School Plan

POYEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
P.O. BOX 209,POYEN, AR 72128-0209

Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Plan

2011-2012


The Poyen Elementary School is committed to educating our students.

Grade Span: K-6 Title I: Title I Schoolwide School Improvement: MS

Table of Contents

Priority 1: Literacy
    Goal: All students will improve in Literacy skills across the curriculum with an emphasis on content and practical open response and literary multiple choice.
Priority 2: Math
    Goal: All students will maintain or increase skills in mathematical problem solving, measurement, and computation with an emphasis on Algebra, Geometry, and Data Analysis and Probability mc and or.
Priority 3: Wellness
    Goal: Students participating in the BMI screening will show an increase in their cardiovascular, muscular strength/endurance, and flexibility activity.
Priority 1: To improve Literacy skills across the curriculum with an emphasis on content and practical open response and literary multiple choice.
Supporting Data: 
  1.  Benchmark-3rd Grade Literacy Exam
    2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:
    21 Students: 44% of Combined Students
    21 Students: 44% of Caucasian Students
    15 Students: 45% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students
    2 Students: 40% of Students with Disabilities 
     2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:

    	    
	   39 Students: 64% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   39 Students: 64% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   29 Students: 56% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	    4 Students: 0% of Students with Disabilities 
     

     2011-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:

    	    
	   36 Students: 89% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   35 Students: 88% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   20 Students: 80% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	    1 Students: 0% of Students with Disabilities 
     

	 


      The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:
Writing mc and writing content and style or.
The lowest identified areas for Caucasian were: Writing mc and writing
content and style or.
       The lowest identified areas for Economically Disadvantaged students
were: Writing mc and writing content and style or.

3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 2009-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following areas: Content, Practical, and Writing multiple
choice and open response. 
    


  2.  
     Benchmark-4th Grade Literacy Exam
    	 
2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
    	  
  
	   25 Students: 61% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   25 Students: 61% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   12 Students: 43% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	    0 Students: 0% of Students with Disabilities 
    

     2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:

    	    
	   34 Students: 74% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   34 Students: 74% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   26 Students: 79% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	    2 Students: 40% of Students with Disabilities 
     

     2011-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced: 
     
	   42 Students: 88% of Combined Students			  

	   42 Students: 88% of Caucasian Students			  

	   29 Students: 83% of Economically Disadvantaged Students	  

	    4 Students: 25% of Students with Disabilities
     

  

     The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:
writing mc.
 The lowest identified areas for Economically Disadvantaged students was:
writing mc
3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 2009-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following areas: Content, Practical, and Writing multiple
choice and writing-content and style open response. 
    		   

  3. Benchmark-5th Grade Literacy Exam 
2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
    	  
  
	   33 Students: 77% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   33 Students: 77% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   14 Students: 74% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	    2 Students: 40% of Students with Disabilities 
     

     2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:

    	    
	   34 Students: 67% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   22 Students: 66% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   10 Students: 50% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	   0 Students:	0% of Students with Disabilities 
     

     2011-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced: 
     
	   46 Students: 74% of Combined Students			  

	   46 Students: 74% of Caucasian Students			  

	   31 Students: 74% of Economically Disadvantaged Students	  

	   6 Students: 33% of Students with Disabilities 
     



     The lowest identified area for the combined population was: writing
mc and reading-literary passage, writing content and style or.	   
  The lowest identified area for Caucasian was: writing mc and
reading-literary passage, writing content and style or.     
  The lowest identified areas for Economically Disadvantaged students
were: writing mc and reading-literary passage, writing content and style
or.  3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:  Based on 2009-11 3 yr trend analysis
indicates weakness in the following areas: Practical and Writing multiple
choice and content open response.	 
     


  4.  Benchmark-6th Grade Literacy Exam 
    	      
		
  2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
       
    
	   21 Students: 49% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   21 Students: 49% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   11 Students: 41% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	    0 Students: 0% of Students with Disabilities 
     

     2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:

    	    
	   46 Students: 85% of Combined Students 
    			  

	   45 Students: 85% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   24 Students: 79% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
        
	   3 Students:	33% of Students with Disabilities 
     

     2011-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:

    	    
	   39 Students: 56% of Combined Students 
     
	   38 Students: 56% of Caucasian Students 
    			  

	   28 Students: 46% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
    	  

	    6 Students: 0% of Students with Disabilities 
     


     The lowest identified area for the combined population was:
Reading-literary passage and writing mc.     
  The lowest identified area for Caucasian was: Reading-literary passage
and writing mc.       

      The lowest identified area for Economically Disadvantaged students
was: Reading-literary passage and writing mc.	  
3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 2009-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following area: Literary multiple choice, practical
writing or, literary content or, and writing mc.
     


