21st CCLC Community Learning Centers Summative ......21st CCLC Community Learning Centers Summative...
Transcript of 21st CCLC Community Learning Centers Summative ......21st CCLC Community Learning Centers Summative...
21st CCLC Community Learning Centers Summative Evaluation Report:
Seminole County Public Schools – Elementary (South)
August 10, 2016
Kaitlin Trippany
This work is funded through a contract with the Florida Department of Education
[590-2446B-6CCC3]
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3 1.0 OVERVIEW AND HISTORY 4 2.0 STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS 5 3.0 PROGRAM OPERATIONS 7 4.0 STAFF CHARACTERISTICS 8
5.0 OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES 10 6.0 SUSTAINABILITY PLAN 23 7.0 LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 25
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks should be given to the following individuals for helping implement this grant during the 2015-2016 school year. Project Administrators:
Ms. Shawneequa Brown, Program Facilitator (Site Coordinator) for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers – Led the implementation of the grants at three sites.
Ms. Taucier Smalls-West, Coordinator of Special Projects/Title I (Instructional Support) and Project Director for all 21st CCLC programs in Seminole County Public Schools – Provided administrative oversight.
Ms. Jamee Minnetto, Resource Development Coordinator, Seminole County Public Schools – Supported the implementation of the grant through grant writing, budget planning, and compliance.
Site Principals:
Principals for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers located at Altamonte Elementary, Casselberry Elementary, and English Estates Elementary – Supported the implementation of the grant by providing on-going school-grant collaboration at each site.
4
1.0 OVERVIEW AND HISTORY
In response to demonstrated community need, Seminole County Public Schools (SCPS) operates three sites under the Elementary (South) 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) Program. These sites are all school-based programs: Altamonte Elementary, Casselberry Elementary and English Estates Elementary. The purpose of these centers is to: (1) provide opportunities for academic enrichment, including supplemental instruction to support students in realizing increased skills in reading/language arts, mathematics, and science; (2) offer students a broad array of additional services, programs, and personal enrichment activities that are designed to reinforce and complement the regular academic program; and (3) provide adult family members of regularly participating students expanded opportunities for literacy and related educational development. The project provides school-based learning and enrichment opportunities for students and adult family members in communities that represent high populations of poverty. Over the 2015-2016 reporting period, the programs served more than 280 students from low income, high-need areas that struggle with crime, drugs, homelessness, and unemployment. The programs offered students the opportunity to receive academic enrichment through project-based learning, homework assistance, and tutoring. In addition, healthy snacks were provided as well as the chance to participate in health and fitness activities and other exciting personal enrichment activities, such as photography, character education, technology, art, and music. The evaluation is composed of six sections, which are briefly outlined below: Student Characteristics provides information about the students served, including demographics, enrollment, and daily attendance. Program Operations describes operations at the sites, including the typical and total time of operation for various reporting timeframes. Staff Characteristics provides information on the composition of staff at each site including staff demographics, ratio of staff to students, staff quality (training and certifications), and turnover. Objectives and Outcomes provides information on program objectives, how those objectives are measured, data analysis methods, progress toward objectives, and finding implications and recommendations. Sustainability Plan provides information on strategies employed to ensure the sustainability of 21st CCLC program and enhance the quality of the services offered. Lessons Learned and Recommendations includes an overall assessment the 21st CCLC programs and program-wide recommendations to enhance program quality.
5
2.0 STUDENT CHARACTERISTICS 2.1 Total Student Enrollment and Attendance Nearly all the students that enrolled in the Elementary (South) 21st CCLC sites became regular
participants. At Altamonte and Casselberry 99 percent of students were regular participants and at
English Estates about 97 percent of students were regular participants. This indicates the programs’
success retaining students in the program.
Table 1. Student Enrollment: Total and Regularly Participating Students for Summer 2015 and School Year 2015-2016.
Center Name
Total Enrolled Attending (at least one day)
Regularly Participating Enrollment (30 days or more)
Summer Only
School Year Only
Both Summer
AND School Year
Total Summer
Only
School Year Only
Both Summer
AND School Year
Total
Altamonte 0 46 22 68 0 45 22 67
Casselberry 0 65 70 135 0 63 70 133
English Estates 0 61 25 86 0 58 25 83
Note. Unduplicated counts shown. Students attending/enrolled in both operation periods are only reported under “Both Summer AND School Year.” Only Summer + Only School Year + Summer AND School Year = Total.
