Hardy Elementary - Hamilton County Schools

Hardy Elementary 

of 

Hamilton County Schools

Consolidated Federal Programs 

Guidelines Manual 

2009-2010 

Hamilton County DOE 

� Jim Scales, PhD, Superintendent 

� Ray Swoffard, Deputy Superintendent for 

Campus Support 

� Dr. Ava Warren, Assist. Superintendent for 

Campus Support 

� Lucile S. Phillips, Director of Federal Programs 

Revised, Summer 2009

School Improvement Plan

HARDY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 

TENNESSEE 

SCHOOL 

IMPROVEMENT 

PLAN

Component 1 

School 

Profile 

and 

Collaborative Process

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

i 

! 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

L 

r 

l 

r 

Component 1a - School Profile and Collaborative Process 

TEMPLATE 1.3 Collection of Academic and Nonacademic Data and 

Analysis/Synthesis 

TEMPLATE 1.3.1: Data Sources (Including surveys) 

. Use surveys to capture perceptual data. Administer some kind of survey to all shareholders with reasonable frequency. 

Determine how often to administer yom surveys by considering several factors: 

• Mobility of student families 

• Grade span served (if you serve only three grades, you could have a complete turnover of parents every three years) 

• Change in leadership 

• Change in organizational practice. 

A school will rarely have each of the surveys listed here, but at least one survey should be administered and evaluated. 

Common survey types include: Title I Needs Assessment, Title I Parent Surveys, District school climate surveys. Staff 

Development SACS Surveys (NSSE). 

TEMPLATE 1.3.1: Data Sources (including surveys) 

(RJIbric Indicator 1.3) 

Data Source 

PEFlBenwood Teacher 

Survey 

Year-Round (lntersession) 

Student Survey 


Parent Survey 


Teacher Survey 

Relevant Findings 

The findings of this survey showed that all teachers believe Hardy is a safe place 

to work. Teachers also have high expectations for the students they teach and 

believe that all students are capable of learning. Teacher responses also 

indicated that the professional development provided supports teacher needs in 

the classroom and that grade-level and vertical team planning benefit the 

teachers. Teachers also believed that the data collected on students was used 

constructively to inform goals and improvement strategies. Better 

communication between the staff and the administration was indicated as an area 

of need. 

Students overall reported that they enjoy coming to Intersession each quarter. 

They like having the different classes and would come back to Intersession 

again. A small amount of students reported that they did not enjoy all of their 

classes because they did not get the class they signed up for. 

Most parents are very happy with the Intersession program. They claim that the 

brochure is easy to read and that their children like coming to Intersession. One 

item that consistently came up on the survey with parents was that their children 

didn't always get the classes they signed up for. 

Teachers consistently reported that Intersession was a benefit to their classroom. 

Those teaching recovery said they were given time to focus on needed skills and 

that the benefit of smaller classes made intense instruction more possible. 

Teachers working enrichment liked the different atmosphere and being able to 

work with students in other grade levels. One concern teachers indicated having 

was not receiving the Intersession schedules and roll sheets early enough to plan 

efficiently.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

t 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 1 

r 

r 

r 

I 

r 

r 

! 

j*1 

I 

TEMPLATE 1.3.2: Narrative and Analysis of Relevant School and Commonity Data 

Some of the factors to consider in this narrative and analysis might be historical background, facilities, environmental and 

safety concerns, socio-economic factors, parent/guardian demographics, honors classes, unique programs, parental support, 

school-business partnerships, major employers, and any other demographic factor (school or community) of major impact, 

including major changes and/or events that have adversely impacted your school. 

TEMPLATE 1.3.2: School and Community Data 

(Rubric lndkator 1.3) 

Student Characteristics 

Hardy Elementary presently bas six hundred thirty-one (631) students enrolled in grades Pre-K - 5th. 

This total includes 97% African American, 2% Caucasian, and 1% Hispanic! Asian. There are 303 

females and 328 males. 

Grade Distribution 

Pre-Kindergarten: 40 students; 19 females, 21 males 

Kindergarten: 110 students; 43 females, 67 males 

First Grade: 115 students; 58 females, 57 males 

Second Grade: 113 students; 47 females, 66 males 

Third Grade: 81 students; 46 females, 35 males 

Fourth Grade: 95 students; 49 females, 46 males 

Fifth Grade: 77 students; 41 females, 36 males 

Attendance Rate 

The attendance rate at Hardy has consistently remained the same for the last three years (2004-2005 - 

94.20/0, 2005-2006 - 93.6%, and 2006-2007 - 93%). Currently this year's attendance rate is at 94%. 

This attendance rate reflects both the efforts of school personnel to improve attendance and the drive of 

Hardy students to want to learn. 

English Proficieney 

One hundred percent (1000/0) of the student body speaks English as their first language. 

Free and Reduced Lunch Rate 

Ninety-eigbt percent (98%) of the students attending Hardy Elementary are on free or reduced lunch. 

Students Scheduled in Classes Without Credentialed Teacher 

Zero 

Discipline Referrals - Suspensions 

The total number of suspensions from July 2007 to March 2008 was 70. This shows a decrease of 15 

from the 2006-2007 school year. The breakdown by gender and grade level is as follows:

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

i 

r 

Grade Male Female 

K 10 1 11 

1 10 1 11 

2 12 4 16 

3 3 2 5 

4 7 2 9 

5 11 7 18 

Totals 53 17 70 

Retention Rate 

Grades Kindergarten through fifth grade had a total of four (4) sbldents retained. 

Kindergarten - 0 

1 st Grade-l 

2 Dd Grade-2 

3 rd Grade-O 

. 4th Grade-O 

5 th Grade-l 

Total 

Transfer Rate 

Hardy Elementary School has always had a high mobility rate for students entering and leaving each 

school year. Most new students come to Hardy from other surrounding urban elementary schools. At 

the same time, many students transfer out due to hardship issues, magnet school selections, and 

relocation. For the 2006-2007 school year we enrolled 161 students, while 151 students transferred out. 

For the 2007-2008 school year we've enrolled 126 new students, while 149 students have transferred out 

to other schools. Student records indicate the number of new students enrolled at Hardy for the 2007- 

2008 school year by grade are as follows: 

• 16 of 115 first grade students new to Hardy 

• 16 of 113 second grade students new to Hardy 

• 16 of 81 third grade students new to Hardy 

• 16 of95 fourth grade students new to Hardy 

• 16 of 77 fifth grade students new to Hardy 

The high mobility rate at Hardy Elementary has always been a factor in student learning. Teachers work 

on many different strategies throughout the year (small groups, running record assessments, DmELS, 

ThinkLink, and classroom assessments) to improve students' learning and performance.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

i 

\ 

classroom where they cannot be seen. Doors are locked, windows are shut, and blinds are drawn lIDtil 

further notice. In the event we must vacate the building, due to a bomb threat or intruder, students are 

evacuated and moved to Garber Elementary School, which is two blocks from Hardy. 

Grade Distribution 

Hardy Elementary School has a total of32 self-contained classroom teachers. Pre-Kindergarten has two 

(2) classrooms with a total of 40 students. Kindergarten has five (6) classrooms with a total of 107 

students. First Grade has seven (7) classrooms with a total of 113 students. Second Grade has six (6) 

classrooms with a total of 107 students. Third Grade has four (4) classrooms with a total of 80 students. 

Fourth Grade has four (4) classrooms with a total of90 students. Fifth Grade has four (4) classrooms 

with a total of 73 students. Grades 3-5 are deparbnentalized to bring focus to a specific subject matter 

concentrating on the strands of the Terra Nova Achievement Test. There are two (2) Comprehensive 

Development Classes (CDC) with a total of21 students servicing grades K-5. 

Length of School Year 

The length of Hardy's school year for the students is 180 days. For the past four years (including this 

one) Hardy has been on a modified "Year ROlIDd" schedule. This gives students the opportunity to 

receive an extra 12 days of instruction during our Intersession periods (between quarters). The length of 

the school year for the faculty is 200 days. Teachers have four professional in-service days prior to the 

opening of school. There are also six professional days built into the school year. 

Length of School Day 

The length of the school day for students at Hardy is a total of seven hours. The day begins at 8:00 

A.M. and ends at 3:00 P.M. Breakfast is offered at 7:30 AM. for those that wish to eat. Teachers are 

required to sign in at 7:55 A.M. and may leave after all the students are distributed in the afternoon. An 

early morning program is offered for students in Kindergarten through 5 th • Teachers arrive in the 

building at 6:15 A.M and the doors are open for students to receive extra instruction from 6:30 A.M. to 

7:30 AM. Teachers have two morning duty days a week, and they are required to be on their duty post 

at 7:30 A.M. until classes begin. Afternoon duty begins at 2:55 P.M. and ends when all students are 

safely gone for the day. 

Operating Budget Distribution Equity 

The operating budget for Hardy Elementary School is $17,403.00 as of 3/08. 

Per Pupil Expenditures 

The district pays $7294.00 per pupil ADM general operational budget for the fiscal year. The state 

report card allocates $7794.00 ADA per pupil for the fiscal year. Title I allocates $500.00 per pupil to 

increase literacy and math skills.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

i 

r 

1 

r I 

r 

I 

l1l 

1 

Component 1 b - Academic and Non-Academic Data 

Analysis/Synthesis 

TEMPLATE 1.4: Variety of Academic and Non-Academic Assessment Measures 

Refer to Component 1 AcademicINonacademic Helpful Hints. 

TEMPLATE 1.4: Variety of Academic and Non-Academic Assessment Measures 

(Rubric indicator 1.4) 

List Data Sources 

A variety of assessment measures were used to conduct this data analysis. The non-academic 

assessments examined were: 

- Teacheri\ttendance 

- Student Attendance 

- Discipline Reports (Suspensions) 

The examined academic assessments were: 

- Fifth Grade Writing Assessment (state test) 

- DmELS 

- TCAP 

- ThinkLink 

- Adequate Yearly Progress Report (A YP)

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

L 

i 

r 

TEMPLATE 1.5: Data Collection and Analysis 

Descn"be the data collection and analysis process used in determining your strengths and needs. Collection refers to the types 

of data gathered. Analysis would be the process used for the full review of all data gathered 

TEMPLATE 1.5: Data Collection and Analysis 

(Rubric Indiclltorl.5) 

Describe the data collection and analysis process used in determining your strengths and needs. 

Both Academic and Non Academic Data were used in this analysis to determine both Hardy's 

strengths and needs. Data was disaggregated into subgroups in order to identify patterns and trends, 

strengths, and needs for instruction. Based upon this data taken from multiple sources, the following 

strengths and needs were identified. 

STRENGTHS 

Model Classroom Teachers model lessons and provide coaching aSsistance for other 

classroom teachers. 

Early Bird Morning school program allows students a time and a place to receive 

additional assistance in both math and literacy skills. 

Literacy and math interventionists provide daily support and enrichment for students. 

Year-rowd Intersession provides recovery classes to move students from non-proficient to 

proficient. It also provides the opportunity for TCAP practice classes to help improve 

scores and familiarity with the testing process and a way for students to participate in 

enrichment classes broadening their knowledge base. 

NEEDS 

Increase the number of students performing at Advanced Levels in both reading and math. 

- Due to long term illness and injury, teacher attendance is low and needs to move up from 

the current 88%. 

- Decrease the number of students scoring nonproficient in writing, while at the same time, 

increase the number of students performing advanced. 

- Continue and add to perfect attendance incentives for students. 

Incorporate a stronger and more rigorous 4th grade and social studies curriculum to bring 

up lagging scores. 

Non-Academic Measures 

Student Attendance - The student attendance data was taken from the School Report Card from the last 

three years. Student attendance is monitored very closely at Hardy. Both school-wide (NBAlNFL) and 

classroom incentives have been put in to place to encomage students to attend school. Over the last 

three years Hardy has been very consistent with their student attendance rates. 

2004-2005 2005-2006 I 2006-2007 

94.2% 93.6% I 93%

Techniques & 62 38 60 40 74 26 81 19 92 8 

Skills 

Vocabulary 64 34 49 51 88 12 96 4 94 6 

Writing 80 20 66 34 82 18 83 17 64 36 

Organization 

Writing Process 61 39 58 42 88 12 84 16 91 9 

Overall Student IS! 2"" 3 ra 41n 5 1n 

Achievement 

Fall 2007 

PIA NP PIA NP PIA NP PIA NP PIA NP 

Math 77 23 75 25 81 19 73 27 74 26 

ReadinglLA 68 32 59 41 83 17 84 16 87 13 

After analyzing the results we can see that at every grade level there

Below is a breakdown of the 2007 TCAP scores by grade and subject. 

Percent of 

students 

scoring 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

60 

50 

Percent of 40 

students 30 

scoring 

20 

10 

0 

3rd Grade 2007 TCAP Scores by Subject 

Math Reading! 

LA 

Social 

Studies 

Science 

4th Grade 2007 TCAP Scores by Subject 

Math Reading! 

LA 

Social 

Studies 

Science 

[] Nonproficient 

• Proficient 

DAdvanced 

bJ Nonproficient 


DAdvanced

80 

70 

60 

Percent of 50 

students 40 

scoring 30 

20 

10 

0 

5th Grade 2007 TCAP Scores by Subject 

Math Readingl Social Science Writing 

LA Studies 

!JI Nonproficient 


o Advanced 

According to the TCAP Achievement data: 

• Hardy has shown consistent growth over the past three years in all subjects. 

• Nonproficient students in Social Studies have increased across all three grades levels, equaling 

more nonproficient than proficient in 5 th grade. 

• For the 5 th grade writing assessment, the advanced percentage of students is extremely low, 

while the nonproficient is at 51 %. 

• Overall there was a higher percentage of nonproficient students in 4th grade. 

• In many cases the nonproficient percentage is higher than the advanced indicating the need to 

push students past proficient.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

I 

I 

i 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r 

i 

F1 

i 

l 

Report Card Data Disaggregation 

Math 

TV AAS Scores Breakdown 

Below Proficient 2005 2006 2007 

White N/A N/A 50% 

African American 32% 18% 20% 

Hispanic N/A N/A N/A 

Native American N/A N/A N/A 

Asian/Pacific Islander N/A N/A N/A 

ED 32% 19% 19% 

SWD 70% 52% 39% 

LEP N/A N/A N/A 

Female 26% 14% 22% 

Male 35% 18% 22% 

From 2005 - 2007 we decreased the percentage of students scoring below proficiency in math; African 

Americans had a 12 point decrease; ED showed a 13 point decrease; SWD showed a 31 point 

decrease; females showed a 3.4 point decrease; and males a 11.7 point decrease. From 2005 - 2006, 

the percentages decreased in all races and gender, but in 2006 - 2007, females increased by 8.6 and 

males increased by 3.7. 

Proficient 2005 2006 2007 


A.f!jcan American 52% 51% 63% 




ED 53% 51% 65% 

SWD 30% 33% 38% 


Female 60% 56% 67% 

Male 48% 49% 63% 

In 2005,52% of African Americans scored proficient in math. 53% of ED students scored proficient, 

30% of SWD, 60% of females, and 48% of males. African Americans decreased by 1 %, ED by 2%, 

pm females 4% in 2006. However, SWD increased by 3% and males increased by .9% in 2006. 2007 

showed a significant jump in points as African Americans increased by 12%, ED by 14%, SWD by 

5%, females by 11 %, and males by 14%. The growth rate from 2005 - 2007 showed African 

r' Americans increased by 11 %, ED by 12%, SWD by 8%, females by 7%, and males 15%. 

Rl9 

I

r L 

r 

r 

r 

r I 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r L 

r l 

r 

r 

r' 

I 


Advanced 2005 2006 2007 






ED 15% 30% 16% 

SWD N/A 15% 23% 


Female 14% 30% 10% 

Male 18% 33% 15% 

In 2005, 16% of African Americans scored advanced in math, 15% of ED, 14.1 offemales and 18% of 

males scored advanced. In 2006, 31 % of African Americans scored advanced, 30% of ED, 15% of 

SWD, 30% offemales and 33% of males also scored advanced. In 2007, scores dropped dramatically 

with students scoring advanced. African Americans and ED dropped by 14%, females dropped by 

20%, and males dropped 18%. However, SWD increased by 8%. From 2005 -2007, African 

Americans and ED increased by 1%, and SWD by 23%. Females dropped 4%, and males dropped 

3%. 

