orchard knob middle school - Hamilton County Department of ...

ORCHARD KNOB MIDDLE 

SCHOOL 

of 

HAMILTON COUNTY SCHOOLS 

TITLE I 

e‐Documentation 

2009 – 2010

The purpose of 

e-documentation is to provide 

transparency and accessibility 

to all of our Title I Schools 

2009-2010

2009 AYP Preliminary Reports School ID: 

3300200 

Orchard Knob Middle School K-8 

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 

Met AYP 

N N Y Y Y Y 

Met Attendance Rate K8 N Y Y Y 

NEW NCLB Status: 

NCLB Status Last Year: 

Target 

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

Student Count 

343 5 1 337 334 55 

Percent Passing 2009 

Percent Passing 2008 

66 

68 

75 

100 

100 

100 

66 

68 

65 

67 

46 

30 0 

Percent Not Passing 2009 

Percent Not Passing 2008 

34 

32 

25 

0 

0 

0 

34 

32 

35 

33 

54 

70 100 

Percent Not Passing 2007 24 0 24 24 75 

Percent Advanced 2009 


11 

9 

75 

100 

0 

0 

10 

9 

10 

8 

14 

0 0 

Made AYP in Math 

* How AYP was Met 

N N N N 

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

Student Count 

343 5 1 337 334 55 

Percent Passing 2009 67 73 100 67 66 57 

Percent Passing 2008 67 100 88 67 67 46 0 

Percent Not Passing 2009 33 27 0 33 34 43 

Percent Not Passing 2008 33 0 12 33 

33 54 100 

Percent Not Passing 2007 33 0 33 34 78 

Percent Advanced 2009 9 45 33 9 

8 6 


Made AYP in Reading 

6 

Y 

100 0 6 

Y 

5 

Y 

0 

Y 

0 

* How AYP was Met PR PR PR PR 

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 2year average 

2CI = Met with 2year avg Confidence Level 

3 = Met with 3year average 

3CI = Met with 3year avg Confidence Level 

SH1 = Safe Harbor by 1year 10% reduction 



TO1 = Met with SWD interium flexibility 

PR = Met with projections 

Reading Benchmarks 

K-8 = 89% HS = 93%

TCAP CRT Achievement Test Results for 2009 

Orchard Knob Middle School 

Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 

African-American 

American Indian 

Asian-Pacific Islander 

Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Reading-Language Arts 

Below 

Proficient 

Percent 

35.7% 

35.8% 

40.0% 

31.5% 

27.4% 

45.8% 

36.1% 

25.0% 

35.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

36.0% 

.0% 

32.5% 

62.2% 

35.7% 

.0% 

2005 

Proficient or 

Advanced 

Percent 

64.3% 

64.2% 

60.0% 

68.5% 

72.6% 

54.2% 

63.9% 

75.0% 

64.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

64.0% 

100.0% 

67.5% 

37.8% 

64.3% 

.0% 


Below 


Percent 

33.5% 

41.3% 

39.8% 

17.9% 

25.7% 

41.7% 

34.6% 

12.5% 

33.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

33.4% 

50.0% 

30.0% 

62.2% 

33.5% 

.0% 

2006 


Advanced 

Percent 

66.5% 

58.7% 

60.2% 

82.1% 

74.3% 

58.3% 

65.4% 

87.5% 

66.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

66.6% 

50.0% 

70.0% 

37.8% 

66.5% 

.0% 


Below 


Percent 

37.3% 

38.5% 

47.0% 

25.4% 

28.0% 

45.3% 

37.6% 

31.3% 

37.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

37.3% 

33.3% 

32.0% 

77.3% 

37.3% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 


Advanced 

Percent 

62.7% 

61.5% 

53.0% 

74.6% 

72.0% 

54.7% 

62.4% 

68.8% 

62.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

62.7% 

66.7% 

68.0% 

22.7% 

62.7% 

.0% 


Below 


Percent 

33.1% 

27.9% 

38.3% 

31.5% 

23.6% 

41.3% 

33.0% 

35.3% 

33.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

33.6% 

.0% 

29.3% 

56.9% 

32.9% 

100.0% 

2008 


Advanced 

Percent 

66.9% 

72.1% 

61.7% 

68.5% 

76.4% 

58.7% 

67.0% 

64.7% 

66.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

66.4% 

100.0% 

70.7% 

43.1% 

67.1% 

.0% 


Below 


Percent 

36.2% 

30.7% 

39.3% 

37.6% 

22.9% 

47.4% 

37.0% 

9.1% 

36.5% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

25.0% 

36.9% 

.0% 

34.0% 

53.7% 

36.2% 

.0% 

2009 


Advanced 

Percent 

63.8% 

69.3% 

60.7% 

62.4% 

77.1% 

52.6% 

63.0% 

90.9% 

63.5% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

75.0% 

63.1% 

100.0% 

66.0% 

46.3% 

63.8% 

.0% 

All students tested 

Page 20 

Questions: Accountability and Testing



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 


Percent 

23.3% 

26.0% 

25.7% 

18.0% 

21.5% 

25.5% 

23.5% 

16.7% 

23.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

23.5% 

.0% 

18.2% 

64.9% 

23.3% 

.0% 

2005 

Math 


Advanced 

Percent 

76.7% 

74.0% 

74.3% 

82.0% 

78.5% 

74.5% 

76.5% 

83.3% 

76.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

76.5% 

100.0% 

81.8% 

35.1% 

76.7% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

24.5% 

18.3% 

34.5% 

20.8% 

19.4% 

29.6% 

24.1% 

31.3% 

24.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

24.6% 

.0% 

18.9% 

70.3% 

24.5% 

.0% 

2006 

Math 


Advanced 

Percent 

75.5% 

81.7% 

65.5% 

79.2% 

80.6% 

70.4% 

75.9% 

68.8% 

75.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

75.4% 

100.0% 

81.1% 

29.7% 

75.5% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

25.1% 

18.0% 

32.8% 

23.8% 

21.7% 

28.1% 

24.6% 

37.5% 

25.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

25.3% 

.0% 

18.9% 

72.7% 

25.1% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Math 


Advanced 

Percent 

74.9% 

82.0% 

67.2% 

76.2% 

78.3% 

71.9% 

75.4% 

62.5% 

74.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

74.7% 

100.0% 

81.1% 

27.3% 

74.9% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

33.9% 

30.5% 

36.4% 

33.8% 

27.0% 

39.8% 

34.4% 

23.5% 

34.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

34.1% 

16.7% 

27.8% 

72.5% 

33.7% 

100.0% 

2008 

Math 


Advanced 

Percent 

66.1% 

69.5% 

63.6% 

66.2% 

73.0% 

60.2% 

65.6% 

76.5% 

65.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

65.9% 

83.3% 

72.2% 

27.5% 

66.3% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

36.3% 

34.0% 

45.5% 

30.9% 

30.9% 

40.8% 

37.4% 

.0% 

36.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

12.5% 

37.0% 

.0% 

31.5% 

75.0% 

36.3% 

.0% 

2009 

Math 


Advanced 

Percent 

63.7% 

66.0% 

54.5% 

69.1% 

69.1% 

59.2% 

62.6% 

100.0% 

63.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

87.5% 

63.0% 

100.0% 

68.5% 

25.0% 

63.7% 

.0% 


Page 47 




Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 


Percent 

63.4% 

63.4% 

76.2% 

51.4% 

64.5% 

62.1% 

63.9% 

50.0% 

63.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

63.7% 

33.3% 

60.9% 

83.8% 

63.4% 

.0% 

2005 

Science 


Advanced 

Percent 

36.6% 

36.6% 

23.8% 

48.6% 

35.5% 

37.9% 

36.1% 

50.0% 

36.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

36.3% 

66.7% 

39.1% 

16.2% 

36.6% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

60.5% 

47.5% 

74.3% 

60.4% 

62.3% 

58.6% 

61.3% 

43.8% 

60.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

60.8% 

.0% 

56.6% 

91.9% 

60.5% 

.0% 

2006 

Science 


Advanced 

Percent 

39.5% 

52.5% 

25.7% 

39.6% 

37.7% 

41.4% 

38.7% 

56.3% 

39.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

39.2% 

100.0% 

43.4% 

8.1% 

39.5% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

59.3% 

35.8% 

74.2% 

66.9% 

60.9% 

57.9% 

59.6% 

53.3% 

59.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

59.8% 

.0% 

55.3% 

90.7% 

59.3% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Science 


Advanced 

Percent 

40.7% 

64.2% 

25.8% 

33.1% 

39.1% 

42.1% 

40.4% 

46.7% 

40.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

40.2% 

100.0% 

44.7% 

9.3% 

40.7% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

61.5% 

38.1% 

65.0% 

76.7% 

61.5% 

61.5% 

62.2% 

47.1% 

61.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

62.2% 

16.7% 

58.8% 

78.4% 

61.4% 

100.0% 

2008 

Science 


Advanced 

Percent 

38.5% 

61.9% 

35.0% 

23.3% 

38.5% 

38.5% 

37.8% 

52.9% 

38.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

37.8% 

83.3% 

41.2% 

21.6% 

38.6% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

63.6% 

43.6% 

56.8% 

82.4% 

64.5% 

62.9% 

63.9% 

54.5% 

64.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

25.0% 

64.9% 

.0% 

62.1% 

75.6% 

63.6% 

.0% 

2009 

Science 


Advanced 

Percent 

36.4% 

56.4% 

43.2% 

17.6% 

35.5% 

37.1% 

36.1% 

45.5% 

35.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

75.0% 

35.1% 

100.0% 

37.9% 

24.4% 

36.4% 

.0% 


Page 74 




Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

Below 


Percent 

63.1% 

65.3% 

63.8% 

60.0% 

61.8% 

64.7% 

63.0% 

66.7% 

63.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

63.7% 

.0% 

60.0% 

88.9% 

63.1% 

.0% 

2005 

Social Studies 


Advanced 

Percent 

36.9% 

34.7% 

36.2% 

40.0% 

38.2% 

35.3% 

37.0% 

33.3% 

36.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

36.3% 

100.0% 

40.0% 

11.1% 

36.9% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

70.1% 

67.5% 

75.7% 

67.3% 

66.9% 

73.9% 

71.5% 

43.8% 

70.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

70.3% 

50.0% 

67.1% 

94.6% 

70.1% 

.0% 

2006 



Advanced 

Percent 

29.9% 

32.5% 

24.3% 

32.7% 

33.1% 

26.1% 

28.5% 

56.3% 

29.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

29.7% 

50.0% 

32.9% 

5.4% 

29.9% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

70.9% 

58.2% 

77.1% 

77.0% 

65.9% 

75.2% 

71.6% 

56.3% 

71.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

71.2% 

33.3% 

67.4% 

97.7% 

70.9% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 



Advanced 

Percent 

29.1% 

41.8% 

22.9% 

23.0% 

34.1% 

24.8% 

28.4% 

43.8% 

28.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

28.8% 

66.7% 

32.6% 

2.3% 

29.1% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

79.4% 

69.5% 

77.1% 

89.9% 

77.6% 

81.0% 

80.1% 

64.7% 

79.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

80.7% 

.0% 

77.4% 

92.2% 

79.4% 

100.0% 

2008 



Advanced 

Percent 

20.6% 

30.5% 

22.9% 

10.1% 

22.4% 

19.0% 

19.9% 

35.3% 

20.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

19.3% 

100.0% 

22.6% 

7.8% 

20.6% 

.0% 

Below 


Percent 

73.3% 

58.8% 

77.7% 

79.6% 

69.7% 

76.4% 

73.9% 

54.5% 

74.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

37.5% 

74.8% 

.0% 

71.2% 

90.0% 

73.3% 

.0% 

2009 



Advanced 

Percent 

26.7% 

41.2% 

22.3% 

20.4% 

30.3% 

23.6% 

26.1% 

45.5% 

25.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

62.5% 

25.2% 

100.0% 

28.8% 

10.0% 

26.7% 

.0% 


Page 101 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 



Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

95.6% 

97.6% 

98.1% 

91.0% 

94.1% 

97.4% 

95.4% 

100.0% 

95.5% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

95.8% 

66.7% 

95.0% 

100.0% 

95.6% 

.0% 

TCAP CRT Achievement Test Results for Advanced Status 2009 

2005 

Advanced 

Percent 

4.4% 

2.4% 

1.9% 

9.0% 

5.9% 

2.6% 

4.6% 

.0% 

4.5% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

4.2% 

33.3% 

5.0% 

.0% 

4.4% 

.0% 


Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

90.6% 

90.9% 

92.9% 

87.7% 

89.1% 

92.0% 

91.0% 

81.3% 

90.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

90.8% 

50.0% 

89.8% 

97.3% 

90.6% 

.0% 

2006 

Advanced 

Percent 

9.4% 

9.1% 

7.1% 

12.3% 

10.9% 

8.0% 

9.0% 

18.8% 

9.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

9.2% 

50.0% 

10.2% 

2.7% 

9.4% 

.0% 


Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

94.7% 

96.7% 

94.0% 

93.4% 

92.0% 

97.0% 

95.3% 

81.3% 

94.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

50.0% 

94.7% 

100.0% 

94.0% 

100.0% 

94.7% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Advanced 

Percent 

5.3% 

3.3% 

6.0% 

6.6% 

8.0% 

3.0% 

4.7% 

18.8% 

5.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

5.3% 

.0% 

6.0% 

.0% 

5.3% 

.0% 


Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

93.3% 

90.4% 

91.5% 

97.7% 

90.8% 

95.5% 

94.4% 

70.6% 

93.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

33.3% 

94.0% 

50.0% 

92.3% 

100.0% 

93.3% 

100.0% 

2008 

Advanced 

Percent 

6.7% 

9.6% 

8.5% 

2.3% 

9.2% 

4.5% 

5.6% 

29.4% 

6.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

66.7% 

6.0% 

50.0% 

7.7% 

.0% 

6.7% 

.0% 


Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

92.8% 

97.0% 

95.5% 

87.9% 

92.2% 

93.4% 

93.4% 

72.7% 

93.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

75.0% 

94.1% 

28.6% 

91.9% 

100.0% 

92.8% 

.0% 

2009 

Advanced 

Percent 

7.2% 

3.0% 

4.5% 

12.1% 

7.8% 

6.6% 

6.6% 

27.3% 

6.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

25.0% 

5.9% 

71.4% 

8.1% 

.0% 

7.2% 

.0% 

Page 20 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

87.0% 

88.6% 

89.5% 

82.9% 

88.2% 

85.6% 

87.2% 

83.3% 

87.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

87.2% 

66.7% 

85.4% 

100.0% 

87.0% 

.0% 

2005 

Advanced 

Percent 

13.0% 

11.4% 

10.5% 

17.1% 

11.8% 

14.4% 

12.8% 

16.7% 

12.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

12.8% 

33.3% 

14.6% 

.0% 

13.0% 

.0% 

Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

89.1% 

84.2% 

90.3% 

93.4% 

89.1% 

88.9% 

89.8% 

75.0% 

89.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

89.3% 

50.0% 

88.1% 

97.3% 

89.1% 

.0% 

2006 

Advanced 

Percent 

10.9% 

15.8% 

9.7% 

6.6% 

10.9% 

11.1% 

10.2% 

25.0% 

11.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

10.7% 

50.0% 

11.9% 

2.7% 

10.9% 

.0% 

Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

89.4% 

85.2% 

91.8% 

91.0% 

88.0% 

90.6% 

90.1% 

75.0% 

89.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

89.6% 

66.7% 

88.3% 

97.7% 

89.4% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Advanced 

Percent 

10.6% 

14.8% 

8.2% 

9.0% 

12.0% 

9.4% 

9.9% 

25.0% 

10.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

10.4% 

33.3% 

11.7% 

2.3% 

10.6% 

.0% 

Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

90.1% 

93.3% 

87.1% 

90.8% 

92.0% 

88.6% 

91.1% 

70.6% 

90.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

90.8% 

50.0% 

88.6% 

100.0% 

90.1% 

100.0% 

2008 

Advanced 

Percent 

9.9% 

6.7% 

12.9% 

9.2% 

8.0% 

11.4% 

8.9% 

29.4% 

9.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

9.2% 

50.0% 

11.4% 

.0% 

9.9% 

.0% 

Math Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

90.3% 

91.0% 

92.0% 

88.6% 

89.1% 

91.3% 

90.9% 

72.7% 

91.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

50.0% 

91.5% 

28.6% 

89.1% 

100.0% 

90.3% 

.0% 

2009 

Advanced 

Percent 

9.7% 

9.0% 

8.0% 

11.4% 

10.9% 

8.7% 

9.1% 

27.3% 

8.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

8.5% 

71.4% 

10.9% 

.0% 

9.7% 

.0% 


Page 47 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


Science Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

98.5% 

97.6% 

99.0% 

99.1% 

98.9% 

98.0% 

98.5% 

100.0% 

98.5% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

98.8% 

66.7% 

98.7% 

97.3% 

98.5% 

.0% 

2005 

Advanced 

Percent 

1.5% 

2.4% 

1.0% 

.9% 

1.1% 

2.0% 

1.5% 

.0% 

1.5% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

1.2% 

33.3% 

1.3% 

2.7% 

1.5% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

97.6% 

94.2% 

100.0% 

99.1% 

100.0% 

95.1% 

97.5% 

100.0% 

97.6% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

97.6% 

100.0% 

97.7% 

97.3% 

97.6% 

.0% 

2006 

Advanced 

Percent 

2.4% 

5.8% 

.0% 

.9% 

.0% 

4.9% 

2.5% 

.0% 

2.4% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

2.4% 

.0% 

2.3% 

2.7% 

2.4% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

98.4% 

96.7% 

99.2% 

99.2% 

99.4% 

97.5% 

98.3% 

100.0% 

98.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

50.0% 

98.4% 

100.0% 

98.2% 

100.0% 

98.4% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Advanced 

Percent 

1.6% 

3.3% 

.8% 

.8% 

.6% 

2.5% 

1.7% 

.0% 

1.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

50.0% 

1.6% 

.0% 

1.8% 

.0% 

1.6% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

94.1% 

86.7% 

95.0% 

99.2% 

97.1% 

91.5% 

94.1% 

94.1% 

94.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

.0% 

94.6% 

66.7% 

93.5% 

98.0% 

94.1% 

100.0% 

2008 

Advanced 

Percent 

5.9% 

13.3% 

5.0% 

.8% 

2.9% 

8.5% 

5.9% 

5.9% 

5.2% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

5.4% 

33.3% 

6.5% 

2.0% 

5.9% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

96.9% 

94.1% 

97.3% 

98.6% 

97.6% 

96.4% 

96.8% 

100.0% 

96.9% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

97.5% 

71.4% 

97.2% 

95.1% 

96.9% 

.0% 

2009 

Advanced 

Percent 

3.1% 

5.9% 

2.7% 

1.4% 

2.4% 

3.6% 

3.2% 

.0% 

3.1% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

2.5% 

28.6% 

2.8% 

4.9% 

3.1% 

.0% 


Page 74 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 



Social Studies Advanced 

Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

99.7% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.1% 

100.0% 

99.3% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

2005 

Advanced 

Percent 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.9% 

.0% 

.7% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

99.7% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.0% 

99.4% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

2006 

Advanced 

Percent 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

1.0% 

.6% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

99.7% 

99.2% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.4% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

Test Year 

2007 

Advanced 

Percent 

.3% 

.8% 

.0% 

.0% 

.6% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.3% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.5% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

2008 

Advanced 

Percent 

.3% 

.0% 

.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

.5% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 


Below 

Advanced 

Percent 

99.7% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.3% 

100.0% 

99.5% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

.0% 

100.0% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

100.0% 

99.7% 

.0% 

2009 

Advanced 

Percent 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.7% 

.0% 

.5% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

.3% 

.0% 

Page 101 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

All students tested. 

Below 


TCAP CRT Achievement Test Preformance Level Counts for 2009 

2006 

Reading-Language Status 


Advanced 

Count Count Count 

114 194 32 

50 60 11 

45 60 8 

19 74 13 

45 111 19 

68 82 13 

112 183 29 

2 

11 3 

114 193 31 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 1 

113 194 31 

1 

0 1 

91 181 31 

23 13 1 

114 194 32 

0 

0 0 

Below 


2007 



Advanced 


141 217 20 

47 71 4 

63 63 8 

31 83 8 

49 112 14 

92 105 6 

136 209 17 

5 

8 3 

140 216 19 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

1 

0 0 

0 

1 1 

140 215 20 

1 

2 0 

107 207 20 

34 10 0 

141 217 20 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

Below 


2008 



Advanced 


124 226 25 

29 65 10 

54 75 12 

41 86 3 

41 117 16 

83 109 9 

118 220 20 

6 

6 5 

124 222 23 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

3 0 

0 

1 2 

124 223 22 

0 

3 3 

95 204 25 

29 22 0 

123 226 25 

1 

0 0 

Below 


2009 



Advanced 


131 205 26 

31 67 3 

44 63 5 

56 75 18 

38 115 13 

93 90 13 

130 198 23 

1 

7 3 

129 200 24 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

2 

4 2 

131 203 21 

0 

2 5 

109 186 26 

22 19 0 

131 205 26 

0 

0 0 

Page 20 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


Below 



2006 

Math Status 


Advanced 


83 219 37 

22 79 19 

39 63 11 

22 77 7 

34 122 19 

48 96 18 

78 212 33 

5 

7 4 

83 217 37 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

2 0 

83 218 36 

0 

1 1 

57 209 36 

26 10 1 

83 219 37 

0 

0 0 

Below 


2007 

Math Status 


Advanced 


95 243 40 

22 82 18 

44 79 11 

29 82 11 

38 116 21 

57 127 19 

89 237 36 

6 

6 4 

95 242 38 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

0 

0 2 

95 241 39 

0 

2 1 

63 232 39 

32 11 1 

95 243 40 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

Below 


2008 

Math Status 


Advanced 


127 211 37 

32 66 7 

51 71 18 

44 74 12 

47 113 14 

80 98 23 

123 203 32 

4 

8 5 

127 208 34 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

3 0 

0 

0 3 

126 209 34 

1 

2 3 

90 197 37 

37 14 0 

126 211 37 

1 

0 0 

Below 


2009 

Math Status 


Advanced 


131 195 35 

34 57 9 

51 52 9 

46 86 17 

51 96 18 

80 99 17 

131 187 32 

0 

8 3 

130 191 31 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

1 

3 4 

131 193 30 

0 

2 5 

101 185 35 

30 10 0 

131 195 35 

0 

0 0 

Page 47 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


Below 



2006 

Science Status 


Advanced 


205 126 8 

57 56 7 

84 29 0 

64 41 1 

109 66 0 

95 59 8 

198 117 8 

7 

9 0 

205 124 8 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

2 0 

205 124 8 

0 

2 0 

171 124 7 

34 

2 1 

205 126 8 

0 

0 0 

Below 


2007 



Advanced 


223 147 6 

44 75 4 

98 33 1 

81 39 1 

106 67 1 

117 80 5 

215 140 6 

8 

7 0 

223 145 5 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

1 0 

0 

1 1 

223 144 6 

0 

3 0 

184 143 6 

39 

4 0 

223 147 6 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

Below 


2008 



Advanced 


230 122 22 

40 51 14 

91 42 7 

99 29 1 

107 62 5 

123 60 17 

222 114 21 

8 

8 1 

227 122 19 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

3 

0 0 

0 

0 3 

229 119 20 

1 

3 2 

190 112 21 

40 10 1 

229 122 22 

1 

0 0 

Below 


2009 



Advanced 


229 120 11 

44 51 6 

63 45 3 

122 24 2 

107 55 4 

122 65 7 

223 115 11 

6 

5 0 

226 114 11 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

1 

0 0 

2 

6 0 

229 115 9 

0 

5 2 

198 112 9 

31 

8 2 

229 120 11 

0 

0 0 

Page 74 



Grade 

Gender 

Income 

Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special 

Education 

Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 


Below 



2006 

Social Studies Status 


Advanced 


235 99 1 

81 39 0 

84 27 0 

70 33 1 

115 56 1 

119 42 0 

228 90 1 

7 

9 0 

235 97 1 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

0 

2 0 

234 98 1 

1 

1 0 

200 97 1 

35 

2 0 

235 99 1 

0 

0 0 

Below 


2007 



Advanced 


266 108 1 

71 50 1 

101 30 0 

94 28 0 

114 58 1 

152 50 0 

257 101 1 

9 

7 0 

265 106 1 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

1 

0 0 

0 

2 0 

265 106 1 

1 

2 0 

223 107 1 

43 

1 0 

266 108 1 

0 

0 0 

Test Year 

Below 


2008 



Advanced 


297 76 1 

73 32 0 

108 31 1 

116 13 0 

135 39 0 

162 37 1 

286 70 1 

11 

6 0 

294 73 1 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

3 

0 0 

0 

3 0 

297 70 1 

0 

6 0 

250 72 1 

47 

4 0 

296 76 1 

1 

0 0 

Below 


2009 



Advanced 


261 94 1 

57 40 0 

87 25 0 

117 29 1 

115 50 0 

146 44 1 

255 89 1 

6 

5 0 

257 89 1 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

1 

0 0 

3 

5 0 

261 87 1 

0 

7 0 

225 90 1 

36 

4 0 

261 94 1 

0 

0 0 

Page 101 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special Education Status 

ELL Status 

TCAP CRT Achievement Test RCPI Reading Language Arts Results for 2009 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th 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 

Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean Mean 

48 

47 

48 

38 

44 

36 

42 

49 

51 

62 

45 

40 

51 

40 

47 

47 

47 

38 

41 

30 

40 

49 

44 

41 

33 

50 

31 

46 

52 

51 

52 

41 

48 

38 

46 

45 

43 

45 

35 

41 

34 

40 

48 

46 

48 

38 

44 

36 

42 

64 

59 

57 

41 

58 

41 

53 

48 

47 

48 

38 

44 

36 

42 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

37 

32 

31 

23 

37 

20 

32 

53 

47 

54 

42 

49 

39 

52 

48 

46 

48 

37 

43 

36 

42 

82 

82 

77 

68 

80 

56 

75 

49 

48 

49 

38 

45 

36 

43 

39 

39 

42 

33 

35 

32 

35 

48 

47 

48 

38 

44 

36 

42 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 


Page 124 



Grade 

Gender 

Income Status 

Ethnicity 

Gifted 

Special Education Status 

ELL Status 

Total 

6th Grade 

7th Grade 

8th Grade 

Female 

Male 

ED 

Non ED 




Hispanic 

White 

Non Gifted 

Gifted 

Non SWD 

SWD 

Non ELL 

ELL 

TCAP CRT Achievement Test RCPI Math Results for 2009 

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 - 

Measurement 

Math RCPI - 

Geometry 


49 

46 

49 

39 

39 

40 

48 

52 

52 

53 

48 

29 

39 

. 

