgets | FAQ | Feedback | Logout
View ACSIP | Actions Report | Program Application for Title Funding | Source of Funds Report
Source of Funds Report

 

LEPANTO ELEMENTARY
502 MCCLELLAN ST.,LEPANTO, AR 72354

Source of Funds

For: NSLA (State-281) - Capital Outlay, NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits, NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries, NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies, NSLA (State-281) - Other Objects, NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services.

Total Amount Reported: $125720

Generated on September 25, 2014


Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Capital Outlay -- $9941
    Priority 1: Literacy
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to utilize our data, interventions, and tutoring to improve and motivate our students in their weakest areas, while striving to meet the rigor of PARCC and Common Core State Standards.
    Priority 2: Math
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits -- $14724
    Priority 1: Literacy
        Goal: All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
    Priority 2: Math
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries -- $59605
    Priority 1: Literacy
        Goal: All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
    Priority 2: Math
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies -- $36302
    Priority 1: Literacy
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to utilize our data, interventions, and tutoring to improve and motivate our students in their weakest areas, while striving to meet the rigor of PARCC and Common Core State Standards.
        Goal: All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
    Priority 2: Math
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Other Objects -- $0
    There is no data for the Source of Funds type "NSLA (State-281) - Other Objects".
Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services -- $5148
    Priority 1: Literacy
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to utilize our data, interventions, and tutoring to improve and motivate our students in their weakest areas, while striving to meet the rigor of PARCC and Common Core State Standards.
        Goal: All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
    Priority 2: Math
        Goal: Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).

Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Capital Outlay -- $9941
Priority 1: Literacy
Supporting Data:
  1. THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2013-2014 As we analyzed our data for the 2013-2014 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in Second Grade were: ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text; recount stories including fables and folktales from diverse cultures, and determine their central message, lesson, or moral; describe how words and phrases supply rhythm and meaning in a story, poem, or song; describe the overall structure of a story, including describing the beginning introduces the story and the ending concludes the action; describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area; know and use various text features to locate key information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. Weak areas for THIRD GRADE were: ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; describe characters in a story and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language; refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a text, using terms such as chapter, scene, and stanza; distinguish their own point of view from that of the narrator or those of the characters; ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; use text features and search tools to locate information relevant to a given topic efficiently; distinguish their own point of view from that of the author of a text; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use determiners; produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory sentences in response to prompts; capitalize dates and names of people; use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series; use commas in greetings and closings of letters. Weak areas for FOURTH GRADE were: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the meaning fo words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the main idea of a text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text; explain events, procedures, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text, including what happened and why, based on specific information in the text; explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing, speaking, reading, or listening; demonstrate understanding of figurative language, word relationships, and nuances in word meanings; explain the function of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs in general and their functions in particular sentences; produce simple, compound, and complex sentences. Our weak areas in Third Grade were: Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how (20%), know and use various text features (23%), describe how reasons support specific points the authors makes in a text (35%), identify the main topic of a multi paragraph text (44%), recount stories, including fables and folktales from diverse cultures (45%). Our weak areas in Fourth Grade were: Reading: refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a topic (19%), determine the main idea of a text; recount key details (31%), describe the relationship between a series of historical events (38%), ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text (38%), describe characters in a story (36%). Writing: demonstrate common of conventions of standard English grammar and usage (7%) demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization and punctuation (33%), produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamatory sentences (46%), use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series (47%). THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2012-2013 As we analyzed our data for the 2012-2013 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: article details;inference; main idea; literary element analysis; sequencing; vocabulary; literary devices; analysis; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area, know and use various text features to locate key facts or information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. THIRD GRADE: article details; inference; literary devices; analysis; use text features and search tools to locate informatin relevant to a given topic efficiently; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; use abstract nouns; irregular nouns; subordinating conjunctions; commas; quotation marks. FOURTH GRADE: article details; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; main idea; analysis; explain how an author uses reasons for reading and evidence to support particular points in a text; fragments; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar adn usage when writing or speaking; metaphor; adage/proverb; demonstratives; adverbs; simple sentences. 2011-2012 As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our greatest need in SECOND GRADE were main topic of a multiparagraph text, identifying the main purpose of a text and know and use various text features. In SECOND GRADE WRITING demonstrate command of the conventions of standards, use commas in dates to separate single words and capitalize dates and names of people. THIRD GRADE'S weakest areas were in describe the relationship between a series, recount stories and including fables and folktales. In THIRD GRADE WRITING the data showed demonstrate command of conventions, and use knowledge of language and its conventions. . FOURTH GRADE data showed a need in the overall structure, describe in depth a character, setting or events, and determine the main idea of a text. In FOURTH GRADE WRITING the areas were produce simple, compound, and complex sentences and demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English. We will focus on these areas in both classroom instruction and intervention time.
  2. 2013-2014 ACTAAP Data According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, the data is as follows: COMBINED POPULATION: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 13% basic, 50% proficient, 25% advanced; NON DISABLED STUDENTS: 6% basic, 53% proficient, and 41% advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% proficient; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 17% below basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced. As we analyzed our data, we will strive to improve the following weak areas: CONTENT (58%) MULTIPLE CHOICE WRITING (54%) OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGES (45%) CONTENT (25%) PRACTICAL (41%) Our STRENGTHS were MULTIPLE CHOICE-LITERARY PASSAGE 62% PRACTICAL PASSAGE 71%; OPEN RESPONSE-WRITING CONTENT 61%, WRITING STYLE 63%, SENTENCE FORMATION 70%, USAGE 76%, MECHANICS 73%. 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% proficient. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, and 0% advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANAGED: 9% scored below basic, 30% scored basic, 26% scored proficient, and 36% scored advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 10% below basic, 0% basic, 30% proficient, and 60% advanced. As we analyzed our data we will strive to improve in the following weak areas: In THIRD GRADE we will work on Literary (50%), Content (50), Practical (38%) all being Open Response items. Our STRENGTHS were Multiple Choice: Content (63%), Practical (63%), Writing (63%), Content (65%), Style (65%), Sentence Formation (70%), Usage (84%), Mechanics (78%)/ 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES-0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-11% Below basic 5% Basic 84% Proficient/Advanced GENDER GAP FEMALE-7% Below Basic 7% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE 21% Below Basic 0% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced ETHNICITY-HISPANIC-40% Below Basic 0% Basic 60% Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN-6% Below Basic 6% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced Our Strengths included Multiple Choice Writing and Content Passage. Our strengths in Open Response were Reading Content and Writing Sentence Formation. We scored above State Average in all areas. We will focus on our weak areas being Multiple Choice Literacy Passage and Practical Passage. Our weak areas in Open Response were Reading Practical and Writing Content. 2013-2014 ACTAAP DATA According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the sub populations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 17% proficient, and 17% advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 39% proficient, 18% advanced; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 42% proficient, and 4% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 20% proficient, and 50% advanced. Our weak areas included WRITING MULTIPLE CHOICE (63%) and OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGE (35%). Our STRENGTHS were in the area of LITERARY PASSAGE (64%), CONTENT PASSAGE (71%) PRACTICAL (66%); open response-CONTENT PASSAGE (78%) PRACTICAL PASSAGE (63%), WRITING CONTENT (71%) STYLE (71%), SENTENCE FORMATION (80%) USAGE (89%) MECHANICS (80%) 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 90% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% advanced NON-DIABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% Advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 6% below basic, 3% basic, 42% proficient, and 48% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 11% basic, 33% proficient, and 56% advanced. In Fourth Grade, we will work on Literary (38%)and Practical (50%) in Open Response items. Our only weak area in Multiple Choice for Fourth Grade was Writing (50%). Our STRENGTHS included the following: all strands of Writing: Content(74%),Style (74%), Sentence Formation (88%), Usage (98%), Mechanics (86%); MULTIPLE CHOICE: Literary (63%), Content (75%), Practical (75%). OPEN RESPONSE: Content (63%). 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 87% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-3.1% Below Basic 11.1% Basic 86% Proficient/Advanced MALE-7.1% Below Basic 7.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE-0% Below Basic 13.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced WHITE-4.1% Below Basic 8.1% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced Our STRENGTHS in Multiple Choice include Writing-Multiple Choice. Open Response Reading Practical Passage, Writing Sentence Formation, Writing Usage, Writing Mechanics. Our WEAKEST areas in multiple choice was Reading Practical Passage. In Open Response Writing Style Domain, Writing Content Domain and Reading Content Domain.
  3. 2013-2014 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2014, FIRST GRADE: COMBINED POPULATION VOCABULARY Out of 31 students tested, 12 scored above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-out of 31 students tested, 15 scored above benchmark, SPELLING-31 students tested, 14 scored above benchmark. Weak areas being in VOCABULARY. SECOND GRADE ITBS DATA 2013-2014 COMBINED POPULATION-VOCABULARY 31.3% above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-43.8% above benchmark, SPELLING-43.7% above benchmark. Our weakest area being in VOCABULARY. 2012-2013 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2013, FIRST GRADE: VOCABULARY 26 out of 32 students scored below basic. 6 out of 32 students scored at or above benchmark. SPELLING: 18 out of 32 scored below basic. 14 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION: 17 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. 15 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE VOCABULARY: 14 out of 25 scored below benchmark. 11 out of 25 scored 44% at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark. 10 out of 25 scored below benchmark. Our STRENGTHS were in COMPREHENSION for both grades with 17 out of 32 scoring at or above benchmark in FIRST GRADE and 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark in SECOND GRADE. SECOND GRADE had a STRENGTH in SPELLING with 13 our of 25 scored at or above benchmark. Our WEAKNESSESS were in VOCABULARY with 26 out of 32 scoring below benchmark and SPELLING with 18 out of 32 scored below benchmark. According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2011-2012, out of 31 students tested, First Grade scored 41% in Reading and 47% in Language. When analyzing the subpopulations, they were as follows: African American-25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient HISPANIC-100% Below Basic CAUCASIAN-16.7% Below Basic 33.3% in Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED- 18.5 Below Basic 37% Basic 44% Proficient/Advanced SECOND GRADE 2011-2012 Overall, 36 students tested-38% Reading 40% Language. When the sub populations were analyzed the results are the following: African American-66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced Hispanic-50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Causasion-41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 41.6 Proficient/Advanced Economically Disadvantaged-46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced
  4. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2013-2014 KINDERGARTEN: EOY-46 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY-45 students were tested 44% scored at or above benchmark 18% scored some risk 38% scored at risk FIRST GRADE EOY-31 students were tested 32% scored at risk 10% scored some risk 58% scored at or above benchmark BOY:34 students were tested 64% scored at or above benchmark 21% scored some risk 15% scored at risk SECOND GRADE EOY-32 students were tested 6% scored at risk 16% scored some risk 78% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 16 students were tested 88% scored at or above benchmark 6% scored some risk 6% scored at risk THIRD GRADE EOY-24 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 15 students were tested 47% scored at or above benchmark 20% scored some risk 33% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2012-2013 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested 50%% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 33% scored low risk EOY-36 students were tested 81% scored low risk 11% scored some risk 8% scored at risk FIRST GRADE: BOY-36 students were tested 33% scored well below benchmark 19% scored below benchmark 48% scored at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 53 scored low risk 38 scored some risk 9% scored at risk SECOND GRADE: BOY-25 students were tested 84% students scored at or above benchmark 8% scored some risk 8% scored at risk EOY-24 students were tested 83% scored low risk 17% scored some risk 0 scored at risk THIRD GRADE: BOY- 36 students were tested 46% were well below benchmark 3% were below benchmark 51% were at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 62% scored low risk 3% scored some risk 46% scored at risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-40 students were tested 60% were at or above benchmark 15% were some risk 25% were at risk EOY-40 students were tested 65% scored at or above benchmark 15% scored some risk 20% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2011-2012 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-33 students tested. 10 students low risk 10 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-35 students tested 17 students low risk 14 students some risk 4 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 28 students low risk 7 students some risk 2 students high risk FIRST GRADE BOY-29 students tested 18 low risk 5 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-29 students tested 17 students low risk 6 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-31 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 5 students high risk SECOND GRADE BOY-32 students tested 23 low risk 3 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-38 students tested 21 students low risk 2 students some risk 15 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 20 students low risk 7 students some risk 9 students high risk THIRD GRADE BOY-38 students tested 22 students low risk 6 students some risk 10 students high risk MOY-41 students tested 25 students low risk 10 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-41 students tested 29 students low risk 5 students some risk 7 students low risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-37 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-36 students tested 24 students low risk 3 students some risk 9 students high risk EOY-38 students tested 19 students low risk 10 students some risk 9 students high risk
  5. Lepanto Elementary's average daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  6. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2014-2015 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested First Sound Fluency: 25% scored at risk 11% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark FIRST GRADE: BOY-43 students were tested Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: 9% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 72% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Correct Letter Sound 7% scored at risk 23% scored some risk 70% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Word Read 58% scored some risk 42% scored at or above benchmark SECOND GRADE-26 students were tested Nonsense Word Fluency-Correct Letter Sound 39% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency-Words Read 19% scored at risk 27% scored some risk 54% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Fluency 27% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 54% scored at or above risk DORF-Accuracy 12% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 76% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Retell 24% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark THIRD GRADE: 51 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 18% scored at risk 35% scored some risk 47% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 14% scored at risk 25% scored some risk 61% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 2% scored at risk 8% scored some risk 90% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 22% scored at risk 22% scored some risk 56% scored at or above benchmark FOURTH GRADE 46 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 39% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 20% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 65% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 11% scored at risk 89% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 15% scored at risk 33% scored some risk 52% scored at or above benchmark
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to utilize our data, interventions, and tutoring to improve and motivate our students in their weakest areas, while striving to meet the rigor of PARCC and Common Core State Standards.
Benchmark Lepanto Elementary scored 87.27% for combined population in Literacy. We will continue to enhance our students knowledge base as set forth in the Common Core State Standards.
Intervention: Lepanto Elementary is in its fifth year of transitioning to COMMON CORE STANDARDS and will continue to utilize COMPREHENSIVE LITERACY STRATEGIES to enhance the education of its students in the classroom setting. We will continue to utilize the Put Reading First building blocks for reading.
Scientific Based Research: Mission Statement." Common Core State Standards Initiative. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2013 Donna DiPrima Bickel, et al. "Investigating The Effectiveness Of A Comprehensive Literacy Coaching Program In Schools With High Teacher Mobility." Elementary School Journal 111.1 (2010): 35-62. ERIC. Web. 11 Sept. 2013. The Role of Interim Assessments in a Comprehensive Assessment System: A Policy Brief (2007) The Aspen Institute Brooks, D. Christopher. “Space Matters: The impact of Formal Learning Environments’ On student Learning. “ British Journal of Educational Technology 42.5 (2011): 719-726. ERIC. Web. 6 Sept. 2013. Fuchs, Douglas & Lynn S. (2005)." What is Scientifically- Based Reserach on Progress Monitoring?" Dorn, LJ.,French C., T. 1998. Apprenticeship in Literacy: Transitions Across Reading and Writing."Stenhouse Publishers, Portland, Maine. Put Reading First The Research Building Blocks for Teaching Children To Read: National Reading Panel, Teaching Children to Read: Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction-Reports of the subgroups. National Institute for Literacy at ED Pubs." Morris, Betty. (2002). “Overcoming Dyslexia.” Shaywitz, Sally E., ( 1996). “Dyslexia” Scientific American, (1996): November.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will continue to purchase materials, supplies, books AND TWO SMARTBOARDS for Courtney Wewers and Debra DuFord enabling classroom teachers the ability to continue a comprehensive literacy program. 1120/66000
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
Mike Kelly, Courtney Wewers, Debra DuFord Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
  • Title Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Capital Outlay: $8,759.00

