Jupiter Elementary School

  1. PLC Story
  2. PLC Practices
  3. Achievement Data
  4. Awards
  5. Resources

In the beginning of the school year teachers begin the collaboration process by developing team norms, SMART goals and themes for their grade levels. This process takes place during preplanning/first week of school. Common planning time is provided to fuel the collaborative process for the end goal of increased student achievement. This collaboration is successful through honoring team norms, supporting each other’s professional development needs and sharing best practices. Jupiter’s teacher leaders present throughout the school year various ideas and research-based practices.

Vertical teams have been created to focus on improving student performance. These teams consist of a teacher from each grade level and specialized areas. They meet regularly to engage in professional conversation to further promote academic success. The goals of these teams are to: increase achievement for all students to close the achievement gap, bring about coordination and communication between grade levels, interpret standards consistently across grade levels, and to encourage innovation in the collaboration process.

Positive impact on students:

  • Focused, data-driven instruction provides students with effective differentiated instruction facilitated by professional learning communities.
  • Effective core level instruction through the collaboration and integration of professional learning communities, implementation of consistent school-wide, cross-curricular instructional strategies and increased RtI fidelity with progress monitoring results in more students achieving proficiency and/or demonstrating growth.

1. Monitoring student learning on a timely basis.

During weekly grade level meetings, teachers focus on the Dufour, Dufour, Eaker’s four guiding questions:

  • What do we want students to learn?

  • How will we know when they have learned it?

  • What will we do if they don’t learn it?

  • How can we extend and enrich the learning for students who have demonstrated proficiency?

    Jupiter’s PLC Teams are structured around grade levels. For primary K-2 and 3-6 intermediate, lead teachers are selected by the Principal, Sherie Troisi. Lead teachers serve as the grade level links between the grade level team and school administration. The teams then choose both the facilitator and recorder for their meetings. The facilitator provides a weekly agenda to school administration and the recorder provides a summary and/or minutes of what was discussed at the data meetings to administration. At the initial meeting each school year, teams develop team norms and SMART goals that are aligned with school goals and objectives. These norms and SMART goals are submitted to administration. K-2 teams vary in size from 5-7 teachers. 3-6 teams vary in size from 5-6 teachers.

    A daily, common planning time enables teams to meet a minimum of once weekly for grade level collaboration. The choice of day is decided upon by the team. K-2 teams usually meet in their Pods except when administration meets with them in the data room. Tuesday weekly data meetings are required for review of progress monitoring, intervention collaboration, and discussion of appropriate intervention strategies. Classroom teachers and administration develop recognition programs to motivate their students and reward their learning gains. Teams meet more frequently to research intervention strategies, to discuss and to collaborate about instructional decisions, and to develop formative and common assessments.

    3-6 teams meet in the data room where data boards track each student in each grade level. Tuesday weekly data meetings review individual student progress in both reading. Teachers mark student growth by moving the students’ names on the data boards. Weekly data is compared to the students’ intervention skill and group to identify appropriate growth. Student growth is discussed among the teams and intervention groups are constructed based on student needs. Reports from Performance Matters, computer programs such as Istation, and teacher anecdotal notes pinpoint areas needed for direct teacher intervention and re-teaching. The teams collaborate, discuss, and research (if needed) alternative/ appropriate intervention strategies for instruction. Teams meet more frequently for research of intervention strategies, collaborative planning, and to develop formative and/or common assessments.

    In K-2, Tuesday weekly data meetings specifically target the lowest 25% of students in reading in that grade level. Weekly progress monitoring of student performance in the intervention and enrichment groups is also discussed. Re-alignment of students and groups and appropriateness of intervention, enrichment, and assessment are identified for those not making growth. Team members share effective instructional practices; gather data about the impact of instructional strategies and use strengths and weaknesses in student learning to adjust instruction. Research into new best practices is often part of the process. For students who are both on and/or above grade level, on-going, flexible skill groups also provide intervention/instruction in fluency, appropriate informational text, and higher order thinking skills.