Reading and Language Arts 

Below Proficient 2005 2006 2007 


Afrjcan American 28% 20% 15% 




ED 28% 21% 14% 

SWD 28% 21% 15% 


Female 20% 13% 10% 

Male 35% 27% 19% 

From 2005 - 2007 we decreased the percentage of students scoring below proficiency in reading, 

language arts, and writing. African Americans showed a 13% decrease, ED a 14% decrease, SWD a 

13% decrease, females a 9% decrease, and males a 16% decrease. From 2005 -2006, African 

Americans scoring below proficiency dropped 7%, ED and SWD dropped 7%, females dropped 7%, 

and males dropped 8%. From 2006 - 2007, African Americans scoring below proficiency dropped 

5%, ED dropped 7%, SWD dropped 5%, females dropped 3%, and males dropped 8%.

r 

r 

r 

r 

F' 

l 

r' 

l 

r 

r I 

rw' 

I 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r I 

L 

r 

r 

r 


Proficient 2005 2006 2007 

White 75% 75% 33% 





ED 66% 63% 68% 

SWD 67% 64% 68% 


Female 73% 67% 68% 

Male 60% 59% 66% 

From 2005 - 2007 the percentage of white students scoring proficient in reading, language arts, and 

writing decreased by 42% (due to students moving to advanced).. African Americans increased by 

1 %, ED increased by 3%, SWD increased by 1%, females decreased by 5%, and males increased by 

6% percent. From 2005 - 2006, White students remained the same, African Americans decreased by 

3%, ED decreased by 3%, SWD decreased by 3%, females decreased by 6.2, and males decreased by 

.8%. From 2006 - 2007, white students scoring proficient in reading, language arts, and writing 

decreased by 42%, African Americans increased by 4%, ED increased by 5%, SWD increased by 4%, 

females increased by .8%, and males increased by 7%. 

Advanced 2005 2006 2007 

White 25% 25% 67% 



Native American N/A. N/A N/A 


ED 6% 16% 18% 

SWD 6% 16% 17% 


Female 7% 20% 22% 

Male 6% 14% 15% 

From 2005 - 2007, white students scoring advanced in reading, language arts, and writing increased 

by 42%, African Americans increased by 12%, ED increased by 12%, SWD increased by 12%, 

females increased by 15%, and males increased by 9%. From 2005 - 2006, white students remained 

the same, showing increases were African Americans by 11 %, ED by 10%, SWD by 10%, females by 

13%, and males by 9%. From 2006-2007, white students increased 42%. Also showing increases 

were African Americans by 1 %, ED by 2%, SWD by 2%, females by 2%, and males by .8%.

r 

i 

! 

r 

r 

L 

r' 

I 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r I 

r 

r 

r l 

TEMPLATE 1.7: Narrative Synthesis of All Data 

Give a narrative synthesis of all data. Synthesis would be the blending of the data reviews to give the big picture. 

TEMPLATE 1.7: Narrative Synthesis of All Data 

(Rubric Indicator 1.7) 

Narrative Synthesis of Data 

Hardy utilizes innovative programs that work to strengthen both teacher and student performance. 

These include coaching assistants for classroom teachers, Early Bird Morning school, literacy and 

math interventionists, as well as recovery classes during year-round intersession. These all assist the 

movement of students from nonproficient to proficient and help broaden their knowledge base. 

After analysis of both the academic and non-academic measures multiple needs were identified to help 

strengthen Hardy. These needs included the decrease in number of students that perform 

nonproficient in writing and an increase in the number of students performing at Advanced Levels in 

reading, writing, and math. Additionally identified is the need to improve teacher attendance and 

increase the perfect attendance incentives for students. In an effort to increase scores a more rigorous 

social studies and 4th grade curriculum needs to be incorporated. 

TEMPLATE 1.8: Prioritized List of Goal Targets 

List in priority order your goal targets. The goals for Component 4 (Action Plan) will be derived from this prioritized list of 

goal targets. Prioritized goals would identify the most critical areas of need and where your wok would start. 

TEMPLATE 1.8: Prioritized List of Goal Targets 


Prioritized List of Goal Targets 

• Increase the number of students performing at advanced levels in both reading and math. 

• Increase the number of students performing advanced in writing, while decreasing the number 

of students scoring nonproficient. 

• Analyze and improve upon the 4th grade curriculum to help increase both math and reading 

scores. 

• Incorporate a more rigorous social studies curriculum throughout the grades in an effort to 

increase scores. 

• Improve teacher attendance from the current 88%. 

• Continue and increase the student attendance incentives in an effort to improve student 

attendance.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

Component 2 - Beliefs. Mission and Vision 

Vision 

• A community of life long learners 

• Creative and abstract thinkers 

• Fluent Readers 

• Creative Writers 

• Involvement and support of all stakeholders 

Mission Statement 

Hardy Elementary School: A School Choosing to Learn ... Year Round is committed to 

high standards of achievement and moving students from proficient to advanced, while 

educating all students using a variety of instructional interventions, assessments, and data 

to drive best practices for teaching strategies. We will incorporate high standards of 

citizenship by using our character program. with the support of the parents and 

community. 

Beliefs 

Student body, parents, community, and we the staffbelieve: 

• All students can learn to their fullest potential. 

• All students can learn in a safe, orderly environment conductive for learning. 

• All students will be able to apply problem solving and critical thinking skills 

through a variety of instructional. strategies. 

• In order to achieve student success, it is essential to address the needs of every 

student's individual learning style through differentiated education. 

• Excellence in academics and character build success for all. 

• Parental and community involvement are vital for student success. 

• The students will score 3.5 or above on the TV AAS in all five subject areas. 

• A minimum of 90% of the fifth grade will score proficient on the writing 

assessment. 

• A minimum of 90% of our fourth grade students will score proficient on the 

Benchmark Task, which is tied to the Hamilton County curriculum policies and 

standards. 

• Teachers, administrators, parents, and students will share in decision-making of 

curriculum alignment and adaptation in order to insure full implementation of the 

curriculum. 

• All students will know how to read and comprehend, problem solve, and write 

fluently. 

• All students will have the ability to use critical thinldng skills at a higher level 

utilizing Bloom's Taxonomy.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

• All students and staff can achieve a 95% attendance rate. 

SUMMARY: After reviewing our mission, vision, and belief statements, there were 

several revisions made based on our student performance on the Terra Nova test for the 

2006-2007 school year. Over the past years our students have made gains each year, 

however, we are still striving to reach the goals we have put in place. The revisions gave 

the staff a clear vision on how we need to implement best practices for the upcoming 

year. The mission and belief statements are the result of school personnel and parents 

working in a collaborative effort to develop a vision that is committed to academic 

excellence. The mission and belief statement are displayed in the hall for parents, staff 

and community to view.

Component 3 

Curricular, Instructional 

Assessment, 

and 

Organizational Effectivenesss

TEMPLATE 3.1.a: Curricular Practices 

Template 3.1.a: Curricular Practices 

(Rubric Indicators 3.1 and 3.2) 

Instructional 

Current Curricular 

Practices School has Supportestablished 

Support system 

School wide is in place to 

achievement enhance quality 

Benchmarks of curriculum 

and Instruction 

* DffiELS *1 Math Lead 

Data Teacher 

* Rigby PM Content 

Bench- Specialist 

marking *1 Literacy 

* Think Link Lead Teacher 

Content 

Evidence of Practice (State in Specialist 

definitive/tangible terms) *2 Inclusion 

teachers and 

assistants 

*6 

ReadinglMath 

Interventionists 

*1 Writing 

interventionist 

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process Templates - August, 2007 

School uses 

the TN 

DOE state 

approved 

standards 

and 

provides 

training to 

the staff in 

Math and 

Literacy 

* Focus 

calendars 

are 

displayed in 

every 

classroom 

School 

communicates a 

School has School has shared vision of 

implemented implemented what students 

a grade a grade should know and 

appropriate appropriate be able to do at 

cohesive cohesive each grade level 

Curriculum standards standards to stakeholders 

is prioritized based model based model through a variety 

and mapped for math for literacy of media formats 

* Think * Everyday *Whole group * Communication 

Link, Mathis used instruction, from teachers is 

DIBELS, school wide small group done through uses 

and reading * Flexible instruction, of daily behavior 

wall of groups are and sheets 

progress created based intervention *The school 

monitoring on Think Link *Job communicates 

tool data embedded through 

* Maps help Unit tests are professional newsletters, 

knowhow given to development phone calls, and 

to meet each monitor *Focus on 5 conferences with 

child's progress reading parents 

needs * Job strategies to *Grade level 

* Data embedded be bulletin boards 

boards professional emphasized that promote 

development on all subject standards being 

Page 13 of45

Is the current practice researchbased? 

Is it a principle & practice of 

high-performing schools? 

Has the current practice been 

effective or ineffective? 

What data source(s) do you 

* Accelerated areas taught 

math *Grades K-S *Open House 

teach the *Eagle Family 

strategies at night 

the designated *Math/Literacy 

times to help Night 

cohesiveness 

in standards 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 

*All scores *School Wide * Focus * DffiELS *Unit Tests * Strategies *TCAP 

indicate Schedule Calendars * Think Link * Think Link listed assessment, 

progress * Master * DffiELS * Data Data scoreS *PM bulletin board 

* Data Schedule * Think Link boards *MetAYP Benchmarks displays 

boards created around * District displayed in * Math lead * Small group *Copies of 

showing literacy groups Professional all teacher instruction communication 

have that support your answer? 

(identify aU applicable sources) each Developme classrooms * Star Math *120 Minute * Think Link 

student's nt Website *90 Minute Literacy block *Parent meeting 

level and Math block *Literacy lead *TCAP report 

progress teachers *Star Math report 

AYP Goals A yP Goals met * Teaching * Student's *Studeilt's *DmELS *Test scores from 

Evidence of effectiveness or 

met in in 2006-2007 is growth growth *TCAP scores Think Link 

ineffectiveness (State in tenns 

of quantifiable improvement) 2006-2007 differentiate progress is progress is up improving *TCAP indicate 

d up and and scores are * Accelerated that focused 

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process Templates - August, 2007 Page 14 of45

ased on scores are improving Reading lessons have 

progress improving *Report cards *Star Reading improved student 

* Think Link * Report * Think Link *Think Link achievement 

and cards' * Accelerated *Increased parent 

DffiELS 

guides the 

planning 

Math 

* Star Math 

attendance at 

meetings 

* All * Intervention *Training is All teachers * All teachers All teachers 

Teachers services are offered for have access have and 

input data provided to all all staff to training implemented interventionist 

into a teachers and all *All staff and progress this program provided job 

computer students no members charts in * All teachers embedded 

Evidence of equitable school 

support for this practice program to 

document 

matter the level 

of performance 

are required 

to 

each of the 

assessment 

have access to 

content 

professional 

development. 

and track implement areas support All teachers 

progress focus through the use standards. 

*TCAP calendars lead teacher 

results program 

Continue Continue this Continue Continue Continue Continue Continue current 

this practice practice July this practice this practice current current practices as 

Next Step (changes or Julythru thruMay July thru Julythru practice practice progress is being 

continuations) May May May which shows which shows shown 

progress is progress is 

being met. being met. 


r 

r i 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r L 

r 

r 

r 

r I 

r 

r l 

i 

l 

Based on the quality of professional development offered to all teachers, we provide equity and adequacy across 

the board. Funds and resources are effectively utilized to assist teachers in meeting the academic needs of the 

students. Teachers are provided assistance through vertical and horizontal teaming, cmriculum mapping and 

summer collaborative, data analysis sessions, and targeted content and effective practice workshops. A thorough 

analysis of our current data indicates that we are making progress in accurately meeting the needs of all students at 

Hardy Elementary. There are still areas for improvement but the persistent use and implementation of 

differentiated instruction, focused assessments and high quality professional development for all teachers reveal 

that we are on the right track in terms of appropriately providing academic success for all students. 


r 

r 

r 

r 

I 

r 

I 

t 

r 

r I 

1 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r L 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

TEMPLATE 3.1.c: Curricular Summary Questions 

The following summary questions are related to curriculum. They are designed as a culminating activity for your 

self-analysis, focus questions discussions, and findings, regarding this area. 

Template 3.1.c: Curricular Summary Questions 

Curriculum Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required 

What are our major strengths and how do we know? 

The equity and consistency we implement in school-wide math and reading programs is one of 

our major strengths. All teachers are effectively implementing educational practices, which 

directly correlate with the progress evident in our TCAP scores and TV ASS gains. Support 

personnel and classroom teacher's work together to employ differentiated instruction to meet 

the needs of all students. Extra materials are available to all staff members for the enrichment 

of the curriculum. The tracking of individual student progress, TCAP scores, and TV ASS gains 

are all evidence of the effectiveness of our program innovations. 


What are our major challenges and how do we know. (These should be stated as curricular practice challenges 

identified in the templates above that could be a cause of the prioritized needs identified in component 1.) 

Our greatest cmriculum challenge is developing the best assessments for determining student needs so that the 

curriculum might be adapted effectively. Continued summative and formative assessments should provide that 

data necessary for the ongoing improvement of our curriculum. Effective communication must be consistently 

maintained to ensure the most appropriate use of our support personnel. 

The scope and sequence of employing our cmriculum map is complicated by a high mobility rate in our 

community. We need to develop a plan that will efficiently assess the students who enter our school mid-term so 

that their needs may be identified and addressed as soon as possible. 


How will we address our challenges? 

Through continued development of authentic formative and summative assessments, we will obtain the data 

necessary to maintain a vital and effective curriculum plan. Teachers continued to need training on the 

development and use of authentic assessments. 

Continued efforts must be made to improve communication with all stakeholders. 

A district-wide pacing guide could mediate the difficulty of maintaining the scope and sequence as students move 

from school to school. 


TEMPLATE 3.2.a: Instructional Practices 

Template 3.2.a: Instructional Practices 


Current Instructional Classroom 

Practices instruction is 

aligned with 

the standards 

based 

curriculum 

* Curriculum 

is aligned to 

Tennessee 

SPI's 

*Teachers use 

the Bluebook 

to develop 

Evidence of Practice (State in 

definitive/tangible terms) 

lesson plans 

and to 

construct 

curriculum 

maps 


Classroom 

Instruction 

is aligned 

with 

Assessment 

s 

* Teachers 

review 

TCAPand 

Think Link 

to align 

classroom 

instruction 

to the SPI's 

in the 

blueprint 

Teachers 

Incorporate a 

Wide Range 

of Research 

Teaching Based-Student 

Process is centered 

Data Driven Strategies 

* Teachers * Inclusion 

create lesson RTlusing 

plans based Voyager 

upon data *Vertical 

analysis to writing 

effectively Assessments 

meet student * Writing 

needs conferences 

* Learning * Small group 

centers are guided 

based on reading 

Think Link, * Intervention 

Star math, and Support with 

TCAP data reading and 

math 

*New 

Literacy 

Page 20 of45 

Students are 

provided with 

multiple 

Classroom opportunities to 

organization and receive 

management additional 

techniques instructional 

support the assistance 

instructional beyond the 

process classroom 

* Professional Interventionists 

development such provide 

as Ruby Payne opportunities 

training for for small group 

Understanding instruction 

Poverty, to help *Before school 

teachers close the tutoring through 

gap for students supplemental 

* Guidance programming 

Counselor helps * Saturday 

support Character writing 

Ed. In the academy 

classroom *The Bridge 

* Inclusion Program 

Program supports *Focus groups 

diversity in in math 

organizational * computer






Adoption- and management programs for 

Houghton of the math and 

Mifflin environment reading 

* Everyday 

math series on 

a daily basis 

* Small focus 

groups for 

Math 

enrichment 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 


Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 

*TCAP *TCAP *TCAP *TCAP * Documentation *TCAP 

What data source(s) do you have 

that support your answer? 