ACTION BUDGET: $8,759.00
Total Budget: $8,759.00
Priority 2: Math
Supporting Data:
  1. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 85% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 25% basic, 76% proficient/advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS 12% basic, 88% proficient/advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% basic; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 89% proficient/advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 33% basic, 67% proficient/advanced We will focus on our greatest areas of needs: Geometry (44%) and Measurement (15%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 73.61% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 23% basic, 39% proficient, and 39% advanced. LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 26% basic, 57% proficient, and 17% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 20% basic, 0% proficient, and 80% advanced. We will focus on our greatest areas of being Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations-Fractions. 2012 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84.49% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: Below Basic 8% Basic 11% 81%% Proficient/Advanced LEP: Below Basic: 40% Basic 0% 60% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 0% Below Basic 12% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 7% Below Basic 7% Basic 85% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 7% Below Basic 10% Basic 82% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history shows a gain of 2.49% from last year. Our weaknesses in MULTIPLE CHOICE were DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY AND MEASUREMENT. OPEN RESPONSE WEAKNESSES were DATA ANALYSIS % PROBABILITY/NUMBERS AND OPERATIONS. Our STRENGTHS included for MULTIPLE CHOICE NUMBERS & OPERATIONS. Strengths in OPEN RESPONSE were GEOMETRY. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE 2013-2014 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall, 54% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 34% proficient/advanced NON DIABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 57% proficient/advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 50% below basic, 50% basic ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 46% proficient/advanced NON ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 70% proficient/advanced We will FOCUS on our weak areas: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%), Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra (39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year is as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 50% below basic, 25% basic, 25% proficient, and 0% advanced NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 12% basic, 50% proficient, and 35% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 40% basic, 40% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 12% below basic, 0% basic, 45% proficient, and 24% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% below basic, 0 basic, 44% proficient, and 44% advanced. We will FOCUS on Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: COMBINED: 13.1% Below Basic 21.1% Basic 66% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 14% Below Basic 20% Basic 65% Proficient/Advanced LEP: 0% Below Basic 25% Basic 75% Proficient/Advanced CAUSCASIAN: 19% Below Basic 33% Basic 62% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 20% Below Basic 33% Basic 47% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 9% Below Basic 13% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history showed a 1% gain over 2011 school year. Our STRENGTHS included MEASUREMENT in MULTIPLE CHOICE. STRENGTHS in OPEN RESPONSE were ALGEBRA. Our WEAKNESSES in MULTIPLE CHOICE included GEOMETRY. WEAK area for OPEN RESPONSE was DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY.
  2. In 2014, ITBS scores First Grade-Math Concepts 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark. Both areas are weaknesses for our school. Second Grade-Math Concepts 46.9% scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 31.3% scored at or above benchmark. Math problems are our weakest area. In 2013, ITBS scores FIRST GRADE: MATH CONCEPTS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 20 out of 32 scored below benchmark. MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 15 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 17 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE: MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 25 students scored at or above benchmark; 13 out of 25 students scored below benchmark. STRENGTHS: MATH CONCEPTS: 16 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark; 9 out of 25 scored below benchmark. In 2012, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 53%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011-2012 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN: 25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 100% Below Basic MULTI-ETHNIC: 50%Basic 50% Advanced CAUCASIAN: 16.7% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our weak areas were MATH CONCEPTS & MATH PROBLEMS. SECOND GRADE: According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2011-2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 35% AFRICAN AMERICAN: 66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced MULTI ETHNIC: 33.3% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 33.3 Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 56% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced Our WEAK areas were MATH CONCEPTS and MATH PROBLEMS. Our data showed no strengths. KINDERGARTEN In 2011, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 55.9%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-28.6% HISPANIC-50% CAUCASIAN-60.9% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-55.2% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-100% Our STRENGTHS were numbers properties and operations and problem solving. Our WEAKNESSES were geometry and measurement. FIRST GRADE ITBS 2011 In 2011 the ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 51.5%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-40% CAUCASIAN-63.6% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-44% FIRST GRADE STRENGTH was measurement. WEAKNESSES were numbers and operations, geometry, and problem solving. . SECOND GRADE 2011 In 2011 ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 64.1%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-66.7% HISPANIC-40% CAUCASIAN-66.7% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-60.6% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-50% SECOND GRADE STRENGTHS were numbers and operations, algebraic concepts, geometry, and single step problems. WEAKNESSES were measurement, multiple step problems, data, relationships/trends, and comparing quantities.
  3. Lepanto Elementary's daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  4. EVALUATION This is Lepanto Elementary's fifth year to utilize THE LEARNING INSTITUTE. We will assess the impact on student achievement by analyzing students performance on TLI modules throughout the year. TLI Math Data 2014-2015 Our weak areas in FIRST GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (c) add to: start unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (j) compare: difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (k) compare: bigger unknown; understand the meaning of the equal sign, and determine if equations involving addition and subtraction are true or false. For example, which of the following equations are true and which are false? 6=6, 7=8-1,5+2=2+5, 4+1=5+2; count to 120, starting at any number less than 120. In this range, read and write numerals and represent a number of objects with a written numeral; add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, one and ones, and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten; express the length of an object as a whole number of length units; by laying multiple copies of a shorter object (the length unit) end to end; understand that the length measurement of an object is the number of same-size length units that span it with no gaps or overlaps. Limit to contexts where the object being measured is spanned by a whole number of length units with no gaps or overlaps; tell and write time in hours and half-hours using analog and digital clocks; organize, represent, and interpret data with up to three categories; ask and answer questions about the total number of data points, how many in each category, and how many more or less are in one category than in another; compose two-dimensional shapes (rectangle, squares, trapezoids, triangles, half-circles, quarter-circles) or three-dimensional shapes (cubes, right rectangular prisms, right circular cones, and right circular cylinders) to create a composite shape, and compose new shapes from the composite shape (a) 2-d shapes. Our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (d) take from: result unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem . (e) take from change unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (h) put together/take apart: added unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (j) put together/take apart: both addends unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (i) compare difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (l) compare smaller unknown; determine whether a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members, e.g. , by pairing objects or counting them by 2’s; write an equation to express an even number as a sum of two equal addends. (a) even and odd; count within 1000, skip count by 5’s, 10’s 100’s. (b) skip counting; measure to determine how much longer one object is than another, expressing the length difference in terms of a standard length unit; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares, describe the shares using the words halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. and describe the whole as two halves, three thirds, four fourths. Recognize that equal shares of identical wholes need not have the same shape. (b) equal shares not same shape. Our weak areas in THIRD GRADE were: solve two-step word problems using the four operations. Represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity. Assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation for estimation strategies including rounding. (a) addition & subtraction; use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 to 100 (a) round to nearest 10; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. (b) subtract; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 (e.g., 9 x 80, 5 x 60) using strategies based on place value and properties of operations. (A range of algorithms may be used); measure and estimate liquid volumes and masses of objects using standard units of grams (g) , kilograms (k), and liters (l). 6 add subtract, multiply, or divide to solve one-step word problems involving masses or volumes that are given in the same units, e.g., by using drawings (such as a beaker with a measurement scale) to represent the problem. (a) measure and estimate liquid volumes; draw a scaled picture graph and a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several categories. Solve one- and two-step “how many more” and “how many less” problems using information presented in scaled bar graphs. For example, draw a bar graph in which each square in the bar graph might represent 5 pets. (a) picture graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm, square m, square in, square ft, and improvised units); relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition. D. recognize area as additive. Find areas of rectilinear figures by decomposing them into non-overlapping rectangles and adding the areas of the non-overlapping parts, applying this technique to solve real world problems; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons, including finding the perimeter given the side lengths, finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimeters. (a) find perimeter. Our weak areas in FOURTH GRADE were: multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (a) equal group-unknown products, equal groups-group size unknown, equal groups-number of groups unknown, arrays, area-unknown products, arrays, area-group size unknown, arrays, area-number of groups unknown; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (b) compare-unknown product; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (d) compare- number of groups unknown; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100. Recognize that a whole number is a multiple of each of its factors. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite. (c) prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule. Identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself. For example, given the rule “Add 3” and the starting number 1, generate terms in the resulting sequence and observe that the terms appear to alternate between odd and even numbers. Explain formally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way. (b) identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself; fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; recognize angle measure as additive. When an angle is decomposed into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum of the angle measures of the parts. Solve addition and subtraction problems to find unknown angles on a diagram on real world and mathematical problems, e.g., by using an equation with a symbol for the unknown angle measure. (a) recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, line segments, rays, angles, (right, acute, obtuse), and perpendicular and parallel lines. Identify these in two-dimensional figures. 2012-2013-As we analyzed our data for 2012-2013, we found the following weaknessess: SECOND GRADE: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one and two-stewp word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing with unknowns in all positins; determine whether a group of objects has an odd or even number of members; count within 10000, skip county by 5's, 10's, and 100's; measure the length of an object twice, using length units of different lengths for the two measurements; describe how the two measurements relate to the size of the unit chosen; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares; desvribing the shares using the word halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. We will also concentrate on CCSS weaknesses: Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Number & Operations in Base Ten THIRD GRADE:interpret products of whole numbers; solve two-step word problems using the four operations; represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity;l use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 or 100; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value; properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 usings strategies based on place value and properties of operations; draw a scaled picture-graph adn a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several catergories; solve one- and two- step "how many more" and "how many less" praoblems using information presented in scaled bar graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares; relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons; including finding the perimeter given the side lengths; finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimters. We have adopted CCSS and will work on the following areas also: Operations & Algebraic Thinking, Numbers & Operations-Fractions FOURTH GRADE: interpret a multiplication equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicaiotn equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicatiogn equation by using draawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100; recognize that a whole numbers is a multiple of each of its factors; determine whether a given whole number in in the range of 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number; determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; fluently add and subtracts multi-digit whole numbers, using the standard algorithm; recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, lines, line segments, rays angles. and perpendicular and parallel lines. We have adopted the CCSS and will also focus on these areas of weak ness: Numbers& Operations in Base Ten and Numbers & Operations-Fractions 2011-2012 EVALUATION As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 , we found the following weaknesses: SECOND GRADE: Operations and Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. THIRD GRADE: Data analysis and probalility; measurement; numbers and operations; geometry; FOURTH GRADE: Geometry; measurement.
  5. TLI Science Data 2014 4th Grade The weak areas in SCIENCE were: generate conclusions based on evidence; evaluate the quality and feasibility of an idea or project; use simple equipment, age appropriate tools, technology, and mathematics in scientific investigations (e.g., balances, hand lenses, microscopes, rulers, thermometers, calculators, computers); apply lab safety rules as they relate to specific science lab activities; classify vertebrates into major subgroups; mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles; identify major parts and functions of the following systems: circulatory; illustrate the interdependence of organisms in an ecosystem; collect and interpret measurable empirical evidence in teams and as individuals; evaluate the impact of water pollution.
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Benchmark The 2014 CRT indicated combined population scored 85% for third grade and fourth grade scored 54%. We will continue to move our third and fourth grade students to the proficient or advanced level on the Math portion of the upcoming PARRC assessment. We have adopted Common Core Standards at Lepanto Elementary. Our scores on the ACTAAP were as follows: THIRD GRADE: Combined Population 85% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS in MULTIPLE CHOICE: Algebra (67%), Measurement (56%), Data/Probability (62%), Numbers/Operations (72%)OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (53%), Algebra (68%), Data/Probability (50%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%); OPEN RESPONSE: Geometry (1%), Measurement (15%). FOURTH GRADE Combined Population 54% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS IN MULTIPLE CHOICE: Numbers/Operations (73%), Algebra (56%), Data/Probability (58%); OPEN RESPONSE: Measurement (55%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Intervention: Computer Assisted Instruction
Scientific Based Research: Ed Thoughts: What We Know About Mathematics Teaching and Learning. p. 61-71, McRel, edited by John Sutton and Alice Krueger, Aurora, CO, 2002. PRWeb, "Reserach Study Shows Stunning Gains for Elemenrtary Student with Person's enVisionMATH Program" April, 2010.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will purchase 8 IPADS and 1 MAC Computer for use by students for research.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Mike Kelly Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Computers
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
NSLA (State-281) - Capital Outlay: $1,182.00

ACTION BUDGET: $1,182.00
Total Budget: $1,182.00

Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits -- $14724
Priority 1: Literacy
Supporting Data:
  1. THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2013-2014 As we analyzed our data for the 2013-2014 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in Second Grade were: ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text; recount stories including fables and folktales from diverse cultures, and determine their central message, lesson, or moral; describe how words and phrases supply rhythm and meaning in a story, poem, or song; describe the overall structure of a story, including describing the beginning introduces the story and the ending concludes the action; describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area; know and use various text features to locate key information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. Weak areas for THIRD GRADE were: ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; describe characters in a story and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language; refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a text, using terms such as chapter, scene, and stanza; distinguish their own point of view from that of the narrator or those of the characters; ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; use text features and search tools to locate information relevant to a given topic efficiently; distinguish their own point of view from that of the author of a text; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use determiners; produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory sentences in response to prompts; capitalize dates and names of people; use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series; use commas in greetings and closings of letters. Weak areas for FOURTH GRADE were: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the meaning fo words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the main idea of a text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text; explain events, procedures, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text, including what happened and why, based on specific information in the text; explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing, speaking, reading, or listening; demonstrate understanding of figurative language, word relationships, and nuances in word meanings; explain the function of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs in general and their functions in particular sentences; produce simple, compound, and complex sentences. Our weak areas in Third Grade were: Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how (20%), know and use various text features (23%), describe how reasons support specific points the authors makes in a text (35%), identify the main topic of a multi paragraph text (44%), recount stories, including fables and folktales from diverse cultures (45%). Our weak areas in Fourth Grade were: Reading: refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a topic (19%), determine the main idea of a text; recount key details (31%), describe the relationship between a series of historical events (38%), ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text (38%), describe characters in a story (36%). Writing: demonstrate common of conventions of standard English grammar and usage (7%) demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization and punctuation (33%), produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamatory sentences (46%), use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series (47%). THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2012-2013 As we analyzed our data for the 2012-2013 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: article details;inference; main idea; literary element analysis; sequencing; vocabulary; literary devices; analysis; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area, know and use various text features to locate key facts or information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. THIRD GRADE: article details; inference; literary devices; analysis; use text features and search tools to locate informatin relevant to a given topic efficiently; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; use abstract nouns; irregular nouns; subordinating conjunctions; commas; quotation marks. FOURTH GRADE: article details; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; main idea; analysis; explain how an author uses reasons for reading and evidence to support particular points in a text; fragments; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar adn usage when writing or speaking; metaphor; adage/proverb; demonstratives; adverbs; simple sentences. 2011-2012 As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our greatest need in SECOND GRADE were main topic of a multiparagraph text, identifying the main purpose of a text and know and use various text features. In SECOND GRADE WRITING demonstrate command of the conventions of standards, use commas in dates to separate single words and capitalize dates and names of people. THIRD GRADE'S weakest areas were in describe the relationship between a series, recount stories and including fables and folktales. In THIRD GRADE WRITING the data showed demonstrate command of conventions, and use knowledge of language and its conventions. . FOURTH GRADE data showed a need in the overall structure, describe in depth a character, setting or events, and determine the main idea of a text. In FOURTH GRADE WRITING the areas were produce simple, compound, and complex sentences and demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English. We will focus on these areas in both classroom instruction and intervention time.
  2. 2013-2014 ACTAAP Data According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, the data is as follows: COMBINED POPULATION: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 13% basic, 50% proficient, 25% advanced; NON DISABLED STUDENTS: 6% basic, 53% proficient, and 41% advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% proficient; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 17% below basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced. As we analyzed our data, we will strive to improve the following weak areas: CONTENT (58%) MULTIPLE CHOICE WRITING (54%) OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGES (45%) CONTENT (25%) PRACTICAL (41%) Our STRENGTHS were MULTIPLE CHOICE-LITERARY PASSAGE 62% PRACTICAL PASSAGE 71%; OPEN RESPONSE-WRITING CONTENT 61%, WRITING STYLE 63%, SENTENCE FORMATION 70%, USAGE 76%, MECHANICS 73%. 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% proficient. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, and 0% advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANAGED: 9% scored below basic, 30% scored basic, 26% scored proficient, and 36% scored advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 10% below basic, 0% basic, 30% proficient, and 60% advanced. As we analyzed our data we will strive to improve in the following weak areas: In THIRD GRADE we will work on Literary (50%), Content (50), Practical (38%) all being Open Response items. Our STRENGTHS were Multiple Choice: Content (63%), Practical (63%), Writing (63%), Content (65%), Style (65%), Sentence Formation (70%), Usage (84%), Mechanics (78%)/ 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES-0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-11% Below basic 5% Basic 84% Proficient/Advanced GENDER GAP FEMALE-7% Below Basic 7% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE 21% Below Basic 0% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced ETHNICITY-HISPANIC-40% Below Basic 0% Basic 60% Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN-6% Below Basic 6% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced Our Strengths included Multiple Choice Writing and Content Passage. Our strengths in Open Response were Reading Content and Writing Sentence Formation. We scored above State Average in all areas. We will focus on our weak areas being Multiple Choice Literacy Passage and Practical Passage. Our weak areas in Open Response were Reading Practical and Writing Content. 2013-2014 ACTAAP DATA According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the sub populations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 17% proficient, and 17% advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 39% proficient, 18% advanced; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 42% proficient, and 4% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 20% proficient, and 50% advanced. Our weak areas included WRITING MULTIPLE CHOICE (63%) and OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGE (35%). Our STRENGTHS were in the area of LITERARY PASSAGE (64%), CONTENT PASSAGE (71%) PRACTICAL (66%); open response-CONTENT PASSAGE (78%) PRACTICAL PASSAGE (63%), WRITING CONTENT (71%) STYLE (71%), SENTENCE FORMATION (80%) USAGE (89%) MECHANICS (80%) 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 90% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% advanced NON-DIABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% Advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 6% below basic, 3% basic, 42% proficient, and 48% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 11% basic, 33% proficient, and 56% advanced. In Fourth Grade, we will work on Literary (38%)and Practical (50%) in Open Response items. Our only weak area in Multiple Choice for Fourth Grade was Writing (50%). Our STRENGTHS included the following: all strands of Writing: Content(74%),Style (74%), Sentence Formation (88%), Usage (98%), Mechanics (86%); MULTIPLE CHOICE: Literary (63%), Content (75%), Practical (75%). OPEN RESPONSE: Content (63%). 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 87% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-3.1% Below Basic 11.1% Basic 86% Proficient/Advanced MALE-7.1% Below Basic 7.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE-0% Below Basic 13.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced WHITE-4.1% Below Basic 8.1% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced Our STRENGTHS in Multiple Choice include Writing-Multiple Choice. Open Response Reading Practical Passage, Writing Sentence Formation, Writing Usage, Writing Mechanics. Our WEAKEST areas in multiple choice was Reading Practical Passage. In Open Response Writing Style Domain, Writing Content Domain and Reading Content Domain.
  3. 2013-2014 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2014, FIRST GRADE: COMBINED POPULATION VOCABULARY Out of 31 students tested, 12 scored above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-out of 31 students tested, 15 scored above benchmark, SPELLING-31 students tested, 14 scored above benchmark. Weak areas being in VOCABULARY. SECOND GRADE ITBS DATA 2013-2014 COMBINED POPULATION-VOCABULARY 31.3% above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-43.8% above benchmark, SPELLING-43.7% above benchmark. Our weakest area being in VOCABULARY. 2012-2013 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2013, FIRST GRADE: VOCABULARY 26 out of 32 students scored below basic. 6 out of 32 students scored at or above benchmark. SPELLING: 18 out of 32 scored below basic. 14 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION: 17 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. 15 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE VOCABULARY: 14 out of 25 scored below benchmark. 11 out of 25 scored 44% at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark. 10 out of 25 scored below benchmark. Our STRENGTHS were in COMPREHENSION for both grades with 17 out of 32 scoring at or above benchmark in FIRST GRADE and 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark in SECOND GRADE. SECOND GRADE had a STRENGTH in SPELLING with 13 our of 25 scored at or above benchmark. Our WEAKNESSESS were in VOCABULARY with 26 out of 32 scoring below benchmark and SPELLING with 18 out of 32 scored below benchmark. According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2011-2012, out of 31 students tested, First Grade scored 41% in Reading and 47% in Language. When analyzing the subpopulations, they were as follows: African American-25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient HISPANIC-100% Below Basic CAUCASIAN-16.7% Below Basic 33.3% in Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED- 18.5 Below Basic 37% Basic 44% Proficient/Advanced SECOND GRADE 2011-2012 Overall, 36 students tested-38% Reading 40% Language. When the sub populations were analyzed the results are the following: African American-66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced Hispanic-50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Causasion-41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 41.6 Proficient/Advanced Economically Disadvantaged-46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced
  4. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2013-2014 KINDERGARTEN: EOY-46 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY-45 students were tested 44% scored at or above benchmark 18% scored some risk 38% scored at risk FIRST GRADE EOY-31 students were tested 32% scored at risk 10% scored some risk 58% scored at or above benchmark BOY:34 students were tested 64% scored at or above benchmark 21% scored some risk 15% scored at risk SECOND GRADE EOY-32 students were tested 6% scored at risk 16% scored some risk 78% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 16 students were tested 88% scored at or above benchmark 6% scored some risk 6% scored at risk THIRD GRADE EOY-24 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 15 students were tested 47% scored at or above benchmark 20% scored some risk 33% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2012-2013 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested 50%% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 33% scored low risk EOY-36 students were tested 81% scored low risk 11% scored some risk 8% scored at risk FIRST GRADE: BOY-36 students were tested 33% scored well below benchmark 19% scored below benchmark 48% scored at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 53 scored low risk 38 scored some risk 9% scored at risk SECOND GRADE: BOY-25 students were tested 84% students scored at or above benchmark 8% scored some risk 8% scored at risk EOY-24 students were tested 83% scored low risk 17% scored some risk 0 scored at risk THIRD GRADE: BOY- 36 students were tested 46% were well below benchmark 3% were below benchmark 51% were at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 62% scored low risk 3% scored some risk 46% scored at risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-40 students were tested 60% were at or above benchmark 15% were some risk 25% were at risk EOY-40 students were tested 65% scored at or above benchmark 15% scored some risk 20% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2011-2012 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-33 students tested. 10 students low risk 10 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-35 students tested 17 students low risk 14 students some risk 4 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 28 students low risk 7 students some risk 2 students high risk FIRST GRADE BOY-29 students tested 18 low risk 5 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-29 students tested 17 students low risk 6 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-31 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 5 students high risk SECOND GRADE BOY-32 students tested 23 low risk 3 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-38 students tested 21 students low risk 2 students some risk 15 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 20 students low risk 7 students some risk 9 students high risk THIRD GRADE BOY-38 students tested 22 students low risk 6 students some risk 10 students high risk MOY-41 students tested 25 students low risk 10 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-41 students tested 29 students low risk 5 students some risk 7 students low risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-37 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-36 students tested 24 students low risk 3 students some risk 9 students high risk EOY-38 students tested 19 students low risk 10 students some risk 9 students high risk
  5. Lepanto Elementary's average daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  6. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2014-2015 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested First Sound Fluency: 25% scored at risk 11% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark FIRST GRADE: BOY-43 students were tested Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: 9% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 72% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Correct Letter Sound 7% scored at risk 23% scored some risk 70% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Word Read 58% scored some risk 42% scored at or above benchmark SECOND GRADE-26 students were tested Nonsense Word Fluency-Correct Letter Sound 39% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency-Words Read 19% scored at risk 27% scored some risk 54% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Fluency 27% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 54% scored at or above risk DORF-Accuracy 12% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 76% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Retell 24% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark THIRD GRADE: 51 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 18% scored at risk 35% scored some risk 47% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 14% scored at risk 25% scored some risk 61% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 2% scored at risk 8% scored some risk 90% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 22% scored at risk 22% scored some risk 56% scored at or above benchmark FOURTH GRADE 46 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 39% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 20% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 65% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 11% scored at risk 89% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 15% scored at risk 33% scored some risk 52% scored at or above benchmark
Goal All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
Benchmark All kindergarten students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten prepared for math and reading readiness.
Intervention: Two ABC preschool classrooms will serve the Lepanto campus providing transition from home to school for low income families.
Scientific Based Research: "The Effects of Preschool Experiences on Academic Achievement of First Graders Kohart, Rebecca; Nickell, Kathryn June 1994, Starting at 3, a project of Education Law Center, supported by a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2005 Education Law Center Hustedt, Jason T., et al. "The effects of the Arkansas Better Chance Program on young children’s school readiness." National Institute for Early Education Research (2007)
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will continue to fund the NSLA Pre-K classroom due to the large number of children who couldn't get into the regular ABC Pre-K program. We felt this was a good use of our monies. 1 classified teacher and 1 parapro hired. PD/Materials & Supplies used to set classroom up. They are under Department of Human Services and Arkansas Minimun Licensure.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Connie Gill, June Franks Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Central Office
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits: $10,695.00