46 

42 

54 

40 

39 

45 

49 

50 

46 

43 

33 

46 

37 

47 

52 

49 

52 

42 

42 

41 

50 

47 

44 

47 

37 

37 

38 

46 

49 

46 

49 

39 

39 

40 

48 

62 

61 

58 

42 

52 

46 

57 

49 

46 

49 

39 

39 

40 

48 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

27 

25 

23 

17 

26 

18 

24 

59 

58 

57 

50 

51 

45 

53 

49 

46 

49 

39 

39 

39 

47 

80 

81 

81 

70 

76 

69 

82 

51 

48 

51 

41 

41 

41 

50 

38 

34 

36 

30 

26 

30 

33 

49 

46 

49 

39 

39 

40 

48 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 


Page 146 



0 

1 

2 

Score Range (0 to 6) 3 

4 

5 

6 


Middle School Writing Results 2005 to 2009 

Test Year 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent 

0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 2 1.6% 

1 .9% 0 .0% 1 .8% 2 1.6% 

5 4.6% 1 .9% 1 .8% 8 6.3% 

20 18.3% 18 16.4% 17 13.9% 39 30.7% 

63 57.8% 69 62.7% 73 59.8% 67 52.8% 

17 15.6% 21 19.1% 27 22.1% 8 6.3% 

3 2.8% 1 .9% 3 2.5% 1 .8% 

2009 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Count Percent 

1 .7% 

0 .0% 

10 7.0% 

33 23.1% 

75 52.4% 

22 15.4% 

2 1.4% 

Page 21 



2005 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Score at Four or Higher 

Four or 

Higher 

Percentages for Scoring At or Above Four 

2006 

Grade Level 

Middle School 


Four or 

Higher 

Test Year 

2007 

Grade Level 

Middle School 


Four or 

Higher 

2008 

Grade Level 

Middle School 


Four or 

Higher 

2009 

Grade Level 

Middle School 


Below Four 

Below Four 

Below Four 

Below Four 

Below Four 

Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent 

Writing 

23.9% 76.1% 17.3% 82.7% 15.6% 84.4% 40.2% 59.8% 30.8% 69.2% 

Female 

18.5% 81.5% 11.3% 88.7% 10.2% 89.8% 32.8% 67.2% 18.0% 82.0% 

Male 

31.8% 68.2% 25.0% 75.0% 20.6% 79.4% 47.0% 53.0% 40.2% 59.8% 

African American 23.9% 76.1% 17.3% 82.7% 15.6% 84.4% 40.0% 60.0% 31.6% 68.4% 

American Indian/Alaska .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

Native 

Asian/Pacific Islander .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 

Hispanic 

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

White 

.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 20.0% 80.0% 

Econ Disadvantaged 24.3% 75.7% 17.9% 82.1% 16.5% 83.5% 39.3% 60.7% 33.1% 66.9% 

Non Econ Disadvantaged 16.7% 83.3% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0% 60.0% 40.0% .0% 100.0% 

Non SWD 

16.1% 83.9% 14.1% 85.9% 11.7% 88.3% 34.9% 65.1% 26.4% 73.6% 

SWD 

68.8% 31.3% 45.5% 54.5% 54.5% 45.5% 72.2% 27.8% 71.4% 28.6% 

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 

23.0% 77.0% 15.1% 84.9% 14.9% 85.1% 40.5% 59.5% 31.3% 68.7% 

System Level 

37.5% 62.5% 75.0% 25.0% 33.3% 66.7% 40.0% 60.0% .0% 100.0% 

State Level 

.0% .0% .0% .0% 25.0% 75.0% .0% 100.0% 66.7% 33.3% 

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

Four or 

Higher 


Page 48 



2003 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 

(Averages are for single years) 

2004 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 

2005 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 

Test Year 

2006 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 

2007 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 

2008 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 

2009 

Grade Level 

Middle School 

Writing 

Score 


Writing 

3.2 

3.9 

3.9 

4.0 

4.1 

3.5 

3.8 

Female 

3.5 

4.0 

4.1 

4.2 

4.3 

3.8 

4.0 

Male 

2.8 

3.8 

3.7 

3.8 

3.9 

3.3 

3.6 

African American 

3.1 

3.9 

3.9 

4.0 

4.1 

3.5 

3.8 

American Indian/Alaska 

Native 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

Asian/Pacific Islander . 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

Hispanic 

4.0 

. 

. 

. 

. 

3.5 

4.5 

White 

4.0 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

3.8 

Econ Disadvantaged 3.1 

3.9 

3.9 

4.0 

4.1 

3.5 

3.8 

Non Econ Disadvantaged 3.8 

4.0 

3.8 

4.0 

4.4 

3.6 

4.2 

Non SWD 

3.4 

4.0 

4.1 

4.1 

4.2 

3.7 

3.9 

SWD 

2.0 

3.1 

3.0 

3.6 

3.4 

2.7 

3.1 

Gifted 

. 

. 

5.0 

4.0 

. 

5.0 

4.3 

ELL 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 

School Level 

3.2 

4.0 

3.9 

4.1 

4.1 

3.5 

3.8 

System Level 

2.3 

3.3 

3.6 

3.0 

4.0 

3.6 

4.0 

State Level 

. 

. 

. 

. 

3.8 

4.0 

3.3 

Outside of State 4.5 

4.0 

6.0 

. 

4.0 

. 

4.0 


Page 76 


TVAAS 

2009 TVAAS School Value Added Report for Orchard Knob Middle 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: 6 7 8 Mean NCE Gain over 

Grades Relative to 

Growth Standard: 0.0 0.0 0.0 

State 3-Yr-Avg: 0.3 0.1 -0.4 Growth 

Standard 

State 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: -4.7 R* -6.2 R* 3.0 G* -2.6 -2.6 

Std Error: 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.6 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: -7.3 R* -8.9 R* -1.8 R -6.0 -6.0 

Std Error: 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.6 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: -12.2 R* -5.4 R* -0.2 Y -5.9 -6.0 

Std Error: 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.6 0.6 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: -8.1 R* -6.9 R* 0.3 G -4.9 -4.9 

Std Error: 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.3 

Estimated School Mean NCE Scores 

Grade: 6 7 8 

New State Baseline: 50.0 50.0 50.0 

State 3-Yr-Avg: 47.9 48.1 47.9 

2006 Mean: 42.4 31.3 37.5 

2007 Mean: 42.2 35.8 34.5 

2008 Mean: 34.4 32.8 33.9 

2009 Mean: 31.9 29.7 32.8 

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.

TVAAS 

2009 Performance Diagnostic Report for Orchard Knob Middle School in Hamilton County 6th 

Grade TCAP CRT Math 

2009 Performance Diagnostic Report for Orchard Knob Middle School in Hamilton County 6th Grade TCAP CRT 

Math 

Predicted Proficiency Group 

Not Proficient Proficient Advanced 

Math Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain -3.1 -12.4 -13.4 

Std Err 3.2 1.4 2.8 

Nr of Students 10 71 14 

% of Students 10.5 74.7 14.7 

Previous Cohort(s) Gain 5.2 -3.8 -9.3 

Std Err 1.7 0.7 2.1 



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

TVAAS 




Math 




2009 Gain -1.9 -6.9 -2.4 

Std Err 2.0 1.1 2.3 



Previous Cohort(s) Gain -3.7 -7.1 -8.0 

Std Err 1.7 0.6 1.5 




TVAAS 




Math 




2009 Gain 4.0 -2.0 1.3 

Std Err 2.3 1.1 2.5 




Std Err 1.4 0.6 2.6 




TVAAS 


TCAP CRT Reading/Language 








State 3-Yr-Avg: 0.4 0.1 -0.3 Growth 

Standard 

State 


Std Error: 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.6 0.6 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: -5.1 R* -0.2 Y -2.4 R* -2.6 -2.7 

Std Error: 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.6 0.6 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: -8.3 R* -1.5 R -1.8 R -3.9 -4.0 

Std Error: 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.6 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: -7.0 R* -2.0 R* -0.8 R -3.3 -3.3 

Std Error: 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.3 


Grade: 6 7 8 


State 3-Yr-Avg: 47.9 48.1 47.9 

2006 Mean: 34.2 27.7 33.3 

2007 Mean: 30.5 30.2 30.0 

2008 Mean: 31.9 30.9 28.3 

2009 Mean: 30.9 30.9 29.5 






TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Reading/Language 


Reading/Language 



Reading/Language Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain -1.6 -6.8 -15.1 

Std Err 5.7 1.2 4.0 




Std Err 1.6 0.8 2.6 




TVAAS 








2009 Gain 5.5 -3.8 

Std Err 2.5 1.5 



Previous Cohort(s) Gain -3.4 -2.1 -0.2 

Std Err 1.5 0.7 2.3 




TVAAS 








2009 Gain 4.3 -4.6 -0.4 

Std Err 2.1 1.1 2.8 




Std Err 1.8 0.7 2.6 




TVAAS 


TCAP CRT Science 








State 3-Yr-Avg: -0.2 -0.3 -0.2 Growth 

Standard 

State 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: 1.8 G* -8.3 R* 2.4 G* -1.4 -1.2 

Std Error: 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.7 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: 3.1 G* -6.9 R* -1.0 Y -1.6 -1.4 

Std Error: 1.2 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.7 

2009 Mean NCE Gain: -2.4 R -8.8 R* -2.4 R* -4.6 -4.3 

Std Error: 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.7 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: 0.8 G* -8.0 R* -0.3 Y -2.5 -2.3 

Std Error: 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.3 


Grade: 6 7 8 


State 3-Yr-Avg: 47.8 47.9 47.9 

2006 Mean: 37.4 26.8 31.0 

2007 Mean: 36.6 28.9 29.8 

2008 Mean: 39.5 29.7 27.9 

2009 Mean: 33.2 30.2 27.6 






TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Science 


Science 



Science Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain 2.9 -2.0 

Std Err 3.2 1.9 



Previous Cohort(s) Gain 4.0 1.7 

Std Err 1.3 1.2 




TVAAS 




Science 




2009 Gain -4.5 -10.6 

Std Err 1.9 1.7 



Previous Cohort(s) Gain -2.9 -9.7 

Std Err 1.1 1.0 




TVAAS 




Science 




2009 Gain -0.8 -7.6 

Std Err 1.1 2.0 



Previous Cohort(s) Gain 1.8 1.8 

Std Err 0.9 1.3 

Nr of Students 228 96 



TVAAS 


TCAP CRT Social Studies 








State 3-Yr-Avg: 0.1 -0.1 -0.2 Growth 

Standard 

State 

2007 Mean NCE Gain: -3.8 R* 0.9 G 1.6 G* -0.4 -0.3 

Std Error: 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.6 0.6 

2008 Mean NCE Gain: -3.2 R* -6.3 R* -5.6 R* -5.0 -5.0 

Std Error: 1.2 1.0 1.1 0.6 0.6 


Std Error: 1.3 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.7 

3-Yr-Avg NCE Gain: -4.2 R* -3.0 R* -0.8 R -2.7 -2.6 

Std Error: 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.3 


Grade: 6 7 8 


State 3-Yr-Avg: 47.6 47.7 47.7 

2006 Mean: 29.5 27.4 30.6 

2007 Mean: 32.3 31.2 29.5 

2008 Mean: 31.3 26.4 25.8 

2009 Mean: 29.5 28.5 28.6 






TVAAS 


Grade TCAP CRT Social Studies 





Social Studies Reference Line 0.0 0.0 0.0 

2009 Gain -4.0 -6.1 

Std Err 1.7 1.6 




Std Err 1.0 1.1 




TVAAS 








2009 Gain -2.8 -5.3 

Std Err 1.6 1.5 




Std Err 0.9 1.1 




TVAAS 








2009 Gain 1.4 -1.0 

Std Err 1.2 2.1 




Std Err 0.9 1.7 




TVAAS 


Gateway Algebra I 

Test Year N Mean 

Mean 

Mean Pred 

Pred Score 

School 

School 

School vs 

Student 

Score %-ile 

Score 

%-ile 

Effect 

Effect %-ile 

State Avg 

Score 

Algebra I 2007 114 475.4 11 495.5 20 -19.2 5 Below 

2008 31 516.5 31 524.5 38 -6.9 29 NDD 

2009 48 518.1 32 526.5 39 -7.6 25 Below 

3-Yr-Avg 193 492.6 16 507.9 26 -11.3 12 Below 

Progress significantly Above the average school in the state. 

Progress Not Detectably Different from the average school in the state. 

Progress significantly Below the average school in the state. 


TVAAS 

2009 Performance Diagnostic Report for Orchard Knob Middle School in Hamilton County 

Gateway Algebra I 

2009 Performance Diagnostic Report for Orchard Knob Middle School in Hamilton County Gateway Algebra I 



Algebra I 2009 Mean -12.4 -9.2 -2.7 

Std Err 6.5 3.9 5.4 



Previous Cohort(s) Mean -15.6 -14.4 -6.1 

Std Err 3.7 2.6 3.2 




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

Hamilton County Department of Education 

ACT EXPLORER Results 2007 to 2009 


Year 

HCDE 

Gender 

Ethnicity 

Special Status - Special 

Education 

Special Status - Economic 

Disadvantaged 

Educational Level Mother 

Educational Level Father 

Total 

Female 

Male 



Caucasian American 

Mexican American 

Asian American 

Hispanic 

Multiracial 

Other 

Prefer not to respond 

No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

Did not complete high school 

High school diploma or GED 

Career-technical 

Some College (no degree) 

Associate degree 

Bachelor degree 

Above Bachelor degree 

Unknown 








Unknown 

Explore College Readiness for English 

Count 

77 

28 

46 

69 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

1 

68 

9 

77 

0 

18 

23 

3 

5 

4 

4 

2 

17 

17 

15 

4 

1 

1 

2 

3 

32 

Not Ready 

Percent 

71% 

61% 

78% 

71% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

50% 

0% 

50% 

68% 

100% 

71% 

0% 

69% 

77% 

75% 

56% 

50% 

67% 

67% 

77% 

81% 

68% 

80% 

100% 

33% 

100% 

60% 

67% 

2006-2007 

Count 

32 

18 

13 

28 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

1 

32 

0 

32 

0 

8 

7 

1 

4 

4 

2 

1 

5 

4 

7 

1 

0 

2 

0 

2 

16 

Ready 

Percent 

29% 

39% 

22% 

29% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

50% 

100% 

50% 

32% 

0% 

29% 

0% 

31% 

23% 

25% 

44% 

50% 

33% 

33% 

23% 

19% 

32% 

20% 

0% 

67% 

0% 

40% 

33% 


Count 

89 

44 

45 

86 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3 

0 

0 

0 

89 

0 

89 

0 

12 

21 

5 

6 

4 

7 

3 

26 

13 

10 

5 

4 

5 

3 

1 

43 

Not Ready 

Percent 

88% 

85% 

92% 

90% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

88% 

0% 

88% 

0% 

80% 

91% 

100% 

75% 

67% 

88% 

100% 

96% 

87% 

77% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

88% 

2007-2008 

Count 

12 

8 

4 

10 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

12 

0 

12 

0 

3 

2 

0 

2 

2 

1 

0 

1 

2 

3 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

6 

Ready 

Percent 

12% 

15% 

8% 

10% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

12% 

0% 

12% 

0% 

20% 

9% 

0% 

25% 

33% 

13% 

0% 

4% 

13% 

23% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

12% 


Count 

99 

38 

61 

98 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

86 

13 

12 

87 

22 

23 

5 

5 

4 

7 

5 

18 

17 

20 

11 

4 

4 

6 

3 

25 

Not Ready 

Percent 

80% 

75% 

85% 

81% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

78% 

100% 

80% 

81% 

96% 

72% 

100% 

63% 

57% 

88% 

100% 

72% 

94% 

83% 

92% 

67% 

100% 

67% 

100% 

68% 

2008-2009 

Count 

24 

13 

11 

23 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

24 

0 

3 

21 

1 

9 

0 

3 

3 

1 

0 

7 

1 

4 

1 

2 

0 

3 

0 

12 

Ready 

Percent 

20% 

25% 

15% 

19% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

22% 

0% 

20% 

19% 

4% 

28% 

0% 

38% 

43% 

13% 

0% 

28% 

6% 

17% 

8% 

33% 

0% 

33% 

0% 

32% 

Source: ACT 

Page 16 

Questions: Kirk Kelly, Phil Ashworth, or Cheryl Ladd




Year 

HCDE 

Gender 

Ethnicity 


Education 


Disadvantaged 



Total 

Female 

Male 






Hispanic 

Multiracial 

Other 


No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 








Unknown 








Unknown 

Count 

101 

41 

56 

90 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

3 

93 

8 

101 

0 

25 

28 

3 

7 

6 

6 

3 

22 

20 

19 

4 

1 

3 

2 

4 

46 

Explore College Readiness for Math 

Not Ready 

Percent 

93% 

89% 

95% 

94% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

50% 

100% 

100% 

92% 

100% 

93% 

0% 

96% 

97% 

75% 

78% 

75% 

100% 

100% 

96% 

95% 

90% 

80% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

80% 

94% 

2006-2007 

Count 

8 

5 

3 

6 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

8 

0 

8 

0 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

0 

0 

1 

1 

2 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

3 

Ready 

Percent 

7% 

11% 

5% 

6% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

50% 

0% 

0% 

8% 

0% 

7% 

0% 

4% 

3% 

25% 

22% 

25% 

0% 

0% 

4% 

5% 

10% 

20% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

20% 

6% 

Count 

100 

52 

48 

95 

0 

1 

0 

0 

3 

1 

0 

0 

100 

0 

100 

0 

14 

23 

5 

8 

6 

8 

3 

27 

14 

13 

5 

4 

5 

3 

1 

49 


Not Ready 

Percent 

99% 

100% 

98% 

99% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

99% 

0% 

99% 

0% 

93% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

93% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

2007-2008 

Count 

1 

0 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Ready 

Percent 

1% 

0% 

2% 

1% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

1% 

0% 

1% 

0% 

7% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

7% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

Count 

116 

49 

67 

115 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

104 

12 

14 

102 

23 

30 

5 

8 

6 

6 

5 

23 

18 

24 

12 

5 

4 

6 

3 

34 


Not Ready 

Percent 

94% 

94% 

94% 

95% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

94% 

100% 

93% 

94% 

100% 

94% 

100% 

100% 

86% 

75% 

100% 

92% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

83% 

100% 

67% 

100% 

92% 

2008-2009 

Count 

7 

3 

4 

6 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

7 

0 

1 

6 

0 

2 

0 

0 

1 

2 

0 

2 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

3 

0 

3 

Ready 

Percent 

6% 

6% 

6% 

5% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

6% 

0% 

7% 

6% 

0% 

6% 

0% 

0% 

14% 

25% 

0% 

8% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

17% 

0% 

33% 

0% 

8% 

Source: ACT 

Page 38 





Year 

HCDE 

Gender 

Ethnicity 


Education 


Disadvantaged 



Total 

Female 

Male 






Hispanic 

Multiracial 

Other 


No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 








Unknown 








Unknown 

Explore College Readiness for Reading 

Count 

105 

42 

59 

93 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

3 

97 

8 

105 

0 

25 

28 

3 

8 

8 

6 

3 

23 

20 

19 

5 

1 

3 

2 

4 

49 

Not Ready 

Percent 

96% 

91% 

100% 

97% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

50% 

100% 

100% 

96% 

100% 

96% 

0% 

96% 

97% 

75% 

89% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

95% 

90% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

80% 

100% 

2006-2007 

Count 

4 

4 

0 

3 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

4 

0 

4 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

Ready 

Percent 

4% 

9% 

0% 

3% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

50% 

0% 

0% 

4% 

0% 

4% 

0% 

4% 

3% 

25% 

11% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

5% 

10% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

20% 

0% 


Count 

101 

52 

49 

96 

0 

1 

0 

0 

3 

1 

0 

0 

101 

0 

101 

0 

15 

23 

5 

8 

6 

8 

3 

27 

15 

13 

5 

4 

5 

3 

1 

49 

Not Ready 

Percent 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

2007-2008 

Count 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Ready 

Percent 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 


Count 

119 

51 

68 

117 

0 

1 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

107 

12 

15 

104 

23 

30 

5 

8 

7 

8 

5 

23 

18 

23 

12 

5 

4 

9 

3 

35 

Not Ready 

Percent 

98% 

98% 

97% 

98% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

97% 

100% 

100% 

97% 

100% 

94% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

96% 

100% 

96% 

100% 

83% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

97% 

2008-2009 

Count 

3 

1 

2 

3 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3 

0 

0 

3 

0 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

Ready 

Percent 

2% 

2% 

3% 

3% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

3% 

0% 

0% 

3% 

0% 

6% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

4% 

0% 

4% 

0% 

17% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

3% 

Source: ACT 

Page 60 





Year 

HCDE 

Gender 

Ethnicity 


Education 


Disadvantaged 



Total 

Female 

Male 






Hispanic 

Multiracial 

Other 


No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 








Unknown 








Unknown 

Explore College Readiness for Science 

Count 

107 

44 

59 

94 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

2 

1 

3 

99 

8 

107 

0 

25 

29 

4 

8 

8 

6 

3 

23 

21 

20 

5 

1 

3 

2 

4 

49 

Not Ready 

Percent 

98% 

96% 

100% 

98% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

98% 

100% 

98% 

0% 

96% 

100% 

100% 

89% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

95% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

80% 

100% 

2006-2007 

Count 

2 

2 

0 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

0 

2 

0 

1 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

Ready 

Percent 

2% 

4% 

0% 

2% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

2% 

0% 

2% 

0% 

4% 

0% 

0% 

11% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

5% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

20% 

0% 


Count 

101 

52 

49 

96 

0 

1 

0 

0 

3 

1 

0 

0 

101 

0 

101 

0 

15 

23 

5 

8 

6 

8 

3 

27 

15 

13 

5 

4 

5 

3 

1 

49 

Not Ready 

Percent 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

2007-2008 

Count 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Ready 

Percent 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 


Count 

118 

51 

67 

116 

0 

1 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

106 

12 

14 

104 

22 

31 

5 

8 

7 

7 

5 

23 

17 

24 

12 

5 

4 

8 

3 

35 

Not Ready 

Percent 

98% 

100% 

97% 

98% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

100% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

98% 

100% 

100% 

98% 

100% 

97% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

88% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

83% 

100% 

89% 

100% 

100% 

2008-2009 

Count 

2 

0 

2 

2 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

0 

0 

2 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

Ready 

Percent 

2% 

0% 

3% 

2% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

2% 

0% 

0% 

2% 

0% 

3% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

13% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

0% 

17% 

0% 

11% 

0% 

0% 

Source: ACT 

Page 82 


Tennessee School Improvement 

Planning Process (TSIPP) 


Tennessee Department of Education 

Commissioner Lana C. Seivers 

October, 2009 

1

Tennessee School Improvement Planning Process 

(TSIPP) 

Assurances 

I certify that Orchard Knob Middle School has utilized the data and other requirements requested 

for each component. The school will operate its programs in accordance with all of the required 

assurances and certifications for each program area. 

I CERTIFY that the assurances referenced above have been satisfied to the best of my 

knowledge. 

__________________________________________ 

Maryo Beck, Principal 

______________________ 

Date Signed 

2

1.1 

SIP Leadership Team 

Member Name 

Component 1 SIP Leadership Team Composition 

Leadership 

Chair? 

(Y/N) 

Maryo Beck Y Principal 

Position 

Name of Subcommittee(s) (when 

applicable) 

Leadership 

Team/Component 1 

Ursula Greene Y Assistant Principal Component 2 

Nathan Freeman Y Assistant Principal Component 5 

Carlene Conway Y Literacy Coach Component 3 

LaShandra Rivers Y Numeracy Coach Component 3 

Yang Im Y Math Department Chair Component 4 

Rachel Burgess Y 

Language Arts Department 

Chair 

Component 4 

Helen Walton Y 8 th Grade Team Leader Component 1 

Theresa Russell N Attendance Clerk Component 4 

Carmen Wilson N 6 th Grade Team Leader Component 1 

Teresa Kelly N 7 th Grade Team Leader Component 3 

Alice Stone 

N 

Social Studies Department 

Chair 

Component 3 

Glenna Swoffard N 

Family Partnership 

Specialist 

Component 1 

Mr. Freeman N Parent Component 1 

Carol Gonzalez N Media Specialist Component 1 

Pauline Jennings N Related Arts Team Leader Component 5 

3

1.2 

Subcommittee Formation and Operation 

School Profile and Collaborative Process 

Member Name Position Chair 

Maryo Beck Principal Y 

Helen Walton 8 th Grade Language Arts Y 

Carmen Wilson 6 th Grade Science N 

Shannon McDaniel 6 th Grade Mathematics N 

Carmen Horvath 6 th Grade Language Arts N 

Lindsay Donohue 6 th Grade Social Studies N 

Glenna Swoffard 

Family Partnership Specialist 

N 

Non-Certified 

Jim Rogers Guidance Counselor N 

Calvin Moore Inclusion Teacher N 

Breland Kilgore School Resource Officer N 

Tracy Davis Inclusion Teacher N 

Ronald Osborne 8 th Grade Social Studies N 

John Weiss 8 th Grade Mathematics N 

Sidney Ashe Jr. Parent N 

Dione M. Carnes Parent N 

Brian M. Freeman Parent N 

Charles Callony Parent N 

Carlton Mathes Community Representative N 

Ashley Reagan 8 th Grade Science N 

Component 1 Subcommittee has met to address critical 

components of the SIP and minutes are on file. 