2.2 Student Demographics Elementary (South) serves students age five to eleven who reside in low income neighborhoods and have a variety of special needs. These factors put students at-risk for academic and social/emotional issues that could interfere with students’ ability to learn and lower students’ overall well-being. Table 2 displays the student gender and age range for each of the sites. In general, there are slightly more male participants than female at Altamonte and Casselberry.
Table 2. Student Demographics for Total Participating Students (All Students Served) and Regularly Participating Students.
Center Name
Total Participating Students Regularly Participating Students
Gender Age
Range
Gender Age
Range Male Female Data Not Provided
Male Female Data Not Provided
Altamonte 38 30 NA 5-11 37 30 NA 5-11
Casselberry 73 62 NA 5-11 72 61 NA 5-11
English Estates 39 47 NA 5-11 39 44 NA 5-11
6
Tables 3 and 4 display the number and percent of students with special needs, including students who are English Language Learners (ELLs) and students with disabilities. About 7-10 percent of Elementary (South) students are English Language Learners. All the Elementary (South) programs have a large percentage of students who have a disability, 19 percent of regular participants at Altamonte, 17 percent at Casselberry, and 17 percent at English Estates. This exceeds the district percentage of about 12 percent. In addition, the majority of students in all three programs qualify for free or reduced price lunch, a commonly used indicator of poverty.
Table 3. Population Specifics: Total Participating Students.
Center Name Limited English
Language Proficiency Identified with Special Needs
Free or Reduced-Price Lunch
Yes No DK* Yes No DK Yes No DK
Altamonte 5 63 NA 13 55 NA 52 16 NA
Casselberry 10 125 NA 23 112 NA 114 21 NA
English Estates 10 76 NA 14 72 NA 80 6 NA *DK = Don’t Know/Could Not Be Determined.
Table 4. Population Specifics: Regularly Participating Students.
Center Name Limited English
Language Proficiency Identified with Special Needs
Free or Reduced-Price Lunch
Yes No DK* Yes No DK Yes No DK
Altamonte 5 62 NA 13 54 NA 51 16 NA
Casselberry 10 123 NA 22 111 NA 112 21 NA
English Estates 8 75 NA 14 69 NA 77 6 NA *DK = Don’t Know/Could Not Be Determined.
As Table 5 indicates, Elementary (South) programs have a diverse population of students.
Table 5. Student Race and Ethnicity: Total and Regularly Participating Students.
Center Name
Total Participating Students Regularly Participating Students
Am
eri
can
Ind
ian
or
Ala
ska
Nat
ive
Asi
an
Bla
ck o
r
Afr
ican
Am
eri
can
His
pan
ic o
r La
tin
o
Haw
aiia
n o
r P
acif
ic
Isla
nd
er
Wh
ite
Two
or
Mo
re R
aces
Dat
a N
ot
Pro
vid
ed
Am
eri
can
Ind
ian
or
Ala
ska
Nat
ive
Asi
an
Bla
ck o
r
Afr
ican
Am
eri
can
His
pan
ic o
r La
tin
o
Haw
aiia
n o
r P
acif
ic
Isla
nd
er
Wh
ite
Two
or
Mo
re R
aces
Dat
a N
ot
Pro
vid
ed
Altamonte 0 0 12 24 0 27 5 N
A
0 0 12 24 0 27 4 N
A Casselberry 0 1 17 51 0 51 15 N
A
0 1 17 50 0 51 14 N
A English Estates 1 1 42 30 0 7 5 N
A
1 1 42 27 0 7 5 N
A
7
Elementary (South) serves students in grades K-5, with the smallest enrollment in Kindergarten and first grade.
Table 6. Student Grade for Total Participating Students.
Center Name Grade In School*
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total
Altamonte 2 5 8 1
5
3
0
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68
Casselberry 5 1
7
2
2
2
5
2
8
3
8
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 135
English Estates 8 6 1
5
1
9
1
6
2
2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 * Grade levels are exclusive, as students can only be in one grade level. Students should be reported under the grade level they were in during the 2015-2016 Academic Year.
Table 7. Student Grade for Regularly Participating Students.
Center Name Grade In School*
K 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total
Altamonte 2 5 8 1
5
2
9
8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67
Casselberry 5 1
7
2
2
2
5
2
8
3
6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 133
English Estates 8 6 1
2
1
9
1
6
2
2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 * Grade levels are exclusive, as students can only be in one grade level. Students should be reported under the grade level they were in during the 2015-2016 Academic Year.
3.0 PROGRAM OPERATIONS 3.1 Summer Operation During the summer of 2015, Elementary (South) was open nine and half hours a day for 23 days.
Table 8. Summer 2015 Operation.