(identify all applicable sources) 

*Think Link 

* Writing 

Assessment 

*DIBELS 

* Think Link * Think Link 

* Writing * Writing 

Assessment Assessment 

*DIBELS * DffiELS 

* Think Link 

* Writing 

Assessment 

* DffiELS 

of Suspensions 

and referrals 

*Daily parent 

communication 

log 

* Think Link 

• Writing 

Assessment 

*DIBELS 

*Scores on *Scores on *Scores on *Scores on The data supports * Scores on the 

the above the above the above the above the decrease in above 

mentioned mentioned mentioned mentioned the number of mentioned 


assessments 

reflect that 

assessments 

reflect that 

assessments 

reflect that 

assessments 

reflect that 

suspensions and 

referrals which 

assessments 

reflect that 

ineffectiveness (State in terms of 

quantifiable improvement) standards are 

being 

standards 

are being 

standards are 

being 

standards are 

being 

are submitted by 

staff members 

standards are 

being 

effectively 

taught 

* Percentage 

effectively 

taught 

* Percentage 

effectively 

taught 

* Percentage 

effectively 

taught 

* Percentage 

effectively 

taught 

*Percentage of 


r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

i 

l 

rn 

I 

TEMPLATE 3.2.b: Instructional Gap Analysis Setting priorities is one way to narrow a school's improvement 

focus. As we know, we have more needs than we have resources. Priority needs can be identified through a Gap 

Analysis. The process will identify the discrepancy, or the gap, between the current state - ''What Is" -which is 

identified in your practices - and the desired future state - "What Ought To Be" - which is found in the rubric. 

Completing Template 3.2.b (the gap analysis) should help school team members discover "What Ought To Be." 

Completion of the gap analysis should enable the School Leadership Team to answer the equity and adequacy 

questions relative to instructional practices, also to be recorded in Template 3.2.b. 

Template 3.2.b: Instructional Gap Analysis 

Instructional Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required 

Hardy effectively uses resources to implement effective and innovative instruction in the 

classroom. Interventionists and access to a wide range of materials ensure students receive the 

best instruction in all subject areas. Inclusion and lead teachers work with classroom teachers 

to develop and implement high quality instructional practices, which create a successful 

learning environment for all students. Staff development offers training in valuable 

instructional interventions for teachers to employ in the classroom. Grade level and vertical 

planning opportunities guarantee that the literacy and math programs are being implemented 

according to the school curriculum map. Assessment programs such as DffiELS and Think 

Link allow teachers to align instruction to the need of the children. 

• TIME 

Adequate time has been allotted for differentiated, standards based curriculum in literacy and in 

math. A 120-minute block of time has been provided for literacy. Math instruction takes place 

in a 90-minute block. Instructional time is lost to transitions and to behavior management 

interventions. 

• MONEY 

Funds are allocated to maintain adequate interventions in each classroom, such as leveled books 

to support literacy development. Funds from various sources provide professional development 

in research based instructional strategies, classroom management, and organization. Funding 

also provides support personnel inside the classroom to help maintain and effective educational 

environment. 

• PERSONNEL 

Additional staffhas been hired to increase student performance. We added two inclusion 

teachers, one inclusion assistant, four reading interventionist to provide small group instruction, 

and two instructional support coaches are in placed for math and reading. Each additional 

member of our staff supports students achieving at high levels. We are accelerating instruction 

considerably to make drastic progress in closing the gap. 

• OTHER RESOURCES 

Vertical Planning Time will be used to continue the process of aligning our content in writing. 

Stipends will be paid for this work. 


r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r 

TEMPLATE 32.c: Instructional Summary Questions 

The following summary questions are related to instruction. They are designed as a culm.inating activity for your 


Template 3.2.c: Instructional Summary Questions 

(RlIbric Indicator 3.4) 

Instructional Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required 

Our teachers offer effective instruction at all levels with equity and consistency. A schoolwide 

plan is in place that includes whole group, small group and individualized instruction 

across all curriculum areas. All teachers have access to training that further develops their 

knowledge of effective instructional practices. 

The school has a wide rage of materials and technology to support differentiated instruction 

in the classroom. Administrative observations and informal "walk-throughs" provide teachers 

with supportive and appropriate feedback for improving instruction. 


What are our major challenges and how do we know. (These should be stated as instructional practice challenges 

identified in the templates above, that could be a cause of the prioritized needs identified in component 1.) 

Our challenge is to incorporate more vertical planning to maintain a vital curriculum map. 

Time in the schedule is the biggest hurdle for meeting this challenge. 

We have addressed an item of concern identified in our review and assessment of the 

curriculum plan this year. We needed to improve the rigor of instruction and the management 

. techniques in our centers so Donna Whyte, consultant, was engaged for two-days of training. 

Improvements were very evident upon her return visit. 



New planning times need to be created for teachers and staff to collaborate more frequently in 

vertical teams. Perhaps something creative could be done with the "snow days" planned into 

the system calendar. 


TEMPLATE 3.3.a: Assessment Practices 

Template 3.3.a: Assessment Practices 


Current Assessment 

Practices 

Evidence of Practice (State in 

definitive/tangible terms) 

DIBELS 

* Every 

class/teacher 

hasDIBELS 

kit, web access 

and booklets are 

used for every 

student 

* Provides 

professional 

development in 

the appropriate 

use of 

assessment 

*Provides 

support and 

technical 

assistance to 

teachers in 

developing and 

using 

assessments 


Think Link 

*Uses 

student 

assessments 

that are 

aligned with 

the 

Tennessee 

Department 

of 

Education 

standards 

based 

curriculum 

* Ensures 

that the 

appropriate 

assessments 

are used to 

guide 

decisions 

relative to 

student 

achievement 

TCAP 

Portfolio 

TCAP Alt 

??????????? 

Woodcock 

Johnson 

Regular Writing 

Prom]?ts 

* Test Data evidence Test protocols *Progress 

protocols- in exceptional sheets/feedback 

CRT 3 rd _S th 

ed.files sheets 

grade, NRT *Provides 

1 st _2 nd grade assessment 

*Uses a information to 

wide range communicate with 

of students, parents, 

assessments, and other 

CRT,NRT, appropriate 

portfolio, stakeholders 

curriculum- regarding student 

based learning 

assessments *Uses a variety of 

etc. data points for 

*Assesses decision making 

all relative to student 

categories achievement 

of students 

Page 27 of45





Yes, all schools 

in district use 

this assessment 

Yes Yes Yes Yes, used to 

identify ex. 

Ed. students 

Yes 

Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 



TCAP scores TCAP State Data sheets, WIDI 

What data source(s) do you have 

that support your answer? 

(identify all applicable sources) 

scores mandated, 

NCLB, and 

is norm test 

work samples nonning 

sample 

2006-75% Scores have Other 100% No over or 2005 -41% prof or 

proficient or improved assessments Advanced or under adv. 

advance across improving. Proficient identification 2006 - 54% prof or 

2007-82% curriculum. Math 82% of students. adv. 


ineffectiveness (State in tenns of 

quantifiable improvement) prof or adv. to 80% and 

Reading 

75% to 

82%. 

2007 - 49% prof or 

adv. 

All staff All staff has All lessons Across board Required by All teachers support 

professionally their own are planned for all special district. writing and teach 

trained. personal on state education SP!' s \all students 

Evidence of equitable school Support from login standards. students. including special 

support for this practice administration, information ed. Participate in 

lead teachers, and web writing. 

and central access. 

Next Step (changes or 

continuations) 

office. 

Continue Continue Continue Continue Continue Continue 


r 

r 

r 

r 

I 

r I 

r 

r 

r 

i 

I 

r 

r 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

TEMPLATE 3.3.b: Assessment Gap Analysis 

Setting priorities is one way to narrow a school's improvement focus. As we know, we have more needs than we 

have resources. Priority needs can be identified through a Gap Analysis. The process will identify the discrepancy, 

or the gap, between the current state - "What Is" -Which is identified in your practices and - and the desired future 

state - "What Ought To Be" - which is found in the rubric. Completing Template 3.3.b (the gap analysis) should 

help school team members discover "What Ought To Be." 

Completion of the gap analysis should enable the School Leadership Team to answer the equity and adequacy 

questions relative to assessment practices, also to be recorded in Template 3.3.b. 

Template 3.3.b: Assessment Gap Analysis 

Assessment Gap Analysis - Narrative Response Required 

Hardy Elementary uses a wide range of standardized as well as teacher made assessments to 

evaluate the effectiveness of instruction. For example, writing assessments are given monthly 

for all grade levels. The papers are graded and individual conferences follow to help students 

assess their personal growth and develop a plan for further success. 

Funds are used to purchase Think Link screening three times a year to evaluate student 

progress on skills addressed on TCAP. Staff development has been provided on the 

development of effective classroom assessments and the best use of results to drive instructional 

practices. 

• TIME 

Adequate time has been allotted for differentiated, standards based curriculum in literacy and in 

math. A 120-minute block of time has been provided for literacy. Math instruction takes place 

in a 90-minute block. Instructional time is lost to transitions and to behavior management 

interventions. 

• MONEY 

Funds are allocated to maintain adequate interventions in each classroom, such as leveled books 

to support literacy development. Funds from various sources provide professional development 

in research based instructional strategies, classroom management, and organization. Funding 

also provides support personnel inside the classroom to help maintain and effective educational 

environment 

• PERSONNEL 

Additional staffhas been hired to increase student performance. We added two inclusion 

teachers, one inclusion assistant, four reading interventionist to provide small group instruction, 

and two instructional support coaches are in placed for math and reading. Each additional 

member of our staff supports students achieving at high levels. We are accelerating instruction 

considerably to make drastic progress in closing the gap. 

• OTHER RESOURCES 

Vertical Planning Time will be used to continue the process of aligning our content in writing. 

Stipends will be paid for this work.

i 

I 

r I 

r 

i 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

\ 

r 

Equity and Adequacy: 

Are we providing equity and adequacy to all of our teachers? 

Are we targeting funds and resources effectively to meet the needs of all of our teachers in being effective with all 

their students? 

Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of all students in our school? 

Think Link Assessment evaluates individual student development and identifies poorly 

developing skills before students are put at risk for persistent academic underachievement. 

Students in grades 1 st - 5 th are tested quarterly. Reports from the test allow teachers to quickly 

and easily identify mastered, partially-mastered, or non-mastered reading skills, enabling 

teachers to readjust instruction to fit the needs of each individual student. Think Link scores are 

going up and teachers are continually adjusting teaching strategies based on scores. 

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process Templates - August, 2007 Page30of46

r 

rmm 

I 

r 

1 

i 

! 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r I 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

TEMPLATE 3.3.e: Assessment Summary Questions 

The following summary questions are related to assessment They are designed as a culminating activity fOT your 


Template 3.3.c: Assessment Summary Questions 


Assessment Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required 

We have a data-driven curriculum created from teacher developed and standardized 

assessments used throughout the year. We created SPI calendars for each classroom to give a 

visual record that would focus instruction on meeting individual needs. 


What are our major challenges and how do we know. (These should be stated as assessment practice challenges 

identified in the templates above, that could be a cause of the prioritized needs identified in component 1.) 

Teachers need to continue to develop authentic assessment measures so that appropriate 

instructional interventions will be made in a recurrent, effective manner. 



Teachers need further training on developing authentic forms of assessment and the proper use 

of results to implement effective instructional changes in the classroom. 

Teachers and support staff should collaborate on grade level and in vertical teams to ensure 

there is effective follow through for using the data received from assessments given. 




Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 

TCAP Agendas Announcemen Subgroup data on Attendance 

What data source(s) do you have t of TCAP 

that support your answer? SASI Census Calendars attendance TCAP 

(identify all applicable sources) ,goals 

Referrals 

Higher test Higher effective Improving All subgroups are *Scores on TCAP 

scores on teaching and scores and showing are improving 


ineffectiveness (State in tenns of 

quantifiable improvement) 

TCAP test 

indicate a 

shared belief 

in our mission 

learning are 

occurring as shown 

through TCAP 

scores reflect 

percentages of 'improvement on 

attendance benchmarking based 

and less on data reports 

suspensions 

*Benchmarking in' 

the areas services 

are being provided 

and belief 

systems 

effectiveness and referrals 

All staff, * Staff attends PD All staff are All teachers have All students and· 

parents, and seSSIOns involvedm access to trainings, parents in grades Kchildren 

are *Lesson plans the curriculum and 5. are given the 

informed of reflecting practices professional specialists ' opportunity to 

Evidence of equitable school 

support for this practice 

these beliefs, ' 

visions, and 

developed in 

trainings 

., 

developments 

an 

implement programs 

for all children 

participate and be 

involved in before 

mission state development &chool tutoring 

assessment of school 

wide 

programs 

Next Step (changes or 

continuations) 

Continue this 

practice, July 

through May 

Continue this 

practice July 

through May 

Continue this 

practice July 

through May 

Continue this practice 

July through May 

Continue this 

practice July 

through May 


(-- IL_ It--

i 

I 

r 

r 

L 

r 

r 

r 

: 

r 

r 

F' 

I 

r 

r 

r 

1 

F' 

! 

i 

! 

r 

F' 

I 

r 

l 

TEMPLATE 3.4.c: Organization Summary Questions 

The following summary questions are related to organization. They are designed as a culminating activity for your 


Template 3.4.c: Organization Summary Questions 


Organization Summary Questions- Narrative Response Required 

Our strengths in organization consist of these: We have changed our organization/schedule for 

less disruptions and transitions in reading. Support personnel are assigned/scheduled to meet 

the needs of students, such as inclusion and reading ability, etc. Many extended learning 

opportunities are offered. 


Our challenges are as follows: We need more participation in extended learning. New students 

transferring into school cause a problem in fitting them into the schedule based on their needs 

(for example, inclusion schedule, reading groups, etc) 


We need to address our challenges through continued publicity and motivation for extended 

learning opportunities. We can assign personnel to meet/greet new students and determine their 

schedule for extra support (if needed) as quickly as possible. 


Component 4 

Action Plan 

Development

GOAL 2 - Action Plan Development 

Template 4.1 - (Rubric Indicator 4.1) Revised DATE: 

Section A -Describe your goal and Identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components Identified the strengths and challenges/needs.) 

The percentage of 5th Grade students scoring proficient or above (4,5,6) in the area of writing will increase form 49 

Goal 

% on the 2007 TCAP writing assessment to 55% on the 2008 TCAP writing assessment. 

This addresses the need for 5Ul grade students scoring below the proficient level in writing to meet the state's 

proficient I advanced levels of student achievement. Our goal will meet NClB requirements for AYP. Students 

Which need(s) does this Goal address? scoring advanced on the 2007 TCAP writing assessment totaled 1 % of students. Students scoring proficient on the 

TCAP 2007 writing assessment totaled 49%. Students scoring non-proficient on the TCAP writing assessment 

totaled 50%. Students need to demonstrate proficiency in the use of standard English conventions when writing. 

In "Investing in Our Future: Moving Toward Excellence." the first goal of the strategic plan for Hamilton County 

How is this Goal linked to the system's Five-Year Plan? Schools promotes raising student achievement. This goal states that every student has the right to be enrolled In an 

effective school, and obtain proficiency in writing. 

ACTION STEPS - Template 4.2 - (Rubric Indicator 4.2) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN - Template 4.3 - (Rubric Indicator 4.3) 

Section B - Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure Section C - For each of the Action Steps you list, give tlmeline, person(s) responsible, proJected cost(s)/requlred resources, funding 

you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action 

strategies and interventions which should be scientifically based step.) 

where possible and include professional development, technology, 

communication, and parent and community Involvement Initiatives 

within the action steps of each goal. 

• All students participate in monthly 

writing prompts In all grade levels to 

develop effective use of Standard 

English conventions. 

Tlmeline 

Person(s) 

Responsible 

Required 

Resources 

Writing prompts 

developed by 

grade levels 

and/or 

Projected Cost(s) 

& Funding 

Sources 

Evaluation Strategy 

Self assessments 

Performance Results' 

I Outcomes 

• End-of-year Core Task Literature 

Project includes writing performance 

assessment. Classroom 

administration 

Tennessee 

rubric 

State writing rubric to 

score writing prompts 

monthly in order to 

determine progress in 

Action July, 2007 Teachers 

$18,000 from 

TCAP writing 

Step • Students use computers to publish to Anchor writing 

Title Budget 

assessment 

final writings. May,2008 InteNentlon- papers 

ists Use of rubric per 

• Teachers teach process writing dally Graphic grade level to analyze 

and give specific feedback to organizers stUdent work and 

students. determine if 

Rubrics strategies are 

• Administration schedule writing effective 

prompts to assist In the Performance 

implementation of writing. Task Texts and 

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process Templates - August, 2007 Page 28 of40 

L_ L.-- L .. fL. __

monthly. 