YES 

NO 

Subcommittee 1 Chair Signature 

4

COMPONENT 2 Beliefs, Mission and Vision 


Ursula Greene Assistant Principal Y 

Rachel Price 6 th Grade Language Arts N 

Jermaine Freeman 6 th Grade Social Studies N 

Julie Hutcherson 6 th Grade Mathematics N 

Kenneth Campbell Inclusion Teacher N 

Brandi Powell Educational Assistant N 

Michael Knight Prison Ministries N 

Valencia Colvin Parent N 

JoAnn Percy Cafeteria Manager N 

Ketha Richardson Business Partner/EPB N 

Jamie Aday 6 th Grade Science N 

Tasha Grandberry Parent N 

Faith Sims On Point N 



YES 

NO 


5

Subcommittee for COMPONENT 3 

Curricular, Instructional, Assessment, and 

Organizational Effectiveness 


Carlene Conway Literacy Coach Y 

LaShandra Rivers Numeracy Coach Y 

Teresa Kelly 7 th Grade Mathematics N 

Alice Stone 7 th Grade Social Studies N 

Shannon Lumley 7 th Grade Science N 

Rita Lyttle 7 th Grade Language Arts N 

Kendra Anderson Inclusion Teacher N 

Sheree Wheat Computer Teacher N 

Carol Gonzalez Librarian N 

Willie Smith CDC Teacher N 

Kenya Houser Parent N 

Jamica Woods Parent N 

(tab in last cell to create a new row as needed) 



YES 

NO 


6

COMPONENT 4 Action Plan Development 


Yang Im 8 th Grade Math/Math Department Chair Y 

Rachel Burgess 

8 th Grade Language Arts/ Language Arts Y 

Department Chair 

Maryo Beck Principal N 

Ursula Greene Assistant Principal N 

Nathan Freeman Assistant Principal N 

Glenna Swoffard Family Partnership Specialist N 

Nancy Van Prooyen Exemplary Educator N 

BB Vaughn Exemplary Educator N 

Cheri Grant Title I Coordinator N 

Theresa Russell Attendance Clerk N 

Kilah Wright 

Inclusion Teacher/Exceptional Education 

Department Chair 

N 



YES 

NO 


7

COMPONENT 5 The School Improvement Plan and Process Evaluation 


Nathan Freeman Assistant Principal Y 

Pauline Jennings Art Teacher N 

Ed McCoy Technology Teacher N 

Marquis Dotson Band Teacher N 

LaShandra Bailey Educational Assistant N 

Sharon Ford Bookkeeper N 

Kelan Flowers PE Teacher N 

Sheree Wheat Computer Teacher N 



YES 

NO 


8

Component 1a – Collection of Academic and 

Nonacademic Data and Analysis/Synthesis 

Data Sources 

Data Source 

SASI 

Relevant Findings 

Student demographics 

Middle Schools for a New 

Society 

Faculty Survey 

(February 2009) 

City of Chattanooga 

Parent/Guardian demographics (Component 1/Title 1) 

Staff demographics (Component 1/Title 1) 

Community demographics 

Hamilton County 

Community demographics 

9

School and Community Data 

Narrative and analysis of relevant school and community factors: 

1.3 

School and Community Data 

500 

Student Characteristics 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

6th 7th 8th total 

female 

male 

total 

2008-2009 2009-2010 

Total students 340 475 

Attendance rate 89.5 % 93.7 % 

Poverty rate 97 % 96.3 % 

Retention rate 0% 22.9 % 

Target transfers out: 46 students 

Exceptional Education Student Demographics: 

2008-2009: 22 Females, 31 Males, totaling 53. Students with Disabilities (SWD) were not a 

subgroup in NCLB due to other placement. 

2009-2010: 30 Females, 57 Males, totaling 87. This number made the SWD a subgroup for 

NCLB. 

CDC Student Demographics: From the 12 students Orchard Knob had last year, 9 are present in 

the current school year, all of whom take alternative assessments. 

Staff Characteristics 

Orchard Knob Middle has a faculty and teaching staff of 39 members. Teachers include 19 

African American, 18 Caucasian, 1 Asian, and 1 Hispanic. There are 13 males and 26 females 

on staff. Twenty-eight percent of the staff have more than 10 years experience while 72% have 

less than 10 years. Twenty-six percent of the staff is non-tenured. Non-tenured teachers are 

10

evaluated three times each year by the administration until they reach tenure, and then 

evaluated twice in each ten-year period unless more frequent evaluations are deemed necessary. 

Nine teachers are new to the building and staff. New staff members were interviewed and hired 

based on the needs of the school. Presently, all staff members are highly qualified in their 

subject areas. (Component 3/Title 1) In order to attract and retain highly qualified teachers, 

Orchard Knob, as a Title I school, pays $15/hour as compared to $10/hour stipends for district 

professional development, and the school has extra opportunities for teachers to work extended 

contracts. In addition, teachers should have more access to technology than their fellow 

teachers in non-Title I schools. The district offers incentive pay to teachers whose students 

score at a certain range in testing over a period of time. (Component 5/Title I) 

8 

SUBJECTS TAUGHT 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

MATH LA SS SCIENCE RA ADMIN SPEC ED 

School Characteristics 

Historical background 

Orchard Knob Middle School was originally constructed in 1961 as Orchard Knob Junior 

High. The location of 500 North Highland Park Avenue was chosen in response to the need 

for a school in this historic part of Chattanooga. In 1989, the school changed to a middle 

school offering grades six through eight. Many prominent citizens from the Chattanooga area 

have attended the school. 

The neighborhood is in a very old part of the city of Chattanooga. During the Civil War, the 

area was used as an encampment for Union soldiers. Today, most of the area is economically 

depressed, containing several subsidized apartment buildings and low income housing 

projects. For this reason, a large majority of students fall into the economically disadvantaged 

category. 

11

Attendance for the 2009-2010 year has risen dramatically with the closing of two Hamilton 

County schools due to budget cuts. A large number of new students now attend Orchard Knob 

Middle from the former Howard Middle School and 21 st Century Academy. Other families 

chose to send their students to Hunter Middle and Ooltewah Middle under the No Child Left 

Behind transfer option. 

Facilities 

Orchard Knob Middle School is composed of a main building which houses seventh and 

eighth grade classrooms on the first and second floors. It also contains the mail office, the 

office of the family partnership specialist, a refurbished library, and several related arts 

classrooms. In later years, a sixth grade wing was added to the school and a gymnasium was 

built on the opposite side. There is a portable building on campus which houses the in-school 

suspension program. A football field is located on the campus grounds as well. 

Length of School Year 

180 instructional days for students, 200 contracted days for teachers 

Operating Hours: 

7:15 a.m. - 2:15 p.m. 

Per-Pupil Expenditure: 

Hamilton County - $7,637 

Instructional 67% Student/Staff support 8% Administration 10% Other expenditures 

17% 

Additional Funds 

Orchard Knob Middle School receives funds from Title I, Title I stimulus the MSNS Grant, 

and Partners in Education. 

Money is also generated from Sprint for the use of a cell tower located on the school grounds. 

Parent/Guardian Demographics 

Orchard Knob Middle School has 475 students. The school sent surveys to all parents and 

guardians and received 113 responses. The survey results are as follows: 

Race/Ethnicity of Mother 

Level of Education 

African American 102 Elementary/Middle 31 

Asian -- High School Diploma 43 

Caucasian 9 Associates Degree 6 

Hispanic 1 Some College Education 34 

Other 1 Bachelor’s Degree 1 

Graduate School 1 

12

Race/Ethnicity of Father 

Employment 

African American 101 Employed 58 

Asian -- Unemployed 37 

Caucasian 7 Disabled 13 

Hispanic 1 

Other 3 

Marital Status 

Income Level of Family 

Married 34 Below $12,000 61 

Single 63 $12,000-$25,000 36 

Divorced 7 $25,000-$50,000 9 

Widowed -- $50,000-$75,000 2 

Other 7 Above $75,000 -- 

Parental Support: An active Parent Teacher Organization (PTO) at Orchard Knob Middle 

School has not been established for the current year. There are parents/guardians who are 

actively involved in school activities such as attending Parent-Teacher Conferences, assisting 

in the library, helping with bulletin boards, monitoring in the cafeteria, implementing School 

Wide Positive Behavior Support, contributing to the School Improvement Plan, giving 

tangible support to teachers and staff, and helping with special events. 

At the Open House in September, the Annual Title I meeting was held and parents were 

informed of the school’s Title I status. (agenda on file) Previously the parent compacts were 

sent home, signed and returned. (Component 6/Title I) 

As estimated, on-site volunteer time is 700 – 800 hours per school year. The current on-site 

volunteer time is 4.0 hours since the beginning of school. 

Family Partnership Specialist: Mrs. Glenna Swoffard is the OKMS parent coordinator and is 

responsible for developing school-based family engagement systems and activities that 

encourage strong partnerships between the school and family. The responsibilities with this 

position include: 

• Free/Reduced Lunch Applications 

• Facilitate activities with parents 

• Coordinate Parent Meetings 

• Facilitate Parent Volunteer Programs 

• Conduct Parent Workshops 

• Liaison between school and home 

• Arrange parent/teacher conferences 

• Maintain communication with parents via Newsletter, Parent Handbook, Phone calls, 

conferences, etc. 

• Contact parents of students who are chronically tardy 

• Coordinate Open House 

• Facilitate the “Be There” Campaign Event-encouraging parents to take an active role in 

their child’s education 

13

Community Characteristics 

Size of community: City of Chattanooga 170,880 (2008 estimates) 

Hamilton County 

332,848 (2008 estimates) 

Demographic Breakdown of the populace: 

Caucasian 59.7% 

African American 36.1% 

Hispanic/Latino 2.1% 

Other 1.9% 

Per Capita City Income: 

Median Household Income: 

$19,689.00 (1999 estimates) 

$32,006.00 (1999 estimates) 

Number of Private Schools: 30 

Major Employers: Hamilton County Department of Education, Covenant Transport, Erlanger 

Medical Center, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee, Memorial Health Systems, Tennessee 

Valley Authority, Unum Provident Corporation, City of Chattanooga, Cigna Health Care, Bi- 

Lo Incorporated, McKee Foods Corporation, Synthetic Industries, Roper Corporation, Pilgrims 

Pride Corporation, Astec Industries, Shaw Industries Incorporated, Olan Mills. 

Residents with Children: 

School Business Partners: 

25.3% of 72,108 housing units 

Tennessee Valley Authority, EPB 

Summary 

Several factors make Orchard Knob Middle School unique in the 2009-2010 school year, ranging 

from changes in student population to staff adjustments, as well as findings in the surrounding 

community. 

There is an array of new students at Orchard Knob Middle this year due to an assortment of 

technical and county-wide changes. Due to school closings this year, we received an influx of 

students either rezoned to Orchard Knob Middle or a failure to complete proper paperwork 

necessary to receive an education from one of the surrounding magnet schools. Some students, 

however, were lost during changes made by NCLB, sending a mix of behavioral students to 

Ooltewah. We lost some of our highest achieving academic students, as well as some low 

performing behavioral students. 

There have also been changes in faculty composition from last year, including nine new teachers 

making the staff total thirty-nine (Component 3/Title 1). All teachers are currently highly 

qualified in their subject area and teach four classes (Component 3/Title 1). There are more 

14

female teachers in our building than male teachers, but the racial distribution is almost equal 

between African Americans and Caucasians in addition to one Asian American and one Hispanic 

teacher. Because of an overwhelming number of seventh grade students which made the student 

to teacher ratio too high, each eighth grade teacher is teaching one class of seventh graders with 

seventh grade curriculum to accommodate this unexpected amount of students. 

15

1.4 

Component 1b – Academic and Non-Academic Data Analysis/Synthesis 

List Data Sources 

TCAP 

Academic Measures 

Writing Assessment 

ThinkLink 

School Report Card 

TVAAS 

TCAP ALT 

Non-Academic Measures 

Attendance 

Discipline 

16

1.5 

Data Collection and Analysis 

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

As soon as the TCAP data was available, the administration, and later the Leadership Team, reviewed the 

findings. In August, grade level teams and individual teachers analyzed their data. The School 

Improvement Plan process, lead by the Leadership Team went into high gear in early September when 

Target Tuesdays (grade level team planning times) were designated as Component work time. All 

teachers and staff were placed on components and were cooperative workers. Mrs. Swafford, our school 

partnership specialist, worked diligently to contact parents and community members to be part of our 

component groups. Parents and community members did respond and contributed greatly to each 

component’s work. We were able to expand our Leadership Team to include a parent who became 

interested through Mrs. Swafford’s efforts. The process was very positive for Orchard Knob Middle 

School. (Component 1/Title I) 

The analysis of current data from TCAP, TCAP ALT, Writing Assessment, TVAAS, Report Cards, 

ThinkLink, attendance, and discipline has assisted in establishing strengths and needs for our curricular 

and instructional planning. We have had the coordinated efforts of our administration, staff, parents, 

community members, and Exemplary Educators to disaggregate all available data to develop a cohesive 

plan of action. 

TCAP CRT Results in Reading and Language Arts 

Reading/Language Arts 

6 th Grade 

Proficient Advanced Prof/Adv 

2005 61.8% 2.4% 64.2% 

2006 49.6% 9.1% 58.7% 

2007 58.2% 3.3% 61.5% 

2008 62.5% 9.6% 72.1% 

2009 66% 3.6% 69.3% 

7 th Grade 


2005 58.1% 1.9% 60.0% 

2006 53.1% 7.1% 60.2% 

2007 47.0% 6.0% 53.0% 

2008 53.2% 8.5% 61.7% 

2009 56.3% 4.5% 60.7% 

17

8 th Grade 


2005 59.5% 9.0% 68.5% 

2006 69.8% 12.3% 82.1% 

2007 68.0% 6.6% 74.6% 

2008 66.2% 2.3% 68.5% 

2009 50.3% 12.1% 62.4% 

All grade levels decreased in their proficiency scores in Reading and Language Arts. Sixth grade dropped 

from 72.1% proficient in 2008 to 69.3% in 2009, a decline of 2.8%. Seventh grade moved from 61.7% 

proficient in 2008 to 60.7% proficient in 2009, a decline of 1%. Eighth grade dropped from 68.5% 

proficient in 2008 to 62.4% proficient in 2009, a decline of 6.1%. There was an increase in the 

percentage of student scoring advance from 6.7% in 2008 to 7.2% in 2009. Sixth grade is staying 

consistent; however, the benchmark is not being met and the grade level is staying stagnant. No strengths 

were found. 

Grades 6-8 


2005 59.9% 4.4% 64.3% 

2006 57.1% 9.4% 66.5% 

2007 57.4% 5.3% 62.7% 

2008 60.2% 6.7% 66.9% 

2009 56.6% 7.2% 63.8% 

Following the same group of students from sixth grade to seventh grade, the scores for 

proficient/advanced are dropping between sixth grade and seventh grade before rising again in eighth 

grade. Each year, the Language Arts scores are gradually increasing for the eighth grade students as 

evidenced by data from the years 2005 to 2006. As seventh graders in 2005, the students were only 60% 

proficient/advanced while in eighth grade, the same students in 2006 were 82.1% proficient/advanced. 

Likewise in 2007, the seventh graders were only 53% proficient/advanced while in 2008, students were 

68% proficient/advanced. In comparing the years 2008 and 2009, there was not a sufficient increase – 

barely a percentage point difference. Therefore, what seemed to be an area of strength is found only to be 

another area of need. 

Females 

Proficient Advance Prof/Adv 

2005 66.7% 5.9% 72.6% 

2006 63.4% 10.9% 74.3% 

2007 64% 8.0% 72.0% 

2008 67.2% 9.2% 76.4% 

2009 69.3% 7.8% 77.1% 

Males 


2005 51.6% 2.6% 54.2% 

2006 50.3% 8% 58.3% 

2007 51.7% 3% 54.7% 

2008 54.2% 4.5% 58.7% 

2009 46% 6.6% 52.6% 

18

Large gaps of lack of equity between males and females are found in Reading and Language 

Arts. The females are at 77% proficient/advanced versus the males being only 52.6% proficient. There 

has been roughly a 20 point differentiation between the male and the female scores for the past five 

years. The females are staying within a four point differentiation each year while the males are staying 

within a five point range. There is no significant increase or decrease between the genders each year. 

This is certainly an area of need. 

There is no ELL subgroup at Orchard Knob. 

All students at Orchard Knob make up the same population. All subgroups are ED and African 

American. 

There is a dip in proficiency in seventh grade scores reading and language arts scores district wide. 

TCAP CRT Results in Math 

6 th Grade 


2005 62.6% 11.4% 74.0% 

2006 65.8% 15.8% 81.6% 

2007 67.2% 14.8% 82.0% 

2008 62.8% 6.7% 69.5% 

2009 57% 9% 66% 

7 th Grade 


2005 63.8% 10.5% 74.3% 

2006 55.8% 9.7% 65.5% 

2007 59.0% 8.2% 67.2% 

2008 50.7% 12.9% 63.6% 

2009 46.4% 8% 54.5% 

8 th Grade 


2005 64.9% 17.1% 82.0% 

2006 72.6% 6.6% 79.2% 

2007 67.2% 9.0% 76.2% 

2008 57% 9.2% 66.2% 

2009 57.7% 11.4% 69.1% 

19

Grades 6-8 


2005 63.7% 13.0% 76.7% 

2006 64.6% 10.9% 75.5% 

2007 64.3% 10.6% 74.9% 

2008 56.2% 9.9% 66.1% 

2009 54% 9.7% 63.7% 

Sixth and seventh grade students decreased in proficiency from 2008 to 2009. Sixth grade students’ 

scores decreased from 69.5% in 2008 to 66% in 2009, a decline of 3.5%. Seventh 

grade scores dropped from 63.6% in 2008 to 54.5% in 2009, a decline of 9.1%. The eighth 

grade students increased their proficiency rate from 66.2% in 2008 to 69.1% in 2009 which is 

an increase of 2.9%. This cannot be viewed as a strength since the scores are well below the benchmark. 

There was a steady increase in eighth grade scores until 2009. The sixth and seventh grade 

scores have fluctuated yearly. There has not been a consistent pattern in proficiency versus nonproficiency. 

Proficiency in mathematics rose 4.6% points from 2008 to 2009 for seventh grade students; however the 

scores are far below the benchmark. 

Females 


2005 66.7% 11.8% 78.5% 

2006 69.7% 10.9% 80.6% 

2007 66.3% 12.0% 78.3% 

2008 65% 8.0% 73.0% 

2009 58.2% 10.9% 69.1% 

Males 


2005 60.1% 14.4% 74.5% 

2006 59.3% 11.1% 70.4% 

2007 62.5% 9.4% 71.9% 

2008 48.8% 11.4% 60.2% 

2009 50.5% 8.7% 59.2% 

There is a lack of equity between the male and the female scores. The females are at 69.1% 

proficient/advanced while the males are 59.2% proficient/advanced. Over the years, the differentiation 

between sixth grade scores has been 14 points, in seventh grade 20 points, and in eighth grade 16 points. 

The females have ranged 11 points, the male have ranged 15 points, and there is a 20 point range 

between the two genders. 

20

8 th Grade performance on Algebra Gateway Exam 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 

% Taking 33.3% 57.8% 97.6% 26.0% 32% 

% Passing 83.8% 71.4% 39.2% 91.2% 78.4% 

% of all 8 th 

Grade 

27.9% 41.3% 38.3% 23.7% 25.6% 

students 

The actual number of students taking the Gateway Assessment has increased; however, no significant 

gains have been made in Gateway scores. (Component 2/Title I) 

Students With Disabilities 

Proficiency Rate 

Math 


2007 25% 22% 

2008 30% 46% 

2009 46% 57% 

The proficiency/advanced rate for students with disabilities have increased each year for the past three 

years. Math scores have improved 21% percentage points from 2007 to 2009 and Reading/Language 

scores have improved 35% percentage points from 2007 to 2009. Although the percentage rates are not 

meeting the benchmark, the steady growth in this subgroup indicates a strength within the department. 

STATE WRITING ASSESSMENT 

Year Grade 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 # 

Students 

Weighted 

Average 

Percent 

at 4,5,6 

2009 8 2 22 75 33 10 0 1 143 3.78 69.2% 

2008 8 1 8 67 39 8 2 2 127 3.53 59.84% 

2007 8 3 24 73 17 1 1 0 120 4.03 83.33% 

2006 8 1 21 68 18 1 0 1 110 4.01 83% 

2005 8 3 17 63 20 5 1 0 109 3.91 76% 

2004 8 3 16 80 23 3 0 0 125 3.92 9% 

Writing results have improved in the past year. In 2008, 59.8% of students scored a four or 

higher on the Writing Assessment. In 2009, the percentage increased to 69.2% of students with a score of 

four or higher. Although an increase is seen, it must be noted that the scores were much higher in 2006 

21

and 2007. There is also a great need to move more students from a score of “4” 

to a score of “5” or “6”. 

TVASS Scores 

Sixth Grade Language Arts 

The difference in the lack of gains between the lowest performing students and the average performing 

students is 3.5 points. All the students are performing below the expected growth standard. There is no 

movement of the highest group. 

22

Sixth Grade Math 

The difference in the lack of gains between the lowest performing students and the middle performing 

students is 5.1 points. All levels are performing below the growth standard. There 

is no movement of the highest group. This data shows a significant lack of growth for our sixth 

graders. 

23

Seventh Grade 


The 

difference in the gains between the lowest performing students and the middle performing students is a 

loss of 5.7 points. Both subgroups are performing below the growth standard. 

There is no high performing group. 

Math 

For the lowest and middle groups, the negative gains did decrease a bit; however, there are no gains in 

any group. 

24

Eighth Grade 


All groups are performing below the growing standard. This year there were not enough 

members in the fifth quartile to create a score. 

Math 

The fourth quartile exceeded the growth standard by 3.7 points showing a strength. There were not 

enough students in the fifth quartile to create a score. 

25

TCAP ALT Scores 

Math 

Reading 

# 0f % % # 0f % % 

Students Proficient Advance Students Proficient Advance 

6 th Grade 1 100% 1 100% 

7 th Grade 6 50% 33% 6 66.7% 16.7% 

8 th Grade 7 42.9% 57.1% 7 85.7% 14.3% 

All students were proficient or advanced in both math and reading, with one student in the seventh grade 

being a Permanent Homebound student who made up the other 16.7% in Math and the other 16.7% in 

Reading. There is a need for students in seventh and eighth grade to move from proficient to advanced 

scores. 

2008 – 2009 Report Card Scores 

6 th Grade Language Arts 

Female 

Male 

A 0 0 

B 6 2 

C 16 9 

D 23 23 

F 9 36 

These scores do reflect the scores made on TCAP. Attention must be given to the fact that no “A”s were 

earned and few “B”s were earned. Also to be noted is the lack of equity between “F”s for males and 

females. 

6 th Grade Math 

Female 

Male 

A 1 0 

B 7 4 

C 22 15 

D 14 18 

F 3 18 

These scores do reflect the scores made on TCAP. Attention must be given to the fact that only one “A” 

was earned and few “B”s were earned. Again the lack of equity must be noted. 

26


Female 

Male 

A 1 0 

B 2 1 

C 17 20 

D 19 19 

F 15 14 

These scores do reflect the scores made on TCAP. Attention must be given to the fact that only one “A” 

was earned and few “B”s were earned. Although there is more equity between the females and males, 

both genders are performing well below the standard. 


Female 

Male 

A 2 0 

B 7 0 

C 14 20 

D 21 19 

F 12 20 

These scores do reflect the scores made on TCAP. Attention must be given to the fact that only two “A”s 

were earned and few “B”s were earned. No males earned an “A” or a “B”. Again the lack of equity must 

be noted. 


Female 

Male 

A 1 5 

B 15 5 

C 20 18 

D 18 39 

F 3 17 

These scores do reflect the scores made on TCAP. Attention must be given to the fact that four more 

males than females earned an “A”, although there were ten more females than males to earn a “B”. 

Again there is a definite lack of equity in the “D”s and “F”s earned. 


Female 

Male 

A 6 10 

B 18 11 

C 23 25 

D 12 15 

F 4 22 

The grade distribution reflects the scores students made on TCAP, which showed an increase in math 

scores in the fourth quartile. Although the lack of equity is seen with the number of “F”s given, more 

“A”s and “B”s were earned. This shows a strength in math instruction for higher performing students. 

27

2008 – 2009 ThinkLink Data 

2008 -2009 ThinkLink data indicated that sixth and seventh students were on target to make 

gains but it was not reflected in the actual TCAP data. 

Reading/Language Arts (Grades 6-8) 

Advanced Proficient Prof. & Adv. Not Proficient 

Test 1 15.6 54.8 70.4 29.6 

Test 2 14.5 56.1 70.6 29.4 

Test 3 18.2 58.7 76.9 23.1 

Grade 6 


Test 1 11.4 56.8 68.2 31.8 

Test 2 18.3 57.0 75.3 24.7 

Test 3 18.4 66.7 85.1 14.9 

Grade 7 


Test 1 16.7 50.0 66.7 33.3 

Test 2 7.1 52.4 59.5 40.5 

Test 3 14.9 57.5 72.4 27.6 

Grade 8 


Test 1 17.9 57.3 75.2 24.8 

Test 2 16.7 57.9 74.6 25.4 

Test 3 20.2 54.3 74.5 25.6 

Sixth and seventh grade scores indicate significant decreases in the percentage of students 

scoring non-proficient, while eighth grade scores indicate a slight increase in students 

scoring non–proficient. Sixth and eighth grade scores indicate significant increases in 

students scoring advanced. Eighth grade scores indicate a cause for concern and a need 

to re-examine the pacing of the curriculum. 

Math (Grades 6-8) 


Test 1 10.5 66 76.5 23.8 

Test 2 13.3 59.3 72.6 23.9 

Test 3 13.7 61.8 75.5 24.6 

28

Grade 6 


Test 1 11.2 64.0 75.2 24.7 

Test 2 14.3 63.1 77.4 22.6 

Test 3 16.6 62.8 79.4 20.5 

Grade 7 


Test 1 11.3 80.4 91.7 8.2 

Test 2 19.8 58.0 77.8 22.2 

Test 3 10.5 71.6 82.1 17.9 

Grade 8 


Test 1 9.3 55.1 64.4 35.6 

Test 2 8.3 65.8 74.1 25.8 

Test 3 14.2 53.3 67.5 32.5 

Sixth and eighth grade non-proficient scores indicate a decrease while seventh grade scores increased. 

Only sixth grade scores indicate an increase in the percentage of students scoring advanced and proficient 

consistently. Eighth grade scores increased significantly on the second testing and declined from the 

second to the third tests realizing only a slight increase from the beginning of the year to the third testing. 

