Monterey Elementary – 2008-2009 Action Plan
Revised: September 4, 2008
Brief assessment of needs
The 2006-2007 CSAP results showed modest improvement in overall math, writing, and science
proficiency for the students of Monterey Elementary. Reading proficiency for 3rd grade was
65%, 4th grade was 27%, and 5th grade was 57%. Based on the State’s School Accountability
Report (SAR), Monterey Elementary demonstrated academic improvement, Average and Stable,
for the first time in CSAP history. Even though Monterey achieved an improved rating on CSAP,
our 3rd grade reading score for 2008 was well below the District and State expectations.
Our 3rd and 5th grade 2008 CSAP scores reveal that there is much work to be done in all areas for
our students at Monterey. Based on our August 2008 DIBELS scores, Monterey Elementary
must focus on targeted interventions, instructional strategies, commitment to PLCs, and
instructional feedback in order to improve student achievement.
Monterey has missed several opportunities for providing interventions and extensions of learning
at both ends of the learning spectrum. For the 2008-2009 school year, Monterey will rework the
Title I budget to provide authentic learning experiences for the bottom and top 20% of our
students. More importantly, Monterey will begin dialogue with local universities to enter into a
reading partnership for our most deficient students.
Finally, Monterey must move from teacher-centered activities to an environment of student-
centered learning. To promote the student-learning environment, the administrative and building
leadership team will model effective PLCs and instructional strategies.
Philosophy – beliefs, goals, and priorities of the organization
1. Ensure staff members understand and support the top academic
priorities for Monterey Elementary.
In order to improve student achievement, the building administrative team will provide an overview of
our CSAP and AYP scores for 2008. Staff members will be apprised of the urgency in correcting our
reading, writing, and math scores. More importantly, staff members must understand that CSAP and
AYP are issues that are not isolated to the intermediate grade levels, but a reflection of practices that are
not consistent with the professional learning communities.
Indicators of success:
90% of the staff members will be able to state the four priorities of the school action plan
as measured by a survey created by the Building Leadership team in October 2008.
80% of the staff will agree that there is a high congruence between what the staff
members believe the school priorities are and what they believe the priorities should be as
measured by a survey created by the Building Leadership team in October 2008.
The Building Leadership Team and teachers will act upon the priorities as measured by
the Instructional Feedback form – overall teacher proficiency in each of the four priorities
should be 65% by September 19; 70% by December 17; and 80% by March 17.
Provide overview of 2008 CSAP, AYP, and DIBELS data with all staff members and
discuss next steps by August 23, 2008.
Begin each PLC and Staff Meeting with a “philosophy first” model, explaining the
rationale and beliefs behind each key action or initiative. Demonstrate how actions are
tied to the priorities.
Have the building leadership team create a survey to assess our level of congruence with
the top four priorities of the school.
Processes – methods, policies, or practices developed to facilitate goal
2. Raise the level of student-teacher engagement and instructional rigor.
Research is conclusive that teachers make the difference. Our teachers have to be the best at delivering
great instruction. Great instruction is multifaceted. For 2008-2009 school year, we will focus on nine
instructional strategies that have been proven to raise student achievement
Indicators of success
By December 2008, 60% of the teachers will provide evidence that they are able to use
the Rigor/Relevance/Relationship Frameworks to plan lessons, write lesson objectives
and select the most appropriate instructional strategy that will enable students to develop
and demonstrate expected knowledge for the lessons. By April 2009 the percentage of
teachers using the Rigor/Relevance/Relationship Frameworks will increase to 80%.
By December 2008, 60% of the teachers will provide evidence that they require student
demonstrations of knowledge that assess the aligned curriculum at least at the level of
rigor defined by the assessment frameworks. By April 2009 the percentage of teachers
providing evidence of student demonstrations of knowledge to an aligned curriculum will
increase to 80%.
By February 2009, 80% of the staff is able to identify how the school environment
supports the relationship dimension of the Rigor/Relevance/Relationship Frameworks.