  5. In 2008, students were tested on the Stanford 10: (combined
population)
(1ST) 30% scored above the 50th percentile
(2ND) 23% scored above the 50th percentile
(3RD) 65% scored above the 50th percentile
(4TH) 77% scored above the 50th percentile
(5TH) 59% scored above the 50th percentile
(6TH) 79% scored above the 50th percentile

In 2009, students were tested on the Stanford 10: (combined population)
Kindergarten (MAT8) 45% at/above 50th percentile
(1ST) no scores received from ADE
(2ND) 43% scored above the 50th percentile
(3RD) 29% scored above the 50th percentile
(4TH) 61% scored above the 50th percentile
(5TH) 64% scored above the 50th percentile
(6TH) 49% scored above the 50th percentile

In 2010, students were tested on the Stanford 10: (combined population)
Kindergarten (MAT8) 71% at/above 50th percentile
(1ST) 40% scored above the 50th percentile
(2ND) 44% scored above the 50th percentile
(3RD) 44% scored above the 50th percentile
(4TH) 72% scored above the 50th percentile
(5TH) 57% scored above the 50th percentile
(6TH) 54% scored above the 50th percentile

In 2011, students were tested on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS):
(combined population that scored above the 50th percentile rank)

(1st) vocabulary 55%
      reading comprehension 68%
      reading total 64%
      spelling 61%
      language total 68%
(2nd) vocabulary 24%
      reading comprehension 33%
      reading total 24%
      spelling 21%
      language total 9%
(3rd) reading comprehension 69%
      language total 50%
(4th) reading comprehension 57%
      language total 52%
(5th) reading comprehension 41%
      language total 30%
(6th) reading comprehension 49%
      language total 36%


  6.  Another source of data was the Arkansas School Performance Report
attendance rate for 2007-2008 was 93.8, 2008-2009 was 94.5 and 2009-2010
was 91.13.