ACTION BUDGET: $10,695.00
Total Budget: $10,695.00
Priority 2: Math
Supporting Data:
  1. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 85% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 25% basic, 76% proficient/advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS 12% basic, 88% proficient/advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% basic; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 89% proficient/advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 33% basic, 67% proficient/advanced We will focus on our greatest areas of needs: Geometry (44%) and Measurement (15%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 73.61% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 23% basic, 39% proficient, and 39% advanced. LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 26% basic, 57% proficient, and 17% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 20% basic, 0% proficient, and 80% advanced. We will focus on our greatest areas of being Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations-Fractions. 2012 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84.49% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: Below Basic 8% Basic 11% 81%% Proficient/Advanced LEP: Below Basic: 40% Basic 0% 60% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 0% Below Basic 12% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 7% Below Basic 7% Basic 85% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 7% Below Basic 10% Basic 82% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history shows a gain of 2.49% from last year. Our weaknesses in MULTIPLE CHOICE were DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY AND MEASUREMENT. OPEN RESPONSE WEAKNESSES were DATA ANALYSIS % PROBABILITY/NUMBERS AND OPERATIONS. Our STRENGTHS included for MULTIPLE CHOICE NUMBERS & OPERATIONS. Strengths in OPEN RESPONSE were GEOMETRY. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE 2013-2014 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall, 54% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 34% proficient/advanced NON DIABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 57% proficient/advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 50% below basic, 50% basic ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 46% proficient/advanced NON ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 70% proficient/advanced We will FOCUS on our weak areas: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%), Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra (39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year is as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 50% below basic, 25% basic, 25% proficient, and 0% advanced NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 12% basic, 50% proficient, and 35% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 40% basic, 40% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 12% below basic, 0% basic, 45% proficient, and 24% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% below basic, 0 basic, 44% proficient, and 44% advanced. We will FOCUS on Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: COMBINED: 13.1% Below Basic 21.1% Basic 66% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 14% Below Basic 20% Basic 65% Proficient/Advanced LEP: 0% Below Basic 25% Basic 75% Proficient/Advanced CAUSCASIAN: 19% Below Basic 33% Basic 62% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 20% Below Basic 33% Basic 47% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 9% Below Basic 13% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history showed a 1% gain over 2011 school year. Our STRENGTHS included MEASUREMENT in MULTIPLE CHOICE. STRENGTHS in OPEN RESPONSE were ALGEBRA. Our WEAKNESSES in MULTIPLE CHOICE included GEOMETRY. WEAK area for OPEN RESPONSE was DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY.
  2. In 2014, ITBS scores First Grade-Math Concepts 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark. Both areas are weaknesses for our school. Second Grade-Math Concepts 46.9% scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 31.3% scored at or above benchmark. Math problems are our weakest area. In 2013, ITBS scores FIRST GRADE: MATH CONCEPTS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 20 out of 32 scored below benchmark. MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 15 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 17 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE: MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 25 students scored at or above benchmark; 13 out of 25 students scored below benchmark. STRENGTHS: MATH CONCEPTS: 16 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark; 9 out of 25 scored below benchmark. In 2012, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 53%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011-2012 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN: 25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 100% Below Basic MULTI-ETHNIC: 50%Basic 50% Advanced CAUCASIAN: 16.7% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our weak areas were MATH CONCEPTS & MATH PROBLEMS. SECOND GRADE: According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2011-2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 35% AFRICAN AMERICAN: 66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced MULTI ETHNIC: 33.3% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 33.3 Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 56% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced Our WEAK areas were MATH CONCEPTS and MATH PROBLEMS. Our data showed no strengths. KINDERGARTEN In 2011, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 55.9%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-28.6% HISPANIC-50% CAUCASIAN-60.9% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-55.2% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-100% Our STRENGTHS were numbers properties and operations and problem solving. Our WEAKNESSES were geometry and measurement. FIRST GRADE ITBS 2011 In 2011 the ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 51.5%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-40% CAUCASIAN-63.6% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-44% FIRST GRADE STRENGTH was measurement. WEAKNESSES were numbers and operations, geometry, and problem solving. . SECOND GRADE 2011 In 2011 ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 64.1%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-66.7% HISPANIC-40% CAUCASIAN-66.7% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-60.6% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-50% SECOND GRADE STRENGTHS were numbers and operations, algebraic concepts, geometry, and single step problems. WEAKNESSES were measurement, multiple step problems, data, relationships/trends, and comparing quantities.
  3. Lepanto Elementary's daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  4. EVALUATION This is Lepanto Elementary's fifth year to utilize THE LEARNING INSTITUTE. We will assess the impact on student achievement by analyzing students performance on TLI modules throughout the year. TLI Math Data 2014-2015 Our weak areas in FIRST GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (c) add to: start unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (j) compare: difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (k) compare: bigger unknown; understand the meaning of the equal sign, and determine if equations involving addition and subtraction are true or false. For example, which of the following equations are true and which are false? 6=6, 7=8-1,5+2=2+5, 4+1=5+2; count to 120, starting at any number less than 120. In this range, read and write numerals and represent a number of objects with a written numeral; add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, one and ones, and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten; express the length of an object as a whole number of length units; by laying multiple copies of a shorter object (the length unit) end to end; understand that the length measurement of an object is the number of same-size length units that span it with no gaps or overlaps. Limit to contexts where the object being measured is spanned by a whole number of length units with no gaps or overlaps; tell and write time in hours and half-hours using analog and digital clocks; organize, represent, and interpret data with up to three categories; ask and answer questions about the total number of data points, how many in each category, and how many more or less are in one category than in another; compose two-dimensional shapes (rectangle, squares, trapezoids, triangles, half-circles, quarter-circles) or three-dimensional shapes (cubes, right rectangular prisms, right circular cones, and right circular cylinders) to create a composite shape, and compose new shapes from the composite shape (a) 2-d shapes. Our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (d) take from: result unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem . (e) take from change unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (h) put together/take apart: added unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (j) put together/take apart: both addends unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (i) compare difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (l) compare smaller unknown; determine whether a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members, e.g. , by pairing objects or counting them by 2’s; write an equation to express an even number as a sum of two equal addends. (a) even and odd; count within 1000, skip count by 5’s, 10’s 100’s. (b) skip counting; measure to determine how much longer one object is than another, expressing the length difference in terms of a standard length unit; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares, describe the shares using the words halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. and describe the whole as two halves, three thirds, four fourths. Recognize that equal shares of identical wholes need not have the same shape. (b) equal shares not same shape. Our weak areas in THIRD GRADE were: solve two-step word problems using the four operations. Represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity. Assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation for estimation strategies including rounding. (a) addition & subtraction; use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 to 100 (a) round to nearest 10; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. (b) subtract; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 (e.g., 9 x 80, 5 x 60) using strategies based on place value and properties of operations. (A range of algorithms may be used); measure and estimate liquid volumes and masses of objects using standard units of grams (g) , kilograms (k), and liters (l). 6 add subtract, multiply, or divide to solve one-step word problems involving masses or volumes that are given in the same units, e.g., by using drawings (such as a beaker with a measurement scale) to represent the problem. (a) measure and estimate liquid volumes; draw a scaled picture graph and a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several categories. Solve one- and two-step “how many more” and “how many less” problems using information presented in scaled bar graphs. For example, draw a bar graph in which each square in the bar graph might represent 5 pets. (a) picture graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm, square m, square in, square ft, and improvised units); relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition. D. recognize area as additive. Find areas of rectilinear figures by decomposing them into non-overlapping rectangles and adding the areas of the non-overlapping parts, applying this technique to solve real world problems; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons, including finding the perimeter given the side lengths, finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimeters. (a) find perimeter. Our weak areas in FOURTH GRADE were: multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (a) equal group-unknown products, equal groups-group size unknown, equal groups-number of groups unknown, arrays, area-unknown products, arrays, area-group size unknown, arrays, area-number of groups unknown; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (b) compare-unknown product; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (d) compare- number of groups unknown; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100. Recognize that a whole number is a multiple of each of its factors. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite. (c) prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule. Identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself. For example, given the rule “Add 3” and the starting number 1, generate terms in the resulting sequence and observe that the terms appear to alternate between odd and even numbers. Explain formally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way. (b) identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself; fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; recognize angle measure as additive. When an angle is decomposed into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum of the angle measures of the parts. Solve addition and subtraction problems to find unknown angles on a diagram on real world and mathematical problems, e.g., by using an equation with a symbol for the unknown angle measure. (a) recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, line segments, rays, angles, (right, acute, obtuse), and perpendicular and parallel lines. Identify these in two-dimensional figures. 2012-2013-As we analyzed our data for 2012-2013, we found the following weaknessess: SECOND GRADE: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one and two-stewp word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing with unknowns in all positins; determine whether a group of objects has an odd or even number of members; count within 10000, skip county by 5's, 10's, and 100's; measure the length of an object twice, using length units of different lengths for the two measurements; describe how the two measurements relate to the size of the unit chosen; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares; desvribing the shares using the word halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. We will also concentrate on CCSS weaknesses: Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Number & Operations in Base Ten THIRD GRADE:interpret products of whole numbers; solve two-step word problems using the four operations; represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity;l use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 or 100; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value; properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 usings strategies based on place value and properties of operations; draw a scaled picture-graph adn a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several catergories; solve one- and two- step "how many more" and "how many less" praoblems using information presented in scaled bar graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares; relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons; including finding the perimeter given the side lengths; finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimters. We have adopted CCSS and will work on the following areas also: Operations & Algebraic Thinking, Numbers & Operations-Fractions FOURTH GRADE: interpret a multiplication equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicaiotn equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicatiogn equation by using draawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100; recognize that a whole numbers is a multiple of each of its factors; determine whether a given whole number in in the range of 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number; determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; fluently add and subtracts multi-digit whole numbers, using the standard algorithm; recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, lines, line segments, rays angles. and perpendicular and parallel lines. We have adopted the CCSS and will also focus on these areas of weak ness: Numbers& Operations in Base Ten and Numbers & Operations-Fractions 2011-2012 EVALUATION As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 , we found the following weaknesses: SECOND GRADE: Operations and Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. THIRD GRADE: Data analysis and probalility; measurement; numbers and operations; geometry; FOURTH GRADE: Geometry; measurement.
  5. TLI Science Data 2014 4th Grade The weak areas in SCIENCE were: generate conclusions based on evidence; evaluate the quality and feasibility of an idea or project; use simple equipment, age appropriate tools, technology, and mathematics in scientific investigations (e.g., balances, hand lenses, microscopes, rulers, thermometers, calculators, computers); apply lab safety rules as they relate to specific science lab activities; classify vertebrates into major subgroups; mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles; identify major parts and functions of the following systems: circulatory; illustrate the interdependence of organisms in an ecosystem; collect and interpret measurable empirical evidence in teams and as individuals; evaluate the impact of water pollution.
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Benchmark The 2014 CRT indicated combined population scored 85% for third grade and fourth grade scored 54%. We will continue to move our third and fourth grade students to the proficient or advanced level on the Math portion of the upcoming PARRC assessment. We have adopted Common Core Standards at Lepanto Elementary. Our scores on the ACTAAP were as follows: THIRD GRADE: Combined Population 85% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS in MULTIPLE CHOICE: Algebra (67%), Measurement (56%), Data/Probability (62%), Numbers/Operations (72%)OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (53%), Algebra (68%), Data/Probability (50%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%); OPEN RESPONSE: Geometry (1%), Measurement (15%). FOURTH GRADE Combined Population 54% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS IN MULTIPLE CHOICE: Numbers/Operations (73%), Algebra (56%), Data/Probability (58%); OPEN RESPONSE: Measurement (55%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Intervention: Prescriptive Diagnostic Intervention
Scientific Based Research: An Action Based Research Study on How Using Manipulatives will Increase Students' Achievement in Mathematics. Published by Crystal Allen in 2007. Educational Leadership. February (2005) Volume 62 Number 5 How Schools Improve p. 81-83. Research Matters/How Students Progress Monitoring Improves Instruction Nancy Safer adn Steve Fleischman. ED Thoughts: What We Know About Mathematics Teaching and Learning. p. 44-45. McRel. Edited by John Sutton and Krueger, Aurora, CO., (2002). McTighe, J. & Wiggins, G., Understanding by Design, ASCD, Alexandria, VA, p. 160, (1998).
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Marilyn Rece HIGHLY QUALIFIED PARAPROFESSIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL ASSISSTANT will assist in the intervention process as tutors for grades K-4. FTE 1.00 1120 NSLA Salary
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Special Education
Marilyn Rece Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Administrative Staff
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
  • Title Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits: $2,955.00