    Students targeted for special intervention/instruction follow the Brevard County guidelines for Tier 1 and Tier 2 groups as outlined in IPST Forms 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, and 5. Teacher collaboration is required for this process as well as collaboration with Title 1 content area coaches, the Literacy Coach, Speech/language pathologist, and the behavior analyst. Support personnel are invited to attend grade level data meetings. Tier 1 group size is more than 8 students (but not the whole class), 2-3 times per week for 15-30 minutes. Tier 2 group size is 4-8 students, 4 times per week for 30 minutes per week. Tier 3 group size is 2-3 students, 4 times per week for 30 minutes. Data/baseline points must be established and a minimum of 5 data points must be graphed to monitor student progress or lack of progress. Phonological Awareness Screeners, Phonics Screeners, as well as, Running Records are the instruments most frequently used. Student progress is also monitored among the grade level intervention group, and compared to both the classroom grade on the targeted skill and the grade level progress on the targeted skill. Intervention providers may be the Gen Ed teacher, ESE teacher, speech-language pathologist, ESOL teacher, ESOL assistants, reading coach, Title I teachers, or Title 1 assistants. The choice of intervention providers is a function of the grade level team and support personnel. Progress is also measured by a rubric (Brevard County Decision Trees) for grades K-6 where progress monitoring benchmarks are identified for the beginning, middle, and end of the year. The K-2 rubric and the progress monitoring intervention graphs help grade level teams compare individual students to intervention groups and the whole grade level to determine the effectiveness of the interventions and make adjustments in size, frequency, and duration of the interventions. Students who do not achieve satisfactory progress in Tier 2 or Tier 3 interventions are referred to the MTSS (Multi-Tiered Student Support-formerly known as the Response to Intervention team) team. This team is run weekly by the schools Guidance Counselor and School Psychologist.

    In 3-6, weekly data meetings specifically target the lowest 25% of students in reading. Weekly progress monitoring of all student performance is discussed and charted, based on direct instruction, intervention groups, enrichment groups and computer based programs. After discussion, collaboration among grade level teams and resource personnel, re-alignment of student groups and appropriateness of interventions occur for students who did not master a specific standard and/or skill and need more targeted instruction. Teachers collaborate to establish new flexible groups for re-teaching specific skills. Research into alternative strategies and the creation of formative and/or common assessments is often part of the process. For students who are both on and/or above grade level, growth beyond grade level skills in reading is achieved through literacy inquiry circles, independent reading and writing, and student based projects. In the final part of the data meeting, teachers prioritize their list of student conferences. Conferencing after the data meeting directly with students regarding their successes and needs ensures a positive outcome for student goals. Students chart their progress, take ownership for successes, and set realistic goals for future achievement. Classroom teachers and administration develop recognition programs to motivate students and reward learning gains. Teams meet more frequently for additional research of intervention/behavior strategies, collaborative planning, and to develop formative and/or common assessments.

2. Creating systems of intervention to provide students with additional time and support for learning.

K-6 grade level teams collaborate to create systematic interventions during weekly data meetings. The leaders of the direct instruction, designated intervention groups reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of specific student academic skills, as well as, the instructional strengths and weaknesses of the teachers. This flexible collaboration maximizes learning and teaching through differentiations in processes, content, and products. The goal for both teachers and students is to spark learning through active student engagement.

K-2 grade level teams collaborate to create enrichment groups as part of their intervention process. High functioning students, who have mastered phonemic awareness and phonics skills, work on reading, vocabulary, and fluency strategies. These students participate in direct instruction, in computer based programs, inquiry circles, writing in response to text, journaling, and research activities. Students are linked with mentor “Book Buddies” from grades 3-6 for reinforcement and relevance.

K-2 teams implement standards based common formative assessments.  Teachers analyze the standards, examine the data, conduct research (as needed), and then, implement standards based common assessments to be used in their classrooms. Following the assessments, teachers analyze and discuss the common assessment data. Item analysis and comparison of student achievement across the grade levels, assist teachers in making adjustments to the test construction and student instruction.

The Literacy coach and the Title 1 content area coaches collaborate with teachers and students to provide enrichment for on and above grade level students. In reading, small groups/classes participate in Literacy Inquiry Circles, and multiple genre book talks and readings. Data based questioning strategies and higher order thinking skills are emphasized. School-wide K-6 classes participate in Reading Count and recognized quarterly if they reach their target goal. After school content area clubs encourage talented students to participate in Book Bash and the Quality Literature competition.