  7.
Goal All students will improve in Literacy skills across the curriculum with an emphasis on content and practical open response and literary multiple choice.
Benchmark All students will meet annual yearly progress on the benchmark exams as established by the Arkansas Department of Education. Poyen Elementary will increase by 5% in 2010 to meet AYP.
Intervention: Curriculum Alignment
Scientific Based Research: Jacobs, Heidi Hayes. (1997). Mapping the Big Picture: Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. ASCD.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Title IIA funds will be used for salaries, materials and supplies for Literacy Coach (.2102) to assist in classrooms.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • Outside Consultants
Title II-A - Employee Salaries: $4488.75
Title II-A - Employee Benefits: $1069.75
ACTION BUDGET: $5558.5
All staff members will attend curriculum/alignment faculty meetings and workshops.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • District Staff
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Literacy meetings are held with language arts teachers, principal, and literacy coach.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • District Staff
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
11E1 CWTs and lesson plans will be used to varify implementation of curriculum alignment process. 11E2 Analyze student achievement data for combined populations and all subgroups using benchmark and interim assessments. Achievement gaps between subpopulations will be identified. 11E3 Curriculum will be reviewed annually, aligned with Arkansas Frameworks, updated, and used to develop student academic improvement plans or IRI's for those scoring below proficient. The school improvement plan will be revised as needed. AIPs/IRIs were developed by teachers for students not scoring proficient or advanced after data analysis of 2011 ACTAAP scores.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • District Staff
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Committees for mapping will align curriculum to state frameworks.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • District Staff
ACTION BUDGET: $
Teachers will receive 60 hours of professional development during the year.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Professional Development
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Teachers/Administrators professional development plan will include: 6 hours of technology, 2 hours of parental involvement (3 hours for administrators), 2 hours of Arkansas history for those teaching social studies. Teachers will be able to use up to 12 of the 60 hours for planning and preparation time before school begins.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Professional Development
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • District Staff
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Title I funds will provide for three paraprofessionals (0.40%)(.25)(.875) to assist in classrooms under the direction of certified teachers.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • District Staff
  • Teachers
Title I - Employee Salaries: $26250.00
Title I - Employee Benefits: $8052.38
ACTION BUDGET: $34302.38
NSLA funds will be used to provide two special education paraprofessionals to assist in classrooms under the direction of certified teachers.
Action Type: Special Education
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Central Office
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Benefits: $4853.22
NSLA (State-281) - Employee Salaries: $22425.00
ACTION BUDGET: $27278.22
Total Budget: $67139.1
Intervention: Balanced Literacy
Scientific Based Research: Teaching Children to Read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. (1999). Report of the National Reading Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Snow, C.E., Burns, S.M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Fowler, D. (1998). Balanced reading instruction in practice. Educational Leadership, 55 (6) 11-12 [EJ 560 963] Teaching Children to Read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. (NICHD)(2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Reading First, Federal Initiative authorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Butler, A., & Turbill, J. (1984). Towards a Reading-Writing Classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Fowler, D. (1998). Balanced reading instruction in practice. Educational Leadership, 55 (6) 11-12 [EJ 560 963]
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Teachers will incorporate Accelerated Reader Test into their class and report to the parents. Teachers will show students how to properly use the Accelerated Reading Computer program. Teachers will develop Accelerated Reading (AR) requirements for all students and will develop AR modifications for students with IEPs and 504 accommodations. Teachers will use the AR to enhance Reading Comprehension of all students by monitoring the progress of each student with data generated from their required reading list. 11E1 Classroom reports will be used to verify implementation of AR. 11E2 Pre/Post assessments will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. 11E3 2010 ACTAAP scores increased in literacy (3rd grade 20%, 4th grade was 13%, and 6th grade was 36%. However, 5th grade decreased 10%. 2011 scores will be used to determine program effectiveness. 2011 scores will be used to determine program effectiveness. In 2011, 3rd grade increased 25%, 4th grade increased 14%, 5th grade increased 8%, but 6th grade decreased 29%. Program continues to reflect overall increase in scores.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Computers
  • District Staff
  • School Library
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Paraprofessional will train students to use computers in the IMPAC lab.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 Janet Crowder, Paraprofessional Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Computers
ACTION BUDGET: $
K-4 teachers will set up the classroom to facilitate a balanced literacy approach. K-6 teachers will use ELLA, ELF, and Literacy Lab strategies. 11E1 CWTs, Lesson Plans, ELLA, ELF, and Literacy Lab protocols will be used to verify implementation. 11E2 Teachers will administer pre/post tests to determine progress. Teachers will monitor process yearly for effectiveness. Teachers will attend updated Professional Development. 11E3 2010 ACTAAP scores increased in literacy (3rd grade 20%, 4th grade was 13%, and 6th grade was 36%. However, 5th grade decreased 10%. 2011 scores will be used to determine program effectiveness. In 2011, 3rd grade increased 25%, 4th grade increased 14%, 5th grade increased 8%, but 6th grade decreased 29%. Program continues to reflect overall increase in scores.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Technology specialist will present a program on Internet Safety.
Action Type: Technology Inclusion
 Brad Newton, Technology Specialist Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Computers
  • District Staff
ACTION BUDGET: $
Community members, parents, and special guests will read to K-6 students on National Reader's Day.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Community Leaders
ACTION BUDGET: $
Teachers will instruct all students in Balanced Literacy writing techniques and strategies. 11E1 Students will write in journals daily. Special education teachers will assist teachers with the IEP and 504 students. Lesson Plans and CWTs will also be used to verify implementation. 11E2 Writing rubrics will be used to evaluate the effectiveness. 11E3 2010 ACTAAP scores increased in literacy (3rd grade 20%, 4th grade was 13%, and 6th grade was 36%. However, 5th grade decreased 10%. 2011 scores will be used to determine program effectiveness. In 2011, 3rd grade increased 25%, 4th grade increased 14%, 5th grade increased 8%, but 6th grade decreased 29%. Program continues to reflect overall increase in scores.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Special Education
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • District Staff
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
All teachers should be certified in the field in which they are teaching. The district will endeavor to recruit and retain highly qualified teachers, and ensure that the appropriate steps are taken to have all teachers highly qualified. Professional Development will be based on the needs of the school, improving instruction, and maintaining highly qualified teacher status.
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: Remediation
Scientific Based Research: Snow, C.E., Burns, S.M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Fowler, D. (1998) Dorn, l., and Scoffos, C. (2001) Shaping literate minds: Developing self-regulated learners. York, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers. Harvey, Stephanie and Goudbis, Anne. Strategies That Work; teaching Comprehension to enhance understanding. 2000.Stenhouse.