ACTION BUDGET: $2,955.00
Total Budget: $2,955.00
Intervention: Lepanto Elementary will continue to offer after school tutoring to students who qualify by use of District Generated Tests.
Scientific Based Research: SCIENTIFIC BASED RESEARCH: Reducing Dropout Rates through Expanded Learning Opportunities Laura Harris Policy Analyst October 28, 2009. "The Effects of an After-School Tutoring Program on the Academic Performance of At-Risk Students and Students with LD. F. Hock, Michael A.Pulvers, Kim D.Deshley, Donald B.Schumaker, Jean. Remedial & Special Edcuation; May/Jun 2001, Vol. 22 Issue 3, p172, 15p, 4 graphs.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
To increase Math Fluency, 3 tutors will be employed to provide additional help for students identified by teachers as need improvement. Tutors will assist with grades 1st-4th grades for 25 weeks. 3 tutors will work 2 hours per day for 4 days a week for a total of 200 hours over the duration of the year with a rate of pay at $8.26 per hour for a total cost of $6030.00 for the year. $1074.00 Benefits
Anthony Dowdy Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
 
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits: $1,074.00

ACTION BUDGET: $1,074.00
Total Budget: $1,074.00

Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries -- $59605
Priority 1: Literacy
Supporting Data:
  1. THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2013-2014 As we analyzed our data for the 2013-2014 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in Second Grade were: ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text; recount stories including fables and folktales from diverse cultures, and determine their central message, lesson, or moral; describe how words and phrases supply rhythm and meaning in a story, poem, or song; describe the overall structure of a story, including describing the beginning introduces the story and the ending concludes the action; describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area; know and use various text features to locate key information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. Weak areas for THIRD GRADE were: ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; describe characters in a story and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language; refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a text, using terms such as chapter, scene, and stanza; distinguish their own point of view from that of the narrator or those of the characters; ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; use text features and search tools to locate information relevant to a given topic efficiently; distinguish their own point of view from that of the author of a text; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use determiners; produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory sentences in response to prompts; capitalize dates and names of people; use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series; use commas in greetings and closings of letters. Weak areas for FOURTH GRADE were: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the meaning fo words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the main idea of a text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text; explain events, procedures, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text, including what happened and why, based on specific information in the text; explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing, speaking, reading, or listening; demonstrate understanding of figurative language, word relationships, and nuances in word meanings; explain the function of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs in general and their functions in particular sentences; produce simple, compound, and complex sentences. Our weak areas in Third Grade were: Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how (20%), know and use various text features (23%), describe how reasons support specific points the authors makes in a text (35%), identify the main topic of a multi paragraph text (44%), recount stories, including fables and folktales from diverse cultures (45%). Our weak areas in Fourth Grade were: Reading: refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a topic (19%), determine the main idea of a text; recount key details (31%), describe the relationship between a series of historical events (38%), ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text (38%), describe characters in a story (36%). Writing: demonstrate common of conventions of standard English grammar and usage (7%) demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization and punctuation (33%), produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamatory sentences (46%), use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series (47%). THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2012-2013 As we analyzed our data for the 2012-2013 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: article details;inference; main idea; literary element analysis; sequencing; vocabulary; literary devices; analysis; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area, know and use various text features to locate key facts or information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. THIRD GRADE: article details; inference; literary devices; analysis; use text features and search tools to locate informatin relevant to a given topic efficiently; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; use abstract nouns; irregular nouns; subordinating conjunctions; commas; quotation marks. FOURTH GRADE: article details; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; main idea; analysis; explain how an author uses reasons for reading and evidence to support particular points in a text; fragments; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar adn usage when writing or speaking; metaphor; adage/proverb; demonstratives; adverbs; simple sentences. 2011-2012 As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our greatest need in SECOND GRADE were main topic of a multiparagraph text, identifying the main purpose of a text and know and use various text features. In SECOND GRADE WRITING demonstrate command of the conventions of standards, use commas in dates to separate single words and capitalize dates and names of people. THIRD GRADE'S weakest areas were in describe the relationship between a series, recount stories and including fables and folktales. In THIRD GRADE WRITING the data showed demonstrate command of conventions, and use knowledge of language and its conventions. . FOURTH GRADE data showed a need in the overall structure, describe in depth a character, setting or events, and determine the main idea of a text. In FOURTH GRADE WRITING the areas were produce simple, compound, and complex sentences and demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English. We will focus on these areas in both classroom instruction and intervention time.
  2. 2013-2014 ACTAAP Data According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, the data is as follows: COMBINED POPULATION: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 13% basic, 50% proficient, 25% advanced; NON DISABLED STUDENTS: 6% basic, 53% proficient, and 41% advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% proficient; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 17% below basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced. As we analyzed our data, we will strive to improve the following weak areas: CONTENT (58%) MULTIPLE CHOICE WRITING (54%) OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGES (45%) CONTENT (25%) PRACTICAL (41%) Our STRENGTHS were MULTIPLE CHOICE-LITERARY PASSAGE 62% PRACTICAL PASSAGE 71%; OPEN RESPONSE-WRITING CONTENT 61%, WRITING STYLE 63%, SENTENCE FORMATION 70%, USAGE 76%, MECHANICS 73%. 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% proficient. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, and 0% advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANAGED: 9% scored below basic, 30% scored basic, 26% scored proficient, and 36% scored advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 10% below basic, 0% basic, 30% proficient, and 60% advanced. As we analyzed our data we will strive to improve in the following weak areas: In THIRD GRADE we will work on Literary (50%), Content (50), Practical (38%) all being Open Response items. Our STRENGTHS were Multiple Choice: Content (63%), Practical (63%), Writing (63%), Content (65%), Style (65%), Sentence Formation (70%), Usage (84%), Mechanics (78%)/ 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES-0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-11% Below basic 5% Basic 84% Proficient/Advanced GENDER GAP FEMALE-7% Below Basic 7% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE 21% Below Basic 0% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced ETHNICITY-HISPANIC-40% Below Basic 0% Basic 60% Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN-6% Below Basic 6% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced Our Strengths included Multiple Choice Writing and Content Passage. Our strengths in Open Response were Reading Content and Writing Sentence Formation. We scored above State Average in all areas. We will focus on our weak areas being Multiple Choice Literacy Passage and Practical Passage. Our weak areas in Open Response were Reading Practical and Writing Content. 2013-2014 ACTAAP DATA According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the sub populations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 17% proficient, and 17% advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 39% proficient, 18% advanced; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 42% proficient, and 4% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 20% proficient, and 50% advanced. Our weak areas included WRITING MULTIPLE CHOICE (63%) and OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGE (35%). Our STRENGTHS were in the area of LITERARY PASSAGE (64%), CONTENT PASSAGE (71%) PRACTICAL (66%); open response-CONTENT PASSAGE (78%) PRACTICAL PASSAGE (63%), WRITING CONTENT (71%) STYLE (71%), SENTENCE FORMATION (80%) USAGE (89%) MECHANICS (80%) 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 90% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% advanced NON-DIABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% Advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 6% below basic, 3% basic, 42% proficient, and 48% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 11% basic, 33% proficient, and 56% advanced. In Fourth Grade, we will work on Literary (38%)and Practical (50%) in Open Response items. Our only weak area in Multiple Choice for Fourth Grade was Writing (50%). Our STRENGTHS included the following: all strands of Writing: Content(74%),Style (74%), Sentence Formation (88%), Usage (98%), Mechanics (86%); MULTIPLE CHOICE: Literary (63%), Content (75%), Practical (75%). OPEN RESPONSE: Content (63%). 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 87% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-3.1% Below Basic 11.1% Basic 86% Proficient/Advanced MALE-7.1% Below Basic 7.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE-0% Below Basic 13.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced WHITE-4.1% Below Basic 8.1% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced Our STRENGTHS in Multiple Choice include Writing-Multiple Choice. Open Response Reading Practical Passage, Writing Sentence Formation, Writing Usage, Writing Mechanics. Our WEAKEST areas in multiple choice was Reading Practical Passage. In Open Response Writing Style Domain, Writing Content Domain and Reading Content Domain.
  3. 2013-2014 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2014, FIRST GRADE: COMBINED POPULATION VOCABULARY Out of 31 students tested, 12 scored above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-out of 31 students tested, 15 scored above benchmark, SPELLING-31 students tested, 14 scored above benchmark. Weak areas being in VOCABULARY. SECOND GRADE ITBS DATA 2013-2014 COMBINED POPULATION-VOCABULARY 31.3% above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-43.8% above benchmark, SPELLING-43.7% above benchmark. Our weakest area being in VOCABULARY. 2012-2013 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2013, FIRST GRADE: VOCABULARY 26 out of 32 students scored below basic. 6 out of 32 students scored at or above benchmark. SPELLING: 18 out of 32 scored below basic. 14 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION: 17 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. 15 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE VOCABULARY: 14 out of 25 scored below benchmark. 11 out of 25 scored 44% at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark. 10 out of 25 scored below benchmark. Our STRENGTHS were in COMPREHENSION for both grades with 17 out of 32 scoring at or above benchmark in FIRST GRADE and 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark in SECOND GRADE. SECOND GRADE had a STRENGTH in SPELLING with 13 our of 25 scored at or above benchmark. Our WEAKNESSESS were in VOCABULARY with 26 out of 32 scoring below benchmark and SPELLING with 18 out of 32 scored below benchmark. According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2011-2012, out of 31 students tested, First Grade scored 41% in Reading and 47% in Language. When analyzing the subpopulations, they were as follows: African American-25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient HISPANIC-100% Below Basic CAUCASIAN-16.7% Below Basic 33.3% in Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED- 18.5 Below Basic 37% Basic 44% Proficient/Advanced SECOND GRADE 2011-2012 Overall, 36 students tested-38% Reading 40% Language. When the sub populations were analyzed the results are the following: African American-66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced Hispanic-50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Causasion-41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 41.6 Proficient/Advanced Economically Disadvantaged-46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced
  4. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2013-2014 KINDERGARTEN: EOY-46 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY-45 students were tested 44% scored at or above benchmark 18% scored some risk 38% scored at risk FIRST GRADE EOY-31 students were tested 32% scored at risk 10% scored some risk 58% scored at or above benchmark BOY:34 students were tested 64% scored at or above benchmark 21% scored some risk 15% scored at risk SECOND GRADE EOY-32 students were tested 6% scored at risk 16% scored some risk 78% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 16 students were tested 88% scored at or above benchmark 6% scored some risk 6% scored at risk THIRD GRADE EOY-24 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 15 students were tested 47% scored at or above benchmark 20% scored some risk 33% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2012-2013 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested 50%% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 33% scored low risk EOY-36 students were tested 81% scored low risk 11% scored some risk 8% scored at risk FIRST GRADE: BOY-36 students were tested 33% scored well below benchmark 19% scored below benchmark 48% scored at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 53 scored low risk 38 scored some risk 9% scored at risk SECOND GRADE: BOY-25 students were tested 84% students scored at or above benchmark 8% scored some risk 8% scored at risk EOY-24 students were tested 83% scored low risk 17% scored some risk 0 scored at risk THIRD GRADE: BOY- 36 students were tested 46% were well below benchmark 3% were below benchmark 51% were at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 62% scored low risk 3% scored some risk 46% scored at risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-40 students were tested 60% were at or above benchmark 15% were some risk 25% were at risk EOY-40 students were tested 65% scored at or above benchmark 15% scored some risk 20% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2011-2012 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-33 students tested. 10 students low risk 10 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-35 students tested 17 students low risk 14 students some risk 4 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 28 students low risk 7 students some risk 2 students high risk FIRST GRADE BOY-29 students tested 18 low risk 5 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-29 students tested 17 students low risk 6 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-31 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 5 students high risk SECOND GRADE BOY-32 students tested 23 low risk 3 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-38 students tested 21 students low risk 2 students some risk 15 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 20 students low risk 7 students some risk 9 students high risk THIRD GRADE BOY-38 students tested 22 students low risk 6 students some risk 10 students high risk MOY-41 students tested 25 students low risk 10 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-41 students tested 29 students low risk 5 students some risk 7 students low risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-37 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-36 students tested 24 students low risk 3 students some risk 9 students high risk EOY-38 students tested 19 students low risk 10 students some risk 9 students high risk
  5. Lepanto Elementary's average daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  6. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2014-2015 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested First Sound Fluency: 25% scored at risk 11% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark FIRST GRADE: BOY-43 students were tested Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: 9% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 72% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Correct Letter Sound 7% scored at risk 23% scored some risk 70% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Word Read 58% scored some risk 42% scored at or above benchmark SECOND GRADE-26 students were tested Nonsense Word Fluency-Correct Letter Sound 39% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency-Words Read 19% scored at risk 27% scored some risk 54% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Fluency 27% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 54% scored at or above risk DORF-Accuracy 12% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 76% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Retell 24% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark THIRD GRADE: 51 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 18% scored at risk 35% scored some risk 47% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 14% scored at risk 25% scored some risk 61% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 2% scored at risk 8% scored some risk 90% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 22% scored at risk 22% scored some risk 56% scored at or above benchmark FOURTH GRADE 46 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 39% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 20% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 65% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 11% scored at risk 89% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 15% scored at risk 33% scored some risk 52% scored at or above benchmark
Goal All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
Benchmark All kindergarten students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten prepared for math and reading readiness.
Intervention: Two ABC preschool classrooms will serve the Lepanto campus providing transition from home to school for low income families.
Scientific Based Research: "The Effects of Preschool Experiences on Academic Achievement of First Graders Kohart, Rebecca; Nickell, Kathryn June 1994, Starting at 3, a project of Education Law Center, supported by a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2005 Education Law Center Hustedt, Jason T., et al. "The effects of the Arkansas Better Chance Program on young children’s school readiness." National Institute for Early Education Research (2007)
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will continue to fund the NSLA Pre-K classroom due to the large number of children who couldn't get into the regular ABC Pre-K program. We felt this was a good use of our monies. 1 classified teacher and 1 parapro hired. PD/Materials & Supplies used to set classroom up. They are under Department of Human Services and Arkansas Minimun Licensure.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Connie Gill, June Franks Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Central Office
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries: $41,000.00