Center Name
Total number of weeks THIS center was
open
Typical number of days per
week THIS center was
open
Typical number of hours per week THIS center was open on
WEEKDAYS WEEKDAY EVENINGS
WEEKENDS
Altamonte 6 23 9.5 0 0
Casselberry 6 23 9.5 0 0
English Estates 6 23 9.5 0 0
8
3.2 School Year Operation The Elementary (South) sites offered programming five days a week for 174 days during the academic year. Casselberry also had programming for one hour a day before school.
Table 9. School Year 2015-2016 Operation.
Center Name
Total # weeks THIS
center was
open
Total # days THIS
center was
open
Typical # days
per week THIS
center was
open
Typical # hours per week THIS center
was open
Total # days THIS center operated
Bef
ore
Sch
oo
l
Du
rin
g Sc
ho
ol
Aft
er S
cho
ol
Wee
ken
ds
/
Ho
liday
s
Bef
ore
Sch
oo
l
Du
rin
g Sc
ho
ol
Aft
er S
cho
ol
Wee
ken
ds/
H
olid
ays
Altamonte 33 174 5 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 174 0
Casselberry 33 177 5 5 0 2.5 0 177 0 174 0
English Estates 33 174 5 0 0 2.5 0 0 0 174 0
4.0 STAFF CHARACTERISTICS 4.1 Staff Demographics As shown on Table 10a, Altamonte employed 12 school day teachers, one center administrator, two non-school day staff members and two other staff members. Casselberry (Table 10b) employed six school day teachers, one center administrator and 12 non-school day staff members. English Estates (Table 10c) employed 17 school day teachers, one center administrator and nine non-school day staff members. English Estates also employed two community members.
Table 10a. Regular Staff by Paid and Volunteer Status.
Staff Type*
Altamonte
Summer of 2015 2015-2016
School Year
Paid Volunteer Paid Volunteer
School Day Teachers (former and substitute) 4 0 12 0
Center Administrators and Coordinators 1 0 1 0
Other Non-Teaching School Day Staff 0 0 2 0
Parents 0 0 0 0
College Students 0 0 0 0
High School Students 0 0 0 0
Community Members 0 1 0 0
Subcontracted Staff 0 0 0 0
Other** 0 0 0 0 * These categories represent the regular responsibilities of program staff during the regular school day. ** Use this category if data do not fit in specific categories provided
9
Table 10b. Regular Staff by Paid and Volunteer Status.
Staff Type*
Casselberry
Summer of 2015 2015-2016
School Year
Paid Volunteer Paid Volunteer
School Day Teachers (former and substitute) 5 0 6 0
Center Administrators and Coordinators 1 0 1 0
Other Non-Teaching School Day Staff 2 0 12 0
Parents 0 0 0 0
College Students 2 0 0 0
High School Students 0 0 0 0
Community Members 0 3 0 0
Subcontracted Staff 0 0 0 0
Other** 0 0 0 0 * These categories represent the regular responsibilities of program staff during the regular school day. ** Use this category if data do not fit in specific categories provided
Table 10c. Regular Staff by Paid and Volunteer Status.
Staff Type*
English Estates
Summer of 2015 2015-2016
School Year
Paid Volunteer Paid Volunteer
School Day Teachers (former and substitute) 4 0 17 0
Center Administrators and Coordinators 1 0 1 0
Other Non-Teaching School Day Staff 2 0 9 0
Parents 0 0 0 0
College Students 0 0 0 0
High School Students 0 0 0 0
Community Members 1 3 2 0
Subcontracted Staff 0 0 0 0
Other** 0 0 0 0 * These categories represent the regular responsibilities of program staff during the regular school day. ** Use this category if data do not fit in specific categories provided
4.2 Overall Staffing Elementary (South) employed 2 male and 60 female staff members. The majority of staff members held a Bachelor’s (45) or Master’s/PhD (9) degree. The remaining staff members had an Associate’s (4) or a High School (4) degree.
10
4.3 Student-to-Staff Ratio All sites operated with 12:1 student-to-staff ratio for academic enrichment and an 18:1 student-to-staff
ratio for personal enrichment (non-academic). This ratio was consistent throughout the 2015-2016
program year.
4.4 Staff Training All sites conducted monthly staff meetings that included professional development. The professional development covered topics such as classroom management, behavior modification, student character development, project-based learning, and curricular and instruction adjustments and refinement. The district project director provided (or brought in others to provide) regular training about curriculum, transition to common core standards, and the use of data to improve programming in order to support the professional growth of the Site Coordinator. The Site Coordinator and Lead Teacher then disseminated applicable information received from seminars, monthly district Site Coordinator leadership meetings, and community resources to site staff.