3-6 Teams all meet outside of their data meetings to research, collaborate, and develop common formative assessments as part of their grade level teams. Teachers discuss the standards, examine the data, do research (as needed), and then, create common assessments to be used in classrooms. Following the assessments, teachers analyze and discuss the common assessment data. Item analysis and comparison of student achievement across the grade levels, help teachers make thoughtful adjustments to the test construction and student instruction.

ASP – Academic Support Programs meet each Saturday for 2 hours for two hours of additional support in reading and math. One hour of reading and one hour of math.

Super Saturday Science – Academic Support Program meets for 5 consecutive Saturdays for reinforcement of Science concepts

RtI – Response to Intervention for students who are identified as below grade level receive additional reading instruction

Inclusion/Co Teaching Model – ESE Resource teacher “pushes into” the regular education classroom to provide support in academic areas to students with special needs, including co-teaching lessons and small group instruction.

Additional supports for learning:

  • Book buddies

  • Academic support in School Age Child Care (after school program)

  • Florida Center for Reading Research

  • Team building activities

  • Student reflections/evaluations

  • Rubrics (teacher and/or student created)

  • Graphic organizers

  • Vocabulary word ladders

  • Differentiated instruction (process and products)

  • Learning Scales

  • Kagan Cooperative Learning structures

  • Comprehension toolkits

    Additional Enrichment Opportunities:

  • Lego League

  • Future Problem Solvers

  • Writing Club

  • Art Club

  • Science Club

  • Math Club

  • Music/Chorus/Strings/Percussion

  • Book Bash

  • Gifted Student Program

  • Odyssey of the Mind

3. Building teacher capacity to work as members of high performing collaborative teams that focus efforts on improved learning for all students.

Our educators talk about their practice, share craft knowledge, observe one another, root for one another’s success, engage in continual discourse about students and standards. Teachers have increased the amount of interaction opportunities (less teacher directed/more student directed – www.fisherandfrey.com). We have more effective re-teaching, participation in heterogeneous productive groups, & integrated curriculum (Fisher & Frey).

Research shows us that “the most promising strategy for sustained, substantive school improvement is building capacity of school personnel to function as a professional learning community.” (Milbry McLaughlin)

Best practice for Jupiter Elementary is to:

  • Clarify learning expectations

  • Articulate vertically (math & reading) across all grade levels

  • Prioritize and implement standards consistently

  • Develop common assessments and authentic assessments/portfolios

  • Establish common outcomes and pacing (integration of literacy and math)

  • Monitor each student’s learning on a timely basis (differentiated instruction & RtI)

  • Expect 100% ownership and commitment to student success and growth among all stakeholders

    We review research to help teachers understand economic issues facing Jupiter students. We advocate teaching in a student-centered problem-based manner with high levels of student collaboration and interaction. These strategies have improved engagement and interaction for all Jupiter students. Teachers strive to forge real life connections among reading, writing, and mathematics instruction toward 21st century literacy (Altieri). These connections are facilitated by a weekly school-based credit union on the Jupiter campus in which students participate.

    Research based strategies and resources help improve core level instruction through engaging strategies and foster effective and consistent teacher collaboration for monitoring student growth and sharing best practices. The PLC model coupled with the continuous improvement cycle fosters ample opportunities for teachers to:

  • Set/Reset Smart goals

  • Use data to inform instruction

  • Prioritize standards and create standards based focused calendars

  • Initiate best practices

  • Self-analyze areas of need and growth

  • Apply action steps

  • Develop work plans

  • Develop professional growth plans (teachers and administrators)

    Our collaboration teams are improving; we have some strong grade level teams that are definitely functioning as communities. Our goal at Jupiter is for 100% buy in by teachers that ALL students can learn. We integrate our new faculty and staff into our Jupiter community and model our best practices, strategies, collaborative learning for them. We will continue to develop our collaborative efforts towards increasing student achievement at Jupiter.

Jupiter Elementary, a high transient diverse Title I school, serves students in pre-Kindergarten through sixth grade.  In reading and math our goal was to increase the number of students scoring a level 3 or higher and to close the achievement gap between state scores and school scores. Through implementation and continuous collaboration within our Professional Learning Communities, our 6th grade students either outperformed or came close to the state average in Reading. In Math our 6th grade students were well above the state average.