ACTION BUDGET: $41,000.00
Total Budget: $41,000.00
Priority 2: Math
Supporting Data:
  1. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 85% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 25% basic, 76% proficient/advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS 12% basic, 88% proficient/advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% basic; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 89% proficient/advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 33% basic, 67% proficient/advanced We will focus on our greatest areas of needs: Geometry (44%) and Measurement (15%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 73.61% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 23% basic, 39% proficient, and 39% advanced. LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 26% basic, 57% proficient, and 17% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 20% basic, 0% proficient, and 80% advanced. We will focus on our greatest areas of being Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations-Fractions. 2012 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84.49% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: Below Basic 8% Basic 11% 81%% Proficient/Advanced LEP: Below Basic: 40% Basic 0% 60% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 0% Below Basic 12% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 7% Below Basic 7% Basic 85% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 7% Below Basic 10% Basic 82% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history shows a gain of 2.49% from last year. Our weaknesses in MULTIPLE CHOICE were DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY AND MEASUREMENT. OPEN RESPONSE WEAKNESSES were DATA ANALYSIS % PROBABILITY/NUMBERS AND OPERATIONS. Our STRENGTHS included for MULTIPLE CHOICE NUMBERS & OPERATIONS. Strengths in OPEN RESPONSE were GEOMETRY. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE 2013-2014 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall, 54% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 34% proficient/advanced NON DIABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 57% proficient/advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 50% below basic, 50% basic ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 46% proficient/advanced NON ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 70% proficient/advanced We will FOCUS on our weak areas: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%), Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra (39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year is as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 50% below basic, 25% basic, 25% proficient, and 0% advanced NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 12% basic, 50% proficient, and 35% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 40% basic, 40% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 12% below basic, 0% basic, 45% proficient, and 24% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% below basic, 0 basic, 44% proficient, and 44% advanced. We will FOCUS on Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: COMBINED: 13.1% Below Basic 21.1% Basic 66% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 14% Below Basic 20% Basic 65% Proficient/Advanced LEP: 0% Below Basic 25% Basic 75% Proficient/Advanced CAUSCASIAN: 19% Below Basic 33% Basic 62% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 20% Below Basic 33% Basic 47% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 9% Below Basic 13% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history showed a 1% gain over 2011 school year. Our STRENGTHS included MEASUREMENT in MULTIPLE CHOICE. STRENGTHS in OPEN RESPONSE were ALGEBRA. Our WEAKNESSES in MULTIPLE CHOICE included GEOMETRY. WEAK area for OPEN RESPONSE was DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY.
  2. In 2014, ITBS scores First Grade-Math Concepts 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark. Both areas are weaknesses for our school. Second Grade-Math Concepts 46.9% scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 31.3% scored at or above benchmark. Math problems are our weakest area. In 2013, ITBS scores FIRST GRADE: MATH CONCEPTS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 20 out of 32 scored below benchmark. MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 15 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 17 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE: MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 25 students scored at or above benchmark; 13 out of 25 students scored below benchmark. STRENGTHS: MATH CONCEPTS: 16 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark; 9 out of 25 scored below benchmark. In 2012, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 53%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011-2012 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN: 25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 100% Below Basic MULTI-ETHNIC: 50%Basic 50% Advanced CAUCASIAN: 16.7% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our weak areas were MATH CONCEPTS & MATH PROBLEMS. SECOND GRADE: According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2011-2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 35% AFRICAN AMERICAN: 66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced MULTI ETHNIC: 33.3% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 33.3 Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 56% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced Our WEAK areas were MATH CONCEPTS and MATH PROBLEMS. Our data showed no strengths. KINDERGARTEN In 2011, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 55.9%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-28.6% HISPANIC-50% CAUCASIAN-60.9% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-55.2% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-100% Our STRENGTHS were numbers properties and operations and problem solving. Our WEAKNESSES were geometry and measurement. FIRST GRADE ITBS 2011 In 2011 the ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 51.5%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-40% CAUCASIAN-63.6% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-44% FIRST GRADE STRENGTH was measurement. WEAKNESSES were numbers and operations, geometry, and problem solving. . SECOND GRADE 2011 In 2011 ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 64.1%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-66.7% HISPANIC-40% CAUCASIAN-66.7% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-60.6% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-50% SECOND GRADE STRENGTHS were numbers and operations, algebraic concepts, geometry, and single step problems. WEAKNESSES were measurement, multiple step problems, data, relationships/trends, and comparing quantities.
  3. Lepanto Elementary's daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  4. EVALUATION This is Lepanto Elementary's fifth year to utilize THE LEARNING INSTITUTE. We will assess the impact on student achievement by analyzing students performance on TLI modules throughout the year. TLI Math Data 2014-2015 Our weak areas in FIRST GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (c) add to: start unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (j) compare: difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (k) compare: bigger unknown; understand the meaning of the equal sign, and determine if equations involving addition and subtraction are true or false. For example, which of the following equations are true and which are false? 6=6, 7=8-1,5+2=2+5, 4+1=5+2; count to 120, starting at any number less than 120. In this range, read and write numerals and represent a number of objects with a written numeral; add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, one and ones, and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten; express the length of an object as a whole number of length units; by laying multiple copies of a shorter object (the length unit) end to end; understand that the length measurement of an object is the number of same-size length units that span it with no gaps or overlaps. Limit to contexts where the object being measured is spanned by a whole number of length units with no gaps or overlaps; tell and write time in hours and half-hours using analog and digital clocks; organize, represent, and interpret data with up to three categories; ask and answer questions about the total number of data points, how many in each category, and how many more or less are in one category than in another; compose two-dimensional shapes (rectangle, squares, trapezoids, triangles, half-circles, quarter-circles) or three-dimensional shapes (cubes, right rectangular prisms, right circular cones, and right circular cylinders) to create a composite shape, and compose new shapes from the composite shape (a) 2-d shapes. Our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (d) take from: result unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem . (e) take from change unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (h) put together/take apart: added unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (j) put together/take apart: both addends unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (i) compare difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (l) compare smaller unknown; determine whether a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members, e.g. , by pairing objects or counting them by 2’s; write an equation to express an even number as a sum of two equal addends. (a) even and odd; count within 1000, skip count by 5’s, 10’s 100’s. (b) skip counting; measure to determine how much longer one object is than another, expressing the length difference in terms of a standard length unit; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares, describe the shares using the words halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. and describe the whole as two halves, three thirds, four fourths. Recognize that equal shares of identical wholes need not have the same shape. (b) equal shares not same shape. Our weak areas in THIRD GRADE were: solve two-step word problems using the four operations. Represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity. Assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation for estimation strategies including rounding. (a) addition & subtraction; use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 to 100 (a) round to nearest 10; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. (b) subtract; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 (e.g., 9 x 80, 5 x 60) using strategies based on place value and properties of operations. (A range of algorithms may be used); measure and estimate liquid volumes and masses of objects using standard units of grams (g) , kilograms (k), and liters (l). 6 add subtract, multiply, or divide to solve one-step word problems involving masses or volumes that are given in the same units, e.g., by using drawings (such as a beaker with a measurement scale) to represent the problem. (a) measure and estimate liquid volumes; draw a scaled picture graph and a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several categories. Solve one- and two-step “how many more” and “how many less” problems using information presented in scaled bar graphs. For example, draw a bar graph in which each square in the bar graph might represent 5 pets. (a) picture graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm, square m, square in, square ft, and improvised units); relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition. D. recognize area as additive. Find areas of rectilinear figures by decomposing them into non-overlapping rectangles and adding the areas of the non-overlapping parts, applying this technique to solve real world problems; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons, including finding the perimeter given the side lengths, finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimeters. (a) find perimeter. Our weak areas in FOURTH GRADE were: multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (a) equal group-unknown products, equal groups-group size unknown, equal groups-number of groups unknown, arrays, area-unknown products, arrays, area-group size unknown, arrays, area-number of groups unknown; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (b) compare-unknown product; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (d) compare- number of groups unknown; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100. Recognize that a whole number is a multiple of each of its factors. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite. (c) prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule. Identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself. For example, given the rule “Add 3” and the starting number 1, generate terms in the resulting sequence and observe that the terms appear to alternate between odd and even numbers. Explain formally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way. (b) identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself; fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; recognize angle measure as additive. When an angle is decomposed into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum of the angle measures of the parts. Solve addition and subtraction problems to find unknown angles on a diagram on real world and mathematical problems, e.g., by using an equation with a symbol for the unknown angle measure. (a) recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, line segments, rays, angles, (right, acute, obtuse), and perpendicular and parallel lines. Identify these in two-dimensional figures. 2012-2013-As we analyzed our data for 2012-2013, we found the following weaknessess: SECOND GRADE: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one and two-stewp word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing with unknowns in all positins; determine whether a group of objects has an odd or even number of members; count within 10000, skip county by 5's, 10's, and 100's; measure the length of an object twice, using length units of different lengths for the two measurements; describe how the two measurements relate to the size of the unit chosen; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares; desvribing the shares using the word halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. We will also concentrate on CCSS weaknesses: Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Number & Operations in Base Ten THIRD GRADE:interpret products of whole numbers; solve two-step word problems using the four operations; represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity;l use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 or 100; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value; properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 usings strategies based on place value and properties of operations; draw a scaled picture-graph adn a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several catergories; solve one- and two- step "how many more" and "how many less" praoblems using information presented in scaled bar graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares; relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons; including finding the perimeter given the side lengths; finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimters. We have adopted CCSS and will work on the following areas also: Operations & Algebraic Thinking, Numbers & Operations-Fractions FOURTH GRADE: interpret a multiplication equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicaiotn equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicatiogn equation by using draawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100; recognize that a whole numbers is a multiple of each of its factors; determine whether a given whole number in in the range of 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number; determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; fluently add and subtracts multi-digit whole numbers, using the standard algorithm; recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, lines, line segments, rays angles. and perpendicular and parallel lines. We have adopted the CCSS and will also focus on these areas of weak ness: Numbers& Operations in Base Ten and Numbers & Operations-Fractions 2011-2012 EVALUATION As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 , we found the following weaknesses: SECOND GRADE: Operations and Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. THIRD GRADE: Data analysis and probalility; measurement; numbers and operations; geometry; FOURTH GRADE: Geometry; measurement.
  5. TLI Science Data 2014 4th Grade The weak areas in SCIENCE were: generate conclusions based on evidence; evaluate the quality and feasibility of an idea or project; use simple equipment, age appropriate tools, technology, and mathematics in scientific investigations (e.g., balances, hand lenses, microscopes, rulers, thermometers, calculators, computers); apply lab safety rules as they relate to specific science lab activities; classify vertebrates into major subgroups; mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles; identify major parts and functions of the following systems: circulatory; illustrate the interdependence of organisms in an ecosystem; collect and interpret measurable empirical evidence in teams and as individuals; evaluate the impact of water pollution.
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Benchmark The 2014 CRT indicated combined population scored 85% for third grade and fourth grade scored 54%. We will continue to move our third and fourth grade students to the proficient or advanced level on the Math portion of the upcoming PARRC assessment. We have adopted Common Core Standards at Lepanto Elementary. Our scores on the ACTAAP were as follows: THIRD GRADE: Combined Population 85% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS in MULTIPLE CHOICE: Algebra (67%), Measurement (56%), Data/Probability (62%), Numbers/Operations (72%)OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (53%), Algebra (68%), Data/Probability (50%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%); OPEN RESPONSE: Geometry (1%), Measurement (15%). FOURTH GRADE Combined Population 54% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS IN MULTIPLE CHOICE: Numbers/Operations (73%), Algebra (56%), Data/Probability (58%); OPEN RESPONSE: Measurement (55%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Intervention: Prescriptive Diagnostic Intervention
Scientific Based Research: An Action Based Research Study on How Using Manipulatives will Increase Students' Achievement in Mathematics. Published by Crystal Allen in 2007. Educational Leadership. February (2005) Volume 62 Number 5 How Schools Improve p. 81-83. Research Matters/How Students Progress Monitoring Improves Instruction Nancy Safer adn Steve Fleischman. ED Thoughts: What We Know About Mathematics Teaching and Learning. p. 44-45. McRel. Edited by John Sutton and Krueger, Aurora, CO., (2002). McTighe, J. & Wiggins, G., Understanding by Design, ASCD, Alexandria, VA, p. 160, (1998).
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Marilyn Rece HIGHLY QUALIFIED PARAPROFESSIONAL INSTRUCTIONAL ASSISSTANT will assist in the intervention process as tutors for grades K-4. FTE 1.00 1120 NSLA Salary
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Special Education
Marilyn Rece Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Administrative Staff
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
  • Title Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries: $13,649.00

ACTION BUDGET: $13,649.00
Total Budget: $13,649.00
Intervention: Lepanto Elementary will continue to offer after school tutoring to students who qualify by use of District Generated Tests.
Scientific Based Research: SCIENTIFIC BASED RESEARCH: Reducing Dropout Rates through Expanded Learning Opportunities Laura Harris Policy Analyst October 28, 2009. "The Effects of an After-School Tutoring Program on the Academic Performance of At-Risk Students and Students with LD. F. Hock, Michael A.Pulvers, Kim D.Deshley, Donald B.Schumaker, Jean. Remedial & Special Edcuation; May/Jun 2001, Vol. 22 Issue 3, p172, 15p, 4 graphs.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
To increase Math Fluency, 3 tutors will be employed to provide additional help for students identified by teachers as need improvement. Tutors will assist with grades 1st-4th grades for 25 weeks. 3 tutors will work 2 hours per day for 4 days a week for a total of 200 hours over the duration of the year with a rate of pay at $8.26 per hour for a total cost of $6030.00 for the year. $1074.00 Benefits
Anthony Dowdy Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
 
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries: $4,956.00

ACTION BUDGET: $4,956.00
Total Budget: $4,956.00

Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies -- $36302
Priority 1: Literacy
Supporting Data:
  1. THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2013-2014 As we analyzed our data for the 2013-2014 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in Second Grade were: ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text; recount stories including fables and folktales from diverse cultures, and determine their central message, lesson, or moral; describe how words and phrases supply rhythm and meaning in a story, poem, or song; describe the overall structure of a story, including describing the beginning introduces the story and the ending concludes the action; describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area; know and use various text features to locate key information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. Weak areas for THIRD GRADE were: ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; describe characters in a story and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language; refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a text, using terms such as chapter, scene, and stanza; distinguish their own point of view from that of the narrator or those of the characters; ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; use text features and search tools to locate information relevant to a given topic efficiently; distinguish their own point of view from that of the author of a text; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use determiners; produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory sentences in response to prompts; capitalize dates and names of people; use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series; use commas in greetings and closings of letters. Weak areas for FOURTH GRADE were: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the meaning fo words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the main idea of a text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text; explain events, procedures, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text, including what happened and why, based on specific information in the text; explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing, speaking, reading, or listening; demonstrate understanding of figurative language, word relationships, and nuances in word meanings; explain the function of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs in general and their functions in particular sentences; produce simple, compound, and complex sentences. Our weak areas in Third Grade were: Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how (20%), know and use various text features (23%), describe how reasons support specific points the authors makes in a text (35%), identify the main topic of a multi paragraph text (44%), recount stories, including fables and folktales from diverse cultures (45%). Our weak areas in Fourth Grade were: Reading: refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a topic (19%), determine the main idea of a text; recount key details (31%), describe the relationship between a series of historical events (38%), ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text (38%), describe characters in a story (36%). Writing: demonstrate common of conventions of standard English grammar and usage (7%) demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization and punctuation (33%), produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamatory sentences (46%), use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series (47%). THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2012-2013 As we analyzed our data for the 2012-2013 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: article details;inference; main idea; literary element analysis; sequencing; vocabulary; literary devices; analysis; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area, know and use various text features to locate key facts or information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. THIRD GRADE: article details; inference; literary devices; analysis; use text features and search tools to locate informatin relevant to a given topic efficiently; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; use abstract nouns; irregular nouns; subordinating conjunctions; commas; quotation marks. FOURTH GRADE: article details; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; main idea; analysis; explain how an author uses reasons for reading and evidence to support particular points in a text; fragments; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar adn usage when writing or speaking; metaphor; adage/proverb; demonstratives; adverbs; simple sentences. 2011-2012 As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our greatest need in SECOND GRADE were main topic of a multiparagraph text, identifying the main purpose of a text and know and use various text features. In SECOND GRADE WRITING demonstrate command of the conventions of standards, use commas in dates to separate single words and capitalize dates and names of people. THIRD GRADE'S weakest areas were in describe the relationship between a series, recount stories and including fables and folktales. In THIRD GRADE WRITING the data showed demonstrate command of conventions, and use knowledge of language and its conventions. . FOURTH GRADE data showed a need in the overall structure, describe in depth a character, setting or events, and determine the main idea of a text. In FOURTH GRADE WRITING the areas were produce simple, compound, and complex sentences and demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English. We will focus on these areas in both classroom instruction and intervention time.
  2. 2013-2014 ACTAAP Data According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, the data is as follows: COMBINED POPULATION: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 13% basic, 50% proficient, 25% advanced; NON DISABLED STUDENTS: 6% basic, 53% proficient, and 41% advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% proficient; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 17% below basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced. As we analyzed our data, we will strive to improve the following weak areas: CONTENT (58%) MULTIPLE CHOICE WRITING (54%) OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGES (45%) CONTENT (25%) PRACTICAL (41%) Our STRENGTHS were MULTIPLE CHOICE-LITERARY PASSAGE 62% PRACTICAL PASSAGE 71%; OPEN RESPONSE-WRITING CONTENT 61%, WRITING STYLE 63%, SENTENCE FORMATION 70%, USAGE 76%, MECHANICS 73%. 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% proficient. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, and 0% advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANAGED: 9% scored below basic, 30% scored basic, 26% scored proficient, and 36% scored advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 10% below basic, 0% basic, 30% proficient, and 60% advanced. As we analyzed our data we will strive to improve in the following weak areas: In THIRD GRADE we will work on Literary (50%), Content (50), Practical (38%) all being Open Response items. Our STRENGTHS were Multiple Choice: Content (63%), Practical (63%), Writing (63%), Content (65%), Style (65%), Sentence Formation (70%), Usage (84%), Mechanics (78%)/ 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES-0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-11% Below basic 5% Basic 84% Proficient/Advanced GENDER GAP FEMALE-7% Below Basic 7% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE 21% Below Basic 0% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced ETHNICITY-HISPANIC-40% Below Basic 0% Basic 60% Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN-6% Below Basic 6% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced Our Strengths included Multiple Choice Writing and Content Passage. Our strengths in Open Response were Reading Content and Writing Sentence Formation. We scored above State Average in all areas. We will focus on our weak areas being Multiple Choice Literacy Passage and Practical Passage. Our weak areas in Open Response were Reading Practical and Writing Content. 2013-2014 ACTAAP DATA According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the sub populations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 17% proficient, and 17% advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 39% proficient, 18% advanced; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 42% proficient, and 4% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 20% proficient, and 50% advanced. Our weak areas included WRITING MULTIPLE CHOICE (63%) and OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGE (35%). Our STRENGTHS were in the area of LITERARY PASSAGE (64%), CONTENT PASSAGE (71%) PRACTICAL (66%); open response-CONTENT PASSAGE (78%) PRACTICAL PASSAGE (63%), WRITING CONTENT (71%) STYLE (71%), SENTENCE FORMATION (80%) USAGE (89%) MECHANICS (80%) 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 90% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% advanced NON-DIABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% Advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 6% below basic, 3% basic, 42% proficient, and 48% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 11% basic, 33% proficient, and 56% advanced. In Fourth Grade, we will work on Literary (38%)and Practical (50%) in Open Response items. Our only weak area in Multiple Choice for Fourth Grade was Writing (50%). Our STRENGTHS included the following: all strands of Writing: Content(74%),Style (74%), Sentence Formation (88%), Usage (98%), Mechanics (86%); MULTIPLE CHOICE: Literary (63%), Content (75%), Practical (75%). OPEN RESPONSE: Content (63%). 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 87% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-3.1% Below Basic 11.1% Basic 86% Proficient/Advanced MALE-7.1% Below Basic 7.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE-0% Below Basic 13.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced WHITE-4.1% Below Basic 8.1% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced Our STRENGTHS in Multiple Choice include Writing-Multiple Choice. Open Response Reading Practical Passage, Writing Sentence Formation, Writing Usage, Writing Mechanics. Our WEAKEST areas in multiple choice was Reading Practical Passage. In Open Response Writing Style Domain, Writing Content Domain and Reading Content Domain.
  3. 2013-2014 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2014, FIRST GRADE: COMBINED POPULATION VOCABULARY Out of 31 students tested, 12 scored above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-out of 31 students tested, 15 scored above benchmark, SPELLING-31 students tested, 14 scored above benchmark. Weak areas being in VOCABULARY. SECOND GRADE ITBS DATA 2013-2014 COMBINED POPULATION-VOCABULARY 31.3% above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-43.8% above benchmark, SPELLING-43.7% above benchmark. Our weakest area being in VOCABULARY. 2012-2013 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2013, FIRST GRADE: VOCABULARY 26 out of 32 students scored below basic. 6 out of 32 students scored at or above benchmark. SPELLING: 18 out of 32 scored below basic. 14 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION: 17 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. 15 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE VOCABULARY: 14 out of 25 scored below benchmark. 11 out of 25 scored 44% at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark. 10 out of 25 scored below benchmark. Our STRENGTHS were in COMPREHENSION for both grades with 17 out of 32 scoring at or above benchmark in FIRST GRADE and 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark in SECOND GRADE. SECOND GRADE had a STRENGTH in SPELLING with 13 our of 25 scored at or above benchmark. Our WEAKNESSESS were in VOCABULARY with 26 out of 32 scoring below benchmark and SPELLING with 18 out of 32 scored below benchmark. According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2011-2012, out of 31 students tested, First Grade scored 41% in Reading and 47% in Language. When analyzing the subpopulations, they were as follows: African American-25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient HISPANIC-100% Below Basic CAUCASIAN-16.7% Below Basic 33.3% in Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED- 18.5 Below Basic 37% Basic 44% Proficient/Advanced SECOND GRADE 2011-2012 Overall, 36 students tested-38% Reading 40% Language. When the sub populations were analyzed the results are the following: African American-66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced Hispanic-50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Causasion-41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 41.6 Proficient/Advanced Economically Disadvantaged-46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced
  4. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2013-2014 KINDERGARTEN: EOY-46 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY-45 students were tested 44% scored at or above benchmark 18% scored some risk 38% scored at risk FIRST GRADE EOY-31 students were tested 32% scored at risk 10% scored some risk 58% scored at or above benchmark BOY:34 students were tested 64% scored at or above benchmark 21% scored some risk 15% scored at risk SECOND GRADE EOY-32 students were tested 6% scored at risk 16% scored some risk 78% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 16 students were tested 88% scored at or above benchmark 6% scored some risk 6% scored at risk THIRD GRADE EOY-24 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 15 students were tested 47% scored at or above benchmark 20% scored some risk 33% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2012-2013 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested 50%% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 33% scored low risk EOY-36 students were tested 81% scored low risk 11% scored some risk 8% scored at risk FIRST GRADE: BOY-36 students were tested 33% scored well below benchmark 19% scored below benchmark 48% scored at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 53 scored low risk 38 scored some risk 9% scored at risk SECOND GRADE: BOY-25 students were tested 84% students scored at or above benchmark 8% scored some risk 8% scored at risk EOY-24 students were tested 83% scored low risk 17% scored some risk 0 scored at risk THIRD GRADE: BOY- 36 students were tested 46% were well below benchmark 3% were below benchmark 51% were at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 62% scored low risk 3% scored some risk 46% scored at risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-40 students were tested 60% were at or above benchmark 15% were some risk 25% were at risk EOY-40 students were tested 65% scored at or above benchmark 15% scored some risk 20% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2011-2012 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-33 students tested. 10 students low risk 10 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-35 students tested 17 students low risk 14 students some risk 4 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 28 students low risk 7 students some risk 2 students high risk FIRST GRADE BOY-29 students tested 18 low risk 5 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-29 students tested 17 students low risk 6 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-31 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 5 students high risk SECOND GRADE BOY-32 students tested 23 low risk 3 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-38 students tested 21 students low risk 2 students some risk 15 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 20 students low risk 7 students some risk 9 students high risk THIRD GRADE BOY-38 students tested 22 students low risk 6 students some risk 10 students high risk MOY-41 students tested 25 students low risk 10 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-41 students tested 29 students low risk 5 students some risk 7 students low risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-37 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-36 students tested 24 students low risk 3 students some risk 9 students high risk EOY-38 students tested 19 students low risk 10 students some risk 9 students high risk
  5. Lepanto Elementary's average daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  6. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2014-2015 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested First Sound Fluency: 25% scored at risk 11% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark FIRST GRADE: BOY-43 students were tested Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: 9% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 72% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Correct Letter Sound 7% scored at risk 23% scored some risk 70% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Word Read 58% scored some risk 42% scored at or above benchmark SECOND GRADE-26 students were tested Nonsense Word Fluency-Correct Letter Sound 39% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency-Words Read 19% scored at risk 27% scored some risk 54% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Fluency 27% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 54% scored at or above risk DORF-Accuracy 12% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 76% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Retell 24% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark THIRD GRADE: 51 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 18% scored at risk 35% scored some risk 47% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 14% scored at risk 25% scored some risk 61% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 2% scored at risk 8% scored some risk 90% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 22% scored at risk 22% scored some risk 56% scored at or above benchmark FOURTH GRADE 46 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 39% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 20% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 65% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 11% scored at risk 89% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 15% scored at risk 33% scored some risk 52% scored at or above benchmark
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to utilize our data, interventions, and tutoring to improve and motivate our students in their weakest areas, while striving to meet the rigor of PARCC and Common Core State Standards.
Benchmark Lepanto Elementary scored 87.27% for combined population in Literacy. We will continue to enhance our students knowledge base as set forth in the Common Core State Standards.
Intervention: Lepanto Elementary is continuing to utilize STANDARDS BASED INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES including the COMMON CORE STANDARDS.
Scientific Based Research: Standards-based Education: Putting Research into Practice, published by Ravay Snow-Renner and Patricia A. Lauer(2005). Fuchs, Douglas & Lynn S. (2005)." What is Scientifically- Based Reserach on Progress Monitoring?" Scientific Based Research: The Role of Interim Assessments in a Comrehensive Assessment System: A Policy Brief. Marianne Perie, Scott Marion, Brian Gong, and Judy Wurtzel. November (2007). Lorrie Shepard, Jane Hannaway, Eva Baker. (2009) Copyright by National Academy of Education. Standards, Assessments-and What Else? The Essential Elements of Standards-Based School Improvement; CSE Technical Report 528; Diane J. Briars, Pittsburgh Public Schools; Lauren B. Resnick, CRESST/University of Pittsburgh; August 2000.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
"G/A" Literacy Coach, Paige Tyler will produce, examine, and share reports showing students' reading progress with teachers and administrators. She will share this information during COMMON PLANNING TIME and any after school meetings. Materials/Supplies
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Paige Tyler Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Computers
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies: $703.00