4.5 Staff Turnover There was minimal staff turnover at the Elementary (South) sites. Only one teacher at Altamonte and Casselberry and eight teachers at English Estates.
4.6 Certified Teachers A total of 37 certified teachers were employed to deliver math, reading, and science activities.
Instruction was provided within stated student to teacher ratios, and aligned with the district’s
instructional plans and 21st CCLC project plans, as well as program goals and objectives.
5.0 OBJECTIVES and OUTCOMES 5.1 Objectives and Activities A variety of activities were offered to meet the needs of the students and families participating in the
21st CCLC program. These activities were aligned to the goals and objectives of the grant. All programs
will continue to offer the activities provided in the most recent school year, as well as additional
activities (described below) based on information gathered from student, family and teacher surveys.
Table 11. Objectives and Description of Activities
Objective Description of Activities
Objective 1.1: 70% of participating
students will improve their
English/language arts (ELA) as
measured by report card grades. PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
11
Objective Description of Activities
Objective 1.2 70% of participating
students will improve their
English/language arts (ELA) as
measured by state assessment (e.g.
FSA). PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
Objective 1.3 70% of the regularly
participating students will improve
writing skills as measured by
Common Core Standard Rubric
during the current year. PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
Objective 2.1 70% of participating
students will improve their
mathematics as measured by report
card grades. PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
Objective 2.2 70% of participating
students will improve their
mathematics as measured by state
assessment (e.g. FSA). PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
Objective 3.1 70% of participating
students will improve their science as
measured by report card grades. PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
Objective 3.2 70% of participating
students will improve their science as
measured by state assessment (e.g.
FSA).
PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring, Engineering Adventures, STEM
Challenges, Homework Help
Objective 4 80% of the regularly
participating students will improve
computer technology skills as
measured by Pre-Post
Assessment/Survey during the
current year.
Pixie, computer research, power point lessons, and Photoshop projects
Objective 5 80% of the regularly
participating students will improve
fitness as measured by Pre-Post
Health and fitness classes to support healthy life style including nutrition, cooking and fitness activities
12
Objective Description of Activities
Assessment/Survey during the
current year.
Objective 6 80% of the regularly
participating students will improve
social interactions as measured by
Pre-Post Assessment/Survey during
the current year.
Character education classes, mentoring, leadership activities, service learning projects, project-based learning
Objective 7 80% of the regularly
participating students will
demonstrate application of positive
character traits as measured by Pre-
Post Assessment/Survey during the
current year.
Character education classes, mentoring, leadership activities, service learning projects, project-based learning
Objective 8 50% of the regularly
participating students will decrease
or reduce disciplinary problems as
measured by School/District Records
during the current year.
Character education classes, mentoring, leadership activities, service learning projects
Objective 9 80% of the regularly
participating students will maintain
or improve attendance as measured
by School/District Records during the
current year.
Providing activities that students noted of high interest on the student interest survey such as photography, cooking,
gardening and sports and recreation, communication with parents
Objective 10 70% of regularly
participating students will
demonstrate their grade promotion
as measured by school/district
records.
PBLs, Skills Specific Tutoring iReady, Homework Help
Objective 11 75% of the parents of
regularly participating students will
demonstrate their knowledge (in a
specified area) as measured by pre-
post assessment
Classes and mini workshops on topics that were indicated on the parent survey
13
Objective Description of Activities
Objective 12 50% of the parents of
regularly participating students will
improve their involvement in student
education as measured by surveys
Workshops on with topics such as: Helping my Child with Homework, Reading with my child, Successful Parent Teacher
Conference, Family Math and Reading Game Nights
Objective 13 75% of the parents of
regularly participating students will
improve their literacy skills as
measured by pre-post assessments.
Classes and mini-workshops on topics that were indicated on the parent survey
Objective 14 50% of the parents of
regularly participating students will
demonstrate their involvement in
student education as measured by
logs
Workshops dealing with topics such as Helping my Child with Homework, Reading with my child, Successful Parent Teacher
Conference, Family Math and Reading Game Nights
5.2 Data Collection Methods The data were collected by site staff using a variety of methods, including teacher, student, and parent
surveys, data from Skyward (the district’s student data system), and statewide assessment data.
5.2.1 Measures and Data Collected: Academic Objectives: The progress towards meeting the academic objectives are measured by course
grades, promotion data and Florida Standards Assessment (FSA) and End-of-Course assessment data.
Personal Objectives: The progress towards meeting the personal objectives are measured by school day
attendance data, discipline referral data, student surveys, and informal assessments.
