– MATH LINKAGE CHART MEADOW HALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2015-2016 IMPROVEMENT PLAN

MEADOW HALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2015-2016 IMPROVEMENT PLAN – MATH LINKAGE CHART
LEADERSHIP
 Our vision is to have Meadow Hall School be a respectful, safe, fun, and nurturing school that
encourages innovative ideas, communicates effectively among all stakeholders, and holds
consistently high expectations for academic achievement. We convey this vision to students
through the slogan “Meadow Hall children – today’s students, tomorrow’s leaders.”
 Our mission is to lead students to exceed MSDE and MCPS achievement benchmarks. We
convey our mission to students through our motto: “Work Hard, Get Smart!”
STUDENT/STAKEHOLDER INSTRUCTIONAL FOCUS AND EQUITY/SEL FOCUS
Teachers will provide daily small group opportunities for students to demonstrate their understanding
of content and academic language by incorporating instructional strategies focused on background
knowledge and interaction. Teachers will collaborate during grade level planning on how the teaching
and learning of second language learners can be advanced by growth mindset approaches.
FACULTY AND STAFF FOCUS
As a result of root cause analysis, and to address the Instructional Focus and Equity/SEL Focus,
professional learning will be focused on the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) model
and strategies, growth mindset, and English Language Learners (ELLs).
MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS, AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Staff uses MAP-P, MAP-M, and Fact Fluency Progression Levels (FFPL) as data sources to measure
and analyze students’ math progress:
PROCESS MANAGEMENT
The following structures and processes will be implemented and monitored to address student and
staff needs:
 All grade level teams will use at least two extended grade level planning sessions each month as
dedicated time to examine teachers’ assessment of the Focus Students’ academic progress.
 All grade level planning meeting agenda will include dedicated time to discuss how academic
language, background knowledge, and interaction will address the needs of the Focus Students.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
SIP Goal #1 – MAP RIT Growth – Composite, Algebraic Thinking, & Number Operations
By June 2016, 75% of All Students will achieve the NWEA RIT growth norm, and 75% of Focus
Students will achieve RIT growth as tabled below.
SIP Goal #2 – Fact Fluency Progression Level Growth (FFPL)
By June 2016, 100% of Focus Students will advance at least 3 Fact Fluency Progression Levels
towards achieving the targets tabled below.
Grade Level:
N:
MAP Growth/Std Dev:
FFPL Targets:
1st
3
23.0/7.32
9
2nd
12
19.0/6.93
20
3rd
7
16.3/6.41
28
4th
12
14.4/6.41
34
5th
6
12.4/6.80
35
MAP growth targets equal 125% of NWEA Fall-to-Spring norms and are applied to all scores.
SIP 2015 Linkage Chart v2 092515
Total
40
MATH PERFORMANCE RESULTS
Table A: % of Students Scoring Proficient on MAP, All Grades, Spring Scores
Composite
Algebraic Thinking
Number Operations
(Prof=MCPS Benchmarks )
Year
Target
All
AW
AA
HL
FR
SE
LE
Focus
2014
77.2
71.3
85.0
61.4
63.8
62.6
21.8
46.9
25.7
2015
80.0
76.2
89.1
64.0
69.8
65.0
46.3
49.0
13.3
2016
83.0
(Proficient = AV+HI Scores)
(Proficient = AV+HI Scores)
2014
77.2
59.7
74.8
47.3
52.2
50.6
21.2
45.3
17.6
2014
77.2
59.7
74.8
49.1
50.9
49.8
17.3
35.8
21.2
2015
80.0
73.7
86.4
58.0
68.3
63.2
42.6
52.0
16.3
2016
83.0
2015
80.0
79.1
89.3
68.3
75.1
72.4
44.1
60.0
20.9
2016
83.0
Targets are MCPS targets; 2014 data are baseline; 2016 data reflect latest MAP administration (Fall 2015).