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Parents will receive a copy of students scores on the ACTAAP exam, Stanford 10, and Qualls. Academic Improvement Plans will be developed in Math & Reading for students scoring below proficient on benchmark exams. IRI will be developed for students showing a significant deficiency in reading. Teachers will implement point in time rediation for students with aip's and monitor student progress.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • District Staff
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Peer tutors will assist students who have been identified by the teacher, have an IEP or 504 placement modifications in completing AR requirements.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Special Education
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Student achievement and curriculum will be reviewed annually by teachers and used to update student academic improvement plans for those scoring below proficient, update curriculum, and revise the school improvement plan.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Action Type: Program Evaluation
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • District Staff
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
All students in K-2 with substantial deficiencies in reading will be provided intensive reading instruction. Students will be evaluated to diagnose specific reading difficulties. The evaluation shall include the DIBELS. The RTI process will be utilized to assist students performing below grade level. K-6 teachers will receive professional development on the RTI process.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Equity
Action Type: Professional Development
Action Type: Special Education
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
11E1 K-2 teachers will implement Pathfinders "Phonetic Connection" a tutoring program for literacy. CWTs and Lesson Plans will be used to verify implementation. It will be used for students that have been identified through DIBELS, MAT8, Stanford 10, and teacher observation as being weak in literacy skills and performing below grade level. 11E2 Students will be monitored for two years to evaluate progress. Dibels will be used for evaluation of effectiveness. 11E3 2010 ACTAAP scores increased in literacy (3rd grade 20%, 4th grade was 13%, and 6th grade was 36%. However, 5th grade decreased 10%. 2011 scores will be used to determine program effectiveness. In 2011, 3rd grade increased 25%, 4th grade increased 14%, 5th grade increased 8%, but 6th grade decreased 29%. Program continues to reflect overall increase in scores.
Action Type: AIP/IRI
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Program Evaluation
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Performance Assessments
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Total Budget: $0
Intervention: Parental Involvement
Scientific Based Research: B.J. Meadows and Marilyn Saltzman; "Building School Communities: Strategies for Leaders"; National Coalitions for Parent Involvement in Education. (NCPIE) (2001).
Actions Person Responsible Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Back-to-School Night will welcome students, faculty, community members back to school. Teachers will provide curriculum and other information to attendants in their informational packets.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • Administrative Staff
  • District Staff
  • Teachers
ACTION BUDGET: $
Parent Center will be set up with materials for responsible parenting as funds are available.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
 Laura Sanders, Parent Facilitator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
  • School Library
ACTION BUDGET: $
Parental Facilitator will compile a Volunteer resource book--listing the interests and availability of volunteers for school staff members’ use including parent survey.
Action Type: Parental Engagement
 Laura Sanders, Parent Facilitator Start: 07/01/2011
End: 06/30/2012
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Parents are made aware at parent-teacher conferences of students' progress. These conferences are held twice a year, one in the fall and one in the spring. Progress Reports are sent home every 5 weeks. Parents will be set up to view their child's grades online through HAC (Home Access Center).
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    		 Laura Sanders, Parent Facilitator Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • District Staff
    • Teachers
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Principal will appoint a Parent Facilitator.
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    		 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Inform parents of the grievance process and procedures for other parental concerns including the Title I Parent Compact listed in the student handbook.
    Action Type: Collaboration
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    		 Laura Sanders, Parent Facilitator Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    • Community Leaders
    • District Staff
    • Teachers
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Continue the Parent/Teacher/Community Organization.
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
    		 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Parent Involvement meetings for parents to visit with teachers about state mandated tests and ways for parents to help their children succeed and provide parents instructions on how to provide learning activities in the home.
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
    		 Laura Sanders, Parent Facilitator Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    • District Staff
    • Performance Assessments
    • Teachers
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Volunteers and substitutes will attend workshop on discipline, confidentiality, classroom management, and needs of school.
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    Action Type: Professional Development
    		 Tina Elliott, Principal Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    • District Staff
    • Outside Consultants
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    11E1 A public meeting will be held to discuss policies, programs, & goals that will provide opportunities for questions and suggestions. 11E2 Sign-in sheets will be kept to evaluate parent involvement. 11E3 There was a decrease of 31 people in attendance at the 2009 meeting compared to 2008. There could be several factors for this decrease. Attendance in 2010 did not increase to the number in attendance in 2008. The district will work on increasing attendance in 2011. There were 15 more people in attendance in 2011 than in 2010.
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    Action Type: Program Evaluation
    		 Jerry Newton, Superintendent Start: 08/19/2011
    End: 11/15/2011
    • Administrative Staff
    • Community Leaders
    • District Staff
    • Teachers
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    The school will provide activities to ease the transition from early childhood to elementary school. Such activities could include HIPPY students eating lunch with Kindergarten students and students touring the classrooms of the grade they will be in during the next school year.
    Action Type: Collaboration
    Action Type: Title I Schoolwide
    		 Brandy Hughes, Dana Teel, Counselors Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    • District Staff
    • Teachers
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Educate teachers (2 hours) and administrators (3 hours) and other staff in the importance of effective communication, value, and utility of contributions of parents.
    Action Type: Parental Engagement
    Action Type: Professional Development
    		 Laura Sanders, Director of Curriculum Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012
    • Administrative Staff
    • District Staff
    • Teachers
    ACTION BUDGET: $
    Total Budget: $0
    Priority 2: All students will maintain or increase skills in mathematical problem solving, measurement, and computation with an emphasis on Algebra, Geometry, and Data Analysis and Probability mc and or.
    Supporting Data: 
    1.  Benchmark-3rd Grade Mathematics Exam
      2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:
      36 Students: 75% of Combined Students
      36 Students: 75% of Caucasian Students
      27 Students: 81% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students
      4 Students: 80% of Students with Disabilities
      2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced:
      39 Students: 87% of Combined Students
      39 Students: 87% of Caucasian Students
      29 Students: 83% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students
      4 Students: 50% of Students with Disabilities 
       2011-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced: 
     