• Teachers will conference with 

students weekly and guide writing 

revisions. working towards student 

2008 

Classroom 

teachers 

materials guide to determine 

proficient and 

advanced writing. 

independence. Admlnlstra- 

• Administrators will monitor to make 

sure that prompts are posted 

promptly. 


tion 

L-.._



Section A -Describe your goal and Identify which need(s) It addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.) 

The percent of students scoring proficient or above In the areas of mathematics will Increase from 80% on the 2007 

Goal 

TCAP test to 85% on the 2008 TCAP test. 

This addresses the needs of students In all grade levels and subgroups scoring below the proficient level in 

mathematics to meet the state's proficient and advanced levels of student achievement. Our goal will meet NClB 

Which need(s) does this Goal address? 

requirements for AYP. Students need to Increase their skills in problem solving and reasoning, representing and 

analvzlna mathematical situations, applying the use of numerical estimation and measurement. 

In the "Investing in Our Future: Moving Toward Excellence." the first goal of the strategic plan for Hamilton County 

How is this Goal linked to the system's Five-Year Plan? Schools promotes raising student achievement. This goal states that every student has the right to be enrolled in an 

effective school and further should obtain proficiency in mathematics. 


Section B - Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure Section C - For each of the Action Steps you list, give tlmellne, person(s) responsible, proJected cost(s)/requlred resources, funding 


strategies and Interventions Which should be scientifically based step.) 



communication, and parent and community Involvement Inltlat/ves 


• Students actively engage In ninetyminute 

cooperative group blocks. This 

Tlmeline 

Person(s) 

Responsible 

Required 

Resources 

& Funding 

Sources 


Action 

Step 

promotes hands-on learning through 

teacher directed Instruction. 

• Teachers create lessons promoting 

problem-solving strategies, higherorder 

thinking skills using Everyday 

Math and Think Link practice 

materials. 

July 2007- 

May-2008 

Classroom 

teachers 

Math lead 

teacher 

Administra- 

Everyday Math 

Materials 

Think Link, 

Instructional 

materials 

$4,967.00 from 

Title I 

Monitored through 

weekly formative 

assessment, Unit 

tests, sample student 

work, Quarterly Think 

Link reports, 

administrative walk- 

• Administration schedule horizontal 

tlon 

throughs, formal 

planning dally and vertical planning 

monthly to plan and implement math 

instruction and set goals. 

observations 

Action 

Step 

• Students actively engage In small 

group lessons daily that are targeted 

to strengthen areas of need. 

• Teachers will Implement differentiated 

Instruction, flexible grouping, and 

centers In order to prevent student 

deficiencies. 

July 2007- 

May-2008 

Classroom 

teachers 

Math lead 

teacher, 

Admlnistra- 

Everyday Math 

Materials 

Think Link 

Materials 

Center Materials 

$11,135.86 from 

Benwood 



assessment, Unit 

tests, student work 

samples, assessment 

lists and rubrics, 

Quarterly Think Link 


Performance Results 

I Outcomes 

'-----. '-----. ll- L- L- L-. IL-_ L- lL- L-. L-., ll- L- L- rL_-" IL- IL_ L-_

• Administrators schedule professional 

development sessions that focus on 

bridging the gap between the old SPI's 

and new state expectations. 

• Teachers create lessons on Think Link 

web site for student practice and 

review. 

• Data promotes communication about 

instructional needs during horizontal I 

vertical planning. 

. 

tion 

Computers 

reports, 

Think Link review 

practice scores 

Administrative walk- 

throughs, formal 

observations 

Action 

Step 

• Students participate in family math 

nights. Parents are invited to attend 

and support student initiatives. 

• Teachers will implement the use of 

cooperative grouping In order to 

demonstrate levels of understanding 

concepts of mathematics. 

• Administration is responsible for 

creating the schedule for parent 

involvement and will provide flyers that 

can be sent home to remind parents of 

initiatives. 

October, 

2007 

Classroom 

teachers 

Math lead 

teacher, 

Administra- 

tion 

Students 

Math 

manipulatives, 

instructional 

materials, flyers 

None 

Parent Attendance 

logs 

Student 

demonstrations 

shOwing 

understanding of 

concepts 

Increase In stUdent 

progress on Think 

Link, weekly and 

monthly assessments 

Action • One Room Schoolhouse 

Step • Girls Inc . 

L. Rogers CHA 


It 

Il __



Section A -Describe your goal and identify which need(s) It addresses. (Remember that your previous components identified the strengths and challenges/needs.) 

Goal 

The percentage of students scoring proficient or advanced in the area of Social Studies will increase from 58 % on 

the 2007 TCAP assessment to 64% on the 2008 TCAP assessment. 

This addresses the needs of students In all grade levels and subgroups scoring below the proficient level in Social 

Which need(s) does this Goal address? Studies to meet the state's proficient and advanced levels of student achievement. Our goal will meet NClB 

reQuirements for A YP. 

In l'lnvesting In Our Future: Moving Toward Excellence." the first goal of the strategic plan for Hamilton County 

How is this Goal linked to the system's Five-Year Plan? Schools promotes raising student achievement. This goal states that every student has the right to be enrolled in an 

effective school, and further should obtain proficiency in Social Studies. 


Section B - Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure Section C - For each of the Action Steps you list, give tlmellne, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/requlred resources, funding 


strategies and Interventions which should be SCientifically based step.) 


communication, and parent and community Involvement Initiatives 


Tlmellne 

Person(s) 

Responsible 

Required 

Resources 


& Funding 

Sources 



/ Outcomes 

• Teachers will develop units based on 

state SPI's that provide students with 

Administrators 

Action 

Step 

understanding of themselves, their 

community, country, and world. 

• The units contain cross-curricular 

connections, which include 

technology. 

• Students utilize literature and current 

events to make text-to-world 

connections. 

• Administrators conduct walk-throughs 

to monitor the lessons. 

• Administration provided professional 

development for hands-on training that 

Included Social Studies application. 

July 2007- 

May 2008 

Classroom 

Teachers 

Related arts 

teachers 

Junior 

Achievement 

Volunteers 

(J.A. Fora 

Day) 

Donna 

Whyte/ 

Administration 

Textbooks, 

leveled books, 

Intemet, Current 

events, Maps, 

Library Materials 

Materials for 

Center Activities 

None 



assessment 

Unit tests & 

Cumulative Reviews 

Sample student work 

Assessment lists and 

rubrics 


Action 

Step 

• Teachers and students 

participated in cultural awareness 

programs such as Harriet 

Tubman's Birthday 

Remembrance. 

• Students and teachers celebrated 

African-American history through 

literature, writing, music, and 

dance 

• Administration will be responsible 

for providing flyers that can be 

sent home to parents about these 

events 

February 

2008 

Classroom 

teachers 

Related arts 

teachers 

Community 

members 

and 

volunteers 

Students, 

parents 

Music, props, 

literature 

Teacher and 

administrator 

personal time 

creating and 

preparing for the 

programs 

Black History writing 

prompts 

Self-assessment 

Musical performances 

in song and dance 

Parental support I 

attendance 

Junior Volunteer 

Action 

Step 

• Members of the community will assist 

in teaching students about economics 

and government. 

October 

2007 

Junior 

Achievement 

volunteers, 

classroom 

Junior 

Achievement 

Materials 

Achievement 

training and 

communication 

by Junior 

assessment by 

teachers 

Project assessments 

teachers Achievement 

Action 

Step 

members Student auestlonnaire 




Section A -Describe your goal and identify which need(s) it addresses. (Remember that your previous components Identified the strengths and challenges/needs.) 

Goal Maintain school wide student attendance at 95% for the 2007-2008 school year. 

Which need(s) does this Goal address? Our goal will meet the NClB requirements for AYP. 

How is this Goal linked to the system's Five-Year Plan? 

In the "Investing in Our Future: Moving Toward Excellence" District Plan for Hamilton County School promotes and 

supports student attendance to Impact student achievement and to raise student test scores. 


Section B - Descriptively list the action you plan to take to ensure 

you will be able to progress toward your goal. Action steps are 

strategies and Interventions which should be scientifically based 


communication, and parent and community involvement Initiatives 


• Students will be encouraged to 

Increase attendance daily by working 

toward daily, weekly, and monthly 

Incentives. 

• Attendance data will be reviewed and 

a plan will be developed to monitor 

student attendance dally, weekly, 

monthly. and quarterly. 

• Administration communicated 

Action 

attendance goals during profeSSional 

development at the beginning of 

Step 

academic year 

• Administration informed parents of 

attendance goals and needs through 

Section C - For each of the Action Steps you list, give timellne, person(s) responsible, projected cost(s)/requlred resources, funding 

sources, evaluation strategy and performance results/outcomes. (For Evaluation Strategy, define how you will evaluate the action 

step.) 


Person(s) 

Tlmeline 

Required 


& Funding Evaluation Strategy 

Responsible Resources 

I Outcomes 

Sources 

Attendance 

Administra- 

Information 

Daily tracking of 

tion, 

NBAINFl attendance through 

Program: Never the office 

Teachers 

Been 

AbsentlNever Target tardy and 

Parents 

July 2007- 

Found late & chronically absent 

Quarterly 

students 

May 2008 Students 

11,572.44 from 

Continuous Progress 

Celebration 

Title I 

Conduct parent 

Attendance 

End of year results 

Perfect 

Clerk 

conferences or make 

Attendance phone calls for 

the use of a parent contract signed 

and returned by parent 

• Student attendance Is monitored 

through SASE and attendance 

percentages are posted for 

stakeholders. staff and awareness. 

Guidance 

counselor, 

Assistants 

Certificates 

Parent contracts 

Milka 

Montgomery 

students chronically 

tardy or absent 

Posting of statistics 

. Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process Templates - August, 2007 Page 35 of40

• Teachers participate in attendance 

initiatives that impact student 

achievement. 

Action 

• High performing teachers are 

recognized and celebrated annually 

based on TV AAS data based on a pay July 2007- 

Step performance scale. 

• Administration will establish a 

May 2008 

Action 

Step 

Action 

Step 

• 

mentoring program to encourage 

teacher attendance and provide 

support to new and experienced 

teachers. 

Students 

Classroom 

Attendance 

roster Increase of teacher 

teachers None attendance to Impact 

Parent students achievement 

Admlnistration 

information 


Component 5 

The School Improvement Plan 

and 

Process Evaluation

r 

r 

r 

r 

r L 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

Component 5 - The School Improvement Plan and Process Evaluation 

TEMPLATE 5.1: Process Evaluation 

The following summary questions are related to Process. They are designed as a culminating activity for you to 

analyze the process used to develop the school improvement plan. 

TEMPLATE 5.1: Process Evaluation 

(Rub,k Indiclltor 5.1) 

Evidence of Collaborative Process - Narrative response required 

What evidence do we have that shows that a collaborative process was used throughout the entire planning process? 

Hardy Elementary has a ongoing collaborative process that includes faculty meetings, parent conferences, parent 

programs, vertical and horizontal team planning and school improvement planning sessions. These meetings allow 

all stakeholders the opportunity to be kept aware of the effectiveness of our plan as well as an opportunity to offer 

input on the revisions necessary to improve the plan. All dates, notices and minutes from these meetings are a part 

of our Title I documentation. 

Evidence of Alignment of Data and Goals - Narrative response required 

What evidence do we have that proves alignment between our data and our goals? 

The goals and beliefs stated in component two are the motivation for the development and maintenance of our 

curriculum. practices, which are discussed in component three. Our action plan addresses the use of specific 

measures such as a balanced literacy block, differentiated instruction, rigorous centers for concept practice and 

interventionists to ensure a high level of success for our students. Other interventions we initiated such as the 

Saturday Writing academy, Early Morning school, and our alternative calendar have come into being as a result of 

the effective evaluation and application of previous data. Assessment tools such as DffiELS, Think Link, unit tests, 

and TCAP provide us with the data necessary to evaluate our program on a quarterly basis to ensure the plan is on 

track. 

In grade level meetings, teachers review the results of Think Link and place children in groups so that 

differentiated instruction might be planned to meet their level of achievement Ongoing teacher development, such 

as two days of training on center activities, improve the quality of the student's work adding rigor and higher level 

thinking opportunities. Positive peer observation, followed by debriefing sessions, encourages effective classroom 

practices.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

i I 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r ! 

r 

r 

r 

Suggestions for the Process - Narrative response required 

What suggestions do we have for improving our planning process? 

Our planning process has been very effective in the past; however, there are some suggestions, which might 

make the process flow a little more smoothly. An earlier start in the new school year for review and revision of our 

plan would help focus teacher's ideas as they develop plans and assessments. 

Since differentiated instruction is one of our educational practices, perhaps that process could be employed in 

developing our SIP by considering the intrinsic strengths of our staff members as they are assigned to work on the 

components. 

We are fortunate to have parents and outside volunteers who are willing to give many hours of service and care to 

our students and staff. It would be beneficial to keep a better record of the volunteer hours given so that recognition 

might be made and positive community interactions increased. 

TEMPLATE 5.2: Implementation Evaluation 

The following summary questions are related to TSIPP Implementation. They are designed as a culminating 

activity for you to plan the monitoring process that will ensure that the action steps from Component 4 are 

implemented. 

TEMPLATE 5.2: Implementation Evaluation 


Evidence of Implementation - Narrative response required 

What is our plan to begin implementation of the action steps? 

Teachers and administration work in vertical teams to disaggregate the data on several levels; by grade levels, and 

subject areas so that appropriate revisions can be made in the action plan. In grade levels, SPIs, Think Link, TCAP, 

and State Standards are aligned to focus the instructional interventions that will take place in the classroom. Using 

these assessments as well as those designed by teachers, the plan is reviewed quarterly in vertical teams to check for 

alignment and progress. Revision of the plan, if necessary, occurs and the process continues., 

Evidence of the Use of Data - Narrative response required 

What is the plan for the use of data? 

TCAP scores for the past three years are used to show patterns of growth as well as identify areas that require 

attention and intervention. DmELS information and running records indicate the benchmark levels of students as 

that appropriate groupings can be made for effective instruction. Think Link is a formative assessment used three 

times a year to assess student needs and achievement on specific SPIs for grades one through five. The monthly 

writing assessment is another data point teachers use to develop a specific plan to meet the goal of advanced level 

writing. All of these tools are employed in vertical.and grade level teams to develop plans for instruction. 


r 

r 

i 

I 

r 

i l 

r 

r 

r I 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r I 

r 

r 

TEMPLATE 5.3: Monitoring and Adjusting Evaluation 

The following summary questions are related to TSIPP Monitoring and Adjusting. They are designed as a 

culminating activity for the school to plan the monitoring process that will ensure that the school improvement plan 

leads to effectively supporting and building capacity for improved student achievement for all students. 

TEMPLATE 5.3: Monitoring and Adjusting Evaluation 


Evidence of Monitoring Dates - Narrative response required 

What are the calendar dates (Nov/Dec and May/June) when the School Leadership Team will meet to sustain the 

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process? Identify the person(s) responsible for monitoring and the role 

they will play in the monitoring process. 

The school leadership team will meet on December 12, 2008 and May 26, 2009 to 

sustain the TSIPP. The Administrative Team will be responsible for monitoring the 

process through formal and informal observations, formative and summative 

assessment and follow up with collaborative sessions to make necessary 

adjustments. 


Page 34 of35

r 

l 

r 

r 

I 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

Evidence of a Process for Monitoring Plan - Narrative response required 

What will be the process that the School Leadership Team will use to review the analysis of the data from the 

assessments and determine if adjustments need to be made in our plan? 

Once the TCAP scores are returned, the administrative team presents the results to the entire staff in disaggregated 

form so that each grade level and subject area is addressed. Scores are compared with results from previous years 

and discrepancies are highlighted. Vertical and grade level teams then meet to discuss and develop interventions to 

address academic areas that have not reached on exceeded our established goals. 

Evidence of a Process for Adjusting Plan - Narrative response required 

What will be the process that the School Leadership Team will use for adjusting our plan (person(s) responsible, 

timeline, actions steps, resources, evaluation strategies) when needed? 

The ongoing use of standardized and teacher created authentic assessments will drive the adjustments needed to 

align our plan with our stated goals. Progress monitoring using tools like running records and portfolio materials is 

a dynamic process occurring daily in the classroom. Grade level teams and subject areas meet regularly to review 

various assessments to discover discrepancies in achievement and set goals so that instruction might be tweaked to 

best meet the needs of the children and meet our goals. Our unique alternative calendar is an example of one of the 

changes we have made to meet the needs of our children. 

