Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies

Mid-Year Reflection

Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies

Mid-Year Reflection

• 4^th           B: 49%                 M: 51%       Increase 2%
• 3^rd           B: 55.75%           M: 61.25%   Increase 5.5%
• 2^nd          B: 38%                 M: 63%        Increase 25%
• 1^st           B: 39.8                 M: 73.8         Increase 34%
• K             B: 52%                 M: 80%         Increase 28%

Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies

Mid-Year Reflection

• A primary implementation challenge was our student’s limited fluency with addition, subtraction and multiplication facts.  This impacted their ability to solve problems and maintain accuracy during grade-level tasks. To address this challenge, we increased the use of fluency-building programs such as X-tra Math, i-Ready Math Learning Games, and i-Ready Fluency flight to provide consistent, targeted practice in grades K-5.
• Another significant challenge involved students’ difficulty comprehending and analyzing word problems.  This affected their ability to determine what the question was asking.  In response to this challenge, we have incorporated more structured problem-solving routines, teacher modeling, anchor charts, and visual supports to help students break down and understand word-problem scenarios more effectively.
• Following the county testing calendar makes it difficult for teachers to have ownership of their own classrooms and determine the pace in which to teach the curriculum. 
• Technology is often slow and can result in less available teaching time and student work time. To address this challenge we try to be patient and at times we have students take the test using paper and pencil then transfer answers onto the computer.
• Primary grades face a unique issue as to the developmental challenge the students face at the beginning of the year when navigating the assessments online.  The structure of the assessment requires students to scroll to view the entire question and answer.  To address this challenge,affects the classroom as a whole and places additional demands on the teacher as they are required to sit with a small group to ensure they can view and understand the entire question.  This limits their ability to support the rest of the class.
• Students cannot see the problems they got wrong on the assessments.  This is a missed remediation opportunity.  To address this challenge, teachers review the most missed problems.

• Teachers analyzed PM data, i-Ready data and Topic assessments to determine student’s strengths and weaknesses.  Fluency-building routines and digital programs helped students make progress toward recalling facts. Students responded well to opportunities using manipulatives such as base ten blocks, place-value models, math journals, calendar math, Touch Math and guided practice both whole and small group instruction. We have also implemented assigned skip counting in grades K-5 to build multiplication fluency.
• Structured problem-solving routines have improved students’ understanding of one and two step word problems with scaffolded supports provided by the teacher.
• PM 1 data indicates 25% proficiency in grades 3-5
• PM 2 data indicates 42% proficiency in grades 3-5

• Students continue to experience challenges applying strategies independently, especially in fractions, word problems and long division.  Teachers will continue remediation in small groups using the above strategies.

• Absent students, Tier 3 and ESE students often require more time to master the necessary skills before the testing window closes.  The amount of testing also leaves less time for instruction and remediation. Leaving the testing window open would allow time for thorough remediation

• Spring instruction will include increased use of manipulatives to support conceptual understanding of long division, spiral review which will reinforce the retention of previous taught skills and strengthen problem solving skills leading to students’ accuracy and independence when solving mathematical problems and deepen conceptual understanding.  The continued practice of using Reteach and fluid small groups will allow teachers to differentiate according to student need.

Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies

Mid-Year Reflection

• · During the fall semester, several challenges were encountered, including low student proficiency in primary grades as demonstrated on the kindergarten STAR PM 1 report. To address this deficiency, the phonics program UFLI was implemented in kindergarten with the plans of expanding it to grade one next year and grade 2 the following year.
• · Another challenge was the complexity and difficulty of the reading materials provided by Benchmark Advance. Teachers also felt challenged with the amount of information and skills addressed in the first few units. To address this challenge, scaffolding and reading supports such as visual aids and hands-on demonstrations were provided for the students. Performance Matters enables teachers to identify which standards or questions students struggled with. This allowed teachers to remediate in flexible and fluid small groups.
• · Instructional pacing and the county’s testing schedule also were challenges for teachers and students. Teachers did not feel the pacing was appropriate, which did not allow enough time for remediation of certain skills.

• · To identify the strengths and weaknesses of the interventions and strategies, teachers meet every 6 weeks for Data Chats with the administration and support staff team.
• · Performance Matters allows teachers, administrators and literacy coach to track individual student progress and address any concerns in a timely manner.
• · Flexibility and fluid guided reading group allow teachers to address individuals who struggled with certain concepts and standards.
• · In the intermediate grades, push-in and pull-out support was afforded to students who needed additional support.
• · iReady is used to bridge instructional gaps.
• · Students continue to experience challenges with the pacing of instruction and the amount of testing as well as difficulty with technology during testing.
• · PM 1 data indicates 47% proficiency in grades 3-5.
• · PM 2 data indicates 63% proficiency in grades 3-5.

• · Ongoing small group instruction and remediation, frequent review of concepts and skills, and the use of structured routines such as vocabulary and visual supports. Explicit modeling, guided practice, and increased practice opportunities are prioritized to reinforce learning.
• · The school is leveraging targeted interventions using programs like iReady, incorporating quarterly iReady incentives, and focusing on specific lessons to meet student needs.
• · For professional development, Core Connection meets with grade levels several times a year to review reading and writing data and provide strategies for specific reading and writing goals.
• · Technology upgrades are being pursued to ensure smooth assessment experiences, and efforts are being made to minimize testing in favor of more instructional and intervention time.
• · Additionally, staff are enhancing reading and writing instruction through annotation, structured routines, and specialized training, while also using tools like Copilot to develop aligned questions. Overall, these collective strategies aim to provide more effective instruction, personalized support, and improved assessment practices for all students.

• Teams meet every 6 weeks to review triangulated data comparing FAST or STAR, iReady and Benchmark Advance scores. Teachers in conjunction with support staff and administration develop plans to remediate and/or enrich students for optimal student growth.