DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Holland Independent School District

2006-2007

Mission Statement

The Holland Independent School District, in partnership with parents and community, will provide a quality education for all students, empowering them to pursue productive and fulfilling lives in an ever-changing, interdependent world.

DISTRICT DECISION-MAKING COMMITTEE

Cindy Gunn, Chairperson

Shane Downing – Elementary School Principal

Janet Frazier – Bowman Middle School Principal

Britt Gordon – High School Principal

Karen Roasa - Counselor

Melany Cearley – Asst. Principal/Counselor

Shelley Lum -Elementary Teacher

Amanda Chaney– Elementary Teacher

Bill Collier– Middle School Teacher

Kelley Gordon– Middle School Teacher

Priscillia Cortez– High School Teacher

Kapa Johnson– High School Teacher

PARENTS

Randy Evans

Jill Marwitz

Frank Pajestka

BUSINESS/COMMUNITY

Terry Johnson

Debbie McKeon

Doris Lange

Doug Moon

COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT (TIA 12)

Holland Independent School District conducted comprehensive needs assessments based on AEIS data such as TAKS performance, attendance rates, dropout rates, and SAT/ACT data. In addition, for general education and for special programs, the data were disaggregated for all population groups, including male and female. Individual student’s strengths and weaknesses were identified by disaggregating TAKS data by grade level, subject area, and objectives.

The needs assessment also consisted of identifying needs for all subject areas, grade levels, and each special program considering the six areas of decision making (planning, curriculum/instruction, staffing, staff development, school organization, budgeting) and through the Effective Schools Correlates (Instructional Leadership, Instructional Focus, High Expectations, School Climate, and Parental Involvement). The elementary school is a Title I, Part A Schoolwide campus based on 52% of low income students. The middle school is a Title I, Part A Schoolwide campus based on the feeder pattern.

Surveys were disseminated to all faculty, staff, and parents, including business and community representatives serving on the district and campus improvement committees. District and campus improvement plans from the 2005-06 school year were reviewed and revised based on the achievement of specific goals and objectives. As a result, the 2006-07 district and campus improvement plans reflect all of the aforementioned needs in order to improve student performance.

Goal #1

All student groups taking the TAKS reading, writing, and math tests will meet or exceed the state standard of 90% passing by the year 2007 to achieve a campus rating of Exemplary.

Objectives

Refer to strategies for regular education students and special programs students.

STRATEGIES	PERSONS RESPONSIBLE	RESOURCES	FORMATIVE EVALUATIONS	TIMELINES	SUMMATIVE EVALUATIONS
Disaggregate TAKS Reading objectives (Gd.3-8) and focus on weaknesses below 86% mastery. (TIA13) Basic Understanding 4, 5, 7 Applying Knowledge of Literary Elements 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Using strategies to Analyze 4,5,6,7 Applying Critical-Thinking Skills 3-11 Disaggregate TAKS Reading objectives (Gd. 9-11) and focus on weaknesses below 90% mastery. (TIA13) Basic Understanding 10 Literary Elements and Techniques 10-11 Analysis and Evaluation 9-11 Revising and editing 10	Classroom teachers Principals	AEIS data Summary Reports Teachers	Lesson plans AEIS-IT Analysis Benchmark tests	Weekly June November, January, March	TAKS Reading
Implement the following initiatives/activities to address Reading weaknesses below 85% mastery: (TIA13)	Literacy Coordinator				TAKS Reading
§ Guided Reading (Elementary	Classroom teachers	ARI funds
§ District spelling curriculum (Elementary)	Classroom teachers	Local funds
§ Reading Recovery (Elementary)	Reading Recovery Teachers	Title I, Part A Title II CSR funds SCE funds $15,513. FTE=0.5	Running records	6 weeks
§ Literacy Groups (Elementary)	RR Teachers	Title I, Part A	DRA	6 weeks
§ Accelerated Reader (Elementary, Middle)		Title I, Part A SCE $2,322	STAR Report	6 weeks
§ Accelerated Vocabulary Program(Elementary, Middle)			STAR Report Progress Reports Teacher-made tests	6 weeks 3 weeks
§ Dyslexia services		Local funds	Neihaus Assessment	6 weeks

STRATEGIES	PERSONS RESPONSIBLE	RESOURCES	FORMATIVE EVALUATIONS	TIMELINES	SUMMATIVE EVALUATIONS
§ After-school tutoring (All levels)		SCE funds $3,500.	Item Analysis Progress Reports	3 weeks
§ Reading classes: Grades 6-8 (Middle School)		Title I, Part A SCE Funds Supplies $1000 SCE funds $26,279. FTE=0.66	Lesson plans Progress reports Benchmark tests	Weekly 3 weeks November, January, March	Longitudinal data
§ TAKS Reinforcement Activity Period (Middle School and High School)		SCE $1,500	Item Analysis Progress Reports	3 weeks
§ Alternative Book Reviews		Local funds	Reports, Projects
§ Writer’s Workshop (Elementary)		Local funds Consultant	Primary Reading and Writing Assessment	August, December
§ Lightspan (Elementary)		Local funds	Pretest Benchmark tests	September November, January, March
§ Critical Thinking Skills and Current Events (All Level)		Local Funds	Lessons Plans	Weekly
§ Root Word Study (All Level)		Local Funds	Lesson Plans	Weekly
§ Consistently implement the pre-referral process when necessary		Local funds	CAP Matrix	Daily
§ Grand Central Station (High School)		SCE funds $2000	Progress Reports	Weekly	TAKS Reading
§ Purchase videos to increase language and experiences	Principal	Local.State	Student success	Weekly	TAKS Reading
§ Ongoing Situation Drills for Higher Level Thinking	Teachers			Weekly
§ Additional Implementation of short answer type questions (ele)	Teachers