Evidence of a Plan for Communicating to All Stakeholders - Narrative response required 

How will the School Leadership Team communicate success/adjustments of the plan to stakeholders and solicit 

ongoing input from stakeholders? 

Administrators meet with the staff to present the data in usable, disaggregated form. There is a forum for parents 

and community so that the results may be presented and suggestions garnered from these interested parties. Parents 

are also advised of the school's and individual student's progress in parent/teacher semester conferences. The 

administration also monitors the scales and graphs of progress displayed within the classroom so that ongoing data 

driven instruction is assured. Grade level and vertical teams evaluate the data to discern the interventions necessary 

to keep goals on track. 

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process Templates - August, 2007 Page 35 of3S

Hamilton County Department of 

Education 

Elementary Division 

District 

Literacy 

Plan

J 

r 

rr1 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

fJ 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r 

rJ 

r 

Phonics 

Synthetic Phonics 

Consonants, Vowels, Blends, Digraphs 

Analytic· Phonics 

Word Families 

Vowel Patterns 

Stru'ctural Analysis 

Closed Vowel Pattern 

Open Vowel Pattern 

Silent E Pattern 

Vowel Team Pattern 

Digraphs 

Diphthongs 

R-Controlled Pattern 

Consonant + Ie Pattern 

Root words with Affixes 

Contractions 

Compound Words 

·Syllabication 

W(jrd StudylWord Origin 

Dr. Maggie Allen

r 

r 

r 

r 

l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

Hardy Elementary 

District's Literacy Plan 

Strategy 1. Reading Series 

Hardy Elementary will maintain a balanced literacy program. We will continue to 

teach the essential components of reading by utilizing the Houghton-Mifflin series as 

a resource along with leveled books. The Teacher Resource room containing a large 

variety of level books fiction and non-fiction has been a great additive to the 

teacher's classroom libraries. These books connect to various units and relate to 

real-life situations. Fountas and Pinnell is still the guide used for leveling books. 

The five bOOding blocks to reading: phonemic awareness, phonic instruction, 

Ouency, vocabulary, and text comprehension will be the focal point of our two-hour 

literacy block. 

Strategy 2. Reading Instruction 

Through the continuous use of running records, the teachers will be able to provide 

more individualized instruction for each student. When analyzing the results of 

each running record, teachers can depict a more prescriptive approach in meeting 

the needs of each student. Our instructional delivery for reading and writing is 

broken down into four components: model, share, guide, and independent. 

The level of the student will indicate how often a student is evaluated utilizing 

moning records. Due to the individualistic guided reading approach, teachers will 

continue to challenge the students at their appropriate ability leveL Teachers wiD 

continue to monitor and readjust to pinpoint deficiencies necessary to improve 

student performance. These adjustments will be reflected in their monthly progress 

report to administration and in their weekly lesson plans. 

The Six Trait Writing approach will be implemented within the literacy block and 

throughout aU disciplines. Each teacher has been given a classroom set of literature 

books that focus on each trait. 

Strategy 3. Sacred Time 

A two-hour uninterrupted literacy instruction is provided to aU teachers. This 

sacred time is monitored by the administration with walk-throughs. It is 

understood that visitors, phone calls, conferences, or intercom announcements 

during this time will not interrupt instruction.

l 

r 

r 

r 

r l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r l 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

Strategy 4. Lesson Planning 

Teachers are required to write weekly lesson plans using the SOSME model (S 

Standards, O-Objectives, S-Strategies, M-Materials, and E-Evaluation). Teachers 

are required to turn in a class roster each month with current reading levels. All 

classes K-S will indicate in their lesson plans which students are emergent, early, 

transitional, or fluent readers. They will also list the strategies being taught. 

Based on running records and DmELS assessment, students not on grade level will 

be referred to the "recovery" component of Intersession to combat any deficiencies. 

Students working on grade level wiD have the opportunity to participate in the 

"enrichment" component of Intersession. This component will aUow students to 

expand on prior knowledge. 

Common planning time for each grade level will allow the teachers the opportunity 

to collaborate and discuss lesson plans, student's achievement and instructional 

strategies for improvement. Teachers are required to have an agenda and take 

minutes of each weekly common planning time. Teachers will also take this 

opportunity to observe others classes below and above the grade level they are 

teaching to allow dialogue during vertical team meetings. The administration and 

modeled classroom teachers will monitor this. 

Strategy 5. Teacher Professional Development 

Hardy Elementary's goal is to become proficient in the implementation of the 

district's literacy plan. The majority of our professional development will focus 

solely on best practices for executing the five buDding blocks of reading. A team of 

teachers from each grade level and the model classroom teachers will demonstrate 

best practices focusing on the five essential components in reading. Professional 

development dates are continuous and focus on student performance.. We will 

continue our academic focus on raising the bar of expectations to guarantee 100% 

of our students will be reading on grade leveL Doring grade level meetings, we will 

model, share, and guide teachers to create a more effective reading block. The 

leadership team will focus on the intensity of the teacher's instructional delivery, the 

analysis of each running record, and the level of effective centers. The 

administrative team and teachers will mesh the Six Trait Writing and the guided 

writing component into the literacy block. This approach will compliment each 

other and strengthen the writing scores. The teachers will continue the book study 

on Robert Marzano's Classroom Instruction that Works-Research Based Strategies 

for Increasing Student Achievement, Valerie Ellery's Creating Strategic Readers 

Techniques for Developing Competency in Phonemic Awareness. Phonics. Fluency. 

Vocabulary. and Comprehension. Cathy A. Ton's The Literacy Coach's Survival 

Guide Essential Questions and Practical Answers. Carol Ann Tomlinson's How to 

Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. Sharon Vaughn's Research 

Based Methods of Reading Instruction - Grades K-3. The validity of these books 

wiD define the teacher's effectiveness during their Hteracy block.

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

meet with the administrative team and modeled classroom teachers monitoring and 

adjusting to meet the needs of the students. In the month of June, teachers, 

administration and modeled classroom teachers will meet to begin long-range 

planning vertically and horizontally. Grade level planning will allow teachers to 

divide into vertical teams to insure consistency and accountability across grade 

levels. 

Strategy 10. Leadership Program 

The administrative team will continue to be on the forefront of the most current 

strategies by attending the International Reading Association, Year-Round School 

Conference, professional development provided by the district and Title I, 

professional readings and study groups, and collaborating with coUeagues and staff.

Benwood 

Initiative 

Proposal 

for 

Year 5

Hardy Data Comments Continued 

Ha rdy Elementary School 

analysis of grade level performance reveals that we must strongly consider our plan of action to target 

students across grade levels. The 2005-2006 group of third grade students exhibited an increase in 

number ofstudents below proficient (6.9%), as well as a decrease in students scoring proficient (4.5%) 

and advanced (9.4%) as 2006-2007 fourth graders. Meanwhile, the 2005- 

2006 fourth grade group showed significant growth of 28.5% decrease in students below proficient, 

19.1 % increase in proficiency and 9.4% advanced as 2006-2007 5 th graders. 

As indicated by the charts below; the achievement gender gap at Hardy is decreasing; however, there 

is still room for improvement. 

2006-2007 Hardy Gender Gap 2IJ05.2006 Hardy Gender Data 

In terms of Hardy's TV AAS Data for the last 2 years, fourth grade surfaces again as an area of 

immediate focus. NCE gains have not been consistently positive over the last three years i.e. -1.0Y in 

2005, 2.0G in 2006, and -1.9R in 2007. Rigorous and differentiated literacy instruction wiII continue to 

be part of our action plan to improve academic achievement for 4th grade as well as maintain the 

achievement gains in 5 th • 

The 2006/2007 TV AAS data for 5 th grade revealed significant positive results in terms of student 

achievement. the 2006 mean NCE gain for f"lfth grade was 10.7G, significantly Iiigher than the set 

growth standard of 6.4 and the state standard of 3.4. In 2007, the mean NCE gain was 1l.6G. Hardy's 

three year average NCE gain is 10.IG. 

Another immediate area of concern is the lack of growth in writing. Writing scores have remained at 

3.4 over the last two years. In addition, our female students performed higher than our male students 

on the 2006 and 2007 state writing assessment, thns challenging us to incorporate a plan that not only 

Page 3 of9

HARDY ELEMENTARY 

2007-2008 Benwood Schools' Rationale Action Plan 

Vision: Excellent schools and excellent teachers preparing every child to be successful in school and in life. 

Goal # 1: Every child is promoted from 5 th grade as a strong reader and writer. 

Objective # 1: Before the end of the 2007-2008 SY, 85 0A, ofSth graders score Proficient in Reading and the percentage of students scoring Advanced will have increased by 

at least 5%. 

Objective # 2: Before the end of the 2007-2008 SY, 

the Tennessee Writing Exam. 

80 % ofSth graders will score Proficient (4.0) and the percentage scoring Exemplary (S.0-6.0) wiH increase by 5% on 

Annual Strategy: Describe Below the Activities You Will Use In One Year To Move Toward the Goal and Objectives 

bat will you do to fulfill the above stated goal? . 0 will be responsible What measures or evidence will you use to demonstrate impact? en and how will monitoring take dicate amount requested only for 

lease provide a budget description of each activity. where or the action/activity? (Include formative and summative indicators.) lace? ose items where Benwood Funds 

mwood Funds are used. Other budgetary activities where BW· an be utilized. 

nds are not used, it is not necessary to state the budget amount What strategy or process will you use to gather data? (Surveys!· 

It please include the activity). TerraNova, DIBELS, ThfukLink, etc.) 

/\ctivity # 1 eachers, 

Two-hour uninterrupted literacy block 

Activity # 2 

HCDE Literacy Plan 

Activity # 3 

Six Trait Writing Process 

dministrators, 

ara-professionals 

. reading lab Teachers and administrators will monitor for 

improvements and assess in the classroom using 

. g records, DIBELS, Star Reading, and 

ThinkLink. 

eachers, 

dministrators, pararofessionals 

in Administrators will conduct walk-throughs, 

eading lab informal and formal observations. Teachers will 

track students through running records, DIBELS, 

(benchmark and progress monitoring), ThinkLink, 

and unit tests. N-OOING ALL YEAR 

eachers; Teachers will base students writing on the 6-point 

dministrators; scale designated by the state. (0-6). A guided 

riting framework illustrating a 4-6 scoring will be 

terventionist, displayed, modeled and shared for student 

iteracy coach improvement. Teachers will select student writing 

to display on the "Writers Wall of Fame," & 

conduct benchmark tasks. N-GOING ALL YEAR 

1 

fA 

fA 

fA

Student Data

2009 AYP Preliminary Reports School ID: 

Met AYP 

Met Attendance Rate K�8 

3300110 

Hardy Elementary School K-8 

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 

N Y Y Y N Y 

Y 

Y 

Y 

Ma t h All White Hisp Black NatAm API ED SWD LEP 

Y 

NEW NCLB Status: 

NCLB Status Last Year: 

Good Standing 

Student Count 

265 4 2 259 262 53 

Percent Passing 2009 74 50 100 74 

74 57 

Percent Passing 2008 80 100 100 80 80 70 

Percent Not Passing 2009 26 50 0 26 

26 43 

Percent Not Passing 2008 20 0 0 20 20 30 

Percent Not Passing 2007 20 50 0 20 19 39 0 

Percent Advanced 2009 21 0 100 21 21 28 


Made AYP in Math 

N N N N 

* How AYP was Met 

Read i ng All White Hisp Black NatAm API ED SWD LEP 

Student Count 

265 4 2 259 262 53 



Percent Not Passing 2009 15 50 0 15 15 25 

Percent Not Passing 2008 11 0 0 11 

11 26 

Percent Not Passing 2007 18 0 0 19 18 30 0 

Percent Advanced 2009 18 0 60 18 

18 27 


Made AYP in Reading Y Y Y Y 

* How AYP was Met 1CI 1CI 1CI SH3 

Math Benchmarks 

K-8 =86% HS = 83% 

* Key to "How AYP was met " 