Family Member Objectives: All of the family member objectives data is collected through surveys and
local assessments.
5.2.2 Data Collection Timeline: Beginning this grant year, data was collected at three points in time. This data was collected a few weeks prior to the November, January, and June reporting periods. The sites were responsible for administering, collecting, and reporting the assessments and surveys specific to 21st CCLC, such as the family member surveys, character surveys, and fitness assessments. All remaining data, such as progress monitoring test scores, attendance data, discipline data, and report card grades were collected by the evaluator using the district’s data system. As a result some system-wide issues during the 2014-2015 program year, specific internal dates have been developed prior to the official reporting periods to ensure the surveys and assessments are administered and data is collected early enough for on time submission. This process has been successful in producing high quality on-time data.
14
5.2.3 Continuous Assessment: The programs used a variety data collection methods throughout nine-week unit plans, such as
summaries and reflections, journals/student folders, visual representations, and collaborative/group
activities. Photos and work samples were regularly collected to show student progress on the project-
based learning unit plans. Teachers checked for understanding throughout unit plan and used data to
guide teacher decision making about future instruction. Feedback was provided to students to help
ensure understanding and improve performance. For each program, teachers met with the Lead
Teacher and Site Coordinator monthly to assess data, and adjust curriculum, resources, and strategies
accordingly. The Lead Teacher had regular correspondence with school principals, assistant principals,
behavior specialists, math and reading coaches, day time teachers, and parents/guardians regarding
data trends and concerns. The Project Director regularly walked through the program with the site
coordinator and lead teacher to talk about program improvements and how the lessons could be
designed to be motivational to the students while also reinforcing high impact standards (an expectation
of the targeted schools’ principals).
5.2.4 Data Quality: The overall quality of the data used for the evaluation is very high. Standardized measures were utilized for academic objectives, including state assessment results (when available). Other data, such as course grades, attendance data, and discipline data are collected at the district level and therefore accurately represent student performance and behavior. In addition, as mentioned the internal reporting dates have been successful in providing the evaluator with high quality data that is collected at the site level. This process ensures that the data is submitted on time and is well organized for analysis and reporting.
5.2.5 Student Inclusion: Exclusion from analysis was necessary only when students were not expected to participate in the
activity, survey, or assessment (i.e. only students in grades 3-10 take the FSA reading assessment) or if
the student was not present or elected not to participate in a specific survey or assessment. Although
participation is encouraged, surveys and assessments conducted at the 21st CCLC sites are voluntary for
students.
15
5.3 Data Analysis and Results: Progress Toward and Achievement of Objectives 5.3.1. Objective 1.1: 70% of participating students will improve their English/language arts (ELA) as
measured by report card grades.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 62 45 73%
Casselberry 129 99 77%
English Estates 79 50 63%
Elementary (South) 270 194 72%
Findings: Overall, Elementary (South) achieved this objective with both Altamonte and Casselberry having more than 70 percent of student improve their report card grades. English Estates was just under the objective target with 63 percent of students improving report card grades.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective. However, it is important to monitor individual
sites to ensure all programs are meeting the goals.
5.3.2 Objective 1.2 70% of participating students will improve their English/language arts (ELA) as
measured by state assessment (e.g. FSA).
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 44 17 39%
Casselberry 84 40 48%
English Estates 53 18 34%
Elementary (South) 181 75 41%
Findings: In 2015, the State of Florida introduced a new statewide standardized assessment (FSA) that assessed the new more rigorous Florida Standards, resulting in a decrease in assessment scores statewide. At Altamonte, about 39 percent of students either maintained a proficient score or improved their score on the ELA assessment. About 34 percent of students at English Estates improved or increased their score. Casselberry had the greatest percentage of students meeting the standard of success with 48 percent of student improving their assessment score.
Progress: Elementary (South) made little progress on this objective.
16
5.3.3 Objective 1.3 70% of the regularly participating students will improve writing skills as measured by
Common Core Standard Rubric during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 62 35 56%
Casselberry 111 102 92%
English Estates 40 29 73%
Elementary (South) 213 166 78%
Findings: Overall, majority of students (78 percent) improved their writing skills over the course of the school year. Casselberry’s students were very successful in improving their writing with 92 percent meeting the objective. About 56 percent of Altamonte’s students improved their writing skills.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.4 Objective 2.1 70% of participating students will improve their mathematics as measured by report
card grades.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 62 43 69%
Casselberry 129 87 67%
English Estates 79 49 62%
Elementary (South) 270 179 66%
Findings: All Elementary (South) sites were close to achieving this objective. Altamonte and Casselberry were just under the target of 70 percent with 69 and 67 percent of students improving their math grade respectively. English Estates had about 62 percent of students who improved their math grade.