ACTION BUDGET: $703.00
Total Budget: $703.00
Intervention: Lepanto Elementary is in its fifth year of transitioning to COMMON CORE STANDARDS and will continue to utilize COMPREHENSIVE LITERACY STRATEGIES to enhance the education of its students in the classroom setting. We will continue to utilize the Put Reading First building blocks for reading.
Scientific Based Research: Mission Statement." Common Core State Standards Initiative. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Sept. 2013 Donna DiPrima Bickel, et al. "Investigating The Effectiveness Of A Comprehensive Literacy Coaching Program In Schools With High Teacher Mobility." Elementary School Journal 111.1 (2010): 35-62. ERIC. Web. 11 Sept. 2013. The Role of Interim Assessments in a Comprehensive Assessment System: A Policy Brief (2007) The Aspen Institute Brooks, D. Christopher. “Space Matters: The impact of Formal Learning Environments’ On student Learning. “ British Journal of Educational Technology 42.5 (2011): 719-726. ERIC. Web. 6 Sept. 2013. Fuchs, Douglas & Lynn S. (2005)." What is Scientifically- Based Reserach on Progress Monitoring?" Dorn, LJ.,French C., T. 1998. Apprenticeship in Literacy: Transitions Across Reading and Writing."Stenhouse Publishers, Portland, Maine. Put Reading First The Research Building Blocks for Teaching Children To Read: National Reading Panel, Teaching Children to Read: Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction-Reports of the subgroups. National Institute for Literacy at ED Pubs." Morris, Betty. (2002). “Overcoming Dyslexia.” Shaywitz, Sally E., ( 1996). “Dyslexia” Scientific American, (1996): November.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Train Kindergarten and Second Grade Teachers in Orton Interventions. Purchase materials to be used by the teachers to implement Orton in the classrooms.
Action Type: Professional Development
Paige Tyler Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies: $4,576.00

ACTION BUDGET: $4,576.00
Purchase individual reading books to be used by Debbie Duford.
Debbie Duford Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies: $312.00

ACTION BUDGET: $312.00
Total Budget: $4,888.00
Goal All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
Benchmark All kindergarten students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten prepared for math and reading readiness.
Intervention: Two ABC preschool classrooms will serve the Lepanto campus providing transition from home to school for low income families.
Scientific Based Research: "The Effects of Preschool Experiences on Academic Achievement of First Graders Kohart, Rebecca; Nickell, Kathryn June 1994, Starting at 3, a project of Education Law Center, supported by a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2005 Education Law Center Hustedt, Jason T., et al. "The effects of the Arkansas Better Chance Program on young children’s school readiness." National Institute for Early Education Research (2007)
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will continue to fund the NSLA Pre-K classroom due to the large number of children who couldn't get into the regular ABC Pre-K program. We felt this was a good use of our monies. 1 classified teacher and 1 parapro hired. PD/Materials & Supplies used to set classroom up. They are under Department of Human Services and Arkansas Minimun Licensure.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Connie Gill, June Franks Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Central Office
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies: $9,000.00

ACTION BUDGET: $9,000.00
Total Budget: $9,000.00
Priority 2: Math
Supporting Data:
  1. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 85% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 25% basic, 76% proficient/advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS 12% basic, 88% proficient/advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% basic; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 89% proficient/advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 33% basic, 67% proficient/advanced We will focus on our greatest areas of needs: Geometry (44%) and Measurement (15%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 73.61% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 23% basic, 39% proficient, and 39% advanced. LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 26% basic, 57% proficient, and 17% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 20% basic, 0% proficient, and 80% advanced. We will focus on our greatest areas of being Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations-Fractions. 2012 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84.49% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: Below Basic 8% Basic 11% 81%% Proficient/Advanced LEP: Below Basic: 40% Basic 0% 60% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 0% Below Basic 12% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 7% Below Basic 7% Basic 85% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 7% Below Basic 10% Basic 82% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history shows a gain of 2.49% from last year. Our weaknesses in MULTIPLE CHOICE were DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY AND MEASUREMENT. OPEN RESPONSE WEAKNESSES were DATA ANALYSIS % PROBABILITY/NUMBERS AND OPERATIONS. Our STRENGTHS included for MULTIPLE CHOICE NUMBERS & OPERATIONS. Strengths in OPEN RESPONSE were GEOMETRY. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE 2013-2014 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall, 54% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 34% proficient/advanced NON DIABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 57% proficient/advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 50% below basic, 50% basic ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 46% proficient/advanced NON ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 70% proficient/advanced We will FOCUS on our weak areas: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%), Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra (39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year is as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 50% below basic, 25% basic, 25% proficient, and 0% advanced NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 12% basic, 50% proficient, and 35% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 40% basic, 40% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 12% below basic, 0% basic, 45% proficient, and 24% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% below basic, 0 basic, 44% proficient, and 44% advanced. We will FOCUS on Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: COMBINED: 13.1% Below Basic 21.1% Basic 66% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 14% Below Basic 20% Basic 65% Proficient/Advanced LEP: 0% Below Basic 25% Basic 75% Proficient/Advanced CAUSCASIAN: 19% Below Basic 33% Basic 62% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 20% Below Basic 33% Basic 47% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 9% Below Basic 13% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history showed a 1% gain over 2011 school year. Our STRENGTHS included MEASUREMENT in MULTIPLE CHOICE. STRENGTHS in OPEN RESPONSE were ALGEBRA. Our WEAKNESSES in MULTIPLE CHOICE included GEOMETRY. WEAK area for OPEN RESPONSE was DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY.
  2. In 2014, ITBS scores First Grade-Math Concepts 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark. Both areas are weaknesses for our school. Second Grade-Math Concepts 46.9% scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 31.3% scored at or above benchmark. Math problems are our weakest area. In 2013, ITBS scores FIRST GRADE: MATH CONCEPTS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 20 out of 32 scored below benchmark. MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 15 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 17 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE: MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 25 students scored at or above benchmark; 13 out of 25 students scored below benchmark. STRENGTHS: MATH CONCEPTS: 16 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark; 9 out of 25 scored below benchmark. In 2012, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 53%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011-2012 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN: 25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 100% Below Basic MULTI-ETHNIC: 50%Basic 50% Advanced CAUCASIAN: 16.7% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our weak areas were MATH CONCEPTS & MATH PROBLEMS. SECOND GRADE: According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2011-2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 35% AFRICAN AMERICAN: 66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced MULTI ETHNIC: 33.3% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 33.3 Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 56% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced Our WEAK areas were MATH CONCEPTS and MATH PROBLEMS. Our data showed no strengths. KINDERGARTEN In 2011, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 55.9%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-28.6% HISPANIC-50% CAUCASIAN-60.9% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-55.2% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-100% Our STRENGTHS were numbers properties and operations and problem solving. Our WEAKNESSES were geometry and measurement. FIRST GRADE ITBS 2011 In 2011 the ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 51.5%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-40% CAUCASIAN-63.6% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-44% FIRST GRADE STRENGTH was measurement. WEAKNESSES were numbers and operations, geometry, and problem solving. . SECOND GRADE 2011 In 2011 ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 64.1%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-66.7% HISPANIC-40% CAUCASIAN-66.7% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-60.6% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-50% SECOND GRADE STRENGTHS were numbers and operations, algebraic concepts, geometry, and single step problems. WEAKNESSES were measurement, multiple step problems, data, relationships/trends, and comparing quantities.
  3. Lepanto Elementary's daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  4. EVALUATION This is Lepanto Elementary's fifth year to utilize THE LEARNING INSTITUTE. We will assess the impact on student achievement by analyzing students performance on TLI modules throughout the year. TLI Math Data 2014-2015 Our weak areas in FIRST GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (c) add to: start unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (j) compare: difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (k) compare: bigger unknown; understand the meaning of the equal sign, and determine if equations involving addition and subtraction are true or false. For example, which of the following equations are true and which are false? 6=6, 7=8-1,5+2=2+5, 4+1=5+2; count to 120, starting at any number less than 120. In this range, read and write numerals and represent a number of objects with a written numeral; add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, one and ones, and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten; express the length of an object as a whole number of length units; by laying multiple copies of a shorter object (the length unit) end to end; understand that the length measurement of an object is the number of same-size length units that span it with no gaps or overlaps. Limit to contexts where the object being measured is spanned by a whole number of length units with no gaps or overlaps; tell and write time in hours and half-hours using analog and digital clocks; organize, represent, and interpret data with up to three categories; ask and answer questions about the total number of data points, how many in each category, and how many more or less are in one category than in another; compose two-dimensional shapes (rectangle, squares, trapezoids, triangles, half-circles, quarter-circles) or three-dimensional shapes (cubes, right rectangular prisms, right circular cones, and right circular cylinders) to create a composite shape, and compose new shapes from the composite shape (a) 2-d shapes. Our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (d) take from: result unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem . (e) take from change unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (h) put together/take apart: added unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (j) put together/take apart: both addends unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (i) compare difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (l) compare smaller unknown; determine whether a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members, e.g. , by pairing objects or counting them by 2’s; write an equation to express an even number as a sum of two equal addends. (a) even and odd; count within 1000, skip count by 5’s, 10’s 100’s. (b) skip counting; measure to determine how much longer one object is than another, expressing the length difference in terms of a standard length unit; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares, describe the shares using the words halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. and describe the whole as two halves, three thirds, four fourths. Recognize that equal shares of identical wholes need not have the same shape. (b) equal shares not same shape. Our weak areas in THIRD GRADE were: solve two-step word problems using the four operations. Represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity. Assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation for estimation strategies including rounding. (a) addition & subtraction; use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 to 100 (a) round to nearest 10; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. (b) subtract; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 (e.g., 9 x 80, 5 x 60) using strategies based on place value and properties of operations. (A range of algorithms may be used); measure and estimate liquid volumes and masses of objects using standard units of grams (g) , kilograms (k), and liters (l). 6 add subtract, multiply, or divide to solve one-step word problems involving masses or volumes that are given in the same units, e.g., by using drawings (such as a beaker with a measurement scale) to represent the problem. (a) measure and estimate liquid volumes; draw a scaled picture graph and a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several categories. Solve one- and two-step “how many more” and “how many less” problems using information presented in scaled bar graphs. For example, draw a bar graph in which each square in the bar graph might represent 5 pets. (a) picture graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm, square m, square in, square ft, and improvised units); relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition. D. recognize area as additive. Find areas of rectilinear figures by decomposing them into non-overlapping rectangles and adding the areas of the non-overlapping parts, applying this technique to solve real world problems; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons, including finding the perimeter given the side lengths, finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimeters. (a) find perimeter. Our weak areas in FOURTH GRADE were: multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (a) equal group-unknown products, equal groups-group size unknown, equal groups-number of groups unknown, arrays, area-unknown products, arrays, area-group size unknown, arrays, area-number of groups unknown; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (b) compare-unknown product; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (d) compare- number of groups unknown; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100. Recognize that a whole number is a multiple of each of its factors. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite. (c) prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule. Identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself. For example, given the rule “Add 3” and the starting number 1, generate terms in the resulting sequence and observe that the terms appear to alternate between odd and even numbers. Explain formally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way. (b) identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself; fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; recognize angle measure as additive. When an angle is decomposed into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum of the angle measures of the parts. Solve addition and subtraction problems to find unknown angles on a diagram on real world and mathematical problems, e.g., by using an equation with a symbol for the unknown angle measure. (a) recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, line segments, rays, angles, (right, acute, obtuse), and perpendicular and parallel lines. Identify these in two-dimensional figures. 2012-2013-As we analyzed our data for 2012-2013, we found the following weaknessess: SECOND GRADE: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one and two-stewp word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing with unknowns in all positins; determine whether a group of objects has an odd or even number of members; count within 10000, skip county by 5's, 10's, and 100's; measure the length of an object twice, using length units of different lengths for the two measurements; describe how the two measurements relate to the size of the unit chosen; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares; desvribing the shares using the word halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. We will also concentrate on CCSS weaknesses: Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Number & Operations in Base Ten THIRD GRADE:interpret products of whole numbers; solve two-step word problems using the four operations; represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity;l use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 or 100; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value; properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 usings strategies based on place value and properties of operations; draw a scaled picture-graph adn a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several catergories; solve one- and two- step "how many more" and "how many less" praoblems using information presented in scaled bar graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares; relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons; including finding the perimeter given the side lengths; finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimters. We have adopted CCSS and will work on the following areas also: Operations & Algebraic Thinking, Numbers & Operations-Fractions FOURTH GRADE: interpret a multiplication equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicaiotn equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicatiogn equation by using draawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100; recognize that a whole numbers is a multiple of each of its factors; determine whether a given whole number in in the range of 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number; determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; fluently add and subtracts multi-digit whole numbers, using the standard algorithm; recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, lines, line segments, rays angles. and perpendicular and parallel lines. We have adopted the CCSS and will also focus on these areas of weak ness: Numbers& Operations in Base Ten and Numbers & Operations-Fractions 2011-2012 EVALUATION As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 , we found the following weaknesses: SECOND GRADE: Operations and Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. THIRD GRADE: Data analysis and probalility; measurement; numbers and operations; geometry; FOURTH GRADE: Geometry; measurement.
  5. TLI Science Data 2014 4th Grade The weak areas in SCIENCE were: generate conclusions based on evidence; evaluate the quality and feasibility of an idea or project; use simple equipment, age appropriate tools, technology, and mathematics in scientific investigations (e.g., balances, hand lenses, microscopes, rulers, thermometers, calculators, computers); apply lab safety rules as they relate to specific science lab activities; classify vertebrates into major subgroups; mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles; identify major parts and functions of the following systems: circulatory; illustrate the interdependence of organisms in an ecosystem; collect and interpret measurable empirical evidence in teams and as individuals; evaluate the impact of water pollution.
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Benchmark The 2014 CRT indicated combined population scored 85% for third grade and fourth grade scored 54%. We will continue to move our third and fourth grade students to the proficient or advanced level on the Math portion of the upcoming PARRC assessment. We have adopted Common Core Standards at Lepanto Elementary. Our scores on the ACTAAP were as follows: THIRD GRADE: Combined Population 85% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS in MULTIPLE CHOICE: Algebra (67%), Measurement (56%), Data/Probability (62%), Numbers/Operations (72%)OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (53%), Algebra (68%), Data/Probability (50%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%); OPEN RESPONSE: Geometry (1%), Measurement (15%). FOURTH GRADE Combined Population 54% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS IN MULTIPLE CHOICE: Numbers/Operations (73%), Algebra (56%), Data/Probability (58%); OPEN RESPONSE: Measurement (55%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Intervention: Computer Assisted Instruction
Scientific Based Research: Ed Thoughts: What We Know About Mathematics Teaching and Learning. p. 61-71, McRel, edited by John Sutton and Alice Krueger, Aurora, CO, 2002. PRWeb, "Reserach Study Shows Stunning Gains for Elemenrtary Student with Person's enVisionMATH Program" April, 2010.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will purchase 8 IPADS and 1 MAC Computer for use by students for research.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Mike Kelly Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Computers
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies: $3,903.00