1 = Made current year benchmark 

1CI = Met current year w/ Confidence Level 

2 = Met with 2�year average 

2CI = Met with 2�year avg Confidence Level 

3 = Met with 3�year average 

3CI = Met with 3�year avg Confidence Level 

SH1 = Safe Harbor by 1�year 10% reduction 



TO1 = Met with SWD interium flexibility 

PR = Met with projections 

Reading Benchmarks 

K-8 = 89% HS = 93%

Hardy Elementary School 

Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special Education Status 

ELL Status 

All students tested 

Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 

African-American 

American Indian 

Asian-Pacific Islander 

Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 

Proficient 

2005 

Math 

Proficient or 

Advanced 

Percent Percent 

30.4% 69.6% 

51.7% 48.3% 

23.3% 76.7% 

16.8% 83.2% 

25.8% 74.2% 

34.5% 65.5% 

31.2% 68.8% 

.0% 100.0% 

30.8% 69.2% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

30.7% 69.3% 

.0% 100.0% 

25.3% 74.7% 

66.7% 33.3% 

30.4% 69.6% 

.0% .0% 

TCAP CRT Achievement Test Results for 2009 

Below 

Proficient 

2006 

Math 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


16.0% 84.0% 

23.0% 77.0% 

23.7% 76.3% 

4.3% 95.7% 

13.8% 86.2% 

18.1% 81.9% 

16.7% 83.3% 

.0% 100.0% 

16.3% 83.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

16.3% 83.7% 

.0% 100.0% 

11.5% 88.5% 

42.9% 57.1% 

16.0% 84.0% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Math 

Below 

Proficient 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


22.1% 77.9% 

18.7% 81.3% 

30.9% 69.1% 

17.4% 82.6% 

22.4% 77.6% 

21.8% 78.2% 

22.2% 77.8% 

20.0% 80.0% 

22.0% 78.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

22.6% 77.4% 

.0% 100.0% 

15.3% 84.7% 

57.1% 42.9% 

22.1% 77.9% 

.0% .0% 

Below 

Proficient 

2008 

Math 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


22.3% 77.7% 

35.9% 64.1% 

20.9% 79.1% 

9.6% 90.4% 

23.8% 76.2% 

20.5% 79.5% 

22.7% 77.3% 

.0% 100.0% 

22.5% 77.5% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

22.7% 77.3% 

.0% 100.0% 

18.5% 81.5% 

43.2% 56.8% 

22.3% 77.7% 

.0% .0% 

Below 

Proficient 

2009 

Math 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


28.6% 71.4% 

41.0% 59.0% 

25.6% 74.4% 

16.3% 83.7% 

26.3% 73.7% 

30.9% 69.1% 

28.1% 71.9% 

100.0% .0% 

28.8% 71.2% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

29.3% 70.7% 

.0% 100.0% 

22.0% 78.0% 

64.3% 35.7% 

28.6% 71.4% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 

Questions: Accountability and Testing


Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special Education 

Status 

ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

2005 

Reading-Language Arts 

Below 

Proficient 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


27.4% 72.6% 

32.6% 67.4% 

30.2% 69.8% 

20.0% 80.0% 

19.5% 80.5% 

34.5% 65.5% 

28.1% 71.9% 

.0% 100.0% 

27.8% 72.2% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

27.7% 72.3% 

.0% 100.0% 

26.2% 73.8% 

36.4% 63.6% 

27.4% 72.6% 

.0% .0% 


2006 


Below Proficient or 

Proficient Advanced 


20.1% 79.9% 

20.3% 79.7% 

35.5% 64.5% 

7.4% 92.6% 

12.9% 87.1% 

26.8% 73.2% 

20.9% 79.1% 

.0% 100.0% 

20.4% 79.6% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

20.5% 79.5% 

.0% 100.0% 

17.2% 82.8% 

37.1% 62.9% 

20.1% 79.9% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 





14.7% 85.3% 

11.0% 89.0% 

27.2% 72.8% 

7.0% 93.0% 

10.4% 89.6% 

18.8% 81.2% 

14.1% 85.9% 

30.0% 70.0% 

15.0% 85.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

15.1% 84.9% 

.0% 100.0% 

11.6% 88.4% 

31.0% 69.0% 

14.7% 85.3% 

.0% .0% 

2008 





11.2% 88.8% 

14.1% 85.9% 

16.5% 83.5% 

1.4% 98.6% 

9.2% 90.8% 

13.4% 86.6% 

11.3% 88.7% 

.0% 100.0% 

11.3% 88.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

11.3% 88.7% 

.0% 100.0% 

7.3% 92.7% 

32.4% 67.6% 

11.2% 88.8% 

.0% .0% 

2009 





17.5% 82.5% 

27.6% 72.4% 

15.4% 84.6% 

7.0% 93.0% 

11.3% 88.7% 

23.5% 76.5% 

17.2% 82.8% 

50.0% 50.0% 

17.3% 82.7% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

17.9% 82.1% 

.0% 100.0% 

14.5% 85.5% 

33.3% 66.7% 

17.5% 82.5% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 

Proficient 

2005 

Science 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


41.9% 58.1% 

60.7% 39.3% 

29.1% 70.9% 

35.8% 64.2% 

39.1% 60.9% 

44.4% 55.6% 

42.7% 57.3% 

11.1% 88.9% 

42.5% 57.5% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

42.3% 57.7% 

.0% 100.0% 

39.2% 60.8% 

60.6% 39.4% 

41.9% 58.1% 

.0% .0% 


2006 

Science 

Below 

Proficient 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


37.3% 62.7% 

37.8% 62.2% 

44.7% 55.3% 

30.9% 69.1% 

32.8% 67.2% 

41.7% 58.3% 

38.0% 62.0% 

20.0% 80.0% 

37.9% 62.1% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

38.1% 61.9% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.5% 66.5% 

60.0% 40.0% 

37.3% 62.7% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Science 

Below 

Proficient 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


24.8% 75.2% 

17.6% 82.4% 

29.6% 70.4% 

27.9% 72.1% 

21.6% 78.4% 

27.8% 72.2% 

25.0% 75.0% 

20.0% 80.0% 

25.2% 74.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

25.4% 74.6% 

.0% 100.0% 

17.6% 82.4% 

61.9% 38.1% 

24.8% 75.2% 

.0% .0% 

2008 

Science 

Below 

Proficient 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


29.8% 70.2% 

34.6% 65.4% 

28.6% 71.4% 

26.0% 74.0% 

32.3% 67.7% 

26.8% 73.2% 

29.8% 70.2% 

25.0% 75.0% 

30.0% 70.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

30.3% 69.7% 

.0% 100.0% 

26.3% 73.7% 

48.6% 51.4% 

29.8% 70.2% 

.0% .0% 

2009 

Science 

Below 

Proficient 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


37.2% 62.8% 

44.8% 55.2% 

35.9% 64.1% 

29.1% 70.9% 

36.1% 63.9% 

38.2% 61.8% 

36.7% 63.3% 

100.0% .0% 

37.3% 62.7% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

50.0% 50.0% 

37.6% 62.4% 

16.7% 83.3% 

32.2% 67.8% 

64.3% 35.7% 

37.2% 62.8% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


Status 

ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 

Proficient 

2005 

Social Studies 

Proficient or 

Advanced 


43.3% 56.7% 

59.6% 40.4% 

14.0% 86.0% 

54.7% 45.3% 

37.5% 62.5% 

48.6% 51.4% 

44.2% 55.8% 

11.1% 88.9% 

44.0% 56.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

43.8% 56.2% 

.0% 100.0% 

38.8% 61.2% 

75.8% 24.2% 

43.3% 56.7% 

.0% .0% 


2006 





33.2% 66.8% 

41.9% 58.1% 

34.2% 65.8% 

25.5% 74.5% 

31.0% 69.0% 

35.4% 64.6% 

34.2% 65.8% 

10.0% 90.0% 

33.8% 66.3% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.9% 66.1% 

.0% 100.0% 

29.2% 70.8% 

57.1% 42.9% 

33.2% 66.8% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 





41.9% 58.1% 

35.2% 64.8% 

43.2% 56.8% 

47.7% 52.3% 

43.2% 56.8% 

40.6% 59.4% 

42.3% 57.7% 

30.0% 70.0% 

42.1% 57.9% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

42.9% 57.1% 

.0% 100.0% 

35.6% 64.4% 

73.8% 26.2% 

41.9% 58.1% 

.0% .0% 

2008 





33.5% 66.5% 

44.9% 55.1% 

19.8% 80.2% 

38.4% 61.6% 

30.0% 70.0% 

37.5% 62.5% 

33.2% 66.8% 

50.0% 50.0% 

33.8% 66.3% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

34.0% 66.0% 

.0% 100.0% 

28.8% 71.2% 

59.5% 40.5% 

33.5% 66.5% 

.0% .0% 

2009 





39.0% 61.0% 

57.1% 42.9% 

17.9% 82.1% 

36.0% 64.0% 

33.8% 66.2% 

44.1% 55.9% 

38.6% 61.4% 

100.0% .0% 

38.8% 61.2% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

50.0% 50.0% 

39.5% 60.5% 

16.7% 83.3% 

33.5% 66.5% 

69.0% 31.0% 

39.0% 61.0% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

TCAP CRT Achievement Test Results for Advanced Status 2009 

2005 

Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Advanced 


84.1% 15.9% 

89.9% 10.1% 

83.7% 16.3% 

78.9% 21.1% 

85.9% 14.1% 

82.4% 17.6% 

84.6% 15.4% 

66.7% 33.3% 

84.2% 15.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

75.0% 25.0% 

84.6% 15.4% 

33.3% 66.7% 

81.9% 18.1% 

100.0% .0% 

84.1% 15.9% 

.0% .0% 

2006 

Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced Advanced 


68.4% 31.6% 

85.1% 14.9% 

81.6% 18.4% 

44.7% 55.3% 

69.8% 30.2% 

66.9% 33.1% 

69.7% 30.3% 

40.0% 60.0% 

69.2% 30.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

25.0% 75.0% 

69.0% 31.0% 

40.0% 60.0% 

66.0% 34.0% 

82.9% 17.1% 

68.4% 31.6% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Math Advanced 

Below 



87.2% 12.8% 

89.0% 11.0% 

91.4% 8.6% 

81.4% 18.6% 

89.6% 10.4% 

85.0% 15.0% 

88.7% 11.3% 

50.0% 50.0% 

87.4% 12.6% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

66.7% 33.3% 

88.5% 11.5% 

33.3% 66.7% 

85.6% 14.4% 

95.2% 4.8% 

87.2% 12.8% 

.0% .0% 

2008 

Math Advanced 

Below 



84.7% 15.3% 

88.5% 11.5% 

87.9% 12.1% 

76.7% 23.3% 

83.1% 16.9% 

86.6% 13.4% 

84.9% 15.1% 

75.0% 25.0% 

84.6% 15.4% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

86.1% 13.9% 

.0% 100.0% 

84.4% 15.6% 

86.5% 13.5% 

84.7% 15.3% 

.0% .0% 

2009 

Math Advanced 

Below 



84.0% 16.0% 

95.2% 4.8% 

89.7% 10.3% 

65.1% 34.9% 

83.5% 16.5% 

84.6% 15.4% 

83.9% 16.1% 

100.0% .0% 

84.2% 15.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

100.0% .0% 

85.2% 14.8% 

33.3% 66.7% 

81.5% 18.5% 

97.6% 2.4% 

84.0% 16.0% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


Status 

ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


2005 


Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Advanced 


93.7% 6.3% 

94.4% 5.6% 

91.9% 8.1% 

94.7% 5.3% 

93.0% 7.0% 

94.4% 5.6% 

93.8% 6.2% 

88.9% 11.1% 

94.0% 6.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

75.0% 25.0% 

94.4% 5.6% 

33.3% 66.7% 

92.8% 7.2% 

100.0% .0% 

93.7% 6.3% 

.0% .0% 

2006 


Advanced 

Below 



83.2% 16.8% 

86.5% 13.5% 

90.8% 9.2% 

74.5% 25.5% 

80.2% 19.8% 

85.8% 14.2% 

84.2% 15.8% 

60.0% 40.0% 

83.3% 16.7% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

75.0% 25.0% 

84.5% 15.5% 

20.0% 80.0% 

81.8% 18.2% 

91.4% 8.6% 

83.2% 16.8% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 


Advanced 

Below 



81.8% 18.2% 

75.8% 24.2% 

88.9% 11.1% 

81.4% 18.6% 

78.4% 21.6% 

85.0% 15.0% 

82.3% 17.7% 

70.0% 30.0% 

82.3% 17.7% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

82.9% 17.1% 

33.3% 66.7% 

79.2% 20.8% 

95.2% 4.8% 

81.8% 18.2% 

.0% .0% 

2008 


Advanced 

Below 



83.5% 16.5% 

83.3% 16.7% 

87.9% 12.1% 

78.1% 21.9% 

80.0% 20.0% 

87.5% 12.5% 

83.6% 16.4% 

75.0% 25.0% 

83.3% 16.7% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

84.5% 15.5% 

25.0% 75.0% 

82.4% 17.6% 

89.2% 10.8% 

83.5% 16.5% 

.0% .0% 

2009 


Advanced 

Below 



88.8% 11.2% 

87.6% 12.4% 

94.9% 5.1% 

84.9% 15.1% 

85.0% 15.0% 

92.6% 7.4% 

88.8% 11.2% 

100.0% .0% 

88.8% 11.2% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

66.7% 33.3% 

100.0% .0% 

90.1% 9.9% 

33.3% 66.7% 

87.2% 12.8% 

97.6% 2.4% 

88.8% 11.2% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


2005 

Science Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Advanced 


96.3% 3.7% 

94.4% 5.6% 

96.5% 3.5% 

97.9% 2.1% 

96.9% 3.1% 

95.8% 4.2% 

97.3% 2.7% 

66.7% 33.3% 

96.6% 3.4% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

75.0% 25.0% 

96.6% 3.4% 

66.7% 33.3% 

95.8% 4.2% 

100.0% .0% 

96.3% 3.7% 

.0% .0% 

2006 


Below 



93.0% 7.0% 

95.9% 4.1% 

89.5% 10.5% 

93.6% 6.4% 

92.2% 7.8% 

93.7% 6.3% 

93.2% 6.8% 

90.0% 10.0% 

92.9% 7.1% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

93.3% 6.7% 

80.0% 20.0% 

92.8% 7.2% 

94.3% 5.7% 

93.0% 7.0% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 


Below 



81.0% 19.0% 

75.8% 24.2% 

84.0% 16.0% 

83.7% 16.3% 

80.8% 19.2% 

81.2% 18.8% 

82.3% 17.7% 

50.0% 50.0% 

81.9% 18.1% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

82.5% 17.5% 

16.7% 83.3% 

78.2% 21.8% 

95.2% 4.8% 

81.0% 19.0% 

.0% .0% 

2008 


Below 



91.7% 8.3% 

94.9% 5.1% 

89.0% 11.0% 

91.8% 8.2% 

91.5% 8.5% 

92.0% 8.0% 

92.0% 8.0% 

75.0% 25.0% 

91.7% 8.3% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

92.4% 7.6% 

50.0% 50.0% 

91.7% 8.3% 

91.9% 8.1% 

91.7% 8.3% 

.0% .0% 

2009 


Below 



89.2% 10.8% 

89.5% 10.5% 

96.2% 3.8% 

82.6% 17.4% 

90.2% 9.8% 

88.2% 11.8% 

89.1% 10.9% 

100.0% .0% 

90.0% 10.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

66.7% 33.3% 

66.7% 33.3% 

90.1% 9.9% 

50.0% 50.0% 

88.1% 11.9% 

95.2% 4.8% 

89.2% 10.8% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


2005 

Social Studies Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Advanced 


92.2% 7.8% 

92.1% 7.9% 

87.2% 12.8% 

96.8% 3.2% 

91.4% 8.6% 

93.0% 7.0% 

92.3% 7.7% 

88.9% 11.1% 

92.5% 7.5% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

75.0% 25.0% 

92.5% 7.5% 

66.7% 33.3% 

91.1% 8.9% 

100.0% .0% 

92.2% 7.8% 

.0% .0% 

2006 


Below 



91.8% 8.2% 

95.9% 4.1% 

86.8% 13.2% 

92.6% 7.4% 

91.4% 8.6% 

92.9% 7.1% 

92.3% 7.7% 

80.0% 20.0% 

91.7% 8.3% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

92.5% 7.5% 

60.0% 40.0% 

90.9% 9.1% 

97.1% 2.9% 

91.8% 8.2% 

.0% .0% 

Test Year 

2007 


Below 



88.4% 11.6% 

82.4% 17.6% 

92.6% 7.4% 

90.7% 9.3% 

87.2% 12.8% 

89.5% 10.5% 

89.5% 10.5% 

60.0% 40.0% 

89.0% 11.0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

100.0% .0% 

33.3% 66.7% 

89.7% 10.3% 

33.3% 66.7% 

86.6% 13.4% 

97.6% 2.4% 

88.4% 11.6% 

.0% .0% 

2008 


Below 



88.8% 11.2% 

93.6% 6.4% 

79.1% 20.9% 

95.9% 4.1% 

89.2% 10.8% 

88.4% 11.6% 

89.1% 10.9% 

75.0% 25.0% 

89.2% 10.8% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

.0% 100.0% 

100.0% .0% 

89.5% 10.5% 

50.0% 50.0% 

88.3% 11.7% 

91.9% 8.1% 

88.8% 11.2% 

.0% .0% 

2009 


Below 



88.5% 11.5% 

95.2% 4.8% 

78.2% 21.8% 

89.5% 10.5% 

86.5% 13.5% 

90.4% 9.6% 

88.4% 11.6% 

100.0% .0% 

88.8% 11.2% 

.0% .0% 

.0% .0% 

66.7% 33.3% 

83.3% 16.7% 

89.4% 10.6% 

50.0% 50.0% 

86.3% 13.7% 

100.0% .0% 

88.5% 11.5% 

.0% .0% 

Page 26 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


Status 

ELL Status 

All students tested. 

Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 

Proficient 

TCAP CRT Achievement Test Preformance Level Counts for 2009 

2006 

Math Status 

Proficient 

Advanced 

Count Count Count 

39 128 77 

17 46 11 

18 44 14 

4 

38 52 

16 65 35 

23 62 42 

39 124 71 

0 

4 6 

39 127 74 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 3 

39 126 74 

0 

2 3 

24 114 71 

15 14 6 

39 128 77 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

2007 

2008 

Math Status 

Math Status 

Below 

Below 

Proficient Proficient Advanced Proficient Proficient Advanced 

Count Count Count Count Count Count 

57 168 33 54 151 37 

17 64 10 28 41 9 

25 49 7 19 61 11 

15 55 16 7 

49 17 

28 84 13 31 77 22 

29 84 20 23 74 15 

55 165 28 54 148 36 

2 

3 5 

0 

3 1 

56 166 32 54 149 37 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

0 

1 0 

1 

1 1 

0 

1 0 

57 166 29 54 151 33 

0 

2 4 

0 

0 4 

33 152 31 38 135 32 

24 16 2 16 16 5 

57 168 33 54 151 37 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

2009 

Math Status 

Below 

Proficient Proficient Advanced 


77 149 43 

43 57 5 

20 50 8 

14 42 30 

35 76 22 

42 73 21 

75 149 43 

2 

0 0 

75 144 41 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 2 

2 

4 0 

77 147 39 

0 

2 4 

50 135 42 

27 14 1 

77 149 43 

0 

0 0 

Page 24 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


Status 

ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

2006 

Reading-Language Status 

Below 

Proficient 


Proficient 

Advanced 


49 154 41 

15 49 10 

27 42 7 

7 

63 24 

15 78 23 

34 75 18 

49 148 37 

0 

6 4 

49 151 40 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

3 1 

49 153 37 

0 

1 4 

36 135 38 

13 19 3 

49 154 41 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

2007 

2008 



Below 

Below 



38 173 47 27 175 40 

10 59 22 11 54 13 

22 50 9 15 65 11 

6 

64 16 1 

56 16 

13 85 27 12 92 26 

25 88 20 15 83 14 

35 169 44 27 172 39 

3 

4 3 

0 

3 1 

38 171 45 27 173 40 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

0 

1 0 

0 

1 2 

0 

1 0 

38 171 43 27 174 37 

0 

2 4 

0 

1 3 

25 146 45 15 154 36 

13 27 2 12 21 4 

38 173 47 27 175 40 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

2009 


Below 



47 192 30 

29 63 13 

12 62 4 

6 

67 13 

15 98 20 

32 94 10 

46 191 30 

1 

1 0 

45 186 29 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

2 1 

2 

4 0 

47 190 26 

0 

2 4 

33 165 29 

14 27 1 

47 192 30 

0 

0 0 

Page 24 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


Status 

ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 

Proficient 


2006 

Science Status 

Proficient 

Advanced 


91 136 17 

28 43 3 

34 34 8 

29 59 6 

38 69 9 

53 66 8 

89 129 16 

2 

7 1 

91 132 17 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

4 0 

91 132 16 

0 

4 1 

70 124 15 

21 12 2 

91 136 17 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

2007 

2008 



Below 

Below 



64 145 49 72 150 20 

16 53 22 27 47 4 

24 44 13 26 55 10 

24 48 14 19 48 6 

27 74 24 42 77 11 

37 71 25 30 73 9 

62 142 44 71 148 19 

2 

3 5 

1 

2 1 

64 144 46 72 148 20 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 1 

0 

1 0 

0 

1 2 

0 

1 0 

64 144 44 72 148 18 

0 

1 5 

0 

2 2 

38 131 47 54 134 17 

26 14 2 18 16 3 

64 145 49 72 150 20 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

2009 


Below 



100 140 29 

47 47 11 

28 47 3 

25 46 15 

48 72 13 

52 68 16 

98 140 29 

2 

0 0 

97 137 26 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

2 1 

3 

1 2 

99 138 26 

1 

2 3 

73 127 27 

27 13 2 

100 140 29 

0 

0 0 

Page 24 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


Status 

ELL Status 


Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 

Proficient 


2006 

Social Studies Status 

Proficient 

Advanced 


81 143 20 

31 40 3 

26 40 10 

24 63 7 

36 70 10 

45 73 9 

80 136 18 

1 

7 2 

81 139 20 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

4 0 

81 140 18 

0 

3 2 

61 129 19 

20 14 1 

81 143 20 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

2007 

2008 



Below 

Below 



108 120 30 81 134 27 

32 43 16 35 38 5 

35 40 6 18 54 19 

41 37 8 28 42 3 

54 55 16 39 77 14 

54 65 14 42 57 13 

105 117 26 79 133 26 

3 

3 4 

2 

1 1 

107 119 28 81 133 26 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

0 

0 1 

1 

0 2 

0 

1 0 

108 118 26 81 132 25 

0 

2 4 

0 

2 2 

77 110 29 59 122 24 

31 10 1 22 12 3 

108 120 30 81 134 27 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

2009 


Below 



105 133 31 

60 40 5 

14 47 17 

31 46 9 

45 70 18 

60 63 13 

103 133 31 

2 

0 0 

101 130 29 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

1 

1 1 

3 

2 1 

104 131 28 

1 

2 3 

76 120 31 

29 13 0 

105 133 31 

0 

0 0 

Page 24 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


ELL Status 


TCAP CRT Achievement Test RCPI Math Results for 2009 

Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Math RCPI - 

Number 

Sense/Theory 

Math RCPI - 

Computation 

Math RCPI - 

Algebraic 

Thinking 

Test Year 

2009 

Math RCPI - 

Real World 

Problem 

Solving 

Math RCPI - 

Data 

Analysis and 

Probability 

Math RCPI - 

Measuremen 

t 

Math RCPI - 

Geometry 

Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean 

55 

78 

61 

54 

53 

57 

61 

49 

83 

58 

50 

46 

54 

60 

56 

79 

62 

60 

53 

58 

62 

63 

70 

63 

54 

61 

61 

60 

57 

79 

63 

55 

54 

59 

62 

54 

77 

59 

53 

51 

56 

59 

56 

78 

61 

54 

53 

58 

61 

28 

58 

35 

30 

31 

34 

35 

55 

78 

61 

54 

53 

58 

61 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

70 

79 

72 

62 

66 

69 

70 

46 

75 

51 

47 

44 

50 

53 

55 

77 

60 

53 

52 

57 

60 

82 

92 

85 

82 

84 

83 

85 

58 

80 

64 

57 

56 

60 

63 

41 

65 

45 

38 

36 

43 

45 

55 

78 

61 

54 

53 

57 

61 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

Page 22 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 


ELL Status 


TCAP CRT Achievement Test RCPI Reading Language Arts Results for 2009 

Total 

3rd Grade 

4th Grade 

5th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Content 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Meaning 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Vocabulary 

Test Year 

2009 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Writing 

Organization 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Writing 

Process 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Grammar 

Conventions 

Reading 

RCPI - 

Techniques 

and Skills 


49 

58 

58 

48 

49 

49 

54 

42 

60 

54 

49 

44 

48 

62 

49 

54 

58 

51 

58 

50 

44 

58 

60 

64 

42 

49 

49 

52 

53 

60 

62 

51 

53 

52 

56 

47 

56 

55 

44 

46 

46 

52 

50 

58 

59 

48 

50 

49 

54 

33 

48 

39 

36 

32 

38 

51 

49 

58 

58 

47 

49 

49 

54 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

68 

75 

76 

59 

58 

61 

67 

45 

55 

54 

48 

46 

45 

55 

49 

58 

58 

47 

49 

48 

53 

78 

82 

84 

69 

72 

71 

76 

51 

60 

61 

50 

51 

51 

56 

40 

47 

47 

35 

39 

39 

44 

49 

58 

58 

48 

49 

49 

54 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

Page 22 



Score Range (0 to 6) 


0 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Grade Level 

Elementary School 

Count 

0 

1 

15 

37 

29 

7 

1 

Elementary Writing Results 2005 to 2009 

2005 

Percent 

.0% 

1.1% 

16.7% 

41.1% 

32.2% 

7.8% 

1.1% 

Grade Level 


Count 

0 

0 

5 

38 

43 

6 

2 

2006 

Percent 

.0% 

.0% 

5.3% 

40.4% 

45.7% 

6.4% 

2.1% 

Grade Level 


Count 

1 

0 

7 

34 

35 

4 

2 

Test Year 

2007 

Percent 

1.2% 

.0% 

8.4% 

41.0% 

42.2% 

4.8% 

2.4% 

Grade Level 


Count 

0 

0 

1 

6 

43 

19 

2 

2008 

Percent 

.0% 

.0% 

1.4% 

8.5% 

60.6% 

26.8% 

2.8% 

Grade Level 


Count 

0 

0 

3 

9 

46 

21 

5 

2009 

Percent 

.0% 

.0% 

3.6% 

10.7% 

54.8% 

25.0% 

6.0% 

Page 26 




Score at Four or Higher 

Below Four 

2005 

Grade Level 

Four or 

Higher 



Below Four 

2006 

Grade Level 

Four or 

Higher 



Below Four 

Test Year 

Grade Level 

Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent 

Writing 

58.9% 41.1% 45.7% 54.3% 50.6% 49.4% 9.9% 90.1% 14.3% 85.7% 

Female 

56.8% 43.2% 34.1% 65.9% 37.5% 62.5% 10.5% 89.5% 5.0% 95.0% 

Male 

60.9% 39.1% 54.7% 45.3% 58.8% 41.2% 9.1% 90.9% 22.7% 77.3% 

African American 

58.4% 41.6% 46.2% 53.8% 50.6% 49.4% 9.9% 90.1% 14.5% 85.5% 

American Indian/Alaska Native 100.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

Asian/Pacific Islander 

.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

Hispanic 

.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 100.0% 

White 

.0% .0% .0% 100.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

Econ Disadvantaged 

59.3% 40.7% 47.2% 52.8% 50.6% 49.4% 10.4% 89.6% 14.3% 85.7% 

Non Econ Disadvantaged 50.0% 50.0% 20.0% 80.0% 50.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0% .0% .0% 

Non SWD 

53.2% 46.8% 39.5% 60.5% 44.3% 55.7% 6.6% 93.4% 11.8% 88.2% 

SWD 

100.0% .0% 84.6% 15.4% 84.6% 15.4% 30.0% 70.0% 25.0% 75.0% 

Gifted 

.0% 100.0% .0% 100.0% .0% .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0% 

ELL 

.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

School Level 

58.8% 41.2% 41.4% 58.6% 49.3% 50.7% 10.6% 89.4% 13.3% 86.7% 

System Level 

50.0% 50.0% 100.0% .0% 50.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0% 100.0% .0% 

State Level 

.0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

Outside of State 100.0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 


Percentages for Scoring At or Above Four 

2007 

Four or 

Higher 



Below Four 

2008 

Grade Level 

Four or 

Higher 



Below Four 

2009 

Grade Level 

Four or 

Higher 

Page 77 



2003 

Grade Level 

Elementary 

School 

Writing 

Score 

(Averages are for single years) 

2004 

Grade Level 


School 

Writing 

Score 

2005 

Grade Level 


School 

Writing 

Score 

Test Year 

2006 

Grade Level 


School 

Writing 

Score 

2007 

Grade Level 


School 

Writing 

Score 

2008 

Grade Level 


School 

Writing 

Score 

2009 

Grade Level 


School 

Writing 

Score 


Writing 

3.5 

3.4 

3.3 

3.6 

3.5 

4.2 

4.2 

Female 

3.7 

3.6 

3.4 

3.8 

3.7 

4.3 

4.5 

Male 

3.1 

3.2 

3.2 

3.4 

3.3 

4.2 

3.9 

African American 

3.5 

3.4 

3.3 

3.6 

3.5 

4.2 

4.2 

American Indian/Alaska Native . 

. 

3.0 

. 

. 

. 

. 

Asian/Pacific Islander 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

Hispanic 

4.0 

4.0 

. 

. 

. 

. 

5.0 

White 

1.0 

. 

. 

5.0 

. 

. 

. 

Econ Disadvantaged 

3.5 

3.4 

3.3 

3.6 

3.5 

4.2 

4.2 

Non Econ Disadvantaged 

. 

3.3 

3.5 

4.2 

4.0 

4.3 

. 

Non SWD 

3.6 

3.5 

3.5 

3.7 

3.5 

4.3 

4.3 

SWD 

1.8 

2.3 

2.2 

2.9 

3.1 

3.8 

3.8 

Gifted 

. 

. 

4.5 

4.0 

. 

6.0 

5.3 

ELL 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

School Level 

3.5 

3.4 

3.3 

3.7 

3.5 

4.2 

4.2 

System Level 

3.0 

3.3 

3.3 

2.8 

3.2 

4.4 

3.0 

State Level 

. 

. 

. 

2.5 

3.0 

. 

. 

Outside of State 3.0 

. 

3.0 

3.0 

3.0 

. 

. 


Page 128 


TVAAS 

2009 TVAAS School Value Added Report for Hardy Elementary School in Hamilton County 

TCAP CRT Math 

The Tennessee Department of Education has reset the growth standard to reflect the state's present student progress. Shading below 

is consistent with this new minimal expectation for systems and schools. The Help link above includes the specific details of this 

transition year. 

Estimated School Mean NCE Gain 

Grade: 3 4 5 Mean NCE Gain over 

Grades Relative to 

Growth Standard: 0.0 0.0 

State 3-Yr-Avg: -0.3 -0.1 Growth 

Standard 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: -2.0 R 0.1 G -1.0 -0.8 

Std Error: 1.5 1.3 1.0 1.0 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: -0.6 Y 4.6 G* 2.0 2.2 

Std Error: 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.0 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: 4.0 G* 5.0 G* 4.5 4.7 

Std Error: 1.5 1.3 1.0 1.0 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: 0.5 G 3.2 G* 1.8 2.0 

Std Error: 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.5 

Estimated School Mean NCE Scores 

Grade: 3 4 5 

New State Baseline: 50.0 50.0 50.0 

State 3-Yr-Avg: 48.9 48.4 48.3 

2006 Mean: 39.6 39.0 51.7 

2007 Mean: 36.1 37.5 38.7 

2008 Mean: 30.6 35.5 42.1 

2009 Mean: 27.8 34.6 40.5 

G* - Estimated mean NCE gain above the growth standard by at least 1 standard error. 

G - Estimated mean NCE gain equal to or greater than growth standard but by less than 1 standard error. 

Y - Estimated mean NCE gain below the growth standard by 1 standard error or less. 

R - Estimated mean NCE gain more than 1 standard error below the growth standard but by 2 standard errors or less. 

R* - Estimated mean NCE gain below the growth standard by more than 2 standard errors. 

State

TVAAS 

2009 Performance Diagnostic Report for Hardy Elementary School in Hamilton County 4th 

Grade TCAP CRT Math 

2009 Performance Diagnostic Report for Hardy Elementary School in Hamilton County 4th Grade TCAP CRT 

Math 

Predicted Proficiency Group 

Not Proficient Proficient Advanced 

Math Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 3.4 4.2 

Std Err 2.8 1.4 

Nr of Students 16 56 3 

% of Students 21.3 74.7 4.0 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 4.9 1.1 -6.1 

Copyright © 2009 SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA. All Rights Reserved. 

Std Err 1.5 0.9 2.3 


% of Students 17.4 74.2 8.5

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Math 


Math 



Math Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 3.5 7.7 

Std Err 1.8 3.5 


% of Students 3.6 75.0 21.4 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 10.8 7.0 4.2 


Std Err 2.2 1.0 1.8 


% of Students 11.3 71.1 17.6

TVAAS 


TCAP CRT Reading/Language 









Standard 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: -2.6 R 6.7 G* 2.0 2.2 

Std Error: 1.4 1.3 1.0 1.0 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: -2.1 R 3.9 G* 0.9 1.1 

Std Error: 1.3 1.4 0.9 0.9 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: -3.6 R* -1.6 R -2.6 -2.5 

Std Error: 1.4 1.3 1.0 1.0 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: -2.8 R* 3.0 G* 0.1 0.2 

Std Error: 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.5 


Grade: 3 4 5 


State 3-Yr-Avg: 48.8 48.3 48.2 

2006 Mean: 39.8 34.2 40.6 

2007 Mean: 39.5 37.1 40.6 

2008 Mean: 37.8 37.4 41.1 

2009 Mean: 33.4 34.2 35.8 






State

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Reading/Language 


Reading/Language 



Reading/Language Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 1.8 -3.5 

Std Err 3.2 1.3 


% of Students 20.0 74.7 5.3 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 4.9 -1.2 -4.9 


Std Err 2.1 0.9 2.7 


% of Students 22.0 66.5 11.4

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Reading/Language 


Reading/Language 



Reading/Language Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain -0.8 -5.5 

Std Err 1.2 3.2 


% of Students 3.6 83.3 13.1 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 10.6 6.3 3.7 


Std Err 3.6 0.8 2.2 


% of Students 7.9 79.9 12.1

TVAAS 


TCAP CRT Science 









Standard 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: 8.6 G* 8.4 G* 8.5 8.8 

Std Error: 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.1 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: -6.2 R* -5.4 R* -5.8 -5.5 

Std Error: 1.5 1.4 1.0 1.0 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: 1.1 G -1.0 Y 0.1 0.3 

Std Error: 1.7 1.4 1.1 1.1 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: 1.2 G* 0.7 G 0.9 1.2 

Std Error: 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.5 


Grade: 3 4 5 


State 3-Yr-Avg: 49.0 48.4 48.2 

2006 Mean: 36.1 35.2 39.1 

2007 Mean: 47.3 44.7 43.0 

2008 Mean: 34.6 41.1 39.3 

2009 Mean: 34.2 35.7 40.2 






State

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Science 


Science 



Science Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 10.3 -1.7 

Std Err 2.6 1.5 


% of Students 41.3 56.0 2.7 



Std Err 1.5 1.3 2.9 


% of Students 36.4 56.8 6.8

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Science 


Science 



Science Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 2.1 -0.4 

Std Err 2.8 1.8 


% of Students 34.9 57.8 7.2 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 7.9 -1.1 1.5 


Std Err 1.6 1.2 6.5 


% of Students 36.4 60.3 3.3

TVAAS 


TCAP CRT Social Studies 









Standard 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: 0.3 G -1.4 R -0.6 -0.4 

Std Error: 1.6 1.3 1.0 1.0 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: 5.9 G* -1.0 Y 2.5 2.6 

Std Error: 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.0 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: 10.4 G* -8.0 R* 1.2 1.4 

Std Error: 1.6 1.4 1.0 1.0 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: 5.5 G* -3.5 R* 1.0 1.2 