Sixth and eighth grade scores indicate significant increases in the number of students scoring advanced. 

Non-Academic Measures 

Attendance 

The State Report indicates that we met the attendance benchmark in 2006, 2007, 2008 but did 

not meet it in 2009. At a later date, this data was changed through confidence interval which indicates the 

AYP attendance benchmark was met for 2009. Raw data reflects that we had a 92% attendance rate for 

the 2008-2009 school year. This is an area of need for Orchard Knob Middle School during the 2009 – 

2010 school year. 

Discipline 

2007 – 2008 Discipline data 

Total discipline entries classified as fighting – 159 

Total separate discipline entries resulting in suspension – 355 

Total separate discipline entries resulting in expulsion – 43 

29

2008 – 2009 Discipline data 

Total discipline entries classified as fighting – 187 

Total separate discipline entries resulting in suspension – 468 

Total separate discipline entries resulting in expulsion – 81 

There is an obvious need for improving the discipline at Orchard Knob Middle School. The number of 

fights, suspensions, and expulsions has increased dramatically from the previous year. This can be 

attributed to the total change in administration with a new principal and two new assistant principals from 

the previous year. We are working to improve discipline by implementing a School Wide Positive 

Behavior Support program. The program is now in its planning stage of implementation. 

1.6 

Report Card Data Disaggregation 

Report Card Data Disaggregation 

As of this date, the Report Card for the 2008-2009 has not been received; however the data has 

been disaggregated using the TCAP CRT scores and the TVASS data. 

30

1.7 

Narrative Synthesis of All Data 

Narrative Synthesis of Data 

Reading and Language Arts 

All data show poor performance by our Orchard Knob students. The TVASS scores indicate our 

students are not even close to making a year’s growth. 

Strengths 

The eighth grade writing scores have improved this year. More students do need to move from a 

score of “4” to scores of “4” and “5”. 

Students with Disabilities’ scores have been improving, indicting a focus on results by the 

teachers. 

Needs 

Observe presentation methods and determine if explicit teaching is occurring by all teachers. 

Accountability by administration for teachers to plan and teach explicitly is a necessity. 

Professional development has been given and will continue to be a focus; however, strategies 

must be transferred to the classroom in order to achieve growth. 

Question whether lack of classroom management is interfering with teaching. Development of 

School Wide Positive Behavior Support System is in process but cannot be counted on until fully 

implemented. 

The lack of equity between the females and males must be addressed. 

With the drop in proficiency in seventh grade being a constant, there needs to be more 

intervention in seventh grade Reading and Language Arts. Reading material for males and 

females need to be of high interest. 

Little to no change in the percent of students scoring non-proficient indicates a need for 

remediation and an additional layer of intervention for most students, especially those students 

scoring in the lowest quartiles. Eighth grade scores suggest that no students moved from nonproficiency 

to proficiency. A need for intervention is strong and considering the curriculum, 

there may be a need for a block of time to address those students’ needs in addition to the regular 

classroom. 

Fluctuating scores indicate the students are not retaining previously taught skills and a need for 

continual review of previously taught skills is needed throughout the year on a regular basis. 

Students do need to get into the library more often. There is a question of whether their behavior 

interferes with the learning process. Once the students are there and settled, are there enough 

non-fiction and biographies available to involve the students? 

A Readers Workshop is a possibility to help student achieve gains. This would include a 

classroom library for each class. 

31



remediation and an additional layer of intervention for most students. 

A school-wide writing curriculum needs to be followed by all disciplines. There should be a 

continuous building of writing skills without isolating it from the Language Arts curriculum 

especially in all grades. 

Expansive use of the new Writing Workshop is necessary. Boys are writing more this year 

because they are able to choose their own topic. It is the student’s own story. Choice could be a 

big factor in Language Arts/Reading in the future. 

The Hamilton County Summer Reading program needs to be incorporated into the school 

curriculum. There should be an assessment of the summer reading books at the beginning of 

school. This assessment can be individualized to fit each student’s book choice and could 

include a demonstration of what the student learned from the reading. This process can be 

modeled throughout the school year in the classroom to prepare the students for the summer 

reading project based work. 

A number of teachers have attended COMP training, but there is a need for all teachers to attend. 

Math 

All data show poor performance by our Orchard Knob students. The TVASS scores indicate our 

students are not making even close to a year’s growth except for one quartile in seventh grade 

and one quartile in eighth grade. 

Strengths 

The only area of strength can be found in eighth grade mathematics for our higher performing 

students. Our sixth graders come to OKMS better prepared than when they finish the year. No 

growth is found in seventh grade; therefore, the growth in eighth grade points to exceptional 

teaching in that grade level for a certain group of students. 

Students with Disabilities’ scores have been improving, indicting a focus on results by the 

teachers. 

Needs 

Observe presentation methods and determine if explicit teaching is occurring. Accountability by 

administration for teachers to plan and teach explicitly. Professional development has been given 

and will continue to be a focus; however, strategies must be transferred to the classroom in order 

to achieve growth. 

Question whether lack of classroom management is interfering with teaching. Development of 

School Wide Positive Behavior Support System is in process but cannot be counted on until fully 

implemented. 

32


Fluctuating scores indicate the students are not retaining previously taught skills and a need for 

continual review of previously taught skills is needed throughout the year on a regular basis. 


remediation and an additional layer of intervention for most students, especially those students 

scoring in the lowest quartiles. Eighth grade scores suggest that no students moved from nonproficiency 

to proficiency. A need for intervention is strong and considering the curriculum, 

there may be a need for a block of time to address those students’ needs in addition to the regular 

classroom. 

Increase the use of technology in all mathematics classes especially in sixth grade which does 

not have a computer lab. The students do not have a program in sixth grade that is comparable to 

Bridge to Algebra and Cognitive Tutor used in seventh and eighth grade. 

For our higher performing students, there is a need to explore the possibilities for math 

enrichment and acceleration. 

Our sixth graders come to OKMS better prepared than when they finish the year. 

The lack of equity between males and females must be addressed. 

1.8 

Prioritized List of Goal Targets 

Prioritized List of Goal Targets 

Reading/Language Arts: Students will increase their proficiency rate by 10% in all subgroups 

while maintaining or increasing the level of advance scores. Students will continue to increase 

writing scores with more students scoring 6’s. 

Mathematics: Students will increase their proficiency rate by 10% in all subgroups while 

maintaining or increasing the level of advance scores. 

Attendance: The school will improve its attendance rate to meet the state requirement of 93%. 

33

2.1 

Component 2 – Beliefs, Common Mission and Shared Vision 

Beliefs 

Orchard Knob Middle Beliefs 

1. Education is both a right and a responsibility, and this is taught to students by having 

high expectations for their abilities and performance. (Components 2, 6, 8, 9/Title I) 

2. A successful educational program includes collaboration, cooperation, and professional 

learning communities. (Components 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10/Title I) 

3. Children learn more from our actions than our words. (Component 2/Title I) 

4. All children are capable of learning and need to feel they can personally make a change 

in their lives regardless of their personal circumstances. (Components 2, 6, 7, 9/Title I) 

5. Instruction will engage diverse learning styles and make real world connections through 

interdisciplinary units. (Components 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9/Title I) 

6. School culture should foster a safe environment for all. (Components 5, 6, 9/Title I) 

7. Support and communication from administration, staff, parents, and the community is 

vital for Orchard Knob Middle School’s success. (Components 5, 6, 7, 10/Title I) 

8. Teachers should participate in on-going professional opportunities that help foster a 

rigorous curriculum. (Components 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9/Title I) 

9. Policies and decisions pertaining to students’ learning should be researched based and 

involve the collaboration of all stakeholders. (Components 1, 2, 6, 8, 9, 10/Title I) 

10. All students can learn and should be taught at high levels, striving above and beyond their 

potential. (Components 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10/Title I) 

34

Common Mission 

Mission Statement 

By the end of the eighth grade, every Orchard Knob Middle School student will have met 

his/her fullest academic potential and be ready to transition to the next stage of learning by 

displaying a sense of responsibility and respect for self and others. Our School-wide Positive 

Behavior Support system, along with our open door policy, will enhance the relationship 

among the community, faculty/staff, and students. 

Shared Vision 

Vision Statement 

Orchard Knob Middle School will be an exceptional center of academic and personal growth, 

providing all students the opportunity for an outstanding education of mind and spirit that 

they can build upon for the rest of their lives, and then use to transform their communities 

into better places for all to live. 

35

3.1.a 

Component 3 - Curricular Practices 

Current 

Curricular 

Practices 

Evidence of 

Practice (State in 

definitive/tangible 

terms) 

School uses 

the TDE 

state 

approved 

standards 

and provides 

training to 

staff in the 

use of the 

standards. 

System wide 

professional 

development 

on standards 

Standards 

embedded in 

lesson or 

unit plans 

Standards 

posted in 

each 

classroom 

Curriculum is 

prioritized and 

mapped. 

System 

curriculum 

alignment 

School 

Understanding 

by Design 

(UbD) plans 

Pacing guides 

School has 

implemented a 

grade 

appropriate 

cohesive 

standards based 

model for 

mathematics 

School wide 

use of 

Cognitive 

Tutor, Bridge 

to Algebra and 

Algebra I 

curriculum 

with Impact 

mathematics 

Support 

system is in 

place for 

enhancing the 

quality of 

curriculum 

and 

instruction 

Numeracy and 

Literacy lead 

teachers 

Numeracy and 

Literacy 

Leaders’ 

networks 

Monthly grade 

level and 

department 

meetings 

Monitoring is 

in place for 

enhancing the 

quality of 

curriculum 

and 

instruction 

District and 

administrative 

and EEs 

walkthroughs 

Target 

Tuesday 

meetings by 

grade level 

Department 

meetings 

Peer 

observations 

and 

walkthroughs 

Teaching 

and learning 

materials 

are 

correlated 

to the state 

standards 

and 

distributed 

to 

instructional 

staff 

Use of state 

approved 

texts and 

materials 

School has 

implemented a 

grade 

appropriate 

cohesive 

standards based 

model for 

literacy 

Writer’s 

Workshop 

__________ 

(identify 

practice) 

Is the current 

practice researchbased? 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

36

Is it a principle & 

practice of highperforming 

schools? 

Has the current 

practice been 

effective or 

ineffective? 

What data 

source(s) do you 

have that support 

your answer? 

(identify all 

applicable 

sources) 


effectiveness or 

ineffectiveness 

(State in terms of 

quantifiable 

improvement) 


equitable school 

support for this 

practice 

Next Step 

(changes or 

continuations) 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Effective Ineffective Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective 

Professional 

development 

attendance 

records on 

file 

Classroom 

checklists 

TCAP 

TVAAS 

State report 

card 

Observation 

records 

Pacing 

guides 

available in 

every 

classroom 

Continuous 

update 

UbD units on 

file 

System 

alignments 

on file 

Available 

district pacing 

guides on file 

UbD units 

inconsistent 

with district 

pacing guides 

School wide 

participation 

and 

monitoring 

Continued 

adjustment 

and 

Thinklink data 

Cognitive tutor 

software 

reports 

Explore test 

data (8 th grade) 

Algebra 

readiness test 

Increased time 

in lab with 

math cognitive 

tutor program 

Implementation 

in all grades 

Continued 

practice and 

monitoring 

Meeting 

minutes and 

agendas on 

file 

Lead teachers’ 

calendars and 

records 

Meeting 

attendance 

records 

Lead teachers’ 

documentation 

Meeting 

attendance 

records 

District wide 

PD 

Continue to 

offer effective 


Meeting 

agendas and 

records on 

file 

Observation 

records on 

file 

Observation 

data 

School wide 

involvement 

in observation 

and 

walkthrough 

schedules 

Continuous 

practice and 

monitoring 

Student 

work on file 

Student 

notebooks 

Compliance 

with state 

adopted 

curriculum 

materials 

Materials 

availability 

records 

Textbook 

and 

materials 

circulation 

records 

School wide 


approved 

and adopted 

materials 

Team 

lesson 

planning 

Sample of 

student 

writings, 

composition 

book 

Publishing 

party 

Implementation 

in all grades 

Continued 

practice and 

monitoring 

37

monitoring 

development 

38

3.1.b 

Curriculum Gap Analysis 

Curriculum Gap Analysis 

“What is” The Current Use of: TIME, MONEY, PERSONNEL And OTHER 

RESOURCES 

• TIME: Increased all class periods to 70 minutes from 55 minutes. All grade level teams 

have common planning and embedded professional development once a week. 

Discontinued “Buzz Time” and Focused Instruction periods to allow more time for core 

subject instruction. All teams communicate with administration through weekly grade 

level meetings. After school tutoring programs are available to all students. 

• MONEY: Each classroom teacher (31) is allotted $200 in BEP funding, half of which 

is retained by the school. Literacy lead teacher is available to staff through grant funding 

provided by Lyndhurst Foundation and administered through the Public Education 

Foundation. Math lead teacher is available to staff through district funding initiative to 

improve math achievement. 

• PERSONNEL: In addition to the principal, OKMS has 2 assistant principals. There are 

26 classroom teachers, as well as 5 inclusion teachers. OKMS also has a full-time 

literacy lead teacher and math lead teacher who functions as instructional coaches. 

Along with a full-time guidance counselor, there is a speech and language pathologist, 

school psychologist, and gifted teacher that are part time. Clerical/other staff includes a 

secretary, attendance clerk, bookkeeper, custodial/cafeteria staff, and a 

family/partnership specialist. 

• OTHER RESOURCES: After school tutoring provided by OKMS teachers and 

vendors. Behavior management/academic support provided by YMCA/YCAP 

programs. 

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: TIME, MONEY, PERSONNEL 

And OTHER RESOURCES 

• TIME: Teacher collaboration within feeder pattern (elementary to middle and middle to 

high) is necessary to accommodate students’ transitional needs and facilitate movement 

from one level to the next. 6 th and 8 th grade teachers need to work with 5 th and 9 th grade 

teachers. Professional development opportunities should be tailored to meet the needs 

of individual teachers. 

• MONEY: More computers are needed in classrooms to ensure equitable student access 

as well as an additional computer lab to serve the 6 th grade. Graphing calculators are 

available, but funds need to be allocated to regularly replace batteries. 

• PERSONNEL: Certified and highly qualified teachers are needed in all areas; currently 

some classes are staffed by permanent substitutes. 

• OTHER RESOURCES: Continued ongoing professional development with focus on 

standards, curriculum alignment, and pacing guides. OKMS needs to plan to continue 

improving parental/community involvement. 

39

Equity and Adequacy: 

Are we providing equity and adequacy to all of our teachers? No. Professional 

development is lacking for related arts teachers, but lead teachers are available to all teachers. 

All teachers receive classroom funding for materials, pacing guides, and aligned curriculum 

maps. 

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

being effective with all their students? Teaching resources including texts and other materials 

available to all teachers. All math and language arts teachers should be equipped with 

projectors and document cameras by the end of the year. 

Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of all students in our school? No. 

Extended contracts for teachers are provided for after-school student remediation and 

enrichment and a Saturday academy for writing and math. Extra help through Fast Math will be 

embedded in the school day for those who can’t attend after school and Saturday classes (Component 2, 

9, 10/Title 1). 

40

3.1.c 

Curricular Summary Questions 

Curriculum Summary Questions 

What are our major strengths and how do we know? 

OKMS has implemented Writing Workshop from Columbia Teachers’ College school wide in language 

arts classes. All math classes in 7 th /8 th grades use Carnegie Learning’s Bridge to Algebra or Algebra I’s 

Cognitive Tutor programs. All 6 th grade math classes use Impact math curriculum. Lead teachers teach 

in model classroom setting, modeling use of curriculum. Lead teachers also provide resources and 

support for math and language arts teachers regarding curriculum planning. Study Island computer 

program will be purchased and used in math and language to support and enrich curriculum. 


What are our major challenges and how do we know? 

There is a lack of content knowledge of teachers due to the implementation of new standards. Training 

is ongoing by the school and the district. There is an urgent need to strengthen our program for all levels 

of students. Half of the academic teachers are either new to the school, new to grade level, and/or new to 

the subject area that they are currently teaching. 


How will we address our challenges? 

Continue to provide high quality and ongoing professional development (Component 4/Title 1). Results 

oriented, departmental agendas followed, implemented, and monitored. Develop strategies to attract 

highly qualified teachers to meet the challenges of our school. Strategies need to be developed for 

teacher performance and longevity need to be put in place by the district (Component 5/Title 1). Explore 

addition of Readers’ Workshop program once Writing Workshop is well-established. Investigate math 

programs with a technology focus such as Voyager. 

41

3.2.a 

Current Instructional 

Practices 

Evidence of Practice (State in 

definitive/tangible terms) 

Is the current practice 

research-based? 

Classroom 

instruction 

aligned with 

standards 

based 

curriculum 

-Grade level 

units 

-Use of SPIs 

and checks 

for 

understanding 

-Common 

planning time 

by grade level 

-Extended 

class time 

-Extended 

common 

planning time 

Classroom 

instruction is 

aligned with 

assessments 

Assessments 

on file 

-Teacher and 

classroom 

observations 

Instructional Practices 

Teaching 

process is data 

driven 

-Data provided 

to all teachers. 

-Use of 

formative 

assessment 

(ThinkLink)data 

for planning 

-Use of TCAP 

data to inform 

instruction 

-Observation of 

teachers to 

improve 

teaching 

methods 

Classroom 

organization 

and 

management 

techniques 

support the 

learning 

process 

-School wide 

Positive 

Behavior 

Support 

(SWPBS) 

plan 

-Lead 

teachers and 

EE’s assist 

teachers with 

classroom 

organization 

and 

management 

techniques 

Students are 

provided 

with multiple 

opportunities 

to receive 

additional 

assistance to 

improve their 

learning 

beyond the 

initial 

classroom 

instruction 

-Academic 

recovery 

-Tutoring 

-SES after 

school 

programs 

Computer 

based 

learning 

(Cognitive 

Tutor and 

Study Island 

programs) 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Classroom 

instruction 

supports the 

learning of 

students with 

diverse 

cultural and 

language 

background 

and with 

different 

learning 

needs and 

styles 

-Student 

choice of 

topics in 

writing 

-SES 

programs 

available to 

all students 

__________ 

(identify 

practice) 

42

Is it a principle & practice of 

high-performing schools? 

Has the current practice been 

effective or ineffective? 

What data source(s) do you 

have that support your answer? 

(identify all applicable 

sources) 

Evidence of effectiveness or 

ineffectiveness (State in terms 

of quantifiable improvement) 


Effective Ineffective Ineffective Ineffective Effective Effective 

-Units on file 

-Tracking 

sheets on file 

-Adherence 

to pacing 

guides 

-Assessments 

on file 

-All subject 

areas and 

grade levels 

have pacing 

guides 

-All subject 

areas and 

grade levels 

have common 

units 

-Academic 

progress 

records 

- 

Assessments 

on file 

-ThinkLink 

formative 

assessments 

-Assessment 

data 

inconsistent 

with units 

and pacing 

guides 

-Common 

assessments 

needed for 

common 

grades and 

subjects 

-ThinkLink test 

data and probes 

-Observation 

records 

-Department 

meeting records 

-Inconsistent 


Thinklink 

probes 

-Discipline 

records on 

file 

-Observation 

records 

-Student 

behavior and 

management 

issues 

interfere with 

instruction 

-Too many 

out-of-school 

suspensions 

for student 

behavior 

-Student 

tutoring 

attendance 

records 

-Academic 

progress 

records 

-Progress 

records for 

students 

consistently 

participating 

in out-ofclassroom 

learning 

opportunities 

-Student 

writing on 

file 

- 

Improvement 

in quantity 

and quality 

of student 

writing over 

time 

Evidence of equitable school 

support for this practice 

Next Step (changes or 


Expectation 

common to 

all teachers 

Continued 

monitoring 

and 

adjustment 

Expectation 

common to 

all teachers 

Continued 

monitoring 

and 

adjustment 

ThinkLink 

probes and/or 

assessments 

available to all 

core subject 

teachers. 

Continued 

monitoring and 

adjustment 

School wide 

participation 

Continued 

monitoring 

and 

adjustment 

Support 

structures 

available to 

all students 

Continued 

monitoring 

and 

adjustment 

All 

Language 

Arts teachers 

use Writing 

Workshop 

structure 

Continued 

monitoring 

and 

adjustment 

43

3.2.b 

Instructional Gap Analysis 

Instructional Gap Analysis 


RESOURCES 

• TIME: Longer instructional blocks (70 minutes.) All students attend 4 core subject classes and 

related arts. 

• MONEY: School and district funds support language arts, reading, and math instruction as well 

as provide teacher training in these areas. Each teacher has access and control over allocated 

BEP funding of $100 for classroom and curricular supplies. 

• PERSONNEL: All classes are within state guidelines pertaining to numbers of students. 

Certified teacher available in alternative behavior management. The ISS class is monitored by a 

classified employee to help prevent out of school suspension of students when possible. 

• OTHER RESOURCES: Literacy lead teacher and math lead teacher available to students and 

teachers full time. Two Exemplary Educators provided by state are available weekly. They may 

suggest professional development activities, initiate surveys of faculty and administration, 

gather data, assist individual teachers, provide resources, and conduct teacher walk throughs. 

They observe classrooms and model for teachers, recommend resources, coach teachers in 

instructional best practices, and offer direction for teachers. A full time school resource officer 

is on site daily. Community organizations YCAP (through the YMCA) and OnPoint provide 

health and safety instruction on a regular basis both during and after school. 



• TIME: Ongoing training needed for teachers in rigorous, higher-order teaching and questioning 

strategies. Teachers need to spend PD time evaluating student work, plans, and assessments. 

Opportunities are needed for teachers to observe best practices in other classrooms. 

• MONEY: Media Center has specific resource needs. We need to increase technology access by 

providing resources such as televisions, projectors, document cameras, computers, and slates to 

all teachers. More computers for student use are necessary in classrooms and in media center. 

Related Arts teachers, such as band and art, need money for instruments and materials. 

Computer Technology needs updated equipment. 

• PERSONNEL: Utilize existing staff more efficiently to address needs of targeted and at-risk 

students. Support and training for teachers in classroom management, inclusion, and 

organizational skills; all teachers should attend COMP training. OKMS desperately needs a full 

time school nurse. 

• OTHER RESOURCES: We need teacher mentors and increased parental/community 

involvement. 


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

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

effective with all their students? Additional resources are being channeled into areas indicated as those 

of top priority. To implement instructional best practices school wide, we need easels, chart paper, box 

lights, and document cameras for all teachers, as well as digital television access. 

Based on the data, are we accurately meeting the needs of all students in our school? No. The 

percentages of proficient/advanced students indicate that we are not meeting the needs of all students. 

44

3.2.c 

Instructional Summary Questions 



Literacy and math lead teacher on site full time. Differentiated math and language arts 

instruction is ongoing through Carnegie Learning and Writers’ Workshop. Advanced classes 

(Algebra I) available to students based on academic performances and TCAP scores. 

Consistent time scheduled in technology labs for 7 th and 8 th grades. Instructional practices 

include standards-based instruction. EEs and lead teachers observe in classrooms on a regular 

basis to offer curriculum and instructional support. District and school based PD sessions are 

provided to emphasize effective strategies and ways to facilitate optimal learning for all 

students (Component 4/Title 1). Available data distributed to teachers 



With the assessment results, our challenges are: 

• State SPIs and checks for understanding must be the basis for all lessons 

• Time on task 

• Bell to bell instruction 

• Transitioning 

• Classroom management 

• Daily lesson planning 



• Implement effective school wide discipline plan to release administrators from 

disciplinary duties to allow them time to focus on instructional issues and classroom 

visibility. 

• Providing Comprehensive Operating Management Procedures (COMP) to all staff 

• Establish clear guidelines for teachers and students. 

45

3.3.a 

Assessment Practices 

Current Assessment Practices 



Is the current practice researchbased? 

Uses student 

assessments 

that are aligned 

with the TDE 

standards 

based 

curriculum 

-Lesson and/or 

unit plans 

include aligned 

assessments 

Ensures that 

the appropriate 

assessments 

are used to 

guide 

decisions 

relative to 

student 

achievement 

-Use of a 

variety of 

assessment 

tools and 

strategies 

-Extensive use 

of summative 

assessments 

Uses a variety 

of data points 

for decision 

making 

relative to 

student 

achievement 

-TCAP data 

available to 

teachers 

-Varied 

classroom 

assessments 

-Quarterly 

assessments, 

weekly 

quizzes, unit 

tests 

-ThinkLink 

-Case 

managers 

maintain 

records for 

students 

receiving 

special 

education 

services 

Assesses all 

categories of 

students 

-Every student 

in class is 

assessed 

-Students’ 

special needs 

are targeted 

Uses a wide 

range of 

assessments, 

CRT, NRT, 

portfolio, 

curriculum 

based 

assessments, 

etc. 

-Use of 

formative and 

summative 

assessments 

-Classroom 

assessments 

-ThinkLink 


Provides 

support and 

technical 

assistance to 

teachers in 

developing and 

using 

assessments 

-District and 

school based 


development 

-Literacy and 

Math Lead 

Teachers and 

two EEs 

provide 

ongoing 

support and 

technical 

assistance in 

developing and 

using 

assessments 

__________ 

(identify 

practice) 

46

Is it a principle & practice of highperforming 


Has the current practice been 

effective or ineffective? 

What data source(s) do you have 

that support your answer? 