Table B: % Students Achieving MAP RIT Growth Targets, Fall-to-Spring
2015
2016
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
P Composite
All 58.5
69.0
69.1
84.3 l 78.1
a
Focus 54.5
33.3
50.0
83.3
n
Algebraic
Thinking
n
All 56.9
50.9
77.9
65.1 i 50.0
Focus 45.5
25.0
50.0
50.0 n g
Number Operations
a
All 56.9
67.9
66.2
74.6 n 73.4
Focus 45.5
30.0
41.7
66.7 d For All Students, MAP growth targets equal the currentcNWEA Fall-to-Spring norms. For Focus Students, MAP
growth targets equal 125% of those norms as tabled under
o Strategic Planning. 2015 data are baseline. 2016 data
reflect the latest MAP administration (Fall 2015). Students scoring above -1 standard deviation for RIT Growth
n
are considered to meet growth target.
t
Table C: % Students Achieving
FFPL Growth Targets
e
n
2015
2016
Grade
1st
2nd
3rd
4th t 5th
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
u
All T
n
All 3
d
Focus T
e
r
Focus 3
s T means targeted students meeting all grade level targets;
All T = all students meeting all grade level targets; Focus
All 3 and Focus 3 = students in each group advancing at
t least 3 Fact Fluency Levels
Progressato Target Key
Met
Progressing
Not Progressing
>10% Regression
n
d
Focus Students: Hispanic second language learners receiving FARMS in grades 1-5
i
who were designated by the MCPS Early Warning Indicator for the 2015 fourth marking
n
period as needing high levels of support.
g
–
s
t
r
e

MEADOW HALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2015-2016 IMPROVEMENT PLAN – READING LINKAGE CHART
LEADERSHIP
 Our vision is to have Meadow Hall School be a respectful, safe, fun, and nurturing school that
encourages innovative ideas, communicates effectively among all stakeholders, and holds
consistently high expectations for academic achievement. We convey this vision to students
through the slogan “Meadow Hall children – today’s students, tomorrow’s leaders.”
 Our mission is to lead students to exceed MSDE and MCPS achievement benchmarks. We
convey our mission to students through our motto: “Work Hard, Get Smart!”
STUDENT/STAKEHOLDER INSTRUCTIONAL AND EQUITY FOCUS
Teachers will provide daily small group opportunities for students to demonstrate their understanding
of content and academic language by incorporating instructional strategies focused on background
knowledge and interaction. Teachers will collaborate during grade level planning on how the teaching
and learning of second language learners can be advanced by growth mindset approaches.
FACULTY AND STAFF FOCUS
As a result of root cause analysis, and to address the Instructional Focus and Equity/SEL Focus,
professional learning will be focused on the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) model
and strategies, growth mindset, and English Language Learners (ELLs).
MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS, AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Staff uses mClass, MAP-R, Word Wall, and MCPS MIRL as data sources to measure and analyze
students’ reading progress.
PROCESS MANAGEMENT
As a result of root cause analysis, the following structures and processes will be implemented and
monitored to address student and staff needs:
 All grade level teams will use at least two extended grade level planning sessions each month as
dedicated time to examine data and teachers’ assessment of the Focus Students’ academic
progress.
 All grade level planning meeting agenda will include dedicated time to discuss how academic
language, background knowledge, and interaction address the needs of the Focus Students.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
SIP Goal #3 – MAP-R RIT Growth
By June 2016, 75% of All Students will achieve the NWEA RIT growth norm, and 75% of Focus Students (FS)
will achieve the Fall-to-Spring RIT growth tabled below.
(3rd-5th)
SIP Goal #4 – MIRL Growth (K-5th)
By June 2016, 75% of FS will read instructionally at or above the levels for their grade as tabled below.
SIP Goal #5 – Word Wall Word Fluency (K-5)
By June 2016, 75% of FS will demonstrate fluency with all Word Wall Words up to their grade.
Grade Level:
N:
Reading Level:
RIT Growth:
WWW Count:
1st
3
13
129
2nd
12
K
276
3rd
7
N
13.0
276
4th
12
R
9.8
276
MAP-R RIT growth equals 125% of NWEA Fall-To-Spring norms.