There are nine instructional strategies that have been identified by McREL that support
student achievement. Monterey Elementary will focus on the following:
o Have students identify similarities and differences
o Summarizing and note taking
o Setting goals and providing feedback to students through informal discussion and
Monterey Elementary, with the support of the district, will offer additional voluntary
training on student-teacher engagement; such as Kagan Training.
Provide at least two staff development trainings on Rigor/Relevance Frameworks to all
teachers before the end of the first semester. Additional training on Rigor/Relevance
Frameworks to occur again in February and April 2009 (emphasis on demonstrations of
Provide professional development for teacher leaders on understanding the relationship
dimension of the Rigor/Relevance/Relationship Frameworks by January 2009.
Use the collaborative decision making process to prioritize which of the nine strategies
from McREL and the Rigor/Revelance/Relationships manual to implement on a quarterly
Implementation – How the organization monitors the system for
continuous improvement, provides feedback, and acts
3. Monitor the academic progress of students and use the data to help
determine appropriate interventions.
Assessing the progress of students should be continuous. Collegial discussions should be frequent and
focused on achievement data. Great foundational work has been laid; we will build on this. This key
action is tied to the District’s efforts to more effectively implement PLCs and the Response to Intervention
Indicators of success
All teachers will progress monitor intensive and strategic students twice a month to
monitor the success of the targeted intervention.
Students not meeting proficiency will be assessed twice a month with DIBELS and Core
Phonics Assessments progress monitoring tools.
Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) meet weekly to discuss what students should
know and be able to do (curriculum alignment), how we know when students have
learned (assessment), what we do when students aren’t learning (interventions), and what
we do when the students have already learned the material (acceleration or enrichment).
80% of the teachers can explain the core concepts of PLC and the RTI models as
measured by the building climate survey conducted in October 2008.
The administrative and building leadership team will ensure that Curriculum Based
Measurement data is analyzed to determine the degree of attainment of the aligned
curriculum. Baseline data will be determined from individual student assessment, PLC
logs, and SMART goals.
Increase the reliability and validity of DIBELS administration through training in
calibration, and use DIBELS data to adjust instruction.
Provide Staff development on the five components of literacy, how to identify areas of
need, and select the most appropriate interventions for student achievement.
Monitor the effectiveness of Professional Learning Communities and continue to provide
ongoing professional development.
Provide ongoing professional development for RTI philosophy and processes.
During Extra Specials, each grade level will discuss specific interventions for those
students who have not mastered a specific skill.
Pre and post test data for writing, reading, and math will be displayed in the staff lounge
and strategic planning room.
4. Provide feedback on instruction
Every effective organization provides feedback on the things that are valued by the organization. What
gets feedback, gets done better. Leaders throughout the organization must provide constructive feedback
to those whom they supervise. It is imperative that teachers continually reflect upon and receive feedback
to improve their practice. In the 08-09 school year, we will continue to take steps to develop a culture of
Indicators of success
Focus on building a culture of collaboration and instructional feedback through climate
surveys given in the 1st and 2nd semesters of 2008-2009. The climate survey will ask
questions on the benefit of the instructional feedback and implementation of instructional
strategies. By December, 65% of the staff will indicate favorably that instructional
feedback and strategies are helping with instruction. By April 2009, the percentage will
increase to 85%.
All non-probationary teachers will have at least four instructional feedback forms
completed and probationary teachers will have at least eight instructional feedback forms
completed each semester.
The administrative and building leadership team will collect and analyze instructional
feedback data quarterly to monitor progress on the key instructional strategies.
Conduct a quarterly review of spot observations with the BLT, PLC-Fs, and teacher
leaders to focus on trends and areas of improvement with the staff at Monterey
The focus of instructional feedback will be on student demonstration of knowledge.
Provide professional development for teachers and staff on good first instruction.
With the support of C&I, conduct joint observations of classroom instruction with
administrators to calibrate by 30 September 2008.
Review progress on the implementation of instructional strategies every quarter.