	   36 Students: 97% of Combined Students			  

	   35 Students: 97% of Caucasian Students			  

	   20 Students: 95% of Economically Disadvantaged Students
      1 Students: 100% of Students with Disabilities 
        The lowest identified areas for the combined population were:
algebra, measurement, and data analysis & probability or.  The lowest
identified areas for Caucasian were: algebra, measurement, and data
analysis & probability or.  The lowest identified areas for Economically
Disadvantaged students were: algebra, measurement, and data analysis &
probability or.

3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 09-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following areas: Measurement, Data Analysis, and
Probability open response. 
    2. Benchmark-4th Grade Mathematics Exam 
       2009-# Tested
& Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
              
	   35 Students: 86% of Combined Students 
      			  

	   35 Students: 86% of Caucasian Students 
      			  

	   22 Students: 79% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
      	  

	    1 Students: 50% of Students with Disabilities 
       
2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
      	  
  
	   34 Students: 74% of Combined Students 
      			  

	   34 Students: 74% of Caucasian Students 
      			  

	   25 Students: 76% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
      	  

	    3 Students: 60% of Students with Disabilities 
       
2008-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced:	  

	   42 Students: 93% of Combined Students			  

	   42 Students: 93% of Caucasian Students			  

	   24 Students: 87% of Economically Disadvantaged Students	  

	    5 Students: 60% of Students with Disabilities
      2011-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced: 42 Students: 86% of Combined Students 42 Students: 86% of Caucasian Students 29 Students: 79% of Economically Disadvantaged Students 4 Students: 0% of Students with Disabilities
       The lowest identified area for the combined population was: number
& operations and mneasurement or.  The lowest identified area for
Caucasian was:	number & operations and mneasurement or.  The lowest
identified area for Economically Disadvantaged students was: number &
operations and mneasurement or.
3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 09-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following areas: Measurement multiple choice and all open
response, with empahasis on number & operations and measurement.
      
                          
    3.  
2009-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
      	  
  
	   34 Students: 92% of Combined Students 
      			  

	   34 Students: 92% of Caucasian Students 
      			  

	   16 Students: 85% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
      	  

	    1 Students: 20% of Students with Disabilities 
       
2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
      	  
  
	   27 Students: 79% of Combined Students 
      			  

	   26 Students: 78% of Caucasian Students 
      			  

	   13 Students: 65% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
      	  

	    1 Students: 33% of Students with Disabilities 
      
2011-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced:	  

	   46 Students: 80% of Combined Students			  

	   46 Students: 80% of Caucasian Students			  

	   31 Students: 81% of Economically Disadvantaged Students	  

	    6 Students: 50% of Students with Disabilities 
       The lowest identified area for the combined population was: all
open response with an emphasis on geometry and measurement.  The lowest
identified areas for Caucasian were: all open response with an emphasis on
geometry and measurement.  The lowest identified areas for Economically
Disadvantaged students were: all open response with an emphasis on
geometry and measurement.

3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 09-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following areas: Algebra, Geometry, Measurement, Data
Analysis, and Probability multiple choice and Geometry & measurement open
response.	     

      
                          
    4. Benchmark-6th Grade Mathematics Exam 
       2009-# Tested &
Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
      	     
	   32 Students: 86% of Combined Students 
      			  

	   32 Students: 86% of Caucasian Students 
      			  

	   21 Students: 78% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
      	  

	    3 Students: 75% of Students with Disabilities 
       
2010-# Tested & Percent of Students Scoring Proficient/Advanced: 
      	  
  
	   46 Students: 98% of Combined Students 
      			  

	   45 Students: 97% of Caucasian Students 
      			  

	   24 Students: 96% of Econ. Disadvantaged Students 
      	  

	    3 Students: 66% of Students with Disabilities 
      
2011-Number and Percent of Students Scoring Proficient or Advanced:	  

	   39 Students: 92% of Combined Students			  

	   38 Students: 92% of Caucasian Students			  

	   28 Students: 89% of Economically Disadvantaged Students 
      6 
                          Students: 50% of Students with Disabilities 
       The lowest identified area for the combined population was: number
and operations Open Response.
  The lowest identified area for Caucasian was: number and operations Open
Response.
 The lowest identified area for Economically Disadvantaged students was:
number and operations Open Response.

3 YEAR TREND ANALYSIS:	Based on 09-11 3 yr trend analysis indicates
weakness in the following area: Open Response in all strands. 
      
                          
    5. In 2008, students were tested on the Stanford 10: 
                          (combined population) (1ST) 59% scored above the 50th 
                          percentile (2ND) 30% scored above the 50th percentile 
                          (3RD) 89% scored above the 50th percentile (4TH) 95% 
                          scored above the 50th percentile (5TH) 68% scored 
                          above the 50th percentile (6TH) 92% scored above the 
                          50th percentile In 2009, students were tested on the 
                          Stanford 10: (combined population) (Kindergarten) MAT8 
                          11% at/above 50th percentile (1ST) No scores received 
                          from ADE (2ND) 48% scored above the 50th percentile 
                          (3RD) 48% scored above the 50th percentile (4TH) 78% 
                          scored above the 50th percentile (5TH) 79% scored 
                          above the 50th percentile (6TH) 60% scored above the 
                          50th percentile In 2010, students were tested on the 
                          Stanford 10: (combined population) (Kindergarten) MAT8 
                          67% at/above 50th percentile (1ST) 50% scored above 
                          the 50th percentile (2ND) 64% scored above the 50th 
                          percentile (3RD) 51% scored above the 50th percentile 
                          (4TH) 67% scored above the 50th percentile (5TH) 67% 
                          scored above the 50th percentile (6TH) 87% scored 
                          above the 50th percentile In 2011, students were 
                          tested on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS). 
                          Percent of students scoring at/above 50th percentile: 
                          (1st) Math Concepts: 71% Problems & Data 
                          Interpretations: 73% Math Total: 71% (2nd) Math 
                          Concepts: 52% Problems & Data Interpretations: 49% 
                          Math Total: 49% (3rd) Math Total: 78% (4th) Math 
                          Total: 62% (5th) Math Total: 54% (6th) Math Total: 64% 

                          
    6. Another source of data was the Arkansas School 
                          Performance Report attendance rate for 2007-08 was 
                          93.8, 2008-09 was 94.5 and 2009-2010 was 91.13. 
                          