SIP 2015 Linkage Chart v2 092515
5th
6
U
7.6
276
Total
40
READING PERFORMANCE RESULTS
Year
Grade
Target
All
AW
AA
HL
FR
SE
LE
Focus
Table D: % of Students Scoring Proficient on MAP-R, Spring Scores
2015
2016
2017
3rd
4th
5th
3rd
4th
5th
3rd
4th
75.0
79.5
84.0
78.0
82.5
87.0
81.0
85.5
58.3
69.7
68.7
88.0
81.8
73.3
42.9
58.3
83.3
36.1
67.7
62.5
42.9
57.1
61.9
00.0
27.3
33.3
18.2
12.5
25.0
00.0
00.0
-
5th
90.0
Targets are MCPS targets established in Summer 2014; 2015 data are baseline; 2016 data reflect latest MAP-R
administration (Fall 2015).
Table E: % Students Achieving MAP-R RIT Growth Targets, Fall-to-Spring
2015
2016
2017
P
3rd
4th
5th
3rdl
4th
5th
3rd
4th
5th
All
62.3
62.5
56.9
a
n
AW
66.7
54.5
60.0
n
AA
71.4
63.6
63.6
i
HL
61.8
66.7
53.8
n
FR
59.0
67.6
59.4
g
a
SE
60.0
63.6
33.3
n
LE
52.4
62.5
33.3
d
Focus
58.3
50.0
c
For demographics except Focus, MAP-R growth targets equal the NWEA 2015 Fall-to-Spring norms; Focus MAP-R
targets are tabled under Strategic Planning. 2015 data o
are baseline. 2016 data reflect latest MAP-R administration
n
(Fall 2015). Students scoring above -1 standard deviation
for RIT Growth are considered to meet growth
target.
t
e
Table F: % Focus Students Achieving MIRL Growth & WWW Fluency Targets
n
2015
2016
2017
t
MIRL
WWW
MIRL
WWW
MIRL
WWW
u
n
1st
100.0
d
2nd
00.0
e
rd
3
42.9
r
4th
8.3
s
th
5
16.7
t
a
All FS
20.0
n results. WWW 2015 data are baseline from 1st marking
MIRL 2015 data are baseline from prior grade Spring 2015
period 2016.
d
Progressi to Target Key
Met
Progressing
Not Progressing
>10% Regression
n
g learners receiving FARMS in grades 1-5
Focus Students: Hispanic second language
who were designated by the MCPS Early–Warning Indicator for the 2015 fourth marking
period as needing high levels of support. s
t
r
e
n
g

MEADOW HALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2015-2016 IMPROVEMENT PLAN – CULTURAL PROFICIENCY LINKAGE CHART
LEADERSHIP
Teachers will be purposeful and intentional in addressing the achievement gaps of ELL students by
applying the tenets of Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) training as they collaboratively
plan each week’s core academic instruction. Plans will highlight background knowledge and interaction
strategies, as well as academic language objectives.
FACULTY AND STAFF FOCUS
Teachers will dedicate their professional learning to SIOP strategies focused on developing students’
background knowledge and promoting student interaction.
MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS, AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Staff uses MAP-R, MAP-M, and MAP-P as data sources to measure and analyze Focus Students’
achievement gap reduction in reading and math achievement.
PROCESS MANAGEMENT
The following structures and processes will be implemented and monitored to address student and
staff needs:
 All grade level teams will use at least two extended grade level planning sessions each month
as dedicated time to examine data and teachers’ assessment of the Focus Students’ academic
progress.
 All grade level planning meeting agenda will include dedicated time to discuss how academic
language, background knowledge, and interaction address the needs of the Focus Students.
 Each grade level team will designate at least one member to join the SIOP PLC. This PLC will
engage in monthly meetings to explore new strategies, discuss best practices, and guide the
overall SIOP learning for the school.