(identify all applicable sources) 


ineffectiveness (State in terms of 

quantifiable improvement) 

Evidence of equitable school 

support for this practice 

Next Step (changes or 



Ineffective Ineffective Ineffective Effective Ineffective Effective 

-Plans and 

assessments on 

file 

-Classroom 

and teacher 

observation 

records 

-Assessments 

on file with 

units are 

inconsistent 

with pacing 

guides 

-Expectation 

common to all 

teachers 

-Continue to 

monitor and 

adjust 

alignment of 

assessments to 

-Classroom 

and teacher 

observation 

records 

-Test scores 

and 


file 

-Little 

effective use of 

formative 

assessment 

data 

ThinkLink 

probes 


core subject 

teachers 

-Provide 

teacher 

training in use 

of formative 

assessment 

-Quarterly 


file 

-ThinkLink 

records 

-Teachers’ 

data planning 

records with 

ThinkLink and 

TCAP scores 

-Lack of 

consistent use 

of common 

assessments 

-Level of data 

usage varies 

from teacher to 

teacher 

-All teams 

required to 

meet and use 

data for 

planning 

-All teachers 

required to 

submit 

quarterly 

assessments 

Continue to 

monitor and 

adjust 

-SPI checklists 

-Teachers’ and 

inclusion 

teachers’ 

records 

-Assessments 

on file 

-Student 

progress 

records 

-Expectation 

common to all 

teachers 

-Every 

teaching team 

assigned an 

inclusion 

teacher/case 

manager 

Continue to 

monitor and 

adjust; more 

teacher support 

needed 

-Assessments 

on file 

-ThinkLink 

records 

-Teachers not 

required to 

evaluate 

assessments 

-No common 

assessments 

required 

-All teachers 

required to 

submit 

quarterly 

assessments 

-Refine and 

adjust existing 

UbD plans 

-Assessments 

on file 

-Department 

and grade level 

meeting 

records 

-Lead 

Teachers’ 

records 

-Class/teacher 

observation 

data 

-Number of 

teachers 

requesting 

assistance 


development 

and EE’s 


teachers; Lead 

teachers 

available to 

math and 

language arts 

teachers 

Continue to 

monitor and 

adjust; more 


needed 

47

standards 

techniques 

-Continue to 

monitor and 

adjust; more 


needed. 

48

3.3.b 

Assessment Gap Analysis 

Assessment Gap Analysis 


RESOURCES 

• TIME: Analyzing incoming assessment data. Administration giving TCAP data results to staff. 

Teachers identified at risk students in the four academic areas. Administration of Thinklink (3 

times per year), data is to be used to monitor progress of students and drive instruction. 

Thinklink tests have been aligned to new state standards. 

• MONEY: Purchasing Study Island (a web based state assessment preparation and standards 

based learning program). Thinklink assessment funded by the district. 

• PERSONNEL: Teachers analyzed data of every student (Thinklink for math and language arts 

and all areas of TCAP) in order to improve student performance and instructional programs. 

(Component 8/Title 1) 

• OTHER RESOURCES: Central office personnel, Public Education Foundation, and principal 

conduct data sessions to provide principals and faculty with a summary and overview of the test 

data. On-going help can be obtained as needed. 



• TIME: All decisions need to be data driven. Administration and staff need to build in time to 

share data with students, parents, and community. 

• MONEY: Purchasing TCAP practice books and replacement batteries for calculators 

• PERSONNEL: Leadership team reviews assessment data and makes recommendations. School 

counselor will conduct data conferences with students and parents. (Component 6/Title 1) 

• OTHER RESOURCES – Training for teachers to conduct teacher/student data conferences. 


Are we providing equity and adequacy to all of our teachers? Yes. All teachers have access to 

professional development, resources, and support. 

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

effective with all their students? Yes. Funds and resources are being directed to address areas of need. 


Percentage of students scoring proficient/advanced on TCAP indicates that we are not meeting the needs 

of all students. 

49

3.3.c 

Assessment Summary Questions 

Assessment Summary Questions- 


This year HCDE has provided Discovery Education’s ThinkLink assessment program for math, 

language arts, and science. Data is available and disseminated through the Central Office’s Office of 

Accountability and Testing. Training and professional development is available for standards-based 

assessment through the school and through central office. 



Classroom assessments are not aligned with common unit plans, but some are aligned with district 

pacing guides. Accountability for use of ThinkLink and other formative assessment data and resources 

is necessary and must be monitored. Create and maintain a workable lab schedule so that all classes have 

access to online testing and interventions. Provide a computer lab for use in 6 th grade and additional 

computers in the media center for student use. 



We need common quarterly grade level assessments developed at the beginning of each quarter that can 

be used as pretests and posttests. All subject area teachers should administer at least two ThinkLink 

probes per quarter. Results should be analyzed by grade level and/or departments and discussed in 

leadership team meetings. (Component 8/Title I) All teachers need to provide support for some students 

and enhanced learning opportunities for others based on data. All teachers should regularly re-teach 

based on posttest results. Assessments should be used to make decisions regarding interventions for 

students. 

50

3.4.a 

Organizational Practices 

Current Organizational Practices 



School’s 

beliefs, mission 

and shared 

vision define 

purpose and 

direction for 


-Entire staff 

collectively had 

input into 

creation of 

vision, mission, 

and belief 

statements. 

-Statements 

posted in 

building 

Organizational 

practices and 

processes 

promote the 

effective time 

on task for all 

students 

-Administrators 

visible at all 

times in 

classrooms and 

hallways to 

assure time on 

task is 

maximized. 

-Teachers 

expected to teach 

“bell to bell” 

-Transition 

between classes 

minimized by 

removing 

lockers. 

-No bells are 

used between 

classes. 

-Transition 

between classes 

by teams 

-Intercom is used 

only when 

necessary 

School 

provides 

continuous 


development 

for school 

leaders 

-PD conducted 

annually before 

start of school 

-School-wide 

participation and 

support of 

district PD 

sessions 

-Target Tuesday 

meetings by 

grade level 

-Monthly staff, 


leadership, and 

departmental 

meetings 

-District 

provided special 

education PD 

-PD conducted 

by literacy and 

numeracy lead 

teachers 

School is 

organized to be 

proactive in 

addressing 

issues that 

might impede 

teaching and 

learning 

-SWPBS 

program in 

development 

-Employment of 

School Resource 

Officer 

-Administrative, 

district, and EEs 

scheduled walk 

throughs 

-Guidance 

Counselor 

-Attendance 

clerk 

-Family 

Partnership 

Specialist 

-Administrative 

team, EEs, and 

district conduct 

walkthroughs to 

target teacher 

and classroom 

needs. 

School is 

organized to 

support a 

diverse learning 

community 

through its 

programs and 

practices 

-Robotics after 


enrichment 

program 

-Saturday writing 

and math 

academy 

-Supplemental 

health and safety 

curriculum 

provided by 

outside nonprofit 

organization 

(OnPoint) 

-Spanish classes 

available to 7 th 

and 8 th grades 

__________ 

(identify 

practice) 

51

Is the current practice research-based? 

Is it a principle & practice of highperforming 


Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 

Has the current practice been effective 

or ineffective? 

What data source(s) do you have that 

support your answer? (identify all 

applicable sources) 


ineffectiveness (State in terms of 

quantifiable improvement) 

Effective Ineffective Effective Some elements 

effective and 

some ineffective 

-Statements 

posted in every 

classroom 

-SIP 

-Middle Schools 

for a New 

Society Grant 

(MSNS) 

-Statements 

revised and 

recreated to 

reflect needs of 

the school 

-Discipline 

referrals on file 

-Bellwork/warmups 

required in 

each class 

-UbD’s are 

required to show 

evidence of 

planning 

-Limited hall 

movement 

during 

instructional time 

-Monitoring of 

class schedules 

by administrators 

-Attendance at 

PD 

-Agendas and 

meeting records 

on file 

-Calendars and 

sign-in sheets on 

file 

-Level of 

participation and 

involvement by 

faculty 

-Evidence or lack 

thereof in 

classroom 

practice 

-New ideas and 

information 

shared with 

teams and or 

entire faculty. 

-Need 

clarification of 

duty 

responsibilities 

for some staff. 

-Administrators 

need more time 

in classrooms 

and in hallways 

during class 

changes 

-Utilization of 

non-classroom 

based personnel 

-Observed 

hallway and 

classroom 

behaviors 

-Placement of 

personnel in 

building 

-No school nurse 

is funded for 

OKMS this year. 

Effective 

-Student 

attendance for 

various 

programs 

-Discipline data 

-Level of 

attendance for 

various programs 

-Grades for 

students who 

consistently 

participate in 

various programs 

52

Evidence of equitable school support 

for this practice 

Next Step (changes or continuations) 

-All stakeholders 

involved in 

writing of 

statements 

-Signs posted 

throughout 

building 

-Review and 

update regularly 

-Monitor 

implementation 

and impact check 

-Consistent 

throughout grade 

levels 

-Implement use 

of hall pass 

system 

-Align UbD’s, 

system pacing 

guides, and state 

standards. 

-Equitable 

opportunities for 

all faculty 

-Continue PD as 

funding is 

available 

-Practice is 

equitable for all 

students 

Consistency with 


and follow up 

-Clarify 

expectations and 

procedures for 

faculty and 

students 

-Implement 

SWPBS plan 

-Opportunities 

and programs 


students 

-Continue to 

assess needs and 

strengthen 

programs as 

funding is 

available. 

53

3.4.b 

Organizational Gap Analysis 

Organizational Gap Analysis 

“What is” The Current Use of: TIME, MONEY, PERSONNEL And OTHER RESOURCES 

• TIME: Daily individual/team planning time; weekly grade level meetings; monthly 

departmental meetings. Target Tuesday meetings utilized for staff development on strategies 

and research-based best practices. 

• MONEY: Title I funding provides a family partnership specialist. Extended contract funds 

provide after school tutoring and recovery. 

• PERSONNEL: Lead teachers in math and literacy work with all grade levels in math and 

language arts. Related arts teachers work with all grade levels. Full time resource officer on 

staff. Teacher assistants in CDC program funded by special education. ISS monitor supervises 

ISS and a teacher is assigned to alternative class placement classes. 

• OTHER RESOURCES: Funds and services provided by local businesses including Electric 

Power Board and Sprint Telecommunications. Funds also provided by Title I stimulus funds 

and the Lyndhurst Foundation (Middle Schools for a New Society) 

“What Ought to Be” – How Should we be Using Our: TIME, MONEY, PERSONNEL And 

OTHER RESOURCES 

• TIME: Provide time for collaboration between grade levels during the school day. Various 

alternative instructional placements such as Saturday School or on-site evening school are 

needed to decrease out of school suspension time. Visit local schools that are in the process of 

implementing Readers’ Workshop. 

• MONEY: Funding for interventionists in math and reading. School nurse is desperately needed 

to minimize student attendance issues and alleviate overcrowded conditions in main office due 

to student illness. 

• PERSONNEL: Maintain consistent communication logs between school/teachers and parents. 

• OTHER RESOURCES: Instruments/materials needed for band. Teacher 

54

training/observations at effective school with similar demographics and concerns. Additional 

computer lab necessary for 6 th grade access to technology. Materials and resources for teacherstudent 

data conferences. 


Are we providing equity and adequacy to all of our teachers? Yes. Resources available to all teachers, but 

accountability is inconsistent. 

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

with all their students? Yes. As a result of being in School Improvement I, funds and resources are being 

directed towards areas of concern. 


55

3.4.c 

Organization Summary Questions 



Administrative and leadership team in place. Adequate team planning time promotes communication and 

consistency with team practices and curriculum. Grade level teams organized in close proximity throughout 

the building. Strong collegial relationships among faculty and staff and within team structures. 



Use team planning time to promote communication and consistency with team practices and curriculum. 

Refine methods of information distribution to improve communication. 



Regular/weekly emails from administration to staff regarding school events and issues. Create yearly and 

monthly calendar and provide to staff and community. Administration should maintain online/Outlook 

calendar with all athletic schedules, field trips, PD, and other school events listed and accessible for viewing 

by all staff. Make better use of ConnectEd program to communicate regularly with parents regarding school 

events. Create and maintain school website with links to staff email addresses and district/school calendar. 

56

4.1 

Component 4 – Action Plan Development 

GOAL 1 – Action Plan Development 

Revised DATE: __________________________ 

Goal 

Which need(s) does this Goal address? 

How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five- 

Year Plan? 

ACTION STEPS) 

Action 

Step 

1.1 

The learners will actively engage in 

problem-based learning utilizing 

IMPACT, Carnegie-Learning Math 

Curriculum, Cognitive Tutor and/or 

additional materials daily. 

The teachers will analyze and structure 

relevant lessons according to data derived 

from THINKLINK, Cognitive Tutor, Fast 

Math, TCAP and EXPLORE monthly. 

The administration will monitor the 

school-wide adopted math curriculum, 

provide immediate professional 

development, and develop plans of action 

for improvement based on school-wide 

ThinkLink, Benchmark Assessments in 

September/January/March. 

Administration is providing additional 

All learners, and all subgroups, at Orchard Knob Middle School will make or exceed AYP benchmarks in 

Mathematics, as mandated by NCLB and measured by the spring 2010 TCAP. 

School-wide proficiency rate in Mathematics was 66% at the spring 2009 TCAP. 

In accordance to MSNS goals that are tied to Hamilton County goals: to increase the number of students scoring 

proficient by 10% and the number of students scoring advanced by 10%. 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

Timeline 

August 

2009-May 

2011 

Person(s) 

Responsible 

LaShandra 

Rivers, 

Numeracy 

Model 

Teacher 

Maryo Beck, 

Principal 

Tennessee 

EEs 

Required 

Resources 

Textbooks, 

computers, 

internet 

access, 

relevant 

programs 

(Thinklink, 

Cognitive 

Tutor, Fast 

Math), 

relevant 

curriculum 

Projected 

Cost(s) & 

Funding 

Sources 

$5,382 – 

Equipment 

Budget 

Evaluation Strategy 

Formal and informal 

observations by 

administration, EEs, 

and central office 

staff 

Peer evaluations 

(student : student & 

teacher : teacher) 

Mastery Assessments 

using ThinkLink and 

TCAP 

Teachers will sign in 

Performance 

Results / Outcomes 

57

classroom time to allow sufficient time to 

implement new strategies. 

at PD. 

Technology 

Two computer labs are available for 

Cognitive Tutor and ThinkLink 

Professional Development 

Teachers will participate in system-wide 

professional development on IMPACT 

and the Carnegie-Learning Math 

Curriculum. (Component 4/Title I) 

The Numeracy Coach will work with 

math teachers to coordinate 

implementation of math interventions. 

(Component 4/Title I) 

Communication 

Parents will have the opportunity to 

attend Family Math Night to work 

specifically with Cognitive Tutor and 

Impact through hands-on demonstrations 

provided by the teachers. 

Action 

Step 

1.2 

The newly-funded Numeracy Coach will 

provide direct instruction in a model 

classroom to one 7 th grade class per day. 

Teachers will observe the implementation 

of the new standards and strategies within 

the model classroom. 

The Numeracy Coach will gather and 

review current data with classroom 

teachers during monthly department 

meetings, especially to identify at-risk 

August 

2009- 

May 2011 

LaShandra 

Rivers, 

Numeracy 

Model 

Teacher 

Maryo Beck, 

Principal 

Tennessee 

EEs 

Textbooks, 

computers, 

internet 

access, 

relevant 

programs 

(Thinklink, 

Cognitive 

Tutors), 

relevant 

curriculum 

District 

Funded 

$47,400 

TCAP Spring 2010 

scores 



administration, EEs 

and Central office 

staff 


Teacher will 

58

students. 

The administration will utilize the 

numeracy coach to provide professional 

development as well as the 

implementation and pacing of new 

standards and curriculum. 

complete monthly 

analysis of at risk 

“Bubble” students 

and standard 


Technology 

The Numeracy Coach will utilize the 

Promethean Board and model its 

effective use in the classroom. 

Communication 

The Numeracy Coach communicates best 

practices in math with faculty. 

Action 

Step 

1.3 

In addition to the regularly scheduled 

block, students with disabilities will 

participate in small group sessions to 

focus on specific areas of need. 

The inclusion teachers and regular 

education teachers will provide students 

with opportunities to strengthen areas of 

weakness using Fast Math and 

individualized direct instruction. 

Administration will provide inclusion 

teachers with needed tools such as Fast 

Math and provide a designated area with 

complete access to technology via 

updated wiring. 

August 

2009 – 

May 2011 

Kayla 

Wright, 

Special Ed 

Chair 

Textbooks, 

computers, 

internet 

access, 

relevant 

programs 

(Fast 

Forward, 

Thinklink, 

Cognitive 

Tutor, Fast 

Math), 

relevant 

curriculum 

Fast Math 

$8,895 

Wiring for 

computers: 

$718.28 



administration 


Assessments 

using ThinkLink, 

TCAP, and Fast 

Math, and Fast 

Forward 

59

Technology 

Newly designated area for small 

inclusion session utilizing new 

technology, Fast Math, Fast Forward, and 

Think Link. 

Communication 

Inclusion teachers will communicate 

student progress with parents and other 

stakeholders through IEP meetings and 

quarterly individualized progress reports. 

Action 

Step 

1.4 

The learners will actively engage in 

standards-based learning through the 

Study Island computer curriculum. 

The teachers will monitor each learner’s 

progress and identify areas of need. The 

teachers will develop differentiated Study 

Island tasks based on the individualized 

needs of each learner. 

The administration will monitor the use 

of Study Island to maximize its benefit to 

learners. They will also provide teachers 

with opportunities for professional 

development to optimize their effective 

use of the program. 

Technology 

Computers will be accessible through two 

computer labs. At least two computers 

are also available in each math 

classroom. 

November 

2009- 

May 2011 

November 

2009 

LaShandra 

Rivers, 

Numeracy 

Model 

Teacher; 

Dr. Genoe, 

Computer/ 

Math 

Specialist 

Computers, 

internet 

access, 

Study 

Island 

curriculum 

Study Island: 

Title I - 

$2,754 



administration and 

EEs 


(student : student & 

teacher : teacher) 

Mastery Assessments 

using Thinklink, 

TCAP 

Use of Probes from 

Think Link software. 

60


Teachers will participate in Study Island 

training provided by a representative of 

the program. (Component 4/Title I) 

Communication 

Teachers will generate a report of each 

learner’s proficiency level based on 

his/her performance in the Study Island. 

Teachers will share these results with 

learners and their parents through triweekly 

progress reports and parent – 

teacher conferences. 


Development 

on Study 

Island by 

company. 

61


Goal 


How is this Goal linked to the system’s Five- 

Year Plan? 

ACTION 

Revised DATE: __________________________ 

All students at Orchard Knob Middle School, and each subgroup of students, will make or 

exceed the AYP benchmarks in language arts as mandated by NCLB and measured by the 

spring 2010 TCAP. 

School-wide proficiency rate in Language Arts/Reading was 67% at the spring 2009 TCAP. 

The goal is link to the system’s Strategic Plan 2011 goals below: 

1. Raising Student Achievement 

To reduce the number of students not proficient by 10% in all subgroups in Reading. 

Moving students from Proficient to Advanced. 

2. High Quality Professional Staff 

A quality for every student. (Continuous professional development) 

5. District Accountability. (On-going assessment) 

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

Action 

Step 

1.1 

Full implementation of Writer’s 

Workshop with Fidelity. 

Students will participate in all 

components in the Writer’s Workshop 

from generating strategies through 

publishing. 

The Language Arts teachers will 

implement elements of Writer’s 

Timeline 

October 

2009 

through 

May 2011 

Daily 

Person(s) 

Responsible 

Literacy 

Lead 

Teacher 

Language 

Arts 

Teachers 

Inclusion 

teachers 

Required 

Resources 

Student 

composition 

books, chart 

paper, easels, 

markers, loose 

leaf notebook 

paper, post-it 

notes, Lucy 

Calkins, 

Writing 

Projected 

Cost(s) & 

Funding 

Sources 

District Funds 

Title I – 

$26,000 

Instructional 

Materials 

Evaluation 

Strategy 

Student published 

work on file 

TCAP Writing 

Assessment data 

analyzed 

TCAP data 

analyzed 

Performance 

Results / 

Outcomes 

62

Action 

Step 

1.2 

Action 

Step 

1.3 

Workshop into their daily lesson plans 

and will participate in school and system 

wide professional development. 

The administration will monitor the 

implementation of Writer’s Workshop 

and support Writer’s Workshop through 

the provision of supplies and professional 

development. Administration will 

lengthen the amount of time in class to 

fully utilize writer’s workshop. 

Saturday Writing Academy 

Students will voluntarily participate in 

the Saturday Writing Academy at the 

school. 

Language Arts teachers will plan, teach 

and assess the students participating in 

Saturday Writing Academy 

The administration will monitor and 

support the Saturday Writing Academy 

Technology will be utilized through the 

use of the computer writing lab. 

Media Center 

Students will participate in structured 

time in the media center for reading and 

checking out new pieces of literature both 

in the genres of fiction and nonfiction. 

Teachers will inbed time in their lessons 

to utilize the media center both through 

research and through time to check out 

reading materials. 

October 

2009 

through 

May 2011 

Saturday 

October 

2009 

through 

May 2011 

Weekly 

Extended 

contract 

teachers 

Language 

Arts 

Teachers 

Inclusion 

teachers 

Language 

Arts 

teachers 

Media 

Specialist 

Workshop: 

Units of Study 

Student 

composition 

books, chart 

paper, easels, 

markers, loose 

leaf notebook 

paper, post-it 

notes, 

computer lab 

Supplement 

existing media 

center 

materials 

(books, 

periodicals, 

etc.) 

Add 

computers 

with internet 

access and 

Extended 

Contract 

$28,000 

District Funds 

Title I 

System Funds 

Title I funds 

Teacher 

evaluations of 

Writer’s 

Workshop process 

Grades monitored 

One-on-one 

conferences with 

students 

Student/Teacher 

conference 

records. 

Student published 

work on file 

TCAP Writing 

Assessment data 

analyzed 

TCAP data 

analyzed 

One-on-one 

conferences with 

students 

TCAP language 

arts scores 

Library circulation 

records 

Library calendar 

Grades monitored 

63

Literacy Lead Teacher 

The newly funded Literacy Coach will 

provide direct instruction in a model 

classroom to one 7 th grade class per day. 

peripheral 

technology to 

media center 

Teachers will observe the implementation 

of the new standards and strategies within 

the model classroom. 

The Literacy Coach will gather and 

review current data with classroom 

teachers during monthly department 

meetings, especially to identify at-risk 

students. 

Action 

Step 1.5 


The administration will utilize the 

literacy coach to provide professional 

development as well as the 

implementation and pacing of new 

standards and curriculum. (Component 

4/Title I) 

August 

2009- 

May 2010 

Daily 

Principal 

Literacy 

Coach 

Classroom 

materials for 

model 

classroom 

Salary/benefits 

package for 

coach 

provided by 

HCDE and/or 

Lyndhurst 

grant funds. 

$47,400 

TCAP/TVAAS 

data 

Technology 

The literacy coach will model best 

practice instruction using available 

classroom technology. 

Communication 

The Literacy Coach communicates best 

practices in reading and language arts 

with faculty. 

In addition to the regularly scheduled 

block, students with disabilities will 

participate in small group sessions to 

focus on specific areas of need. 

64

Action 

Step 1.6 

Action 

Step 1.7 

Student Data Conferences 

Readers’ Workshop 

December 

2009 – 

May 2011 

August 

2010- 

May 2011 

Guidance 

Counselor 

Teachers 

Language 

arts and 

inclusion 

teachers 

Literacy 

Lead 

Teacher 

Student 

folders and 

copies of 

pertinent data 

Training for 

teachers 

Notebooks and 

materials for 

workshop 

curriculum 

Title I funds 

Title I funds 

MSNS and 

other grant 

funds 

TCAP records 

TCAP/TVAAS 

data 

65


Goal 


How is this Goal linked to the system’s 

Five-Year Plan? 

ACTION 

Action 

Step 

1 

Action 

Step 

2 

Full time attendance clerk on 

staff to monitor and maintain 

attendance records and 

collaborate with Family 

Partnership Specialist to help 

improve relations between the 

school, families, and the 

community. 

Attendance clerk will contact 

parents of absent students 

through ConnectEd callout 

system 

Attendance committee monitors 

attendance quarterly and 

provides student incentives for 

perfect attendance 

Revised DATE: __________________________ 

Percent of students attending school will meet the NCLB attendance rate of 93% in 2009- 

2010. 

Meet the 2009 NCLB benchmark 

By end of 2010-2011 school year, school attendance will be 94%. 

Timeline 

Daily, 

August 

2009- 

May 

2011 

Quarterly 

August 

2009- 

May 

2011 

Person(s) 

Responsible 

Director of 

Classified 

Staff; 

Attendance 

Clerk 

Alice Stone 

Carmen 

Horvath 

Ron 

Osborne 

Ursula 

Greene 

Required 

Resources 

Office with 

computer 

access to 

SASI and 

ConnectEd; 

telephone 

Time for trip 

planning, 

buses for 

transportation, 

appropriate 

destinations 

for trips 

Projected 

Cost(s) & 

Funding 

Sources 

Salary/benefits 

package 

($47,862) 

$3,000 from 

Electric Power 

Board 

Evaluation 

Strategy 

Tennessee 

framework for 

evaluation of 

classified 

staff 

Percent of 

students 

meeting 93% 

attendance 

goal each 

quarter 

Performance 

Results / 

Outcomes 

66

Glenna 

Swoffard 

Action 

Step 

3 

Action 

Step 

4 

Action 

Step 

5 

Tri-weekly competitions 

between grade levels; grade 

with highest weekly attendance 

above 93% wins an out-of-dress 

code pass for the following 

week. 

Teachers will participate in 

monthly attendance initiatives to 

impact student achievement. 

Administration and the SWPBS 

team will revise and implement 

the school wide rules and 

expectations to the faculty and 

staff. 

The SWPBS team will 

implement school wide rules 

and expectations to improve 

student behavior and 

attendance 

Parent and community 

meetings scheduled regularly 

for sharing of student 

attendance and discipline data 

in order to problem solve and 

disseminate school and district 

information. 

Every 

three 

weeks 

August 

2009- 

May 

2011 

Monthly 

August 

2009- 

May 

2011 

August 

2009- 

May 

2011 

Attendance 

clerk; 

homeroom 

teachers 

Patricia 

Moore; 

Principal 

Principal 

SWPBS 

team 

Family 

Partnership 

Specialist 

None 

Incentives for 

teachers 

Discipline and 

attendance 

data 

Materials for 

posting rules 

and 

procedures 

SWISS (data 

collection 

program) 

None 

None; 

donations 

School 

General 

account 

Percent of 

students 

meeting 

attendance 

goal 

Teacher 

attendance 

records 

Discipline 

and 

attendance 

data 

67

Component 5 – The School Improvement Plan and Process Evaluation 

5.1 

Process Evaluation 

Evidence of Collaborative Process 

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

entire planning process? 