    
                    
    
                      Goal
                      All students will maintain or increase skills in 
                        mathematical problem solving, measurement, and 
                        computation with an emphasis on Algebra, Geometry, and 
                        Data Analysis and Probability mc and or.
    
                    
    
                      Benchmark
                      All students will meet annual yearly progress on the 
                        benchmark exams as established by the Arkansas 
                        Department of Education. Poyen Elementary will increase 
                        by 2% in 2010 to meet AYP.
    
                    
    
                      
                        
    
                          
                          
    
                            Intervention: Curriculum 
                          Alignment
    
                          
    
                            Scientific Based Research: Jacobs, 
                              Heidi Hayes. (1997). Mapping the Big Picture: 
                              Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. 
                            ASCD.
    
                          
    
                            Actions
                            Person Responsible
                            Timeline
                            Resources
                            Source of Funds
    
                          
    
                            11E1 CWts and Lesson Plans will be used to 
                              verify curriculum alignment. 11E2 Teachers will 
                              reevaluate and update the previously aligned Math 
                              curriculum to the Arkansas Frameworks using 
                              benchmarks and interim assessments. 11E3 Teachers 
                              evaluated and aligned curriculum. They 
                              disaggragated 2011 ACTAAP scores to determine weak 
                              areas to improve.
    Action Type: 
                              Alignment
    Action Type: Program 
Evaluation
    		
                            Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • District Staff
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Faculty and committee will meet to update and 
                              revise ACSIP plan periodically. 
    Action Type: 
                              Professional Development
    Action Type: Program 
                              Evaluation
    		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Administrative Staff
      
                                
    • Community Leaders
      
                                
    • District Staff
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            11E1 ALE program will be developed and set up 
                              for students in grades K-6. Teachers, 
                              Administrators, and Parents will meet and develop 
                              AIPs for students not scoring proficient. State 
                              ALE funds will be used for materials, supplies, 
                              and professional development for assigned staff 
                              members. 11E2 CWTs and Lesson Plans will be used 
                              to verify implementation. Entrance/Exit 
                              conferences will be used to determine 
                              effectiveness. 11E3 This is the baseline year for 
                              gathering data. Results will be in the 11-12 
                              acsip. There were no students in the ALE program 
                              during the 2010-2011 school year.
    Action Type: 
                              AIP/IRI
    Action Type: Alignment
    Action Type: 
                              Program Evaluation
    		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Administrative Staff
      
                                
    • District Staff
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Total Budget:
                            $0
    
                        
    
                          
                          
    
                            Intervention: Balanced Math
    
                          
    
                            Scientific Based Research: McTighe, 
                              J. & Wiggins, G., Understanding by Design, 
                              ASCD, Alexandria, VA, p. 160, (1998). Lilburn, 
                              Pat., Sullivan, and Peter, Good Questions for Math 
                              Teaching: Why Ask Them and What to Ask, K–6. 
                              Marilyn Burns Educational Associates, 2005. Burns, 
                              Marilyn, Silbey, Robyn. So You Have to Teach Math? 
                              Sound Advice for K–6 Teachers, Marilyn Burns 
                              Educational Associates, 2002. 
    
                          
    
                            Actions
                            Person Responsible
                            Timeline
                            Resources
                            Source of Funds
    
                          
    
                            11E1 K-5 teachers will implement "Growing with 
                              Mathematics" comprehensive Mathematics Program 
                              into their curriculum. They will use manipulatives 
                              to solve math problems. The program components 
                              support a balanced approached for concept and 
                              skill development. It will provide a variety of 
                              experiences to develop mathematical concepts, 
                              which will address at risk students, as well as 
                              maintain proficient and advanced students.CWTs and 
                              Lesson Plans will be used to verify 
                              implementation. 11E2 Benchmark and interim 
                              assessments will be used to evaluate program 
                              effectiveness. 11E3 Overall, students increased in 
                              Math scores during 2008, however, scores went down 
                              at every grade but 5th on 2009 tests. 2010 scores 
                              indicated an increase in 3rd and 6th, but decrease 
                              in 4th and 5th (3rd grade increased 12%,4th grade 
                              decreased 18%, 5th grade decreased 13% and 6th 
                              grade increased 12%). In 2011, 3rd grade increased 
                              10%, 4th grade increased 12%, 5th grade increased 
                              3%; 6th grade decreased from 98% prof/adv to 92% 
                              prof/adv. Program continues to reflect overall 
                              increase in scores.
    Action Type: 
                              Alignment
    Action Type: Equity
    Action Type: 
                              Professional Development
    Action Type: Program 
                              Evaluation
    		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Teachers
      
                                
    • Teaching Aids
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            The math teachers will integrate the 
                              instructional strategies for open-response 
                              questions on the Benchmark exams. Students will 
                              take home open-response items to share with 
                              parents. 
    Action Type: Collaboration
    Action 
                              Type: Parental Engagement
    		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Performance Assessments
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Paraprofessional will train students to use 
                              computers in the IMPAC lab. 
    Action Type: 
                              Technology Inclusion
    		
                            Janet Crowder, Paraprofessional
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Computers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Total Budget:
                            $0
    
                        
    
                          
                          
    
                            Intervention: Remediation
    
                          
    
                            Scientific Based Research: 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, p. 160, (1998). 
    