ACTION BUDGET: $3,903.00
Lepanto Elementary purchased 10 computers at $631.45 each plus tax and then 16 computers at $673.80 for the library for students in K-4 grades to utilize for research projects.
Carey Smith Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Computers
  • School Library
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Materials & Supplies: $17,808.00

ACTION BUDGET: $17,808.00
Total Budget: $21,711.00

Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Other Objects -- $0
There is no data for the Source of Funds "NSLA (State-281) - Other Objects".

Source of Funds: NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services -- $5148
Priority 1: Literacy
Supporting Data:
  1. THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2013-2014 As we analyzed our data for the 2013-2014 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in Second Grade were: ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text; recount stories including fables and folktales from diverse cultures, and determine their central message, lesson, or moral; describe how words and phrases supply rhythm and meaning in a story, poem, or song; describe the overall structure of a story, including describing the beginning introduces the story and the ending concludes the action; describe the connection between a series of historical events, scientific ideas or concepts, or steps in technical procedures in a text; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area; know and use various text features to locate key information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. Weak areas for THIRD GRADE were: ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; describe characters in a story and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language; refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a text, using terms such as chapter, scene, and stanza; distinguish their own point of view from that of the narrator or those of the characters; ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers; use text features and search tools to locate information relevant to a given topic efficiently; distinguish their own point of view from that of the author of a text; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use determiners; produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, and exclamatory sentences in response to prompts; capitalize dates and names of people; use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series; use commas in greetings and closings of letters. Weak areas for FOURTH GRADE were: refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the meaning fo words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text; determine the main idea of a text and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize the text; explain events, procedures, ideas, or concepts in a historical, scientific, or technical text, including what happened and why, based on specific information in the text; explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking; use knowledge of language and its conventions when writing, speaking, reading, or listening; demonstrate understanding of figurative language, word relationships, and nuances in word meanings; explain the function of nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs in general and their functions in particular sentences; produce simple, compound, and complex sentences. Our weak areas in Third Grade were: Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how (20%), know and use various text features (23%), describe how reasons support specific points the authors makes in a text (35%), identify the main topic of a multi paragraph text (44%), recount stories, including fables and folktales from diverse cultures (45%). Our weak areas in Fourth Grade were: Reading: refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a topic (19%), determine the main idea of a text; recount key details (31%), describe the relationship between a series of historical events (38%), ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text (38%), describe characters in a story (36%). Writing: demonstrate common of conventions of standard English grammar and usage (7%) demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization and punctuation (33%), produce and expand complete simple and compound declarative, interrogative, imperative, exclamatory sentences (46%), use commas in dates and to separate single words in a series (47%). THE LEARNING INSTITUTE DATA 2012-2013 As we analyzed our data for the 2012-2013 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: article details;inference; main idea; literary element analysis; sequencing; vocabulary; literary devices; analysis; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases in a text relevant to a grade 2 topic or subject area, know and use various text features to locate key facts or information in a text efficiently; identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe. THIRD GRADE: article details; inference; literary devices; analysis; use text features and search tools to locate informatin relevant to a given topic efficiently; describe the logical connection between particular sentences and paragraphs in a text; use abstract nouns; irregular nouns; subordinating conjunctions; commas; quotation marks. FOURTH GRADE: article details; inference; determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology; explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems and drama when writing or speaking about a text; compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations; main idea; analysis; explain how an author uses reasons for reading and evidence to support particular points in a text; fragments; demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar adn usage when writing or speaking; metaphor; adage/proverb; demonstratives; adverbs; simple sentences. 2011-2012 As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 school year from The Learning Institute we found that our greatest need in SECOND GRADE were main topic of a multiparagraph text, identifying the main purpose of a text and know and use various text features. In SECOND GRADE WRITING demonstrate command of the conventions of standards, use commas in dates to separate single words and capitalize dates and names of people. THIRD GRADE'S weakest areas were in describe the relationship between a series, recount stories and including fables and folktales. In THIRD GRADE WRITING the data showed demonstrate command of conventions, and use knowledge of language and its conventions. . FOURTH GRADE data showed a need in the overall structure, describe in depth a character, setting or events, and determine the main idea of a text. In FOURTH GRADE WRITING the areas were produce simple, compound, and complex sentences and demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English. We will focus on these areas in both classroom instruction and intervention time.
  2. 2013-2014 ACTAAP Data According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, the data is as follows: COMBINED POPULATION: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 13% basic, 50% proficient, 25% advanced; NON DISABLED STUDENTS: 6% basic, 53% proficient, and 41% advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% proficient; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 17% below basic, 53% proficient, and 37% advanced. As we analyzed our data, we will strive to improve the following weak areas: CONTENT (58%) MULTIPLE CHOICE WRITING (54%) OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGES (45%) CONTENT (25%) PRACTICAL (41%) Our STRENGTHS were MULTIPLE CHOICE-LITERARY PASSAGE 62% PRACTICAL PASSAGE 71%; OPEN RESPONSE-WRITING CONTENT 61%, WRITING STYLE 63%, SENTENCE FORMATION 70%, USAGE 76%, MECHANICS 73%. 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% proficient. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 0% basic, 0% proficient, and 0% advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANAGED: 9% scored below basic, 30% scored basic, 26% scored proficient, and 36% scored advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 10% below basic, 0% basic, 30% proficient, and 60% advanced. As we analyzed our data we will strive to improve in the following weak areas: In THIRD GRADE we will work on Literary (50%), Content (50), Practical (38%) all being Open Response items. Our STRENGTHS were Multiple Choice: Content (63%), Practical (63%), Writing (63%), Content (65%), Style (65%), Sentence Formation (70%), Usage (84%), Mechanics (78%)/ 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 year the THIRD GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES-0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-11% Below basic 5% Basic 84% Proficient/Advanced GENDER GAP FEMALE-7% Below Basic 7% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE 21% Below Basic 0% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced ETHNICITY-HISPANIC-40% Below Basic 0% Basic 60% Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN-6% Below Basic 6% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced Our Strengths included Multiple Choice Writing and Content Passage. Our strengths in Open Response were Reading Content and Writing Sentence Formation. We scored above State Average in all areas. We will focus on our weak areas being Multiple Choice Literacy Passage and Practical Passage. Our weak areas in Open Response were Reading Practical and Writing Content. 2013-2014 ACTAAP DATA According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 88% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the sub populations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 17% proficient, and 17% advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 39% proficient, 18% advanced; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 42% proficient, and 4% advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 20% proficient, and 50% advanced. Our weak areas included WRITING MULTIPLE CHOICE (63%) and OPEN RESPONSE LITERARY PASSAGE (35%). Our STRENGTHS were in the area of LITERARY PASSAGE (64%), CONTENT PASSAGE (71%) PRACTICAL (66%); open response-CONTENT PASSAGE (78%) PRACTICAL PASSAGE (63%), WRITING CONTENT (71%) STYLE (71%), SENTENCE FORMATION (80%) USAGE (89%) MECHANICS (80%) 2012-2013 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 90% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 13% below basic, 25% basic, 50% proficient, and 13% advanced NON-DIABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 0% basic, 38% proficient, and 59% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 1: 0% MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% Advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 0% basic, 40% proficient, and 40% advanced 1ST YEAR LEP STUDENTS: 0% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 6% below basic, 3% basic, 42% proficient, and 48% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 11% basic, 33% proficient, and 56% advanced. In Fourth Grade, we will work on Literary (38%)and Practical (50%) in Open Response items. Our only weak area in Multiple Choice for Fourth Grade was Writing (50%). Our STRENGTHS included the following: all strands of Writing: Content(74%),Style (74%), Sentence Formation (88%), Usage (98%), Mechanics (86%); MULTIPLE CHOICE: Literary (63%), Content (75%), Practical (75%). OPEN RESPONSE: Content (63%). 2011-2012 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall 87% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-3.1% Below Basic 11.1% Basic 86% Proficient/Advanced MALE-7.1% Below Basic 7.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE-0% Below Basic 13.1% Basic 87% Proficient/Advanced WHITE-4.1% Below Basic 8.1% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN-0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced Our STRENGTHS in Multiple Choice include Writing-Multiple Choice. Open Response Reading Practical Passage, Writing Sentence Formation, Writing Usage, Writing Mechanics. Our WEAKEST areas in multiple choice was Reading Practical Passage. In Open Response Writing Style Domain, Writing Content Domain and Reading Content Domain.
  3. 2013-2014 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2014, FIRST GRADE: COMBINED POPULATION VOCABULARY Out of 31 students tested, 12 scored above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-out of 31 students tested, 15 scored above benchmark, SPELLING-31 students tested, 14 scored above benchmark. Weak areas being in VOCABULARY. SECOND GRADE ITBS DATA 2013-2014 COMBINED POPULATION-VOCABULARY 31.3% above benchmark, COMPREHENSION-43.8% above benchmark, SPELLING-43.7% above benchmark. Our weakest area being in VOCABULARY. 2012-2013 ITBS DATA According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2013, FIRST GRADE: VOCABULARY 26 out of 32 students scored below basic. 6 out of 32 students scored at or above benchmark. SPELLING: 18 out of 32 scored below basic. 14 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION: 17 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark. 15 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE VOCABULARY: 14 out of 25 scored below benchmark. 11 out of 25 scored 44% at or above benchmark. COMPREHENSION 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark. 10 out of 25 scored below benchmark. Our STRENGTHS were in COMPREHENSION for both grades with 17 out of 32 scoring at or above benchmark in FIRST GRADE and 15 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark in SECOND GRADE. SECOND GRADE had a STRENGTH in SPELLING with 13 our of 25 scored at or above benchmark. Our WEAKNESSESS were in VOCABULARY with 26 out of 32 scoring below benchmark and SPELLING with 18 out of 32 scored below benchmark. According to the data from the ITBS for the school year 2011-2012, out of 31 students tested, First Grade scored 41% in Reading and 47% in Language. When analyzing the subpopulations, they were as follows: African American-25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient HISPANIC-100% Below Basic CAUCASIAN-16.7% Below Basic 33.3% in Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED- 18.5 Below Basic 37% Basic 44% Proficient/Advanced SECOND GRADE 2011-2012 Overall, 36 students tested-38% Reading 40% Language. When the sub populations were analyzed the results are the following: African American-66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced Hispanic-50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Causasion-41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 41.6 Proficient/Advanced Economically Disadvantaged-46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced
  4. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2013-2014 KINDERGARTEN: EOY-46 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY-45 students were tested 44% scored at or above benchmark 18% scored some risk 38% scored at risk FIRST GRADE EOY-31 students were tested 32% scored at risk 10% scored some risk 58% scored at or above benchmark BOY:34 students were tested 64% scored at or above benchmark 21% scored some risk 15% scored at risk SECOND GRADE EOY-32 students were tested 6% scored at risk 16% scored some risk 78% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 16 students were tested 88% scored at or above benchmark 6% scored some risk 6% scored at risk THIRD GRADE EOY-24 students were tested 17% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 66% scored at or above benchmark BOY: 15 students were tested 47% scored at or above benchmark 20% scored some risk 33% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2012-2013 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested 50%% scored at risk 17% scored some risk 33% scored low risk EOY-36 students were tested 81% scored low risk 11% scored some risk 8% scored at risk FIRST GRADE: BOY-36 students were tested 33% scored well below benchmark 19% scored below benchmark 48% scored at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 53 scored low risk 38 scored some risk 9% scored at risk SECOND GRADE: BOY-25 students were tested 84% students scored at or above benchmark 8% scored some risk 8% scored at risk EOY-24 students were tested 83% scored low risk 17% scored some risk 0 scored at risk THIRD GRADE: BOY- 36 students were tested 46% were well below benchmark 3% were below benchmark 51% were at or above benchmark EOY-32 students were tested 62% scored low risk 3% scored some risk 46% scored at risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-40 students were tested 60% were at or above benchmark 15% were some risk 25% were at risk EOY-40 students were tested 65% scored at or above benchmark 15% scored some risk 20% scored at risk DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2011-2012 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-33 students tested. 10 students low risk 10 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-35 students tested 17 students low risk 14 students some risk 4 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 28 students low risk 7 students some risk 2 students high risk FIRST GRADE BOY-29 students tested 18 low risk 5 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-29 students tested 17 students low risk 6 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-31 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 5 students high risk SECOND GRADE BOY-32 students tested 23 low risk 3 students some risk 6 students high risk MOY-38 students tested 21 students low risk 2 students some risk 15 students high risk EOY-37 students tested 20 students low risk 7 students some risk 9 students high risk THIRD GRADE BOY-38 students tested 22 students low risk 6 students some risk 10 students high risk MOY-41 students tested 25 students low risk 10 students some risk 6 students high risk EOY-41 students tested 29 students low risk 5 students some risk 7 students low risk FOURTH GRADE BOY-37 students tested 16 students low risk 8 students some risk 13 students high risk MOY-36 students tested 24 students low risk 3 students some risk 9 students high risk EOY-38 students tested 19 students low risk 10 students some risk 9 students high risk
  5. Lepanto Elementary's average daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  6. DIBELS ASSESSMENT 2014-2015 KINDERGARTEN: BOY-36 students were tested First Sound Fluency: 25% scored at risk 11% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark FIRST GRADE: BOY-43 students were tested Letter Naming Fluency: 100% scored at or above benchmark Phoneme Segmentation Fluency: 9% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 72% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Correct Letter Sound 7% scored at risk 23% scored some risk 70% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency: Word Read 58% scored some risk 42% scored at or above benchmark SECOND GRADE-26 students were tested Nonsense Word Fluency-Correct Letter Sound 39% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark Nonsense Word Fluency-Words Read 19% scored at risk 27% scored some risk 54% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Fluency 27% scored at risk 19% scored some risk 54% scored at or above risk DORF-Accuracy 12% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 76% scored at or above benchmark DORF-Retell 24% scored at risk 12% scored some risk 64% scored at or above benchmark THIRD GRADE: 51 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 18% scored at risk 35% scored some risk 47% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 14% scored at risk 25% scored some risk 61% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 2% scored at risk 8% scored some risk 90% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 22% scored at risk 22% scored some risk 56% scored at or above benchmark FOURTH GRADE 46 students were tested DORF (Fluency) 39% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 46% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Accuracy) 20% scored at risk 15% scored some risk 65% scored at or above benchmark DORF (Retell) 11% scored at risk 89% scored at or above benchmark DAZE 15% scored at risk 33% scored some risk 52% scored at or above benchmark
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to utilize our data, interventions, and tutoring to improve and motivate our students in their weakest areas, while striving to meet the rigor of PARCC and Common Core State Standards.
Benchmark Lepanto Elementary scored 87.27% for combined population in Literacy. We will continue to enhance our students knowledge base as set forth in the Common Core State Standards.
Intervention: Lepanto Elementary is continuing to utilize STANDARDS BASED INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES including the COMMON CORE STANDARDS.
Scientific Based Research: Standards-based Education: Putting Research into Practice, published by Ravay Snow-Renner and Patricia A. Lauer(2005). Fuchs, Douglas & Lynn S. (2005)." What is Scientifically- Based Reserach on Progress Monitoring?" Scientific Based Research: The Role of Interim Assessments in a Comrehensive Assessment System: A Policy Brief. Marianne Perie, Scott Marion, Brian Gong, and Judy Wurtzel. November (2007). Lorrie Shepard, Jane Hannaway, Eva Baker. (2009) Copyright by National Academy of Education. Standards, Assessments-and What Else? The Essential Elements of Standards-Based School Improvement; CSE Technical Report 528; Diane J. Briars, Pittsburgh Public Schools; Lauren B. Resnick, CRESST/University of Pittsburgh; August 2000.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will purchase DIBELS software to be used in all classrooms. 63000/65000 Purchased services
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
Paige Tyler Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Central Office
  • Computers
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
  • Teaching Aids
NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services: $2,253.00