Progress: Elementary (South) made significant progress towards achieving this objective.
5.3.5 Objective 2.2 70% of participating students will improve their mathematics as measured by state
assessment (e.g. FSA).
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 43 17 40%
Casselberry 83 45 54%
English Estates 53 26 49%
Elementary (South) 179 88 49%
17
Findings: As stated above, in 2015, the State of Florida introduced a new statewide standardized
assessment (FSA) that assessed the new more rigorous Florida Standards, resulting in a decrease in
assessment scores statewide. Students attending Elementary (South) performed slightly better on the
math assessment compared to the ELA with almost 50 percent of student making an improvement or
maintaining a satisfactory score. At Altamonte, with 40 percent of students either maintained a
proficient score or improved their score on the ELA assessment had the lowest percentage of all three
sites. About 49 percent of students at English Estates improved or increased their score. Casselberry
again had the greatest percentage of students meeting the standard of success with 54 percent of
student improving their assessment score.
Progress: Elementary (South) made some progress on this objective.
5.3.6. Objective 3.1 70% of participating students will improve their science as measured by report card
grades.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 62 56 90%
Casselberry 129 94 73%
English Estates 79 57 72%
Elementary (South) 270 207 77%
Findings: In science, 90 percent of Altamonte’s students were able to improve their grade or maintain high grades. At Casselberry and English Estates slightly more than 70 percent of students met the objective.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.7 Objective 3.2 70% of participating students will improve their science as measured by state
assessment (e.g. FSA).
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 8 3 38%
Casselberry 35 15 43%
English Estates 20 6 30%
Elementary (South) 63 24 38%
Findings: The number of students measured is so low because the statewide Science assessment is
only taken by students in fifth grade. Therefore, unlike the ELA and math assessment, the science objective is not a “growth” or “improvement” metric because there are not two years of student
18
performance to measure. Instead the science objective is based on the percentage of students receiving a satisfactory score, which is a more difficult measurement of student performance. This may help explain the low scores in science. However, with only 38 percent of students receiving a satisfactory score, science programming should remain a high priority for Elementary (South).
Progress: Elementary (South) made some progress on this objective.
5.3.8 Objective 4 80% of the regularly participating students will improve computer technology skills as
measured by Pre-Post Assessment/Survey during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 58 34 59%
Casselberry 109 106 97%
English Estates 44 35 80%
Elementary (South) 211 175 83%
Findings: Students at Casselberry and English Estates significantly improved their computer technology skills throughout the school year with 97 and 80 percent of students meeting the standard of success, respectively. About 60 percent of students at Altamonte improved their computer technology skills.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.9 Objective 5 80% of the regularly participating students will improve fitness as measured by Pre-
Post Assessment/Survey during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 59 56 95%
Casselberry 106 72 68%
English Estates 62 51 82%
Elementary (South) 227 179 79%
Findings: Both Altamonte and English Estates had more than 80 percent of students improve their fitness throughout the school year. About 68 percent of students at Casselberry met the fitness objective.
Progress: Elementary (South) made significant progress on this objective.
19
5.3.10 Objective 6 80% of the regularly participating students will improve social interactions as
measured by Pre-Post Assessment/Survey during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 62 42 68%
Casselberry 109 98 90%
English Estates 51 51 100%
Elementary (South) 222 191 86%
Findings: Casselberry and English Estates exceeded the target for improvement of student social interactions while Altamonte had about 68 percent of students make improvements in this area.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.11 Objective 7 80% of the regularly participating students will demonstrate application of positive
character traits as measured by Pre-Post Assessment/Survey during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 58 20 34%
Casselberry 113 105 93%
English Estates 53 32 60%
Elementary (South) 224 157 70%
Findings: While 93 percent of students at Casselberry demonstrated the application of positive character traits, students at English Estates and Altamonte appeared to have struggled with this objective.
Progress: Elementary (South) made significant progress on this objective.
5.3.12 Objective 8 50% of the regularly participating students will decrease or reduce disciplinary
problems as measured by School/District Records during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 67 64 96%
Casselberry 133 131 98%
English Estates 83 81 98%
Elementary (South) 283 276 98%
Findings: Discipline is not a significant issue at Elementary (South).
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
20
5.3.13 Objective 9 80% of the regularly participating students will maintain or improve attendance as
measured by School/District Records during the current year.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 67 26 39%
Casselberry 133 65 49%
English Estates 83 41 49%
Elementary (South) 283 132 47%
Findings: About half of the students at Casselberry and English Estates maintained or improved their school day attendance. About 40 percent of Altamonte’s students maintained or improved their attendance.