                          
    
                            Actions
                            Person Responsible
                            Timeline
                            Resources
                            Source of Funds
    
                          
    
                            Parents and students are informed of scores 
                              made on the ACTAAP. Academic Improvement Plans 
                              will be written for students scoring below 
                              proficient. Teachers will monitor the success of 
                              the interventions according to the AIPs. 
                              
    Action Type: AIP/IRI
    Action Type: 
                              Collaboration
    Action Type: Parental 
                              Engagement
    		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Administrative Staff
      
                                
    • District Staff
      
                                
    • Performance Assessments
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            11E1 K-5 teachers will implement "Growing with 
                              Mathematics" comprehensive Mathematics Program 
                              into their curriculum. They will receive training 
                              and use manipulatives to solve math problems. The 
                              program components support a balanced approached 
                              for concept and skill development. It will provide 
                              a variety of experiences to develop mathematical 
                              concepts, which will address at risk students, as 
                              well as maintain proficient and advanced 
                              students.CWTs and Lesson Plans will be used to 
                              verify implementation. 11E2 Benchmark and interim 
                              assessments will be used to evaluate program 
                              effectiveness. 11E3 Overall, students increased in 
                              Math scores during 2008, however, scores went down 
                              at every grade but 5th on 2009 tests. 2010 scores 
                              indicated an increase in 3rd and 6th, but decrease 
                              in 4th and 5th (3rd grade increased 12%,4th grade 
                              decreased 18%, 5th grade decreased 13% and 6th 
                              grade increased 12%). In 2011, 3rd grade increased 
                              10%, 4th grade increased 12%, 5th grade increased 
                              3%; 6th grade decreased from 98% prof/adv to 92% 
                              prof/adv. Program continues to reflect overall 
                              increase in scores.
    Action Type: 
                              AIP/IRI
    Action Type: Alignment
    Action Type: 
                              Collaboration
    Action Type: Professional 
                              Development
    Action Type: Program 
                              Evaluation
    Action Type: Title I 
                            Schoolwide
    		
                            Laura Sanders, Federal Coordinator
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Administrative Staff
      
                                
    • District Staff
      
                                
    • Performance Assessments
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Total Budget:
                            $0
    
                  
    
                    
                    
    
                      Priority 3: 
                      To promote and support positive, healthy lifestyle 
                        choices to aid in decreasing the average BMI on routine 
                        annual screening. 
    
                    
    
                      Supporting Data: 
                      
                        
      
                          
    1. Poyen Elementary School Body Mass Index 
                          (BMI)indicates the percentage of students who may be 
                          at risk in the overweight category. In 2004-05, 60% of 
                          males were healthy or underweight with 40% being 
                          overweight; 65.9% of females were healthy or 
                          underweight and 34.1% were overweight. In 2005-06, 
                          65.2% of males were healthy or underweight with 34.9% 
                          being overweight; 66.7% of females were healthy or 
                          underweight and 33.4% being overweight. In 2006-07, 
                          69.5% of males were healthy or underweight with 20.6% 
                          being overweight; 62.4% of females were healthy or 
                          underweight with 15.6% being overweight. 
                          
    2. School Health Index Module I Poyen Elementary 
                          School - 91% Poyen High School - 89% Module 2 Poyen 
                          Elementary School - 59% Poyen High School - 84% Module 
                          3 Poyen Elementary School - 90% Poyen High School - 
                          92% Module 4 Poyen Elementary School - 75% Poyen High 
                          School - 87% Module 5 Poyen Elementary School - 78% 
                          Poyen High School - 79% Module 6 Poyen Elementary 
                          School - 61% Poyen High School - 65% Module 7 Poyen 
                          Elementary School - 60% Poyen High School - 64% Module 
                          8 Poyen Elementary School - 75% Poyen High School - 
                          72% 
                          
    3. Another source of data was the Arkansas School 
                          Performance Report attendance rate for 2005-06 was 
                          94.3, 2006-07 was 91.13, and 2007-08 was 93.8. 
                      
    
                    
    
                      Goal
                      Students participating in the BMI screening will 
                        show an increase in their cardiovascular, muscular 
                        strength/endurance, and flexibility activity.
    
                    
    
                      Benchmark
                      By the school year 2010-2011 there will be a 
                        decrease of the average Body Mass Index for students by 
                        1/2% as evaluated by the annual BMI screening.
    
                    
    
                      
                        
    
                          
                          
    
                            Intervention: Poyen Elementary 
                              School will encourage strategies and activities 
                              that promote an active and healthy 
lifestyle.
    