• Teams were created within the school, consisting of all stakeholders, in order to collect 

information relevant to each component of our SIP. (Component 6/Title I) 

• “Target Tuesday” meetings, September 9 – October 6, were reserved for discussions 

concerning disaggregating student data (ie; TCAP, ThinkLink, etc.) and to develop 

components in the School Improvement Plan. 

• Bi-monthly SWPBS meetings are conducted for the Component 5 Committee (Nathan B 

Freeman, Chairperson, Polly Jennings, Ed McCoy, Lachandra Bailey, Kelan Flowers, 

Sheree Wheat, Sharon Ford and Marquis Dotson) to discuss strategies which, upon 

implementation, will decrease negative student behavior, thus increasing time on task in 

the classroom. 

Evidence of Alignment of Data and Goals 

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

• Goals are based on data from the 2009 TCAP scores, ThinkLink formative results, weekly 

lesson plans, and teacher made tests. Data collected indicates the need to increase both 

Math and Reading/Language Arts, Writing and attendance scores to meet NCLB goals for 

the 2009-2010 school years. 

68

Evidence of Communication with All Stakeholders 

What evidence do we have of our communication of the TSIPP to all stakeholders? 

• Faculty meetings, Target Tuesday (in house professional development), community 

meetings, school news letter, and school events such as Open House, Family Math Night 

and Family Reading Night are used to communicate school goals and objectives to all 

stakeholders. The SIP will be posted on the OKMS website for public access. 

• The Family Partnership Specialist will coordinate all school to community activities and 

school newsletters to be distributed to students, teachers, parents, and community members. 

Evidence of Alignment of Beliefs, Shared Vision, and Mission with Goals 

What evidence do we have that shows our beliefs, shared vision and mission in Component 2 

align with our goals in Component 4? 

• Our beliefs are all students that are actively engaged in a positive learning environment can 

learn at high levels. All stakeholders (i.e.; administration, teachers, students, parents, and 

community.) must put forth a collaborative effort to produce this environment. 

(Component 6/Title I) 

• The goals of improving Language Arts and Math scores as well as attendance rates are in 

direct correlation to the belief that students are actively engaged in a positive learning 

environment. 

• Goals were designed to align with the beliefs, shared vision, and mission creating student 

achievement that should meet or exceed AYP benchmarks, NCLB standards, and MSNS 

goals in Mathematics, Language Arts, and Reading. 

69

Evidence of Alignment of Action Steps with Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment and 

Organization 

What evidence do we have that shows our action steps in Component 4 align with our 

analyses of the areas of curriculum, instruction, assessment and organization in Component 

3? 

The actions of Component 4 have been designed to address all parties involved in implementing 

the aspects of curriculum, instruction, assessment and organization as found in Component 3. The 

goals and action steps are developed from formative and summative assessments. The assessment 

determine and curricular and instructional practices. 

Suggestions for the Process 

What suggestions do we have for improving our planning process? 

• The faculty and staff of Orchard Knob Middle School were asked to make suggestions 

on how the SIP process can be improved. The faculty suggested beginning the SIP process 

earlier in the school year or beginning the spring before. Also, suggestions included 

displaying SIP progress in a common area so that all members of the faculty have the 

ability to see each component and add suggestions. . 

70

5.2 

Implementation Evaluation 

Evidence of Implementation 

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

All teachers will be provided a copy of our SIP. The goals and action steps will be reviewed so the 

teachers will have a clear vision of where the school is and where it needs to be in relation to the 

goals and action steps in the School Improvement Plan. Professional Development will emphasize 

the use of best practices to implement the action steps provided in the SIP. (Component 4/Title I) 

All stakeholders – administration, faculty, staff, parents, community, and business partners – will 

continuously monitor and revise actions steps as needed to assure that the goals of the SIP will be 

met. (Component 6/Title I) 

Growth data in all areas for our school will be reviewed by the Leadership Team and distributed to 

our stakeholders. This information will be published throughout the school year so that all 

individuals will see our growth or lack thereof. If growth is not occurring, the action steps will be 

modified. Parents and community members who served on component committees will be invited 

back to revisit their work and to monitor what is being completed. (Component 6/Title I) 

Teacher, student, and school achievement will be recognized through classroom, grade level, 

school, and community activities. The partnership with the Electric Power Board and other 

agencies in our geographic area, as well as funds obtained through Title I, will help us celebrate 

the achievements of our school. Orchard Knob Middle School will continue to encourage 

community and system support in the endeavor to continue and promote growth. 

The administrators and Leadership Team of Orchard Knob Middle School will develop specific 

steps of implementation and give directives to the faculty and staff to complete the action steps 

stated in the SIP. The Exemplary Educators will utilize the implementation and check for the SIP. 

71

Evidence of the Use of Data 

What is the plan for the use of data? 

ThinkLink is an individualized diagnostic testing tool that provides data to be analyzed by each 

classroom teacher three times a year in order to show progress in areas of reading, language arts, 

science, math, and social studies. Classroom teachers will use the data to compare student scores 

from one testing period to the next. The ThinkLink program provides resources for teacher use for 

both acceleration and enrichment purposes. The teachers will focus on this data to teach needed 

skills to individual students. Student scores will be compared from one year to the next. In this 

way, teachers will be able to determine if student needs are being met and if progress is taking 

place in student mastery and teacher effectiveness. 

Data collection, analysis, and synthesis will be ongoing and continuous. This will provide 

information to all stakeholders to guide decisions about instruction, assessment, and organization. 

Ultimately, each decision will be based on one question: What is in the best interest of the 

student? 

Projected Dates for Administering Assessments: 

ThinkLink – August, December, and February 

Writing Assessment – February 

Saturday Writing Academy helps support student achievement through practice in anticipation 

of the Writing Assessment in February. The teachers will use best practices in teaching writing, 

including teaching modeling, explicit instruction of the writing process, collaborative small group 

revision, writing before and after reading, use of portfolios and rubrics to show growth in writing, 

and the teaching of grammar in the context of writing to assist attainment of mastery level of 

reading and writing skills for all students. 

72

Cognitive Tutor – Math – Weekly 

Eighth grade math teachers use this computer based program to raise academic achievement. 

Bridge to Algebra – Math – Weekly 

Seventh grade math teachers use this computer based program to raise academic achievement. 

Study Island – Daily 

A web based standards assessment study program used by the math and language arts teachers to 

improve student achievement. (New in the Fall of 2009) 

Curriculum Maps – Daily 

Teacher-made Curriculum Maps help guide lesson planning and development for effective 

teaching and learning. The Curriculum Map is standards based and student driven. 

Teacher Made Tests – Weekly 

Weekly assessments are used by teachers to measure mastery of standards. Teachers will use this 

data to compare the performance of each student. These assessments vary depending on the 

classroom teacher and/or the instructional level of the student. 

District Wide Standards – Daily 

The system has provided materials and teachers to help implement the new standards which will 

eventually improve student achievement. 

Daily/Weekly/Quarterly Semester Yearly Review 

Data is disaggregated through department meetings and weekly team meetings. The reviews will 

help teachers and administrators effectively map a course/plan of action that will help students 

meet academic goals and success. 

73

5.3 

Monitoring and Adjusting Evaluation 

Evidence of Monitoring Dates 

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 Orchard Knob Middle School Leadership Team will meet monthly to review the TSIPP. 

Mr. Maryo C. Beck, Principal, is the primary facilitator and will monitor the process procedure. 

Mr. Beck will set the agenda and the schedule. The Leadership Team will consist of team 

leaders, department heads, literacy and numeracy model teachers, Exemplary Educators and 

administrators. The School Leadership Team will review the TSIPP reports and data regarding 

attendance gathered by Ms. Theresa Russell. Reports will be presented by Mr. Maryo C. Beck. 

Dates for Leadership Team Meetings: 

August 18, 2009 

September 15, 2009 

October 27, 2009 

November 17, 2009 

December 15, 2009 

January 20, 2010 

February 17, 2010 

March 17, 2010 

April 21, 2010 

May 19, 2010 

74

Evidence of a Process for Monitoring Plan 

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

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

Exemplary Educators will utilize their SIP monitoring device and CORFORM observations data 

sheets to inform the School Leadership Team of progress or lack thereof pertaining to the goals 

and action steps. Data will be collected for ThinkLink in September, December, and February. 

Attendance averages which are collected daily, weekly, and monthly will be reviewed. Other 

resources will be provided from our model numeracy and literacy teachers. Recommendations in 

regard to adjustments and changes will be presented to the faculty during faculty and grade-level 

meetings. Adjustments in the action plan will be made based on recommendations from the 

School Leadership Team. 

Evidence of a Process for Adjusting Plan 

What will be the process that the School Leadership Team will use for adjusting our plan 

[person(s) responsible, timeline, action steps, resources, evaluation strategies] when 

needed? 

The literacy and numeracy coaches and the administration will oversee continuous monitoring of 

math, reading/language arts, and attendance. Mrs. Rivers and Mrs. Conway, the model teachers, 

will be in the classroom monitoring teaching strategies and making sure that resources are 

available for teachers. Ms. Russell will collect attendance and prepare a monthly report. Data 

will be kept and reviewed in order that adjustments can be made as deemed necessary by the 

Leadership Team. The Exemplary Educators’ reports on SIP implementation will also be used to 

determine adjustments. 

75

Evidence of a Plan for Communicating to All Stakeholders 

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

stakeholders and solicit ongoing input from stakeholders? 

The School Leadership Team will communicate adjustments of the plan to stakeholders on a 

continuous basis. 

Ongoing reports to stakeholders will be distributed through email, staff meetings, subject area 

meetings, newsletters, Connect Ed, and parent meetings. 

76

Title I Budget 

Title I, 2010.01 Project 

SCHOOL NAME: Orchard Knob Middle 

Activity Code: 6162 School Status: Program Improvement 1 

Principal: Mayro Beck Org Number: 2101 

Per Pupil Amount: 364 x $560 Total Allocation: $203,840 

TARGETED: Math (All, AA, ED, SWD), Reading (All AA, ED. SWD) 

2009 Sep-09 Mar-10 

5110-Regular Instruction Appropriation Carryover Budget Change Budget change Expenditures Balance 

51101161 Teachers $ 37,470.00 $ - $ - $ 25,074.00 $ 22,166.55 $ 40,377.45 

Yeng Im 

TBA 

51101409 Extended Contracts $ 28,000.00 $ - $ 12,235.00 $ (16,000.00) $ - $ 24,235.00 

51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 4,059.00 $ - $ 759.00 $ 565.00 $ 1,361.65 $ 4,021.35 

51102041 Retirement(6.42 Certified/15.01 Classified) $ 4,204.00 $ - $ 785.00 $ 583.00 $ 1,423.06 $ 4,148.94 

51102061 Life Insurance $65 $ 65.00 $ - $ - $ 16.00 $ 32.50 $ 48.50 

51102071 Medical Insurance $9,000 $ 9,000.00 $ - $ - $ 2,250.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 6,750.00 

51102081 Dental Insurance $345 $ 345.00 $ - $ - $ 87.00 $ 172.50 $ 259.50 

51102101 Unemployment $180 $ 180.00 $ - $ - $ 45.00 $ 90.00 $ 135.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 949.00 $ - $ 177.00 $ 132.00 $ 318.37 $ 939.63 

51102991 Long Term Disability 0.36% $ 236.00 $ - $ 44.00 $ 33.00 $ 79.15 $ 233.85 

51103999 Other Contracted Services $ 30,576.00 $ - $ - $ (30,576.00) $ - $ - 

51104291 Instructional Materials $ 26,355.00 $ - $ (5,000.00) $ 16,307.00 $ 29,209.90 $ 8,452.10 

51105999 Student Incentives $ 10,000.00 $ - $ - $ (1,090.00) $ 4,210.24 $ 4,699.76 

51107221 Equipment $ 10,000.00 $ - $ 5,000.00 $ 12,017.00 $ 16,685.10 $ 10,331.90 

$ 161,439.00 $ - $ 14,000.00 $ 9,443.00 $ 80,249.02 $ 104,632.98 

TOTAL FOR 5110 - Regular Instruction with carryover $ 175,439.00 

5213-Parental Involvement 

52134999 Parent supplies, postage, awards $ - $ 2,075.00 $ - $ - $ 1,097.16 $ 977.84 

52135999 Parent meeting expenses $ 5,000.00 $ 2,075.00 $ - $ - $ 1,643.70 $ 5,431.30 

$ 5,000.00 $ 4,150.00 $ - $ - $ 2,740.86 $ 6,409.14 

This must equal 1% of allocation or: $ 2,508 

TOTAL FOR 5213 - Parental Involvement with carryover $ 9,150.00 

5221-Staff Development 

52211621 Clerical Overtime $ 2,500.00 $ 3,054.00 $ - $ - $ 434.98 $ 5,119.02 

52211961 Stipends $ 20,384.00 $ 14,552.00 $ (8,728.00) $ (10,000.00) $ 1,267.50 $ 14,940.50 

52212011 Social Security 6.20% $ 1,419.00 $ 551.00 $ - $ (620.00) $ 102.06 $ 1,247.94 

52212041 Retirement 6.42/15.01% $ 1,684.00 $ 833.00 $ - $ (642.00) $ 115.37 $ 1,759.63 

52212121 Medicare 1.45% $ 332.00 $ 128.00 $ - $ (145.00) $ 23.87 $ 291.13 

52212991 LTD 0.36% $ 82.00 $ 32.00 $ - $ (36.00) $ 5.29 $ 72.71 

52213071 Telephone Charges $ 300.00 $ - 

$ 54.46 $ 245.54 

52213081 Consultants $ 3,000.00 $ 5,041.00 $ - $ 2,000.00 $ 9,300.00 $ 741.00 

52213551 Travel $ 3,000.00 $ 6,682.00 $ (4,000.00) 

$ 1,469.05 $ 4,212.95 

52215241 Registration Fees $ 2,000.00 $ 4,553.00 $ - 

$ 1,092.00 $ 5,461.00 

52215999 Meeting expenses, food, etc. $ 3,000.00 $ 5,790.00 $ - 

$ 1,000.00 $ 7,790.00 

$ 37,401.00 $ 41,516.00 $ (12,728.00) $ (9,443.00) $ 14,864.58 $ 41,881.42 

TOTAL FOR 5221 - Staff Development with carryover $ 66,189.00 

TOTAL BUDGET $ 250,778.00 

NOTES: Carryover amounts must be verified by Rachel Elliott, CPA 

Verification will take place after September 30, 2009. 

Journal FastMath to Stimulus after amendment. 

Title I Technician: Mary West, Title I Staff Accountant: Barbara Craigmiles 

Title I Coordinator: Cheri Grant 

Reconciled 01/14/10 

Will move SES money to teacher salary line item during March 2010 amendment.

Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

14:56:56 

Hamilton County Department of 

GL Transactions by Date Range 

Ledger: GL 

Fiscal Year: 2010 

Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 

FY Date Reference 

Vendor Name 

Transaction Description 

Amount Amount Amount 

Account: 21016162 - 51101161 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB REG ED TEACHER 

2010 07/10/2009 EARN REG 02140DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

2,375.15 

0.00 2,375.15 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 

REVERSE ACCR PR JOB 318857 JE 

0.00 2,375.15 -2,375.15 

2010 07/17/2009 EARN REG 01140DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,147.79 

0.00 1,147.79 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

803.45 -803.45 

2010 07/24/2009 EARN REG 02150DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

2,375.15 

0.00 2,375.15 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 2,375.15 -2,375.15 

2010 07/31/2009 EARN REG 01150DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,147.79 

0.00 1,147.79 

2010 08/07/2009 EARN REG 02160DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 1,441.15 -1,441.15 

2010 08/14/2009 EARN REG 01160DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,147.79 

0.00 1,147.79 

2010 08/21/2009 EARN REG 02177DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 09/04/2009 EARN REG 02180DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 09/18/2009 EARN REG 02190DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 10/02/2009 EARN REG 02200RN 

HOLIDAY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 10/16/2009 EARN REG 02210DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 10/30/2009 EARN REG 02399DP 

RETRO PAY GRS. 3 

183.10 

0.00 

183.10 

2010 10/30/2009 EARN REG 02220DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 11/13/2009 EARN REG 02230DP 

NON-PAID HOLIDAY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 11/27/2009 EARN REG 02240DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 12/11/2009 EARN REG 02250DP 


1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 12/24/2009 EARN REG 02260DP 

SICK TAKEN GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 01/08/2010 EARN REG 02010DP 

TEA HOL & VAC GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 01/22/2010 EARN REG 02020DP 


1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 02/05/2010 EARN REG 02030DP 


1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 02/10/2010 JE5924 

GREENE 7/17/09-8/14/09 JE 

0.00 2,639.92 -2,639.92 

2010 02/19/2010 EARN REG 02040DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 03/05/2010 EARN REG 02050DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

Total for Account: 21016162 - 51101161 31,801.37 9,634.82 22,166.55 

Page: 

1 

Total for Org Key: 

21016162 31,801.37 9,634.82 22,166.55 

Total for Report: 

31,801.37 9,634.82 22,166.55 

Report: GL5068 

User: BARBARA CRAIGMILES

Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

14:57:53 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102011 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB SOCIAL SECURITY 

2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

FICA 

2 

144.50 

0.00 

144.50 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

144.50 -144.50 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

FICA 

2 

70.80 

0.00 

70.80 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

49.56 

-49.56 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

FICA 

2 

144.50 

0.00 

144.50 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

144.50 -144.50 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

FICA 

2 

70.80 

0.00 

70.80 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

88.48 

-88.48 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

FICA 

2 

70.80 

0.00 

70.80 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02399DP 

FICA 

2 

11.35 

0.00 

11.35 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

FICA 

2 

91.15 

0.00 

91.15 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 01/22/2010 CONT REG 02020DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 02/05/2010 CONT REG 02030DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 02/10/2010 JE5924 

GREENE 7/17/09-8/14/09 JE 

0.00 

162.84 -162.84 

2010 02/19/2010 CONT REG 02040DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 03/05/2010 CONT REG 02050DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

Total for Account: 21016162 - 51102011 

1,951.53 

589.88 1,361.65 

Page: 

1 


21016162 1,951.53 589.88 1,361.65 


1,951.53 589.88 1,361.65 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

14:58:45 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102041 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB STATE RETIREMENT 

2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

152.49 

0.00 

152.49 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

152.49 -152.49 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

73.69 

0.00 

73.69 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

51.58 

-51.58 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

152.49 

0.00 

152.49 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

152.49 -152.49 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

73.69 

0.00 

73.69 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

92.52 

-92.52 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

73.69 

0.00 

73.69 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02399DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

11.76 

0.00 

11.76 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 01/22/2010 CONT REG 02020DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 02/05/2010 CONT REG 02030DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 02/10/2010 JE5924 

GREENE 7/17/09-8/14/09 JE 

0.00 

169.49 -169.49 

2010 02/19/2010 CONT REG 02040DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 03/05/2010 CONT REG 02050DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 


2,041.63 

618.57 1,423.06 

Page: 

1 


21016162 2,041.63 618.57 1,423.06 


2,041.63 618.57 1,423.06 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

14:59:35 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102061 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB LIFE INSURANCE 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 

BENEFIT ALLOCATION 1ST JE 

16.25 

0.00 

16.25 

2010 01/31/2010 JE5895 

BENEFIT ALLOCATION JE 

16.25 

0.00 

16.25 


32.50 

0.00 

32.50 

Page: 

1 


21016162 32.50 0.00 32.50 


32.50 0.00 32.50 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

15:00:27 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102071 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB MEDICAL INSURANCE - PPO 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 

BENEFIT ALLOCATION 1ST JE 2,250.00 

0.00 2,250.00 

2010 01/31/2010 JE5895 

BENEFIT ALLOCATION JE 2,250.00 

0.00 2,250.00 


4,500.00 

0.00 4,500.00 

Page: 

1 


21016162 4,500.00 0.00 4,500.00 


4,500.00 0.00 4,500.00 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

15:01:29 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102081 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB DENTAL INSURANCE 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 


86.25 

0.00 

86.25 

2010 01/31/2010 JE5895 


86.25 

0.00 

86.25 


172.50 

0.00 

172.50 

Page: 

1 


21016162 172.50 0.00 172.50 


172.50 0.00 172.50 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

15:02:16 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102101 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 


45.00 

0.00 

45.00 

2010 01/31/2010 JE5895 


45.00 

0.00 

45.00 


90.00 

0.00 

90.00 

Page: 

1 


21016162 90.00 0.00 90.00 


90.00 0.00 90.00 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

15:03:03 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102121 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB EMPLOYER MEDICARE 

2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

33.79 

0.00 

33.79 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

33.79 

-33.79 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

16.56 

0.00 

16.56 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

11.59 

-11.59 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

33.79 

0.00 

33.79 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

33.79 

-33.79 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

16.56 

0.00 

16.56 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

20.69 

-20.69 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

16.56 

0.00 

16.56 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02399DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

2.65 

0.00 

2.65 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.32 

0.00 

21.32 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 01/22/2010 CONT REG 02020DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 02/05/2010 CONT REG 02030DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 02/10/2010 JE5924 

GREENE 7/17/09-8/14/09 JE 

0.00 

38.12 

-38.12 

2010 02/19/2010 CONT REG 02040DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 03/05/2010 CONT REG 02050DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 


456.35 

137.98 

318.37 

Page: 

1 


21016162 456.35 137.98 318.37 


456.35 137.98 318.37 



Date: 

Time: 

03/08/2010 

15:04:02 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102991 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB LONG TERM DISABILITY 

2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

LTD 

2 

8.55 

0.00 

8.55 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

8.55 

-8.55 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

LTD 

2 

4.13 

0.00 

4.13 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

2.89 

-2.89 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

LTD 

2 

8.55 

0.00 

8.55 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

8.55 

-8.55 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

LTD 

2 

4.13 

0.00 

4.13 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

5.19 

-5.19 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

LTD 

2 

4.13 

0.00 

4.13 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 01/22/2010 CONT REG 02020DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 02/05/2010 CONT REG 02030DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 02/10/2010 JE5924 

GREENE 7/17/09-8/14/09 JE 

0.00 

9.50 

-9.50 

2010 02/19/2010 CONT REG 02040DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 03/05/2010 CONT REG 02050DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 


113.83 

34.68 

79.15 

Page: 

1 


21016162 113.83 34.68 79.15 


113.83 34.68 79.15 



Federal Program Requisitions - Instructional Materials 


Vendor 

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

Follett Library Resources 12/3/2009 R25791 $2,017.40 $2,017.40 21016162 P22507 51104291 $0.00 

Apperson Print Services 8/18/2009 R23943 $359.16 $359.16 21016162 P20820 51104291 $0.00 

Study Island, LLC 10/2/2009 R24828 $2,754.00 $2,754.00 21016162 P21675 51104291 $0.00 

Magnatag Visible System 10/15/2009 R25070 $310.53 $310.53 21016162 P21892 51104291 $0.00 

Office Depot 10/15/2009 R25079 $3,330.84 $3,330.84 21016162 P21946 51104291 $0.00 

HCDE Warehouse 11/5/2009 WH87662 $794.40 $794.40 21016162 JE5753 51104291 $0.00 to whse 11/12/2009 


Truan d/b/a Amerilam 11/9/2009 R25433 $179.84 $179.84 21016162 P22233 51104291 $0.00 

Camcor, Inc 11/9/2009 R25434 $307.96 $307.96 21016162 P22241 51104291 $0.00 

School Box of Tennessee 11/11/2009 R25477 $211.21 $211.21 21016162 P22243 51104291 $0.00 


Triumph Learning 11/30/2009 R25727 $0.00 $0.00 21016162 P22457 51104291 $0.00 

Follett Library Resources 2/16/2010 R26998 $2,639.24 $0.00 21016162 P23536 51104291 $2,639.24 

Chattanooga Office Supply (COS) 12/9/2009 R25893 $1,075.54 $1,075.54 21016162 P22571 51104291 $0.00 

Shield's Electronics 1/6/2010 R26204 $97.92 $97.92 21016162 P22886 51104291 $0.00 

Scholastic 1/6/2010 R26209 $2,038.25 $2,038.25 21016162 P22894 51104291 $0.00 

Chattanooga Office Supply (COS) 1/22/2010 R26456 $389.98 $389.98 21016162 P23030 51104291 $0.00 


HCDE Warehouse 2/5/2010 WH87674 $794.10 $0.00 21016162 51104291 $794.10 to whse 2/9/2010 

Triumph Learning 2/5/2010 R26801 $2,967.30 $2,967.30 21016162 P23311 51104291 $0.00 

Monday, March 08, 2010 Page 1 of 2

Vendor 


COS Business Products 2/5/2010 R26806 $2,553.99 $2,553.99 21016162 P23312 51104291 $0.00 

Scholastic 2/12/2010 R26972 $2,284.59 $0.00 21016162 P23534 51104291 $2,284.59 

School Box 11/23/2009 R25652 $165.70 $165.70 21016162 P22444 51104291 $0.00 

School Sum $29,209.90 $23,491.97 $5,717.93 

Grand Total 

$29,209.90 $23,491.97 $5,717.93 

Monday, March 08, 2010 Page 2 of 2

Date: 

Time: 

01/14/2010 

14:31:26 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51101161 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB REG ED TEACHER 

2010 07/10/2009 EARN REG 02140DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

2,375.15 

0.00 2,375.15 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 2,375.15 -2,375.15 

2010 07/17/2009 EARN REG 01140DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,147.79 

0.00 1,147.79 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

803.45 -803.45 

2010 07/24/2009 EARN REG 02150DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

2,375.15 

0.00 2,375.15 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 2,375.15 -2,375.15 

2010 07/31/2009 EARN REG 01150DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,147.79 

0.00 1,147.79 

2010 08/07/2009 EARN REG 02160DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 1,441.15 -1,441.15 

2010 08/14/2009 EARN REG 01160DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,147.79 

0.00 1,147.79 

2010 08/21/2009 EARN REG 02177DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 09/04/2009 EARN REG 02180DP 

PERSONAL ACCRUAL GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 09/18/2009 EARN REG 02190DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 10/02/2009 EARN REG 02200RN 


1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 10/16/2009 EARN REG 02210DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,441.15 

0.00 1,441.15 

2010 10/30/2009 EARN REG 02399DP 

RETRO PAY GRS. 3 

183.10 

0.00 

183.10 

2010 10/30/2009 EARN REG 02220DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 11/13/2009 EARN REG 02230DP 