Progress: Elementary (South) made progress towards this objective.
5.3.14 Objective 10 70% of regularly participating students will demonstrate their grade promotion as
measured by school/district records.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 62 60 97%
Casselberry 130 125 96%
English Estates 79 75 95%
Elementary (South) 271 260 96%
Findings: About 96 percent of Elementary (South) students were promoted to the next grade level.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.15 Objective 11 75% of the parents of regularly participating students will demonstrate their
knowledge (in a specified area) as measured by pre-post assessment
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 42 30 71%
Casselberry 15 5 33%
English Estates 57 57 100%
Elementary (South) 114 92 81%
Findings: The Elementary (South) sites had varying levels of family member performance with 100 percent of family members at English Estates and 71 percent at Altamonte improved their knowledge in
21
math skills, reading skill, and health wellness. While on 33 percent of family members were able to improve their knowledge.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.16 Objective 12 50% of the parents of regularly participating students will improve their
involvement in student education as measured by surveys
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 58 46 79%
Casselberry 46 34 74%
English Estates 51 51 100%
Elementary (South) 155 131 85%
Findings: More than 50 percent of the participating family members increased their involvement in their student’s education.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
5.3.17 Objective 13 75% of the parents of regularly participating students will improve their literacy
skills as measured by pre-post assessments.
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 63 63 100%
Casselberry 0 0 NA
English Estates 58 47 81%
Elementary (South) 121 110 91%
Findings: 100 percent of Altamonte’s family members and 81 percent of English Estates’ family members improved their literacy skills by participating in events hosted by the 21st CCLC. However, Casselberry did not have any regularly participating family member participate in the literacy activities.
Progress: Elementary (South) achieved this objective.
22
5.3.18 Objective 14 50% of the parents of regularly participating students will demonstrate their
involvement in student education as measured by logs
Site Total Participants
Measured
Total Number of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Percent of Participants
Meeting Standard of Success
Altamonte 67 29 43%
Casselberry 133 0 0%
English Estates 83 56 67%
Elementary (South) 283 85 30%
Findings: The Elementary (South) sites have varying amounts of parent participation.
Progress: Elementary (South) made some progress towards this objective.
5.4 Other Findings Students and family members responded very favorably to the majority of questions on the end-of-year survey. The majority of family members were very satisfied or satisfied with all aspects of the programs. Only about one to three percent of family members were “unsatisfied” any aspect of the program. Ninety seven percent of family member respondents would sign their child up for the program in the future and would recommend the program to others. Students also felt that the Elementary (South) 21st CCLC programs were beneficial academically and socially. Over 65 percent of respondents felt that the program ‘definitely’ helped with understanding the importance of following rules, solving problems, and academics. Fewer students felt that the program ‘definitely’ helped students improve their grades, approximately 55 percent. Teachers felt that students attending Elementary (South) 21st CCLC programs improved the most in the quality of homework completion and academic performance. However, 53 percent of teachers felt that parental involvement did not change as a result of the program. 5.5 Student Success Snapshot
The Snapshot student, a third grade student, struggled with various social challenges. He would be taken out of the classroom during the school day for disruptive and often violent behavior. His mom and teachers were very frustrated with his school day behavior and how it would impact his overall success. To provide an outlet for her son, the snapshot student’s mom signed him up for a number of after school activities, including 21st CCLC. Knowing the student’s history, the 21st CCLC staff found ways to allow the student to develop leadership skills and become a part of the community. Quickly, he became engaged and helpful, even applying Covey leadership habits. Initially, in the beginning of the school year, the snapshot student was targeted for summer school. However, by the end of the school year, he showed a level gain on standardized testing, as well as a marked improvement in his school day behavior.
23
5.6 Overall Findings for Each Objective The overall progress for each objective is addressed in Section 5.3 Data Analysis and Results. Of the 18 objectives measured, the Elementary (South) either achieved or made significant progress on 13 of them. Some progress was made on the remaining objectives that primarily measured student performance on the statewide assessments and classroom grades. The statewide assessments in ELA and mathematics, Florida Standards Assessment (FSA), are new and more rigorous than previous assessments. Consequently, it may take some time for students and teachers to adjust but the students’ performance suggests that programing changes may be necessary to improve student outcomes. In addition, science needs to remain an area of focus for the program, although, science is only assessed in Grade 5 it is apparent from that students need more support in that area.
6.0 SUSTAINABILITY PLAN 6.1 Vision and Desired Results
6.1.1 Vision: The mission of the Seminole County Public Schools is to ensure that all students acquire
the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to be productive citizens.