                          
    
                            Scientific Based Research: Let's Get 
                              Physical-Promotion and Educatoin Strategies by Dr. 
                              Hal Wechsler 
                              http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/menu/NNEC/Files/2003/LetsGetPhysical.pdf
    
                          
    
                            Actions
                            Person Responsible
                            Timeline
                            Resources
                            Source of Funds
    
                          
    
                            University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension 
                              Service will present a program on food, nutrition, 
                              and health that is aligned with the Arkansas 
                              Frameworks.
    Action Type: Alignment
    Action 
                              Type: Professional Development
    Action Type: 
                              Wellness
    		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Outside Consultants
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Implement and encourage participation in 
                              extracurricular programs that support physical 
                              activity, i.e. basketball, football, swimming, 
                              walking, personal fitness class, etc.
    Action 
                              Type: Collaboration
    Action Type: Parental 
                              Engagement
    Action Type: Wellness
    		
                            Dennis Emerson, Wellness Char
                            Start: 07/01/2011
    End: 06/30/2012    		
                            
                              
      
                                
    • Administrative Staff
      
                                
    • District Staff
      
                                
    • Teachers
    		
                            
                              
    
                                
                                
    
                                
                                
    
                                
    
                                
    
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
    
                          
    
                            Physical Education and Health curriculum will 
                              be aligned with Arkansas Frameworks. Principal 
                              will monitor lesson plans.
    Action Type: 
                              Alignment
    Action Type: Collaboration
    Action 
                              Type: Program Evaluation
    Action Type: 
                              Wellness
    		
                            Parker Nash, Physical Education Teacher
                            Start: 06/01/2011
    End: 07/01/2012    		
                            
                              
      		
                            
                              
      
                                
                                
      
                                
                                
      
                                
      
                                
      
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
      
                          
      
                            Parents will be involved in physical activity 
                              and nutrition education through homework, national 
                              school lunch program menus, and parent-teacher 
                              organization presentations. Information will be 
                              made available to parents in the Parent 
                              Center.
      Action Type: Parental 
                              Engagement
      Action Type: Wellness
      		
                            Laura Sanders, Parent Facilitator
                            Start: 07/01/2011
      End: 06/30/2012      		
                            
                              
        
                                
      • Community Leaders
        
                                
      • District Staff
        
                                
      • Teachers
      		
                            
                              
      
                                
                                
      
                                
                                
      
                                
      
                                
      
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
      
                          
      
                            Students will be provided 150 minutes of 
                              guided physical activity each week.
      Action 
                              Type: Wellness
      		
                            Tina Elliott, Principal
                            Start: 07/01/2011
      End: 06/30/2012      		
                            
                              
        		
                            
                              
        
                                
                                
        
                                
                                
        
                                
        
                                
        
                                ACTION BUDGET:
                                $
        
                          
        
                            Total Budget:
                            $0
        
                  
        

                  
      • Planning Team
                  
        
                  
        
                    
                    
        
                      Classification
                      Name
                      Position
                      Committee
        
                    
        
                      
                      Angel Morrison
                      Special Ed Paraprofessional
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      
                      Heather Embry
                      HIPPY
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      
                      Jeannie Edwards
                      Paraprofessional
                      Title I
        
                    
        
                      
                      Kandy Spurlin
                      HIPPY
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      
                      Kathy Nannemann
                      Special Education
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      
                      Martha Moore
                      paraprofessional
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      
                      Shelley Roark
                      Special Education
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      
                      Terry Collins
                      Paraprofessional
                      Title I
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Aimee Henderson
                      6th Grade
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Amy Thompson
                      Kindergarten Teacher
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Angie Hicks
                      Kindergarten Teacher
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Candy Collins
                      4th Grade
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Cindy Oden
                      Special Education
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Connie Skinner
                      5th Grade
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Dana Teel
                      Music/Counselor
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Debbie McCrackin
                      4th Grade
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Diane Wright
                      1st Grade
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Jamie Austin
                      3rd Grade
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Karye Brockert
                      1st Grade
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Kim Turner
                      5th Grade
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Michelle Shuffield
                      ABC Preschool
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Ouida Newton
                      6th Grade
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Rhea Ann Hall
                      3rd Grade
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Stephanie Austin
                      2nd Grade
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Classroom Teacher
                      Tena Roark
                      2nd Grade
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Community Representative
                      Jeff Thompson
                      Parent
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      District-Level Professional
                      Laura Sanders
                      Curriculum and Assessment, Parent 
                        Facilitator
                      math/literacy
        
                    
        
                      Non-Classroom Professional Staff
                      Beth Evans
                      Secretary
                      Title I
        
                    
        
                      Non-Classroom Professional Staff
                      Brandy Hughes
                      Counselor
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Non-Classroom Professional Staff
                      Jennifer Wentz
                      Speech & Language
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Non-Classroom Professional Staff
                      Terri Williams
                      Media Specialist
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Non-Classroom Professional Staff
                      Vicky Bennings
                      Literacy Coach
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Parent
                      Amy Diehl
                      Parent
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Parent
                      Dawn Dugan
                      ABC Pre-K Paraprofessional
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Parent
                      Jenny Wheatley
                      Parent
                      Literacy
        
                    
        
                      Parent
                      Shirley Montgomery
                      Parent
                      Math
        
                    
        
                      Principal
                      Tina Elliott
                      Principal
                      Steering
        
                  
          •