1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 11/27/2009 EARN REG 02240DP 

SALARY GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 12/11/2009 EARN REG 02250DP 


1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 12/24/2009 EARN REG 02260DP 

SICK TAKEN GRS. 3 

1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

2010 01/08/2010 EARN REG 02010DP 


1,477.77 

0.00 1,477.77 

Total for Account: 21016162 - 51101161 25,890.29 6,994.90 18,895.39 

Page: 

1 


21016162 25,890.29 6,994.90 18,895.39 


25,890.29 6,994.90 18,895.39 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:02:19 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

FICA 

2 

144.50 

0.00 

144.50 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

144.50 -144.50 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

FICA 

2 

70.80 

0.00 

70.80 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

49.56 

-49.56 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

FICA 

2 

144.50 

0.00 

144.50 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

144.50 -144.50 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

FICA 

2 

70.80 

0.00 

70.80 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

88.48 

-88.48 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

FICA 

2 

70.80 

0.00 

70.80 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

FICA 

2 

88.48 

0.00 

88.48 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02399DP 

FICA 

2 

11.35 

0.00 

11.35 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

FICA 

2 

91.15 

0.00 

91.15 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

FICA 

2 

90.75 

0.00 

90.75 


1,588.53 

427.04 1,161.49 

Page: 

1 


21016162 1,588.53 427.04 1,161.49 


1,588.53 427.04 1,161.49 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:03:41 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

152.49 

0.00 

152.49 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

152.49 -152.49 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

73.69 

0.00 

73.69 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

51.58 

-51.58 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

152.49 

0.00 

152.49 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

152.49 -152.49 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

73.69 

0.00 

73.69 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

92.52 

-92.52 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

73.69 

0.00 

73.69 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

92.52 

0.00 

92.52 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02399DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

11.76 

0.00 

11.76 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

94.87 

0.00 

94.87 


1,662.15 

449.08 1,213.07 

Page: 

1 


21016162 1,662.15 449.08 1,213.07 


1,662.15 449.08 1,213.07 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:04:31 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102061 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB LIFE INSURANCE 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 


16.25 

0.00 

16.25 


16.25 

0.00 

16.25 

Page: 

1 


21016162 16.25 0.00 16.25 


16.25 0.00 16.25 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:05:04 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102071 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB MEDICAL INSURANCE - PPO 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 

BENEFIT ALLOCATION 1ST JE 2,250.00 

0.00 2,250.00 


2,250.00 

0.00 2,250.00 

Page: 

1 


21016162 2,250.00 0.00 2,250.00 


2,250.00 0.00 2,250.00 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:05:58 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 51102101 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 

2010 09/30/2009 JE5154 


45.00 

0.00 

45.00 


45.00 

0.00 

45.00 

Page: 

1 


21016162 45.00 0.00 45.00 


45.00 0.00 45.00 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:06:37 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

33.79 

0.00 

33.79 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

33.79 

-33.79 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

16.56 

0.00 

16.56 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

11.59 

-11.59 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

33.79 

0.00 

33.79 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

33.79 

-33.79 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

16.56 

0.00 

16.56 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

20.69 

-20.69 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

16.56 

0.00 

16.56 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

20.69 

0.00 

20.69 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02399DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

2.65 

0.00 

2.65 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.32 

0.00 

21.32 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

21.22 

0.00 

21.22 


371.47 

99.86 

271.61 

Page: 

1 


21016162 371.47 99.86 271.61 


371.47 99.86 271.61 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:07:51 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 07/10/2009 CONT REG 02140DP 

LTD 

2 

8.55 

0.00 

8.55 

2010 07/10/2009 RV318857 


0.00 

8.55 

-8.55 

2010 07/17/2009 CONT REG 01140DP 

LTD 

2 

4.13 

0.00 

4.13 

2010 07/17/2009 RV322223 


0.00 

2.89 

-2.89 

2010 07/24/2009 CONT REG 02150DP 

LTD 

2 

8.55 

0.00 

8.55 

2010 07/24/2009 RV318969 


0.00 

8.55 

-8.55 

2010 07/31/2009 CONT REG 01150DP 

LTD 

2 

4.13 

0.00 

4.13 

2010 08/07/2009 CONT REG 02160DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 08/07/2009 RV318971 


0.00 

5.19 

-5.19 

2010 08/14/2009 CONT REG 01160DP 

LTD 

2 

4.13 

0.00 

4.13 

2010 08/21/2009 CONT REG 02177DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 09/04/2009 CONT REG 02180DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 09/18/2009 CONT REG 02190DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 10/02/2009 CONT REG 02200RN 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

LTD 

2 

5.19 

0.00 

5.19 

2010 10/30/2009 CONT REG 02220DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

LTD 

2 

5.32 

0.00 

5.32 


92.55 

25.18 

67.37 

Page: 

1 


21016162 92.55 25.18 67.37 


92.55 25.18 67.37 





Vendor 


Camcor, Inc 11/9/2009 R25434 $307.96 $307.96 21016162 P22241 51104291 $0.00 

Apperson Print Services 8/18/2009 R23943 $359.16 $359.16 21016162 P20820 51104291 $0.00 

Study Island, LLC 10/2/2009 R24828 $2,754.00 $2,754.00 21016162 P21675 51104291 $0.00 

Magnatag Visible System 10/15/2009 R25070 $310.53 $310.53 21016162 P21892 51104291 $0.00 




Truan d/b/a Amerilam 11/9/2009 R25433 $179.84 $179.84 21016162 P22233 51104291 $0.00 

Scholastic 1/6/2010 R26209 $2,038.25 $0.00 21016162 P22894 51104291 $2,038.25 

School Box of Tennessee 11/11/2009 R25477 $211.21 $211.21 21016162 P22243 51104291 $0.00 

School Box 11/23/2009 R25652 $165.70 $0.00 21016162 P22444 51104291 $165.70 

Triumph Learning 11/30/2009 R25727 $2,967.30 $0.00 21016162 P22457 51104291 $2,967.30 


Chattanooga Office Supply (COS) 12/9/2009 R25893 $1,075.54 $0.00 21016162 P22571 51104291 $1,075.54 



School Sum $19,148.80 $12,804.09 $6,344.71 

Grand Total 

$19,148.80 $12,804.09 $6,344.71 

Friday, January 15, 2010 Page 1 of 1

Federal Program Requisitions - Student Incentives 


Vendor 


STARS 1/13/2010 R25274 $330.00 $190.00 21016162 P22087 51105999 $140.00 

Domino's Pizza 11/11/2009 R25485 $250.00 $0.00 21016162 P22237 51105999 $250.00 

Bi Lo Inc 11/11/2009 R25484 $100.00 $0.00 21016162 P22236 51105999 $100.00 

Bi Lo Inc 11/11/2009 R25483 $250.00 $0.00 21016162 P22235 51105999 $250.00 

Durham Transportation 10/15/2009 R24967 $250.00 $250.00 21016162 P21880 51105999 $0.00 

School Sum $1,180.00 $440.00 $740.00 

Grand Total 

$1,180.00 $440.00 $740.00 


Federal Program Requisitions - Equipment 


Vendor 


Snyder Productions 8/20/2009 R24021 $8,868.00 $8,868.00 21016162 P21043 51107221 $0.00 

Carnegie Learning 8/17/2009 R23941 $5,382.00 $5,382.00 21016162 P20889 51107221 $0.00 

Book System Inc 7/20/2009 R23480 $567.50 $567.50 21016162 P20473 51107221 $0.00 

School Sum $14,817.50 $14,817.50 $0.00 

Grand Total 

$14,817.50 $14,817.50 $0.00 


Federal Program Requisitions - PI - Other Charges 


Vendor 


Bi Lo Inc 1/15/2010 R26366 $150.00 $0.00 21016162 52135999 $150.00 

Bi Lo Inc 10/16/2009 R25110 $63.70 $63.70 21016162 P21925 52135999 $0.00 

Bi Lo Inc 8/25/2009 R24121 $300.00 $117.02 21016162 P21083 52135999 $182.98 

School Sum $513.70 $180.72 $332.98 

Grand Total 

$513.70 $180.72 $332.98 


Supplemental Pay - Clerical Overtime 


Stipend 

Number 

Stamp 

Date 

Date 

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

STI0257 

9/24/2009 9/28/2009 SASI Training 21016162 52211621 July 20-21, 2009 $229.78 $229.78 Maryo Beck 

Theresa Russell 

STI0256 

9/24/2009 9/28/2009 SASI Training 21016162 52211621 August 24, 2009 $43.30 $43.30 

Patricia Moore 

STI0255 

9/24/2009 9/28/2009 SASI Training 21016162 52211621 July 20-21, 2009 $161.90 $161.90 

Patricia Moore 

TOTAL $434.98 $434.98 

Grand Total 

$434.98 $434.98 


Supplemental Pay - Stipends 


Stipend 

Number 

Stamp 

Date 

Date 


STI0322 

10/19/2009 10/20/2009 Comp Training 21016162 52211961 October 3-10, 2009 $975.00 $975.00 Maryo Beck 

Jamie Aday 

Lindsay Donahue 

Jermaine Freeman 

Julie Hutcherson 

Shannon Lumley 

Alice Stone 

STI0277 

10/2/2009 10/2/2009 Comp Training 21016162 52211961 September 19, 2009 $292.50 $292.50 


Jermaine Freeman 

John Weiss 

TOTAL $1,267.50 $1,267.50 

Grand Total 

$1,267.50 $1,267.50 


Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:58:23 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 10/09/2009 CONT REG 02202DP 

FICA 

2 

14.25 

0.00 

14.25 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

FICA 

2 

29.66 

0.00 

29.66 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

FICA 

2 

58.15 

0.00 

58.15 


102.06 

0.00 

102.06 

Page: 

1 


21016162 102.06 0.00 102.06 


102.06 0.00 102.06 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

13:59:32 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 10/09/2009 CONT REG 02202DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

34.49 

0.00 

34.49 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

37.06 

0.00 

37.06 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

43.82 

0.00 

43.82 


115.37 

0.00 

115.37 

Page: 

1 


21016162 115.37 0.00 115.37 


115.37 0.00 115.37 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:00:22 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 10/09/2009 CONT REG 02202DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

3.33 

0.00 

3.33 

2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

6.93 

0.00 

6.93 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

13.61 

0.00 

13.61 


23.87 

0.00 

23.87 

Page: 

1 


21016162 23.87 0.00 23.87 


23.87 0.00 23.87 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:01:06 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 




2010 10/16/2009 CONT REG 02210DP 

LTD 

2 

1.79 

0.00 

1.79 

2010 11/13/2009 CONT REG 02230DP 

LTD 

2 

3.50 

0.00 

3.50 


5.29 

0.00 

5.29 

Page: 

1 


21016162 5.29 0.00 5.29 


5.29 0.00 5.29 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:01:53 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21016162 - 52213071 TITLE I ORCHARD KNOB TELEPHONE 

2010 07/31/2009 JE5059 

7/09- DODDS AVE PHONE CHGS JE 

18.13 

0.00 

18.13 

2010 08/31/2009 JE5126 

AUG-09 DODDS AVE CO PD PH JE 

18.15 

0.00 

18.15 

2010 11/30/2009 JE5788 

11-09 DODDS AV CTY PD PHE JE 

18.18 

0.00 

18.18 


54.46 

0.00 

54.46 

Page: 

1 


21016162 54.46 0.00 54.46 


54.46 0.00 54.46 



Federal Program Requisitions - Consultants 


Vendor 


Jim Gennoe 12/3/2009 R25788 $5,000.00 $500.00 21016162 P22503 52213081 $4,500.00 

School Sum $5,000.00 $500.00 $4,500.00 

Grand Total 

$5,000.00 $500.00 $4,500.00 


Federal Programs Travel/Registration Fees Expenses 

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


TE0216 Osborne Ronald Instructional Strategies -EdPro Chattanooga, TN 11/23-24/2009 2101616 5221355 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

TE0201 Jennings Pauline EdPro Development Chattanooga, TN 11/23-24/2009 2101616 5221355 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

TE0200 Price Rachel EdPro Development Chattanooga, TN 11/23-24/2009 2101616 5221355 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

TE0199 Greene Ursula EdPro Development Chattanooga, TN 11/23-24/2009 2101616 5221355 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

TE0198 Burgess Rachel EdPro Development Chattanooga, TN 11/23/2009 2101616 5221355 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

TE0161 Rivers LaShandra NCTM Conference Nashville, TN 11/18-20/2009 2101616 5221355 $386.18 52215 $266.00 $0.00 

TE0160 Im Yang Regional Math Conference Nashville, TN 11/18-20/2009 2101616 5221355 $518.96 52215 $226.00 $0.00 

TE0145 Freeman Nathan Creating Conditions for Succe Nashville, Tn 11/4-6/09 2101616 5221355 $563.91 $0.00 $0.00 

School Sum 

Grand Total 

$1,469.05 $492.00 $0.00 

$1,469.05 $492.00 $0.00 


Federal Programs PaymentVouchers - Registration Fees 

School Payable Claim Form Number Vendor Amt Requested Amt Paid OrgNumber ObjectCode ReasonforPV 


APCF0063 EdPro Development Inc $600.00 $600.00 

21016162 52215241 Staff Development Conference 11/23-24/2009. Received from school on 11/1 

School Sum $600.00 

Grand Total 

$600.00 

This expenditure was paid by Board-approval. 

Friday, January 15, 2010

Federal Program Requisitions - SD - Other 


Vendor 


Bi Lo Inc 11/2/2009 R25336 $1,000.00 $192.77 21016162 P22144 52215999 $807.23 

School Sum $1,000.00 $192.77 $807.23 

Grand Total 

$1,000.00 $192.77 $807.23 


Title I Stimulus Budget 



Activity Code: 6162 School Status: In Program Improvement 1 



TARGETED: Math (All, AA, ED, SWD), Reading (All AA, ED, SWD) 

Sep-09 

5110-Regular Instruction Appropriation Budget Change Expenditures Balance 

51101409 Extended Contracts $ 12,000.00 $ - $ - $ 12,000.00 

51101166 Interventionists $ 21,600.00 $ - $ 3,470.00 $ 18,130.00 

Vernita Justice (15 hrs wk/36 wks/$20 hr) $ 10,800.00 

TBA (15 hrs wk/36 wks/$20 hr) $ 10,800.00 

51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 2,083.00 $ - $ - $ 2,083.00 

51102041 Retirement(6.42 Certified/15.01 Classified) $ 770.00 $ - $ - $ 770.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 487.00 $ - $ 50.32 $ 436.68 

51102991 Long Term Disability 0.36% $ 43.00 $ - $ - $ 43.00 

51103361 Equipment Repair $ 3,500.00 $ - $ 150.00 $ 3,350.00 

51104291 Instructional Materials $ - $ 5,000.00 $ 4,587.24 $ 412.76 

51105999 Student Incentives $ 24,476.00 $ (20,000.00) $ 800.00 $ 3,676.00 

51107221 Equipment $ - $ 15,000.00 $ 8,172.31 $ 6,827.69 

$ 64,959.00 $ - $ 17,229.87 $ 47,729.13 

TOTAL FOR 5110 - Regular Instruction with carryover $ 64,959.00 


52131891 Family Partnership Specialist $ 31,110.00 $ - $ 14,358.36 $ 16,751.64 


51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 1,929.00 $ - $ 879.72 $ 1,049.28 

51102041 Retirement(6.42 Certified/15.01 Classified) $ 4,670.00 $ - $ 2,155.20 $ 2,514.80 

51102061 Life Insurance $65 $ 65.00 $ - $ 32.50 $ 32.50 

51102071 Medical Insurance $9,000 $ 9,000.00 $ - $ 4,500.00 $ 4,500.00 

51102081 Dental Insurance $345 $ 345.00 $ - $ 172.50 $ 172.50 

51102101 Unemployment $180 $ 180.00 $ - $ 90.00 $ 90.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 451.00 $ - $ 205.80 $ 245.20 

51102991 Long Term Disability 0.36% $ 112.00 $ - $ 21.74 $ 90.26 

$ 47,862.00 $ - $ 22,415.82 $ 25,446.18 

This must equal 1% of allocation or: $ 

- 



52211961 Stipends $ 12,740.00 $ - $ 780.00 $ 11,960.00 

52212011 Social Security 6.20% $ 790.00 $ - $ 48.40 $ 741.60 

52212041 Retirement 6.42/15.01% $ 818.00 $ - $ (58.07) $ 876.07 

52212121 Medicare 1.45% $ 185.00 $ - $ 11.28 $ 173.72 

52212991 LTD 0.36% $ 46.00 $ - $ - $ 46.00 

$ 14,579.00 $ - $ 781.61 $ 13,797.39 

TOTAL FOR 5221 - Staff Development with carryover $ 14,579.00 

TOTAL BUDGET $ 127,400 

8/10/09 - Per Lucile Phillips 

This school is in School Improvement: Phase 1. They must use SES setaside for SES services.

Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:18:48 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 51101166 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK TEACHER - NO BENEFITS 

2010 10/16/2009 EARN REG 02210DP 

SCHOOL STIPENDS GRS. 3 

540.00 

0.00 

540.00 

2010 10/30/2009 EARN REG 02221DP 


600.00 

0.00 

600.00 

2010 11/13/2009 EARN REG 02230DP 


770.00 

0.00 

770.00 

2010 11/27/2009 EARN REG 02240DP 

REGULAR HRS WORKED GRS. 3 

420.00 

0.00 

420.00 

2010 12/11/2009 EARN REG 02250DP 


420.00 

0.00 

420.00 

2010 12/24/2009 EARN REG 02260DP 


540.00 

0.00 

540.00 

2010 01/08/2010 EARN REG 02010DP 


180.00 

0.00 

180.00 


3,470.00 

0.00 3,470.00 

Page: 

1 


21046162 3,470.00 0.00 3,470.00 


3,470.00 0.00 3,470.00 



Federal Program Requisitions - Maintenance/Repair 


Vendor 


Giant Steps Music 1/6/2010 R26206 $150.00 $0.00 21046162 P22870 51103361 $150.00 

School Sum $150.00 $0.00 $150.00 

Grand Total 

$150.00 $0.00 $150.00 




Vendor 


Sports Spectrum 1/6/2010 R26205 $1,158.85 $0.00 21046162 P22869 51104291 $1,158.85 

EAI Educational 12/18/2009 R26087 $26.20 $0.00 21046162 P22758 51104291 $26.20 

Triumph Learning 12/17/2009 R26051 $2,967.30 $0.00 21046162 P22791 51104291 $2,967.30 

School Box 12/11/2009 R25939 $434.89 $0.00 21046162 P22625 51104291 $434.89 

School Sum $4,587.24 $0.00 $4,587.24 

Grand Total 

$4,587.24 $0.00 $4,587.24 


Federal Program Requisitions - Student Incentives 


Vendor 


Bi Lo Inc 12/17/2009 R26067 $800.00 $0.00 21046162 P22729 51105999 $800.00 

School Sum $800.00 $0.00 $800.00 

Grand Total 

$800.00 $0.00 $800.00 


Federal Program Requisitions - Equipment 


Vendor 


AFP School Supply 12/18/2009 R26065 $1,912.68 $0.00 21046162 51107221 $1,912.68 

Dell Computers 12/16/2009 R26040 $605.69 $0.00 21046162 P22727 51107221 $605.69 

Tech Depot 12/16/2009 R26036 $1,764.00 $0.00 21046162 P22762 51107221 $1,764.00 

Dell Computers 12/8/2009 R25866 $1,636.72 $0.00 21046162 P22569 51107221 $1,636.72 


Insight Public 12/3/2009 R25787 $0.00 $0.00 21046162 51107221 $0.00 Quote cancelled by 

school/McNabb 

Dell Computers 12/3/2009 R25783 $1,636.72 $0.00 21046162 P22542 51107221 $1,636.72 

cam audio Inc 12/3/2009 R25782 $184.00 $0.00 21046162 P22497 51107221 $184.00 

School Sum $8,172.31 $0.00 $8,172.31 

Grand Total 

$8,172.31 $0.00 $8,172.31 


Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:37:53 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52131899 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK OTHER SALARIES 

2010 11/27/2009 EARN REG 02240DP 

SB SICK MEMBERSHIP GRS. 3 

1,196.53 

0.00 1,196.53 

2010 12/02/2009 JE5736 

SWOFFARD 8/7/09-11/13/09 JE 9,572.24 

0.00 9,572.24 

2010 12/11/2009 EARN REG 02250DP 

SICK ACCRUAL PERIOD GRS. 3 

1,196.53 

0.00 1,196.53 

2010 12/24/2009 EARN REG 02260DP 

SICK ACCRUAL PERIOD GRS. 3 

1,196.53 

0.00 1,196.53 

2010 01/08/2010 EARN REG 02010DP 

SICK BANK ASSESSMENT GRS. 3 

1,196.53 

0.00 1,196.53 

Total for Account: 21046162 - 52131899 14,358.36 

0.00 14,358.36 

Page: 

1 


21046162 14,358.36 0.00 14,358.36 


14,358.36 0.00 14,358.36 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:38:45 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132011 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK SOCIAL SECURITY 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

FICA 

2 

73.31 

0.00 

73.31 

2010 12/02/2009 JE5736 

SWOFFARD 8/7/09-11/13/09 JE 

586.48 

0.00 

586.48 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

FICA 

2 

73.31 

0.00 

73.31 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

FICA 

2 

73.31 

0.00 

73.31 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

FICA 

2 

73.31 

0.00 

73.31 


879.72 

0.00 

879.72 

Page: 

1 


21046162 879.72 0.00 879.72 


879.72 0.00 879.72 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:39:19 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132041 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK STATE RETIREMENT 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

179.60 

0.00 

179.60 

2010 12/02/2009 JE5736 

SWOFFARD 8/7/09-11/13/09 JE 1,436.80 

0.00 1,436.80 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

179.60 

0.00 

179.60 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

179.60 

0.00 

179.60 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

TCRS 15.01 

2 

179.60 

0.00 

179.60 


2,155.20 

0.00 2,155.20 

Page: 

1 


21046162 2,155.20 0.00 2,155.20 


2,155.20 0.00 2,155.20 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:40:07 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132061 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK LIFE INSURANCE 

2010 12/11/2009 JE5772 

BENEFIT ALLOCATIONS JE 

32.50 

0.00 

32.50 


32.50 

0.00 

32.50 

Page: 

1 


21046162 32.50 0.00 32.50 


32.50 0.00 32.50 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:40:48 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132071 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK MEDICAL INSURANCE - PPO 

2010 12/11/2009 JE5772 

BENEFIT ALLOCATIONS JE 4,500.00 

0.00 4,500.00 


4,500.00 

0.00 4,500.00 

Page: 

1 


21046162 4,500.00 0.00 4,500.00 


4,500.00 0.00 4,500.00 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:41:36 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132081 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK DENTAL INSURANCE 

2010 12/11/2009 JE5772 


172.50 

0.00 

172.50 


172.50 

0.00 

172.50 

Page: 

1 


21046162 172.50 0.00 172.50 


172.50 0.00 172.50 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:42:56 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132101 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 

2010 12/11/2009 JE5772 


90.00 

0.00 

90.00 


90.00 

0.00 

90.00 

Page: 

1 


21046162 90.00 0.00 90.00 


90.00 0.00 90.00 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:44:15 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132121 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK EMPLOYER MEDICARE 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

17.15 

0.00 

17.15 

2010 12/02/2009 JE5736 

SWOFFARD 8/7/09-11/13/09 JE 

137.20 

0.00 

137.20 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

17.15 

0.00 

17.15 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

17.15 

0.00 

17.15 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

17.15 

0.00 

17.15 


205.80 

0.00 

205.80 

Page: 

1 


21046162 205.80 0.00 205.80 


205.80 0.00 205.80 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:45:09 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52132991 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK LONG TERM DISABILITY 

2010 11/27/2009 CONT REG 02240DP 

LTD 

2 

4.31 

0.00 

4.31 

2010 12/02/2009 JE5736 

SWOFFARD 8/7/09-11/13/09 JE 

34.50 

0.00 

34.50 

2010 12/11/2009 CONT REG 02250DP 

LTD 

2 

4.31 

0.00 

4.31 

2010 12/24/2009 CONT REG 02260DP 

LTD 

2 

4.31 

0.00 

4.31 

2010 01/08/2010 CONT REG 02010DP 

LTD 

2 

4.31 

0.00 

4.31 


51.74 

0.00 

51.74 

Page: 

1 


21046162 51.74 0.00 51.74 


51.74 0.00 51.74 



Supplemental Pay - Stipends 


Stipend 

Number 

Stamp 

Date 

Date 


STI0245 

9/21/2009 9/21/2009 Comp Training 21046162 52211961 9/12/09 $780.00 $780.00 Maryo Beck 

Jamie Aday 

Lindsay Donohue 

Marquis Dotson 

Jermain Freeman 


Shannon Lumley 

Alice Stone 

John Weiss 

TOTAL $780.00 $780.00 

Grand Total 

$780.00 $780.00 


Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:48:27 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52212011 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK SOCIAL SECURITY 

2010 10/09/2009 CONT REG 02202DP 

FICA 

2 

48.40 

0.00 

48.40 


48.40 

0.00 

48.40 

Page: 

1 


21046162 48.40 0.00 48.40 


48.40 0.00 48.40 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:49:07 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52212041 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK STATE RETIREMENT 

2010 10/09/2009 CONT REG 02202DP 

TCRS 6.42% 

2 

0.00 

58.07 

-58.07 


0.00 

58.07 

-58.07 

Page: 

1 


21046162 0.00 58.07 -58.07 


0.00 58.07 -58.07 



Date: 

Time: 

01/15/2010 

14:49:49 



Ledger: GL 


Posting 

Debit Credit 

Net 


Vendor Name 



Account: 21046162 - 52212121 TITLE I ARRA STIMULUS OK EMPLOYER MEDICARE 

2010 10/09/2009 CONT REG 02202DP 

MEDICARE 

2 

11.28 

0.00 

11.28 


11.28 

0.00 

11.28 

Page: 

1 


21046162 11.28 0.00 11.28 


11.28 0.00 11.28 






Activity Code: 6162 School Status: Program Improvement 1 




2009 

5110-Regular Instruction Appropriation Carryover Expenditures Balance 

51101161 Teachers $ 37,470 $ - 

$ 37,470.00 

Yeng Im 

51101409 Extended Contracts $ 28,000 $ - 

$ 28,000.00 

51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 4,059 $ - 

$ 4,059.00 

51102041 Retirement(6.42 Certified/15.01 Classified) $ 4,204 $ - 

$ 4,204.00 

51102061 Life Insurance $65 $ 65 $ - 

$ 65.00 

51102071 Medical Insurance $9,000 $ 9,000 $ - 

$ 9,000.00 

51102081 Dental Insurance $345 $ 345 $ - 

$ 345.00 

51102101 Unemployment $180 $ 180 $ - 

$ 180.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 949 $ - 

$ 949.00 

51102991 Long Term Disability 0.36% $ 236 $ - 

$ 236.00 

51103999 Other Contracted Services $ 30,576 $ - 

$ 30,576.00 

51104291 Instructional Materials $ 26,355 $ - $ 1,168.56 $ 25,186.44 

51105999 Student Incentives $ 10,000 $ - 

$ 10,000.00 

51107221 Equipment $ 10,000 $ - $ 14,844.50 $ (4,844.50) 

$ 161,439.00 $ - $ 16,013.06 $ 145,425.94 

TOTAL FOR 5110 - Regular Instruction with carryover $ 161,439 


52134999 Parent supplies, postage, awards $ - $ 2,075.00 

$ 2,075.00 

52135999 Parent meeting expenses $ 5,000.00 $ 2,075.00 $ 272.36 $ 6,802.64 

$ 5,000.00 $ 4,150.00 $ 272.36 $ 8,877.64 

This must equal 1% of allocation or: $ 2,508 



52211621 Clerical Overtime $ 2,500.00 $ 3,054.00 

$ 5,554.00 

52211961 Stipends $ 20,384.00 $ 14,552.00 

$ 34,936.00 

52212011 Social Security 6.20% $ 1,419.00 $ 1,099.00 

$ 2,518.00 

52212041 Retirement 6.42/15.01% $ 1,684.00 $ 1,386.00 

$ 3,070.00 

52212121 Medicare 1.45% $ 332.00 $ 256.00 

$ 588.00 

52212991 LTD 0.36% $ 82.00 $ 75.00 

$ 157.00 

52213071 Telephone Charges $ 300.00 

$ 300.00 

52213081 Consultants $ 3,000.00 $ 5,041.00 

$ 8,041.00 

52213551 Travel $ 3,000.00 $ 6,682.00 

$ 9,682.00 

52215241 Registration Fees $ 2,000.00 $ 4,553.00 

$ 6,553.00 

52215999 Meeting expenses, food, etc. $ 3,000.00 $ 5,790.00 

$ 8,790.00 

$ 37,401.00 $ 42,788.00 $ - $ 80,189.00 

TOTAL FOR 5221 - Staff Development with carryover $ 80,189 

TOTAL BUDGET $ 250,778 

NOTES: 

Journal FastMath to Stimulus after amendment.