 All staff will engage in professional development related to small group instruction, academic
language, building background knowledge, and promoting interaction.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
SIP Goal #6 – MAP-M and MAP-P Proficiency Gap Reduction
By June 2016, all demographics will reduce the Proficiency Gap between 2015 results and the
2016 MCPS target of 83% by one-third.
SIP Goal #7 – MAP-R Proficiency Gap Reduction (3rd-5th)
By June 2016, all demographics will reduce the Proficiency Gap between 2015 results and the
2016 MCPS target of 83% by one-third.
SIP 2015 Linkage Chart v2 092515
Table H: % of Students Scoring Proficient on MAP-M and MAP-P
Algebraic Thinking for All Grade Levels
AA
HL
FR
SE
2016 MCPS Target
83.0
83.0
83.0
83.0
2015 Result
58.0
68.3
63.2
42.6
Gap
25.0
14.7
19.8
40.4
1/3 of Gap
8.4
4.9
6.6
13.5
2016 Goal
66.4
73.2
69.8
56.1
2016 Result
LE
83.0
49.0
34.0
11.4
60.4
LE
83.0
52.0
31.0
10.4
62.4
Table I: % of Students Scoring Proficient on MAP-M and MAP-P
Number Operations for All Grade Levels
P
AA
HL
FR
SE
LE
l
2016 MCPS Target
83.0
83.0
83.0
83.0
83.0
a
2015 Result
68.3
72.4
44.1
60.0
n75.1
Gap
14.7
10.6
38.9
23.0
n 7.9
1/3 of Gap
4.9
3.6
13.0
7.7
i 2.7
2016 Goal
73.2
76.0
57.1
67.7
n77.8
2016 Result
g
a
MAP-R GAP
n REDUCTION
d
Table J: % of Students Scoring
Proficient on MAP-R
c HL
AA
FR
SE
LE
o 78.0
2016 MCPS Target
78.0
78.0
78.0
78.0
n 36.1
2015 Result
42.9
42.9
00.0
18.2
t 41.9
Gap
35.1
35.1
78.0
59.8
e
1/3 of Gap
11.7
14.0
11.7
26.0
20.0
n
2016 Goal
54.6
50.1
54.6
26.0
38.2
t
2016 Result
u
2016 MCPS Target
82.5
82.5
82.5
82.5
n 82.5
d 67.7
2015 Result
58.3
57.1
27.3
12.5
e 14.8
Gap
24.2
25.4
55.2
70.0
r 5.0
1/3 of Gap
8.1
8.5
18.4
23.4
s 72.7
2016 Goal
66.4
65.6
45.7
35.9
t
2016 Result
a
2016 MCPS Target
87.0
87.0
87.0
87.0
n 87.0
2015 Result
83.3
61.9
33.3
26.0
d 62.5
Gap
3.7
25.1
53.7
62.0
i 24.5
1/3 of Gap
1.3
8.4
17.9
20.7
n 8.2
2016 Goal
84.6
70.3
51.2
45.7
g 70.7
2016 Result
–
s
Met
Progressingt
Not Prog.
>10% Regression
r
e
n

3rd Grade
STUDENT/STAKEHOLDER CULTURAL PROFICIENCY FOCUS
4th Grade
 Our mission is to lead students to exceed MSDE and MCPS achievement benchmarks. We
convey our mission to students through our motto: “Work Hard, Get Smart!”
MAP-M and MAP-P GAP REDUCTION
Table G: % of Students Scoring Proficient on MAP-M and MAP-P
Composite for All Grade Levels
AA
HL
FR
SE
2016 MCPS Target
83.0
83.0
83.0
83.0
2015 Result
64.0
69.8
65.0
46.3
Gap
19.0
13.2
18.0
36.7
1/3 of Gap
6.4
4.4
6.0
12.3
2016 Goal
70.4
74.2
71.0
58.6
2016 Result
5th Grade
 Our vision is to have Meadow Hall School be a respectful, safe, fun, and nurturing school that
encourages innovative ideas, communicates effectively among all stakeholders, and holds
consistently high expectations for academic achievement. We convey this vision to students
through the slogan “Meadow Hall children – today’s students, tomorrow’s leaders.”