6.1.2 Results Orientation: The Elementary South 21st CCLC program achieved or made significant
progress on 13 of the 18 grant objectives for the 2015-16 school year. While student performance has improved in the areas of ELA, Math, and Science over the course of this grant cycle, the program continues to struggle to meet objectives in these areas.
6.1.3 Strategies for Achieving Results: The program utilized the following best practices/strategies
in order to achieve program goals and objectives:
Lessons/instruction aligned to school-day activities
Implementation of Project Based Learning
Staff training in the areas of PBL implementation and classroom management
Frequent review of student data
Regular meetings with the program Facilitators to discuss program details and address any concerns
6.2 Community Relationships
6.2.1 Building Community Support: The programs’ advisory council played a significant role in building community support. By leveraging the partnerships established through the advisory board, the Elementary South programs were able to secure significant support in the area of programming for both students and adult family members.
6.2.2 Strategic Partnerships: The most effective means that the program has utilized to foster strategic partnerships is its Advisory Board. Advisory Board members have been able to access resources and services for the programs that would not have otherwise been accessible. Partnerships with Molina Healthcare and the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space
24
(CASIS) will be vital to the program moving forward as these organizations support progress toward Science, Math, and Health related program objectives.
Table 12: Partnerships and Sub-Contracts
Agency Name Type of
Organization
Sub- Contractor (Yes/No)
Estimated Value ($) of
Contributions
Estimated Value ($) of Sub-
contract
Type of Service
Provided
Molina Healthcare For-Profit No $954 Programming
Redick Media Media Yes
$2,575 Programming
Hoop Dreams Elite For-Profit Yes
$4,600 Programming
Consumer Debt
Counselors Non-Profit No $500 Programming
/ Food
CASIS - Center for the
Advancement of
Science in Space Non-Profit No $10,507 Programming
Note: Value of subcontract must be ZERO if the agency is listed as “No” in the subcontractor column. Likewise, the value of the subcontract must be greater than ZERO if the agency is listed as “Yes” in the subcontractor column. Note: The USED’s federal definition differentiates between a “partner” and a “subcontractor”. A subcontractor receives compensation (to some extent) for their services; partners do not.
6.3 Accounting for Change
6.3.1 Developing Internal Strengths: Professional development was a focus as PBL training was
also provided for all teachers and staff involved in the program to increase the rigor of the programs’ academic components. In addition, district staff and community specialists were recruited to deliver adult family member literacy workshops.
6.3.2 Strategies for Development:
Meetings of program facilitators and district level decision makers
Frequent monitoring and feedback by program
Evaluator Parent and student survey data
Collaboration with school day staff
6.3.3 Adaptability to change: Collaboration between program administration and the school principals proved to be beneficial. Program operations and results were reviewed regularly, issues were addressed that arose during the year and priorities and needs were discussed in order to adjust procedures and policies to meet the needs of all involved.
6.4 Strategic Financing
25
6.4.1 Resource Requirements: The Title I Data Assistant was responsible for data collection from the program staff, ensuring all monthly deliverables are submitted. Each site Facilitator managed daily operations of the program including scheduling, data collection, and parent interaction. In addition, program Facilitators provided support and training for program staff. Regular meetings were essential to ensure continuity within programs.
6.4.2 Cost Management: District purchasing policies governing purchase thresholds, vendors, and approval of all
purchases to ensure they line up with federal guidelines were followed.
Inventory was kept listing available resources and distributed across all sites at the beginning of the year.
Requests for supplies were sent via email to the program director for approval prior to ordering.
All orders were placed by one central bookkeeper to avoid duplication between sites.
6.4.3 Revenue Enhancement: Though several lucrative partnerships have been formed in the effort to sustain the program, the district does not currently possess the funds to continue the Elementary South program without the significant financial support provided by the 21st CCLC grant. The Elementary South programs will continue to work with existing partners as well as accessing the Foundation for Seminole County Public School for assistance in gaining new partnerships.
7.0 LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Seminole County Public Schools Elementary (South) 21st CCLC program has provided high quality
services to the students and family members who attended this year. The site has achieved or made
significant progress on the majority of the program objectives, including discipline, attendance, and
student performance. There a few key recommendations that may help enhance the program quality:
As a result of the increase rigor of statewide assessments it may be necessary to re-evaluate some of the programming or add additional support to ensure that students are learning and mastering the new standards.
In addition, improving Science achievement is a district priority and should continue to be a focus for the Elementary (South).
A continued effort to encourage more parent participation in the program is recommended.