Overall, Jupiter Elementary has not seen the growth in reading and math in grades 3-5 that was expected therefore vertical teams were implemented in order to focus on student needs based on the data. Vertical team collaboration also provides the teachers the opportunity to fully understand what their students should come to them knowing and where they need to be for the following grade level. Through sharing best practices and expertise Jupiter teachers are able to provide standards based instruction with a focus on overall academic achievement and closing the achievement gap.

Further Disaggregation of FCAT Data (2011-2014)
Scale: % at or above proficient

                                                                 Reading FCAT Data

Jupiter/State

Reading  3+

2011

2012

2013

2014

Grade 3

71/72

53/58

43/57

52/57

Grade 4

62/71

61/62

46/60

45/61

Grade 5

64/69

48/61

53/60

50/61

Grade 6

76/67

71/57

50/59

60/60

Math FCAT Data

 Jupiter/State

Math 3+

2011

2012

2013

2014

Grade 3

72/76

43/56

39/58

48/58

Grade 4

60/74

41/60

42/61

43/63

Grade 5

59/63

37/57

46/55

50/56

Grade 6

82/57

75/53

61/52

63/53

 In Writing, there was a steady increase over the last three years of FCAT Writes from 25% in 2012, 27% in 2013, and 42% in 2014 and as a school we were getting closer to the state average.

                                                                FCAT Writing

Jupiter/State

Writing  3.5+

2012

2013

2014

 

25/48

27/57

42/53

 FCAT Science Data (2012-2016)
Scale: % at or above proficient

                                                                 FCAT Science

 Jupiter/State

Science  %3+

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

 

34/51

50/53

42/54

35/53

47/51

The new Florida Standards Assessment was implemented in the 2014-2015 school year. The FSA is based on more rigorous standards which increased the rigor of the state assessments in English Language Arts (FSA ELA) and Mathematics (FSA Math). The cut off scores were increased as well.

Further Disaggregation of FSA Data (2015-2016)
Scale: % at or above proficient

ELA FSA Data

Jupiter/State

Reading  3+

2015

2016

Grade 3

38/53

42/54

Grade 4

47/54

38/60

Grade 5

34/52

40/52

Grade 6

54/51

43/52

 

MATH FSA Data

Jupiter/State

Math 3+

2015

2016

Grade 3

32/58

34/61

Grade 4

32/59

48/59

Grade 5

35/55

45/55

Grade 6

59/50

45/50

With our current Administration Jupiter continues to implement grade level team collaboration, vertical team collaboration, book studies, as well as; other formats of Professional Learning Communities. With the increase in rigorous standards, assessment, and an increase in cut off scores it’s critical that teachers are provided multiple opportunities for collaboration on an on-going basis. Through continued collaboration, rigorous standards based instruction will be enhanced with an emphasis on student engagement while continuing to close the achievement gap between Jupiter state scores and state averages.

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Positive Behavior Intervention Support Bronze Model School
  • Florida Power Library School
  • 21st Century Innovation Center
  • School Recycling Award
  • Keeping Brevard Beautiful Environment Recognition (numerous recognitions)
  • USDA Gold Award
  • USDA Silver Award
  • Parent Involvement Award
  • Platinum Key Site Endorsement School Aged Child Care
  • School Aged Child Care Safety Award
  • Governor Sterling Award
  • Five Star Cafeteria Award
  • Home Depot Grant ($5000)
  • Excellence in Visual Arts
  • Energy Conservation Award
  • Future Problem Solvers
  • Math Team Competition (8th and 10th place district winner)
  • Discovering Quality Literature (1st, 2nd, and 3rd place awards)
  • District Science Fair
  • Art Show
  • One of four schools receiving a perfect score for Internal Audit (7 consecutive Years)
  • Platinum ESEA Award
  • Energy Star Award

Faculty/Staff Achievements

  • Discovery STAR Educators
  • Six National Board Certified Teachers
  • Twenty Reading Endorsed Teachers
  • Twenty-three teachers with advanced degrees
  • Forty-two ESOL endorsed teachers
  • Excellence in Teaching Award for Math (Foundation of Excellence)

Top