Std Error: 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.5 


Grade: 3 4 5 


State 3-Yr-Avg: 48.6 48.2 48.0 

2006 Mean: 38.6 37.9 38.9 

2007 Mean: 39.4 38.9 35.6 

2008 Mean: 34.3 45.3 37.9 

2009 Mean: 30.7 44.7 37.4 






State

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Social Studies 





Social Studies Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 14.9 10.9 

Std Err 3.2 1.8 


% of Students 24.0 73.3 2.7 



Std Err 1.8 1.2 2.9 


% of Students 31.4 62.7 5.9

TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Social Studies 





Social Studies Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 1.2 -8.7 

Std Err 2.3 1.5 


% of Students 35.7 56.0 8.3 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 1.4 -2.9 -10.2 


Std Err 1.3 1.1 3.6 


% of Students 43.1 51.9 5.0

TVAAS/Value Added 

Grade Status Mean Gain Range 

Reading/ 

Language Arts 

Math Social Studies Science 

A Exceptional > 1.2 >1.5 >0.4 >0.6 

B Exceeds State Growth Standard 0.7 to 1.2 0.5 to 1.5 -0.1 to 0.4 -0.2 to 0.6 

C Maintains State Growth Standard - 0.1 to 0.6 -0.5 to 0.4 -0.8 to -0.2 -1.1 to -0.3 

D Below State Growth Standard -0.6 to -0.2 -1.9 to -0.6 -1.6 to -0.9 -1.9 to -1.2 

F Deficient

Title I, 2010.01 Project 

Title I Stimulus Budget 

SCHOOL NAME: Hardy Elementary 

Activity Code: 7411 School Status: Not in Program Improvement 

Principal: Natalie Elder Org Number: 2104 

Per Pupil Amount: 603 x $350 Total Allocation: $211,050 

5110-Regular Instruction Appropriation Expenditures Balance 

51101166 COMP Specialist $ 28,800.00 

$ 28,800.00 

Romelle Sorrells (20 hrs wk/23 wks/$31 hr) $ 14,400.00 

Larry Cassady (20 hrs wk/23 wks/$31 hr) $ 14,400.00 

51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 1,786.00 

$ 1,786.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 418.00 

$ 418.00 

51103991 Other Contracted Services $ 500.00 

$ 500.00 

51104291 Instructional Materials $ 28,997.00 $ 7,554.89 $ 21,442.11 

51105999 Student Incentives $ 5,000.00 $ 1,575.00 $ 3,425.00 

51107221 Equipment $ 121,334 $ 109,898.25 $ 11,435.75 

$ 186,835.00 $ 119,028.14 $ 67,806.86 

TOTAL FOR 5110 - Regular Instruction $ 186,835 

5221-Staff Development 

52211621 Clerical Overtime $ 2,500.00 $ 1,298.57 $ 1,201.43 

52211961 Stipends $ 1,500.00 

$ 1,500.00 

52212011 Social Security 6.20% $ 248.00 

$ 248.00 

52212041 Retirement 6.42% $ 471.00 

$ 471.00 

52212121 Medicare 1.45% $ 58.00 

$ 58.00 

52212991 LTD 0.36% $ 14.00 

$ 14.00 

52213081 Consultants $ 10,000.00 

$ 10,000.00 

52213551 Travel $ 5,000.00 $ 776.88 $ 4,223.12 

52215241 Registration Fees $ 3,924.00 

$ 3,924.00 

52215999 Meeting expenses, food, etc. $ 500.00 

$ 500.00 

$ 24,215.00 $ 2,075.45 $ 22,139.55 

TOTAL FOR 5221 - Staff Development $ 24,215.00 

TOTAL BUDGET $ 211,050

Title I, 2010.01 Project 

Title I Stimulus Budget 

SCHOOL NAME: Hardy Elementary 

Activity Code: 7411 School Status: Not in Program Improvement 

Principal: Aneta Ferguson Org Number: 2104 

Per Pupil Amount: 603 x $350 Total Allocation: $211,050 

5110-Regular Instruction Appropriation 

Mar-10 

Budget Change Expenditures Balance 

51101166 COMP Specialist $ 28,800.00 $ - $ 19,958.82 $ 8,841.18 

Romelle Sorrells (20 hrs wk/23 wks/$31 hr) $ 14,400.00 $ 

- 

Larry Cassady (20 hrs wk/23 wks/$31 hr) $ 14,400.00 $ 

- 

51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 1,786.00 $ - $ (26.03) $ 1,812.03 

51102041 Retirement $ - $ 135.00 $ 134.73 $ 0.27 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 418.00 $ - $ 289.39 $ 128.61 

51103991 Other Contracted Services $ 500.00 $ - $ - $ 500.00 

51104291 Instructional Materials $ 28,997.00 $ (15,165.00) $ 8,197.76 $ 5,634.24 

51105999 Student Incentives $ 5,000.00 $ - $ 3,543.07 $ 1,456.93 

51107221 Equipment $ 121,334 $ 15,030.00 $ 128,391.41 $ 7,972.59 

$ 186,835.00 $ - $ 160,489.15 $ 26,345.85 

TOTAL FOR 5110 - Regular Instruction $ 186,835 

5221-Staff Development 

52211621 Clerical Overtime $ 2,500.00 $ - $ 359.24 $ 2,140.76 

52211961 Stipends $ 1,500.00 $ - $ - $ 1,500.00 

52212011 Social Security 6.20% $ 248.00 $ - $ 22.27 $ 225.73 

52212041 Retirement 6.42% $ 471.00 $ - $ 53.92 $ 417.08 

52212121 Medicare 1.45% $ 58.00 $ - $ 5.21 $ 52.79 

52212991 LTD 0.36% $ 14.00 $ - $ - $ 14.00 

52213081 Consultants $ 10,000.00 $ - $ - $ 10,000.00 

52213551 Travel $ 5,000.00 $ - $ 315.69 $ 4,684.31 

52215241 Registration Fees $ 3,924.00 $ - $ - $ 3,924.00 

52215999 Meeting expenses, food, etc. $ 500.00 $ - $ - $ 500.00 

$ 24,215.00 $ - $ 756.33 $ 23,458.67 

TOTAL FOR 5221 - Staff Development $ 24,215.00 

TOTAL BUDGET $ 211,050 

This expenditure was questioned by e-mail on 12/21/09

Date: 

Time: 

04/06/2010 

14:29:16 


GL Transactions by Date Range 

Ledger: GL 

Fiscal Year: 2010 

FY 

Posting 

Date Reference Vendor Name 

Transaction Description 

Debit 

Amount 

Credit 

Amount 

Net 

Amount 

Account: 21047411 - 51101166 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS HARDYTEACHER - NO BENEFITS 

2010 07/24/2009 EARN REG 02155DP 

REGUALR DOLLARS GRS. 3 

2,518.24 

0.00 2,518.24 

2010 07/24/2009 RV072409 

Retirement Incentive GRS. JE 

0.00 

419.71 -419.71 

2010 07/24/2009 JE5160 

REVERSE PAYROLL JE5009 JE 

0.00 

419.71 -419.71 

2010 07/31/2009 EARN REG 02156DP 


2,518.24 

0.00 2,518.24 

2010 07/31/2009 EARN REG 02155CM 


0.00 2,518.24 -2,518.24 

2010 09/04/2009 EARN REG 02180DP 

REGULAR HRS WORKED GRS. 3 

800.00 

0.00 

800.00 

2010 09/18/2009 EARN REG 02190DP 


800.00 

0.00 

800.00 

2010 10/02/2009 EARN REG 02200RN 


1,360.00 

0.00 1,360.00 

2010 10/16/2009 EARN REG 02210DP 


1,520.00 

0.00 1,520.00 

2010 10/30/2009 EARN REG 02220DP 


1,440.00 

0.00 1,440.00 

2010 11/13/2009 EARN REG 02230DP 


800.00 

0.00 

800.00 

2010 11/27/2009 EARN REG 02240DP 


1,440.00 

0.00 1,440.00 

2010 12/11/2009 EARN REG 02250DP 


880.00 

0.00 

880.00 

2010 12/24/2009 EARN REG 02260DP 


1,520.00 

0.00 1,520.00 

2010 01/22/2010 EARN REG 02020DP 


400.00 

0.00 

400.00 

2010 02/05/2010 EARN REG 02030DP 


800.00 

0.00 

800.00 

2010 02/19/2010 EARN REG 02040DP 


1,720.00 

0.00 1,720.00 

2010 03/05/2010 EARN REG 02050DP 


1,600.00 

0.00 1,600.00 

2010 03/19/2010 EARN REG 02060DP 


1,600.00 

0.00 1,600.00 

2010 04/02/2010 EARN REG 02070DP 


1,600.00 

0.00 1,600.00 

Total for Account: 21047411 - 51101166 23,316.48 3,357.66 19,958.82 

Report: GL5068 

User: 

BARBARA CRAIGMILES 

Total for Org Key: 

Page: 

21047411 23,316.48 3,357.66 19,958.82 

Total for Report: 

23,316.48 3,357.66 19,958.82 

1

Date: 

Time: 

04/06/2010 

14:30:25 



Ledger: GL 


FY 

Posting 



Debit 

Amount 

Credit 

Amount 

Net 

Amount 

Account: 21047411 - 51102011 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS HARDYSOCIAL SECURITY 

2010 07/24/2009 RV072409 

FICA 

JE 

0.00 

26.03 

-26.03 

Total for Account: 21047411 - 51102011 

0.00 

26.03 

-26.03 


User: 



Page: 

21047411 0.00 26.03 -26.03 


0.00 26.03 -26.03 

1

Date: 

Time: 

04/06/2010 

14:31:09 



Ledger: GL 


FY 

Posting 



Debit 

Amount 

Credit 

Amount 

Net 

Amount 

Account: 21047411 - 51102041 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS HARDYSTATE RETIREMENT 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 02156DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

134.73 

0.00 

134.73 


134.73 

0.00 

134.73 


User: 



Page: 

21047411 134.73 0.00 134.73 


134.73 0.00 134.73 

1

Federal Program Requisitions - Instructional Materials 


Vendor Processed Req No Requested Paid OrgNumber PO# 5110Object 5213Object 5221Object Encumberance 

School Box of Tennessee 3/12/2010 R27629 $1,433.01 $0.00 21047411 P24080 51104291 $1,433.01 

McGraw (Everyday Math) 10/2/2009 R24835 $3,600.35 $3,600.35 21047411 P21872 51104291 $0.00 

Really Good Stuff 9/15/2009 R24477 $981.75 $981.75 21047411 P21336 51104291 $0.00 

School Box of Tennessee 7/20/2009 R23448 $563.85 $563.85 21047411 P20402 51104291 $0.00 

HCDE Printing Shop 7/13/2009 WH87652 $1,618.80 $1,618.80 21047411 JE5207 51104291 $0.00 to whse 7/16/2009 

School Sum $8,197.76 $6,764.75 $1,433.01 

Grand Total 

$8,197.76 $6,764.75 $1,433.01 

Tuesday, April 06, 2010 Page 1 of 1

Federal Program Requisitions - Student Incentives 



Premier Agendas, Inc. 3/26/2010 R27867 $955.50 $0.00 21047411 51105999 $955.50 

Brainerd Trophy 3/16/2010 R27679 $680.00 $0.00 21047411 P24137 51105999 $680.00 

Jones School Supply 3/16/2010 R27677 $860.25 $0.00 21047411 P24136 51105999 $860.25 

Evaco/Smencil 3/4/2010 R27416 $550.00 $0.00 21047411 P23890 51105999 $550.00 

Positive Promotions 7/22/2009 R23492 $0.00 $0.00 21047411 51105999 $0.00 Cancelled by L. Phillips 

Oriental Trading 7/13/2009 R23340 $497.32 $497.32 21047411 P20307 51105999 $0.00 Moved by JE5763 

School Sum $3,543.07 $497.32 $3,045.75 

Grand Total 

$3,543.07 $497.32 $3,045.75 

Tuesday, April 06, 2010 Page 1 of 1

Federal Program Requisitions - Equipment 



B & H Photo Video 3/26/2010 R27868 $180.00 $0.00 21047411 P24216 51107221 $180.00 

Insight 3/26/2010 R27865 $1,226.65 $0.00 21047411 51107221 $1,226.65 

Camcor, Inc 3/26/2010 R27863 $576.76 $0.00 21047411 P24236 51107221 $576.76 

Communications and Electronics 3/26/2010 R27861 $975.00 $0.00 21047411 P24258 51107221 $975.00 

Adams Business 3/26/2010 R27860 $4,069.75 $0.00 21047411 P24265 51107221 $4,069.75 

Apple Computer 2/24/2010 R27216 $20,360.00 $20,360.00 21047411 P23713 51107221 $0.00 

Apple Computer 8/14/2009 R23912 $101,003.25 $101,003.25 21047411 P20982 51107221 $0.00 

School Sum $128,391.41 $121,363.25 $7,028.16 

Grand Total 

$128,391.41 $121,363.25 $7,028.16 

Wednesday, April 07, 2010 Page 1 of 1

Supplemental Pay - Stipends Hardy Elementary School 

Stipend 

Number 

STI0053 

Stamp 

Date 

Date 

Processed Program Activity Org Number Object Code PayPeriod AmtRequested Amount Paid Nameof Supervisor 

7/27/2009 7/27/2009 Worked in the Office 21047411 52211621 $359.24 $359.24 Natalie Elder 

Stephanie Jackson 

STI0013 7/14/2009 7/14/2009 Clerical Activity 21047411 52211621 $0.00 $0.00 

$939.33 paid in 2008-09 Budget 

Elaine Barnett 

Staphanie Jackson 

Grand Total 

TOTAL $359.24 $359.24 

$359.24 $359.24 

Wednesday, April 07, 2010 Page 1 of 1

Date: 

Time: 

04/07/2010 

07:47:22 



Ledger: GL 


FY 

Posting 



Debit 

Amount 

Credit 

Amount 

Net 

Amount 

Account: 21047411 - 52212011 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS HARDYSOCIAL SECURITY 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02155DP 

FICA 

2 

55.53 

0.00 

55.53 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02175DP 

FICA 

2 

22.27 

0.00 

22.27 

2010 09/24/2009 JE5138 

REVERSE 072409 PAYROLL JE 

0.00 

55.53 

-55.53 


77.80 

55.53 

22.27 


User: 



Page: 

21047411 77.80 55.53 22.27 


77.80 55.53 22.27 

1

Date: 

Time: 

04/07/2010 

07:48:03 



Ledger: GL 


FY 

Posting 



Debit 

Amount 

Credit 

Amount 

Net 

Amount 

Account: 21047411 - 52212041 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS HARDYSTATE RETIREMENT 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02155DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

140.99 

0.00 

140.99 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02175DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

53.92 

0.00 

53.92 

2010 09/24/2009 JE5138 


0.00 

140.99 -140.99 


194.91 

140.99 

53.92 


User: 



Page: 

21047411 194.91 140.99 53.92 


194.91 140.99 53.92 

1

Date: 

Time: 

04/07/2010 

07:48:49 



Ledger: GL 


FY 

Posting 



Debit 

Amount 

Credit 

Amount 

Net 

Amount 

Account: 21047411 - 52212121 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS HARDYEMPLOYER MEDICARE 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02155DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

12.99 

0.00 

12.99 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02175DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

5.21 

0.00 

5.21 

2010 09/24/2009 JE5138 


0.00 

12.99 

-12.99 


18.20 

12.99 

5.21 


User: 



Page: 

21047411 18.20 12.99 5.21 


18.20 12.99 5.21 

1

Federal Programs - Travel/Registration Fees 

TE Number Last Name First Name Title IIAdministrator Name of Workshop Location Date OrgKey 3551 3551Amount 5241 5241Amount 5999 599Amount 


School Sum 

Grand Total 

TE0321 Ferguson Anetta Winter Institute Knoxville, TN 01/17-19/2010 2104741 5221355 $315.69 $0.00 $0.00 

Wednesday, April 07, 2010 Page 1 of 1 

$315.69 $0.00 $0.00 

$315.69 $0.00 $0.00

Annual Meeting/Open House

Parental Involvement Policy

Parent Compact

Beginning of year 

compliance & 

documentation meeting

LEADERSHIP TEAM 

& 

FACULTY MEETINGS

Parent Nights and Events

District Monitoring

Title I Inventory

Hardy Elementary - Hamilton County Schools

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?