ACTION BUDGET: $2,253.00
Total Budget: $2,253.00
Goal All students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten more prepared for math and reading readiness.
Benchmark All kindergarten students who attended Pre-K will enter kindergarten prepared for math and reading readiness.
Intervention: Two ABC preschool classrooms will serve the Lepanto campus providing transition from home to school for low income families.
Scientific Based Research: "The Effects of Preschool Experiences on Academic Achievement of First Graders Kohart, Rebecca; Nickell, Kathryn June 1994, Starting at 3, a project of Education Law Center, supported by a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2005 Education Law Center Hustedt, Jason T., et al. "The effects of the Arkansas Better Chance Program on young children’s school readiness." National Institute for Early Education Research (2007)
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will continue to fund the NSLA Pre-K classroom due to the large number of children who couldn't get into the regular ABC Pre-K program. We felt this was a good use of our monies. 1 classified teacher and 1 parapro hired. PD/Materials & Supplies used to set classroom up. They are under Department of Human Services and Arkansas Minimun Licensure.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Professional Development
Connie Gill, June Franks Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Central Office
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services: $500.00

ACTION BUDGET: $500.00
Total Budget: $500.00
Priority 2: Math
Supporting Data:
  1. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 85% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 25% basic, 76% proficient/advanced; NON-DISABLED STUDENTS 12% basic, 88% proficient/advanced; LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 100% basic; ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% basic, 89% proficient/advanced; NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 33% basic, 67% proficient/advanced We will focus on our greatest areas of needs: Geometry (44%) and Measurement (15%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year our data is as follows: Overall: 73.61% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: STUDENENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 23% basic, 39% proficient, and 39% advanced. LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 50% basic, 50% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 26% basic, 57% proficient, and 17% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 0% below basic, 20% basic, 0% proficient, and 80% advanced. We will focus on our greatest areas of being Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations-Fractions. 2012 BENCHMARK DATA THIRD GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84.49% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: Below Basic 8% Basic 11% 81%% Proficient/Advanced LEP: Below Basic: 40% Basic 0% 60% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 0% Basic 100% Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 0% Below Basic 12% Basic 88% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 7% Below Basic 7% Basic 85% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 7% Below Basic 10% Basic 82% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history shows a gain of 2.49% from last year. Our weaknesses in MULTIPLE CHOICE were DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY AND MEASUREMENT. OPEN RESPONSE WEAKNESSES were DATA ANALYSIS % PROBABILITY/NUMBERS AND OPERATIONS. Our STRENGTHS included for MULTIPLE CHOICE NUMBERS & OPERATIONS. Strengths in OPEN RESPONSE were GEOMETRY. 2014 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE 2013-2014 According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2014 school year, the FOURTH GRADE BENCHMARK DATA is as follows: Overall, 54% Proficient/Advanced. When analyzing the subpopulations, they scored as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 33% below basic, 33% basic, 34% proficient/advanced NON DIABLED STUDENTS: 18% below basic, 25% basic, 57% proficient/advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 50% below basic, 50% basic ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 21% below basic, 33% basic, 46% proficient/advanced NON ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 10% basic, 70% proficient/advanced We will FOCUS on our weak areas: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%), Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra (39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%). 2013 BENCHMARK DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2013 school year is as follows: STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: 50% below basic, 25% basic, 25% proficient, and 0% advanced NON-DISABLED STUDENTS: 3% below basic, 12% basic, 50% proficient, and 35% advanced. MONITORED FORMER LEP STUDENTS YEAR 2: 100% advanced LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT STUDENTS: 20% below basic, 40% basic, 40% proficient, and 0% advanced. ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 12% below basic, 0% basic, 45% proficient, and 24% advanced. NON-ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS: 11% below basic, 0 basic, 44% proficient, and 44% advanced. We will FOCUS on Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. DATA FOURTH GRADE According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 84% PROFICIENT/ADVANCED Analysis of subpopulations are as follows: COMBINED: 13.1% Below Basic 21.1% Basic 66% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 14% Below Basic 20% Basic 65% Proficient/Advanced LEP: 0% Below Basic 25% Basic 75% Proficient/Advanced CAUSCASIAN: 19% Below Basic 33% Basic 62% Proficient/Advanced MALE: 20% Below Basic 33% Basic 47% Proficient/Advanced FEMALE: 9% Below Basic 13% Basic 78% Proficient/Advanced AFRICAN AMERICAN: 0% Below Basic 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our performance history showed a 1% gain over 2011 school year. Our STRENGTHS included MEASUREMENT in MULTIPLE CHOICE. STRENGTHS in OPEN RESPONSE were ALGEBRA. Our WEAKNESSES in MULTIPLE CHOICE included GEOMETRY. WEAK area for OPEN RESPONSE was DATA ANALYSIS & PROBABILITY.
  2. In 2014, ITBS scores First Grade-Math Concepts 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 12 out of 31 scored at or above benchmark. Both areas are weaknesses for our school. Second Grade-Math Concepts 46.9% scored at or above benchmark; Math Problems 31.3% scored at or above benchmark. Math problems are our weakest area. In 2013, ITBS scores FIRST GRADE: MATH CONCEPTS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 20 out of 32 scored below benchmark. MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 15 out of 32 scored at or above benchmark; 17 out of 32 scored below benchmark. SECOND GRADE: MATH PROBLEMS: WEAKNESS 12 out of 25 students scored at or above benchmark; 13 out of 25 students scored below benchmark. STRENGTHS: MATH CONCEPTS: 16 out of 25 scored at or above benchmark; 9 out of 25 scored below benchmark. In 2012, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 53%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011-2012 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN: 25% Below Basic 50% Basic 25% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 100% Below Basic MULTI-ETHNIC: 50%Basic 50% Advanced CAUCASIAN: 16.7% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced Our weak areas were MATH CONCEPTS & MATH PROBLEMS. SECOND GRADE: According to the TREND ANALYSIS for the 2011-2012 school year is as follows: OVERALL: 35% AFRICAN AMERICAN: 66.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 16.7% Proficient/Advanced HISPANIC: 50% Basic 50% Proficient/Advanced MULTI ETHNIC: 33.3% Below Basic 33.3% Basic 33.3 Proficient/Advanced CAUCASIAN: 41.7% Below Basic 16.7% Basic 56% Proficient/Advanced ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED: 46.4% Below Basic 25% Basic 28.6% Proficient/Advanced Our WEAK areas were MATH CONCEPTS and MATH PROBLEMS. Our data showed no strengths. KINDERGARTEN In 2011, ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 55.9%. According to the trend analysis for the 2011 school year the data is as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-28.6% HISPANIC-50% CAUCASIAN-60.9% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-55.2% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-100% Our STRENGTHS were numbers properties and operations and problem solving. Our WEAKNESSES were geometry and measurement. FIRST GRADE ITBS 2011 In 2011 the ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 51.5%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-40% CAUCASIAN-63.6% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-44% FIRST GRADE STRENGTH was measurement. WEAKNESSES were numbers and operations, geometry, and problem solving. . SECOND GRADE 2011 In 2011 ITBS scores indicated that the combined population scored 64.1%. The subpopulations were as follows: AFRICAN AMERICAN-66.7% HISPANIC-40% CAUCASIAN-66.7% ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED-60.6% LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENT-50% SECOND GRADE STRENGTHS were numbers and operations, algebraic concepts, geometry, and single step problems. WEAKNESSES were measurement, multiple step problems, data, relationships/trends, and comparing quantities.
  3. Lepanto Elementary's daily attendance rate for 2012-2013 was 94.2%, 2011-2012 was 94.3%, 2010-2011 was 92.8%.
  4. EVALUATION This is Lepanto Elementary's fifth year to utilize THE LEARNING INSTITUTE. We will assess the impact on student achievement by analyzing students performance on TLI modules throughout the year. TLI Math Data 2014-2015 Our weak areas in FIRST GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (c) add to: start unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (j) compare: difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 20 to solve word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using objects, drawings, and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem (k) compare: bigger unknown; understand the meaning of the equal sign, and determine if equations involving addition and subtraction are true or false. For example, which of the following equations are true and which are false? 6=6, 7=8-1,5+2=2+5, 4+1=5+2; count to 120, starting at any number less than 120. In this range, read and write numerals and represent a number of objects with a written numeral; add within 100, including adding a two-digit number and a one-digit number, and adding a two-digit number and a multiple of 10, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. Understand that in adding two-digit numbers, one adds tens and tens, one and ones, and sometimes it is necessary to compose a ten; express the length of an object as a whole number of length units; by laying multiple copies of a shorter object (the length unit) end to end; understand that the length measurement of an object is the number of same-size length units that span it with no gaps or overlaps. Limit to contexts where the object being measured is spanned by a whole number of length units with no gaps or overlaps; tell and write time in hours and half-hours using analog and digital clocks; organize, represent, and interpret data with up to three categories; ask and answer questions about the total number of data points, how many in each category, and how many more or less are in one category than in another; compose two-dimensional shapes (rectangle, squares, trapezoids, triangles, half-circles, quarter-circles) or three-dimensional shapes (cubes, right rectangular prisms, right circular cones, and right circular cylinders) to create a composite shape, and compose new shapes from the composite shape (a) 2-d shapes. Our weak areas in SECOND GRADE were: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (d) take from: result unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem . (e) take from change unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (h) put together/take apart: added unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (j) put together/take apart: both addends unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (i) compare difference unknown; use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem. (l) compare smaller unknown; determine whether a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members, e.g. , by pairing objects or counting them by 2’s; write an equation to express an even number as a sum of two equal addends. (a) even and odd; count within 1000, skip count by 5’s, 10’s 100’s. (b) skip counting; measure to determine how much longer one object is than another, expressing the length difference in terms of a standard length unit; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares, describe the shares using the words halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. and describe the whole as two halves, three thirds, four fourths. Recognize that equal shares of identical wholes need not have the same shape. (b) equal shares not same shape. Our weak areas in THIRD GRADE were: solve two-step word problems using the four operations. Represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity. Assess the reasonableness of answers using mental computation for estimation strategies including rounding. (a) addition & subtraction; use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 to 100 (a) round to nearest 10; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction. (b) subtract; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 (e.g., 9 x 80, 5 x 60) using strategies based on place value and properties of operations. (A range of algorithms may be used); measure and estimate liquid volumes and masses of objects using standard units of grams (g) , kilograms (k), and liters (l). 6 add subtract, multiply, or divide to solve one-step word problems involving masses or volumes that are given in the same units, e.g., by using drawings (such as a beaker with a measurement scale) to represent the problem. (a) measure and estimate liquid volumes; draw a scaled picture graph and a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several categories. Solve one- and two-step “how many more” and “how many less” problems using information presented in scaled bar graphs. For example, draw a bar graph in which each square in the bar graph might represent 5 pets. (a) picture graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares (square cm, square m, square in, square ft, and improvised units); relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition. D. recognize area as additive. Find areas of rectilinear figures by decomposing them into non-overlapping rectangles and adding the areas of the non-overlapping parts, applying this technique to solve real world problems; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons, including finding the perimeter given the side lengths, finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimeters. (a) find perimeter. Our weak areas in FOURTH GRADE were: multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (a) equal group-unknown products, equal groups-group size unknown, equal groups-number of groups unknown, arrays, area-unknown products, arrays, area-group size unknown, arrays, area-number of groups unknown; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g. by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (b) compare-unknown product; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicative comparison, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison. (d) compare- number of groups unknown; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100. Recognize that a whole number is a multiple of each of its factors. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number. Determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite. (c) prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule. Identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself. For example, given the rule “Add 3” and the starting number 1, generate terms in the resulting sequence and observe that the terms appear to alternate between odd and even numbers. Explain formally why the numbers will continue to alternate in this way. (b) identify apparent features of the pattern that were not explicit in the rule itself; fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; recognize angle measure as additive. When an angle is decomposed into non-overlapping parts, the angle measure of the whole is the sum of the angle measures of the parts. Solve addition and subtraction problems to find unknown angles on a diagram on real world and mathematical problems, e.g., by using an equation with a symbol for the unknown angle measure. (a) recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, line segments, rays, angles, (right, acute, obtuse), and perpendicular and parallel lines. Identify these in two-dimensional figures. 2012-2013-As we analyzed our data for 2012-2013, we found the following weaknessess: SECOND GRADE: use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one and two-stewp word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing with unknowns in all positins; determine whether a group of objects has an odd or even number of members; count within 10000, skip county by 5's, 10's, and 100's; measure the length of an object twice, using length units of different lengths for the two measurements; describe how the two measurements relate to the size of the unit chosen; partition circles and rectangles into two, three, or four equal shares; desvribing the shares using the word halves, thirds, half of, a third of, etc. We will also concentrate on CCSS weaknesses: Operations & Algebraic Thinking and Number & Operations in Base Ten THIRD GRADE:interpret products of whole numbers; solve two-step word problems using the four operations; represent these problems using equations with a letter standing for the unknown quantity;l use place value understanding to round whole numbers to the nearest 10 or 100; fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value; properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; multiply one-digit whole numbers by multiples of 10 in the range 10-90 usings strategies based on place value and properties of operations; draw a scaled picture-graph adn a scaled bar graph to represent a data set with several catergories; solve one- and two- step "how many more" and "how many less" praoblems using information presented in scaled bar graphs; measure areas by counting unit squares; relate area to the operations of multiplication and addition; solve real world and mathematical problems involving perimeters of polygons; including finding the perimeter given the side lengths; finding an unknown side length, and exhibiting rectangles with the same perimeter and different areas or with the same area and different perimters. We have adopted CCSS and will work on the following areas also: Operations & Algebraic Thinking, Numbers & Operations-Fractions FOURTH GRADE: interpret a multiplication equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicaiotn equation as a comparison; multiply or divide to solve word problems involving multiplicatiogn equation by using draawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem, distinguishing multiplicative comparison from additive comparison; find all factor pairs for a whole number in the range 1-100; recognize that a whole numbers is a multiple of each of its factors; determine whether a given whole number in in the range of 1-100 is a multiple of a given one-digit number; determine whether a given whole number in the range 1-100 is prime or composite; generate a number or shape pattern that follows a given rule; use place value understanding to round multi-digit whole numbers to any place; fluently add and subtracts multi-digit whole numbers, using the standard algorithm; recognize angle measure as additive; draw points, lines, line segments, rays angles. and perpendicular and parallel lines. We have adopted the CCSS and will also focus on these areas of weak ness: Numbers& Operations in Base Ten and Numbers & Operations-Fractions 2011-2012 EVALUATION As we analyzed our data for the 2011-2012 , we found the following weaknesses: SECOND GRADE: Operations and Algebraic Thinking and Numbers & Operations in Base Ten. THIRD GRADE: Data analysis and probalility; measurement; numbers and operations; geometry; FOURTH GRADE: Geometry; measurement.
  5. TLI Science Data 2014 4th Grade The weak areas in SCIENCE were: generate conclusions based on evidence; evaluate the quality and feasibility of an idea or project; use simple equipment, age appropriate tools, technology, and mathematics in scientific investigations (e.g., balances, hand lenses, microscopes, rulers, thermometers, calculators, computers); apply lab safety rules as they relate to specific science lab activities; classify vertebrates into major subgroups; mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles; identify major parts and functions of the following systems: circulatory; illustrate the interdependence of organisms in an ecosystem; collect and interpret measurable empirical evidence in teams and as individuals; evaluate the impact of water pollution.
Goal Our goal at Lepanto Elementary is to prepare our students to achieve success on the PARCC assessment. We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Benchmark The 2014 CRT indicated combined population scored 85% for third grade and fourth grade scored 54%. We will continue to move our third and fourth grade students to the proficient or advanced level on the Math portion of the upcoming PARRC assessment. We have adopted Common Core Standards at Lepanto Elementary. Our scores on the ACTAAP were as follows: THIRD GRADE: Combined Population 85% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS in MULTIPLE CHOICE: Algebra (67%), Measurement (56%), Data/Probability (62%), Numbers/Operations (72%)OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (53%), Algebra (68%), Data/Probability (50%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%); OPEN RESPONSE: Geometry (1%), Measurement (15%). FOURTH GRADE Combined Population 54% proficient/advanced. STRENGTHS IN MULTIPLE CHOICE: Numbers/Operations (73%), Algebra (56%), Data/Probability (58%); OPEN RESPONSE: Measurement (55%). We will strive to improve in our weak areas: MULTIPLE CHOICE: Geometry (44%), Measurement (46%); OPEN RESPONSE: Numbers/Operations (44%), Algebra(39%), Geometry (25%), Data/Probability (28%).
Intervention: Computer Assisted Instruction
Scientific Based Research: Ed Thoughts: What We Know About Mathematics Teaching and Learning. p. 61-71, McRel, edited by John Sutton and Alice Krueger, Aurora, CO, 2002. PRWeb, "Reserach Study Shows Stunning Gains for Elemenrtary Student with Person's enVisionMATH Program" April, 2010.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Lepanto Elementary will purchase Follett software will be maintained for the library.
Carey Smith Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Computers
  • Teachers
NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services: $1,000.00

ACTION BUDGET: $1,000.00
Lepanto Elementary will purchase a subscription to Brian Pop for use by teachers and students.
Mike Kelly Start: 07/01/2014
End: 06/30/2015
  • Central Office
  • Computers
NSLA (State-281) - Purchased Services: $1,395.00

ACTION BUDGET: $1,395.00
Total Budget: $2,395.00