School Plan - Blytheville Public Schools

ACSIP http://acsip.state.ar.us/cgi-bin/index.cgi?rm=report_acsip
Goal
Benchmark
1st grade is Algebra and for 2nd grade is Measurement. In the Algebra strand, the weakest area
was Patterns (49%) and in the Measurement strand, the weakest area was Money (44%).
According to 2008-2009 data from The Learning Institute, Interim Assessments. The weakest area
for 1st grade is Measurement and 2nd grade is Geometry.
In the Measurement Strand in 2009-51% and 2010-35%. Data for 2nd grade shows Math Overall
percentiles were 2009-40%. In the Geometry strand in 2009-39% and 2010-30%.
Kindergarten students will demonstrate an improvement in their ability to use one-to-one correspondence
through counting collections and will develop automaticity in number fluency.
First grade will focus on Algebraic Concepts (solving number sentences, understanding numerical
patterns, use operational symbols, and number sentences to model situations). Second grade will focus on
Number Properties and Operations (place value, estimating numbers, comparing numbers, ordering
numbers, and creating/interpreting representation of numbers.
By the end of the 2012-2013 school year 71.66% of students will score proficient or advanced on the
Benchmark exam. Currently 69.08% of students were proficient in Math on the Benchmark exam of 2012.
Intervention: ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE: Implement various instructional methods, a variety of manipulatives, and
high yield strategies to improve math proficiency with/without the use of technology.
Scientific Based Research:
Barkley, S., (2005). Quality Teaching in a Culture of Coaching. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Education.
Baroody, A.. J. (2006). “Mastering the Basic Number Combinations.” Teaching Children Mathematics, 13, 22-31.
Burns, M. (2005). “Building a Teaching Bridge from Reading to Math.” Leadership Compass, 3, 1-3.
Burns, M. (2005). “Lessons by Marilyn Burns-Using Storybooks To Teach Math.” Scholastic Instructor, 27-30.
Burns, N. (2007, Nov.), "Nine Ways to Catch Kids Up", Educational Leadership.
Calegari, N., & Moulthrop, D. (2006). “Lead Don’t Lecture.” Edutopia, 51-53.
Carpenter, Thomas P.,& Fennema, Elizabeth & Franke, Megan Loef & Levi, Linda & Empson, Susan B. (1999) "
Children's Mathematics, Cognitively Guided Instruction" Porstmouth, NH: Heinman, NCTM
Covington, L., & Taylor, R. (Fall/Winter 2005-2006). “Mathematics Leadership Needed to Close The Achievement
Gaps: A Commentary on a Critical Issue in Mathematics Education.” National Center of Science and Math Journal,
4-5.
ETA Cuisinare (2006). "Hands on Standards The First Source for Introducing Math Manipulatives (Grades 1-2)." ETA,
1-184.
Henson, Will Psy. D. (2008). Behavior Support Strategies for Education Paraprofessionals.
Herrera, T. (2005). “Marilyn Burns Talks about Todays Classrooms.” The NCTM Standards, 3, 1-4.
Keeley, P., & Rose, C. M. (2006). Mathematics Curriculum Study. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Learning Resources (2006). "Hands on standards, photo-illustrated lessons for teaching with math manipulatives
(Grades PreK- 2)." Vernon Hills,IL
Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., &, Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom Instruction That Works. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Stiff, L. V. (2005, October). "Making calculator use add up." NCTM. Retrieved August 23, 2007, from
http://www.nctm.org.
Van de Walle, J., & Lovin, L. H. (2006). Teaching Student Centered Mathematics Grades K-3. Boston, MA: Pearson
Education.
Whitin, D. J. (2006). “Problem Posing in the Elementary Classroom.” Teaching Children Mathematics, 13, 14-18.
Actions
(1-2) COLLABORATION: To improve
student outcomes in math, cross
grade level meetings will be held to
determine any gaps or redundancies
in the curriculum and vertical
alignment.
Action Type: Alignment
Action Type: Collaboration
Person
Responsible
Diane Jenkins,
Math
Instructional
Facilitator
Timeline Resources Source of Funds
Start:
07/01/2012
End:
06/30/2013
District Staff
Teachers ACTION BUDGET: $
28 of 69 10/11/2012 1:45 PM