Activity Code: 6162 School Status: In Program Improvement 1 




5110-Regular Instruction Appropriation Expenditures Balance 

51101409 Extended Contracts $ 12,000 

$ 12,000.00 

51101166 Interventionists $ 21,600 

$ 21,600.00 

TBA (15 hrs wk/36 wks/$20 hr) $ 10,800 

TBA (15 hrs wk/36 wks/$20 hr) $ 10,800 

51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 2,083 

$ 2,083.00 

51102041 Retirement(6.42 Certified/15.01 Classified) $ 770 

$ 770.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 487 

$ 487.00 

51102991 Long Term Disability 0.36% $ 43 

$ 43.00 

51103361 Equipment Repair $ 3,500 

$ 3,500.00 

51105999 Student Incentives $ 24,476 

$ 24,476.00 

$ 64,959.00 $ - $ 64,959.00 

TOTAL FOR 5110 - Regular Instruction with carryover $ 64,959 


52131891 Family Partnership Specialist $ 31,110 

$ 31,110.00 


51102011 Social Security 6.20% $ 1,929 

$ 1,929.00 

51102041 Retirement(6.42 Certified/15.01 Classified) $ 4,670 

$ 4,670.00 

51102061 Life Insurance $65 $ 65 

$ 65.00 

51102071 Medical Insurance $9,000 $ 9,000 

$ 9,000.00 

51102081 Dental Insurance $345 $ 345 

$ 345.00 

51102101 Unemployment $180 $ 180 

$ 180.00 

51102121 Medicare 1.45% $ 451 

$ 451.00 

51102991 Long Term Disability 0.36% $ 112 

$ 112.00 

$ 47,862.00 $ - $ 47,862.00 

This must equal 1% of allocation or: $ 

- 



52211961 Stipends $ 12,740 

$ 12,740.00 

52212011 Social Security 6.20% $ 790 

$ 790.00 

52212041 Retirement 6.42/15.01% $ 818 

$ 818.00 

52212121 Medicare 1.45% $ 185 

$ 185.00 

52212991 LTD 0.36% $ 46 

$ 46.00 

$ 14,579.00 $ - $ 14,579.00 

TOTAL FOR 5221 - Staff Development with carryover $ 14,579 

TOTAL BUDGET $ 127,400


Cordially invites you to 

Open House 

September 3, 2009 

5:30 P.M.-7:30 P.M. 

Please join us and learn about some of the “jacketacular” 

opportunities at OKMS: 

You will also have an opportunity to meet the staff and tour 

the school. 

Light Refreshments will be served. 

Orchard Knob Middle School is a Title I funded program.

School Name: 

Parent Involvement Policy – School Level 



Mission Statement 

By the end of the 8 th grade, every Orchard Knob Middle School student will be able 

to read at or above grade level, write with clarity, master 8 th grade subject matter 

standards and display a sense of responsibility and respect for self and others. 

The school mission will be accomplished through: 

• A student centered-program 

• A supportive and caring environment 

• An accepting of personal responsibilities 

• A respect and consideration for all 

• A positive attitude toward school 

• Welcoming of parents into the building 

• Encouraging parental involvement 

Include parents in the decisions that affect their child(ren) by: 

a. Conduct meetings with parents to determine specific needs 

b. Including parent members in leadership committees as needed 

c. Maintaining open communication between teachers and parents 

2. Report student progress to parents on a regular basis by: 

a. mid-term progress reports 

b. report cards 

c. ½ day parent conference days 

d. phone calls 

e. informal dialogue 

f. open door policy 

g. use of Connect-ed system 

3. Provide parents with opportunities to build parenting skills by offering monthly 

meetings for parents to discuss ways to help their child(ren). 

4. Build capacity for parental involvement by: 

a. Convening to inform parents of responsibilities and encourage 

participation; if parents are not participating other ways of communicating 

must be established i.e., letters to parents, home-visits to encourage 

parental involvement, etc. 

b. Offering meetings at flexible times coinciding with teachers planning 

period, parent-teacher conferences, etc. 

c. Involving parents in planning, review, and improvement through 

conferences, informal dialog at sports events to schedule a formal meeting, 

etc. 

1



5. Provide assistance to children-at-risk of not meeting high standards by: 

a. Providing individual intervention with certified teacher(s) 

b. Informing parents of how they can help their children achieve. 

1. Describe how the school jointly develops, with the input of parents, the 

written parent involvement plan. 

Parents as well as faculty, students, district, and community involvement make up the 

collaborative process at Orchard Knob Middle School. Parent-Teacher Conferences, 

volunteering in classroom and other assessment tools are presented to parents 

throughout the year for their input. Another tool used at the beginning of the school 

year is Open House to invite new parents and welcome the upper grade level parents 

back as well. 

Parental Involvement Expectations 

1. To be actively involved in parent-teacher meetings, volunteering, etc. 

2. To express concerns by responding and coming to parent-teacher conferences and 

other needs assessments 

3. To be active volunteers at school and in the community 

4. To support the faculty, staff and administration at Orchard Knob Middle School 

5. To participate and support special events/activities, academically as well as sports 

related 

a. Describe the annual meeting where parents receive information 

concerning being a Title I school. (Attach documentation) 

Our annual Open House which is held at the beginning of the school year gives parents 

the opportunity to get acquainted with faculty and staff, familiarize themselves with 

policies, procedures and the expectation from the administration. Parents are also able to 

visit their child’s classes, have lunch with their child(ren), spend time with teachers, and 

obtain any pertinent information that is needed for the school year. 

It is communicated to parents each year at Open House what it means to be a Title I 

school and what it means to be “in school improvement”. The Title I brochures and 

pamphlets provided by the district are handed out along with other parental information 

at the school level. 

2



b. Describe how parents are explained the requirements of Title I, and 

the rights of parents to be involved in the school. 

Parents receive the following literature: 

“Parents’ Rights In Education – A guide to No Child Left Behind Act.” 

“Schoolwide Title I Programs – How and Why They Work” 

“About School-Parent Compacts” 

The documents are also available for Spanish-speaking parents. 

Flyer - No Child Left Behind “Frequently Asked Questions” 

Parents are given the parental involvement plan to review the expectations for their 

involvement. 

c. Describe the schedules of school parent meetings.(Attach 

documentation) 

1. PTA Membership Drive held at basketball games, etc., during school year 

2. Parent Conferences are held once a semester 

3. Parent conferences with teachers and administration are on-going 

d. Describe how parents are involved in an organized, ongoing, and 

timely way. (Attach documentation) 

Parents have attended PTA meetings when held, (2) Parent-Teacher Conferences, (3) 

On-going volunteer opportunities i.e., assisting with creating bulletin boards, Parents 

inform the school and other parents of the information that is shared with them at 

meetings. There are parents who initiate calls to school to communicate concerns and 

issues that need to be addressed in a timely manner. 

e. Describe how the school provides parents timely information about 

programs under parent involvement. (Attach documentation) 

(1) All PTA notices, newsletters, minutes and agendas, meeting dates, etc., are distributed 

(2) Agenda-Mates and student compacts are given to parents at the beginning of the 

school year, (3) Phone calls are made daily by teachers and family partnership specialist, 

(4) The automated phone system is used for notice of special activities, parent-teacher 

conferences, and other pertinent information. 

3



i. Describe how the school will provide parents a description and 

explanation of the curriculum used in the school, forms of 

academic assessment used to measure student progress, and 

the proficiency levels students are expected to meet. (Attach 

documentation) 

The school will use the following to provide parents a description and explanation of the 

curriculum (1) Curriculum Handbook and Agenda-Mate, (2) Progress Report/Report 

Cards, (3) Parent-Teacher Meetings, (4) Agenda Mates, (5) Radio (10) Local and State 

Standards (6) Guidance Counselor, (7) Local and State Standards and (8) Parent 

Coordinator 

ii. Describe how the school provides parents with opportunities 

for regular meetings. (Attach documentation) 

The school provides parents will opportunities for regular meetings: Parent-Teacher 

Conferences, Parent invited to Thanksgiving Lunch with their child(ren) , Family Social 

Gathering Time, student/parent support the Food Bank of Chattanooga, Newsletter, etc. 

f. Describe how the school develops, with the input of parents, its schoolparent 

compact. (Attach compact and documentation) 

All parents receive the literature “About School-Parent Compacts”. Communication 

regarding the compact. Parents are asked to discuss the importance of compact with their 

child, sign it and return to the school. 

2. Describe how parents, teachers, and administrators share the responsibility 

of improving student achievement and meeting the state’s high standards. 

a. Describe the school’s responsibility to provide to provide high-quality 

curriculum in a supportive and effective learning environment. 

a. Our mission and vision statements describe how we will provide and sustain a high 

quality curriculum and a safe and effective learning environment for all students to 

succeed in high school and in life. By the end of 8 th grade every Orchard Knob Middle 

School student will be able to read at or above grade-level, write with clarity, master 8 th 

grade subject matter standards and display a sense of responsibility and respect for self 

and others. 

b. Describe the ways in which each parent is responsible for supporting 

their children’s learning. 

Orchard Knob Middle School ask that (1) Parents attend regular parent-teacher meetings, 

(2) volunteer, (3) ensure that their child attends school regularly, (4) ensure that their 

child’s assignments are complete and turned in a timely manner (5) and support the 

procedures and policies of the school 

4



c. Address the following 

i. Parent teacher conferences 

ii. Student progress reports 

iii. Opportunities for parents to volunteer and observe classrooms. 

1. Parent-teacher conferences are held each semester. Notices are distributed to all 

parents as a reminder, posted at the school, students are given an out-of-uniform dress 

code if parent attends Parent-Teacher Conferences at designated times. 2. Progress 

Reports are sent home each nine weeks. 3. Parents are welcome to visit the school at their 

convenience and may visit classrooms after first reporting to the office/parent-coordinator 

office. Parents are also given the opportunity to volunteer at the school. 

3. Describe when and how the school distributes the written school level parent 

involvement plan. 

Send announcements welcoming parents to come to Parent-Teacher conference. Have a 

letter to parents about Parent Teacher Association (PTA) dates, etc. Notify parents with 

name of Family Partnership Specialist and how beneficial it will be to help the parent 

with informational about scheduling parent-teacher meetings or general information, etc., 

for their child. 

4. Describe how the school notifies parents of the written school-level plan in a way 

that is easy for parents to understand. 

The school’s parental involvement plan is reviewed at the school level, discussed with 

parents at Teacher-Parent and administrators meetings, and all stakeholders upon final 

review. 

5. Describe how the school makes the school level plan available to the local 

community. 

The plan is mailed to district stakeholders and available for review by parents, 

community at any time. 

6. Describe how the school periodically updates the Parental Involvement plan to 

meet the needs of the parents and the school. 

The plan is reviewed on-going along with the School Improvement Plan 

7. Describe how the school gets feedback from parents on needed changes of the 

plan throughout the school year. 

Currently there is not an active PTA. Communication is gathered at school level and 

available for review and revision from parents and community. We also have a parent 

Focus Group which is conducted by the Academic Coach. 

8. Describe how the school provides assistance to parents in understanding 

achievement standards, assessments, and how to monitor progress and provide 

assistance to their children. 

5



(1) Parent Meetings, Parent-Teacher Conferences, and support from guidance counselors, 

administrators, etc., and other additional resources to assist students in obtaining a 

challenging curriculum to succeed in high school and in life. 

9. Describe the materials and training that the school will provide to parents. 

Flyers/letters, telephone messaging, one-on-one dialog with teachers and parents to meet 

the students needs in acquiring a quality education 

10. Describe the type of training that the school receives to reach out to, 

communicate, and work with parents as equal partners. 

1. Develop a Family Social Gathering Time for parents and students to understand test 

materials, etc. Schedule Parent-Teacher Conferences to discuss student behavior as well 

as academic success. The staff will attend workshops provided by the district, state, and 

national levels then relate this information to parents. Use of local resources and training 

for the parent coordinator. Parents have the opportunity to come to school environment 

and observe child(ren) instructional 

11. Describe the way the school will integrate and coordinate services for parental 

involvement. Include the grants that provide parental support. 

Our school improvement plan is governed by the school and district. It is the engine that 

drives and integrates the implementation of the goals for our school. Title I and MSNS 

are integrated in our plan along with action steps and persons responsible for 

implementing our goals. Parental Involvement is integrated in each goal of our plan. 

12. Describe the types of information that is provided to parents in a language they 

can understand. 

(1) Flyers/letters (2) parent mailings, (3) report cards, (4) test data (5) progress reports 

(6) school improvement plan 

13. Describe the types of support that is provided at the request of parents. 

Support services through (1) social worker, (2) guidance counseling, (3) SRO, (4) social 

worker/social service agencies (5) community partners i.e., Prison Ministries, Why 

Know, Saturday Academy, outside speakers (6) Family Partnership Specialist 

14. If applicable, describe the opportunities provided for parents with limited 

English proficiency, disabilities, and migrant status. 

Orchard Knob Middle is 99.7% African American and currently does not have students 

who are categorized as English Language Learners (ELL). The District provides 

language appropriate documents and services (i.e., lunch applications, Title I brochures, 

registration information, parent telephone communication, interpreters, etc.) Ell students 

entering Orchard Knob Middle in the future can receive the aforementioned services. 

Orchard Knob Middle currently has one (1) bilingual teacher on staff. 

6



Msword:orchard knob middle school parental involvement policy August 2009 

7


Parent Compact 

Parent/Guardian Agreement 

As parent/guardian, I want my child to be successful; therefore, I will 

• Be responsible for him/her reporting to school regularly, on time, and in uniform 

• Be responsible for conferencing with his/her teachers throughout the school year 

• Be responsible for assisting with homework and other assignments 

• Be responsible for volunteering at the school when possible 

• Be supportive of the teachers and administrative team 

Signature ____________________________ 

Date ________________________ 

Student Agreement 

As a student I want to be successful at OKMS, so I will 

• Be responsible and attend school on a regular basis in uniform 

• Be responsible by obeying school/classroom rules and expectations 

• Be responsible for my learning 

• Be responsible by bringing supplies on a daily basis 

• Be respectful to myself and others 

Signature ____________________________ 

Date _________________________ 

Teacher Agreement 

As a teacher at OKMS, I will promote student achievement and will 

• Be responsible for providing a safe learning environment 

• Be responsible for teaching state standards and a rigorous curriculum 

• Be responsible for regularly contacting parents regarding student achievement and 

behavior 

Signature ___________________________ 

Date __________________________ 

Principal Agreement 

As principal of OKMS I will 

• Be responsible for promoting academic learning, student success, and will encourage 

communication for all parties involved. 

Signature ___________________________ 

Date ____________________________ 

Revised Summer 2009


Office of Student Assignment 

3074 Hickory Valley Rd. 

Chattanooga, Tennessee 37421 

July 28, 2009 

Dear Parent: 

Orchard Knob Middle has been identified by the Tennessee Department of Education as a “High Priority” school in School 

Improvement I. This means that students have not met state and federal goals in Math and Reading for two consecutive 

years. Results of spring test scores indicate that 14 of the district’s 21 middle schools met state and federal goals. Ninetyone 

percent of the state’s elementary and middle school students scored proficient to advanced in math and reading. 

Because Orchard Knob Middle is a Title I high priority school, your child is eligible to transfer to another public school in 

the district. You may choose to transfer your child to one of the following schools: 

Choice School 

% of Students Proficient & 

Advanced in Math 

in 2008-09 (Target 86%) 

% of Students Proficient & 

Advanced in Reading 

in 2008-09 (Target 89%) 

Attendance 

Rate in 2008-09 

(Target 93%) 

Orchard Knob Middle 67% 66% Met Requirement 

Hunter Middle School 95% 97% Met Requirement 

Ooltewah Middle School 97% 98% Met Requirement 

Signal Mtn. Middle 100% 100% Met Requirement 

If you choose to transfer your child, please be aware of the following: 

• The district will provide or pay for transportation to and from your child’s Choice School as long as Orchard Knob 

Middle is a high priority school identified for improvement. If the school meets achievement goals for two straight 

years, it will no longer be a high priority school. 

• Your child will be allowed to remain at the new school until he/she completes the highest grade. 

• If funds are not available for all students to be transported, priority for transportation will be given to lowest achieving 

students from low-income families. 

• If requests for a Choice School exceed that school’s capacity, priority for first choice will be given to lowest achieving 

students from low-income families. 

Orchard Knob Middle has many innovative programs to help the students succeed. Every year, Orchard Knob Middle 

participates in the district’s Saturday Writing Academy – a 13 week initiative where students sharpen their writing skills. 

Orchard Knob Middle also partners with community agencies to provide after school support at the school. 

Orchard Knob uses Title I funds for Gateway coaches, technology, instructional materials, and educational field trips at no 

cost to the parents. Parents are encouraged to volunteer and be a part of the learning experience. 

We encourage you to help by: 

Encouraging consistent attendance 

Having a place designated for homework 

Reviewing the student’s daily work 

Having regular conversations with school staff 

Limiting television 

Making sure that your child has enough rest. 

1

If you would like for your child to transfer, you must complete the attached form on page three. Return it no later 

than August 11 th using the pre-addressed envelope to the Student Assignment Office. Sheryl Randolph will notify 

you by August 15 th to provide transportation information and the date your child may start attending the Choice 

School. If you do not receive notification, please call 209-8654 to inquire. 

If you decide not to transfer your child, he/she may be eligible to participate in a free after-school tutoring program called 

Supplemental Educational Services (SES). Eligible students are those from low-income families. If your child is eligible, 

you will receive more information by mail in September 18, 2009. 

Sincerely, 

Sheryl Randolph 

Sheryl Randolph 

Director of Student Services 


2


Office of Student Assignment 

3074 Hickory Valley Rd. 


“NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND”CHOICE TRANSFER 

Student’s Name: Last____________________ First ____________________ Middle ______________ 

Grade______ Sex ________ Student’s Social Security Number _________________________________ 

Student Address_______________________________________________________________________ 

City_________________________________ State _________________Zip ____________ 

Parent/Guardian Information – Student lives with:____ Mother & Father ___Mother ___Father ___Other 

Family Telephone Number (_____) _______-______________ Cell Phone (____) ____________________ 

Birth Date ____/____/____ Race: ___Asian ___Black ___Hispanic ___Indian ___White 

Parent/Guardian Name __________________________________________ Work Phone _____________ 

School Student Attended in 2008-09 _________________________________ Grade ______ 

School Student is Zoned/Assigned to Attend in 2009-2010. ________________________Grade______ 

Does this student receive special education services? _______ If yes describe.__________________________ 

Special Education students will be placed according to his/her IEP (Individualized Educational Plan). 

Transfer Choices 

1 st School Choice ________________________________________ 

2 nd School Choice ________________________________________ 

Do you need transportation? Yes No 

Applications must be received in the Student Assignment office by August 11, 2009. Completed applications should be 

sent to: 

Department of Student Assignment 

Attention: Sheryl Randolph 


3074 Hickory Valley Road 


Parent's or Guardian’s Certification 

I hereby certify that the information provided on this form is accurate and true. 

Signature of Parent or Guardian Date Signed Relationship to Student 

3

LEADERSHIP TEAM 

& 

FACULTY MEETINGS

PARENT EVENTS & 

VOLUNTEERS

“Be There” 

Event 

Date: Tuesday, 

October 13, 2009 

Time: 4-6 p.m. 

Come join Orchard Knob 

Elementary and Orchard 

Knob Middle for this community 

event. There will be free 

food, giveaways, music, face 

Location: Carver Parks 

& Recreation Center 

Located at the corner of Cleveland 

Street and Orchard Knob Avenue 

For more information you 

may contact Demetria Ruffin 

at 493-0385 or Glenna 

Swoffard at 493-7800 

painting and lots of fun! 

“Be there”! You don’t want 

to miss this event.

Federal Programs Monitoring Document 

ALL Title I Schools 

2009-2010 SY 

The Title I Red Documentation Notebook combines the federally required 10 Components of the School Improvement 

Plan with the Tennessee School Improvement Plan. When the federal programs technology coordinators monitor for 

documentation, the SIP and the Title I Documentation Notebook need to be available. When the state monitors visit your 

school, these are required documentation. The red Title I Documentation Notebook must be completed by the principal 

designee and available upon request at each Title I School. The red Title I Documentation Notebook consists of 15 

Sections. The months designated below are the months documentation should be placed in the notebook. Designee will 

initial in the blank preceding the month and the Coordinator should initial in the following blank. 

SECTION 1 (Component 1 – Needs Assessment – 1114.b.1.A) 

Test Data, Non-Academic Data (attendance, suspension, expulsions, discipline referrals,) minutes from 

leadership team meetings, parent surveys, teacher surveys, student surveys (at secondary level) 

Coordinator’s Initials/Date ____________ 

Designee’s Initials/Date ____________ 

Location in School Improvement Plan ___________________________ 

SECTION 2 (Component 2 - 1114.b.1.B)– Effective Schoolwide Reform Strategies Identified) 

a) provide opportunities for all students to meet proficiency (Extended Learning Opportunities identified such as 

Career Ladder, Extended Contracts and SES) 

b) use effective, research-based methods and instructional strategies (Research to verify that strategies are effective.) 

c) include strategies to address the needs of all students in the school, but particularly the needs of low achieving 

students and those at-risk of not meeting the State’s student academic achievement standards. (Identify what is 

for all students – field trips, instructional materials, equipment, etc. Identify what is for at-risk students such as 

extended learning, SES, software, interventionists, Gateway coaches, graduation coaches, etc.) 

d) address how the school will determine if such needs have been met are consistent with, and are designed to 

implement the state and complex area improvement plans, if any. 

Examples: Title I funds will be used to implement 

differentiated instruction; align curriculum & instruction with state standards & spi's; provide after school tutoring 

for at-risk students; Saturday Writing Academy; ThinkLink purchase (needs assessments); parents supporting 

literacy; small groups addressing test-taking skills; technology supporting math intervention; reading interventionists 

to support at-risk students; collaborative grade level & vertical planning; school-wide literacy focus; balanced 

literacy/small group guided instruction in literacy and math; family partnership specialist; job-embedded staff 

development; model classroom teacher; writing across the curriculum; fostering Algebraic Thinking; incentives for 

attendance; collaborative planning; Computer lab for assessment-monitoring-reinforcement; extended day tutoring; 

flexible teaching schedules within Ninth Grade Academy; Student Advocate Program; etc. 




1

SECTION 3 (Component 3 - 1114.b.1.C) – Highly Qualified Teachers & Paraprofessionals) - List all 

teachers, educational degrees, paraprofessionals and how they have become highly qualified. Include 

the daily schedules of everyone paid by Title I. 




SECTION 4 (Component 4 - 1114.b.1.D) – Professional Development) Description of research-based, 

on-going professional development that has taken place throughout the 2009-2010 school year; signin 

sheets from sessions; copies of stipend sheets sent to the Title I office, copies of consultant 

agreements sent to Title I office, lists of conferences attended and how it met needs of teachers 

and/or students. Have the documentation to prove that the staff development is indeed research 

based. 




SECTION 5 (Component 5 - 1114.b.1.E) – Strategies to Attract and Retain Highly Qualified Teachers.) 

List the strategies in place to recruit and retain teachers in your building. For example – (1) Stipends 

paid in Title I schools are $15/hour as compared to $10/hour for district professional development. 

(2) Teachers in Title I schools have extra opportunities to work extended contracts than their 

counterparts in non-Title I schools. (3) Teachers in Title I schools have access to technology that 

exceeds their non-Title I counterparts, (4) Teachers in Title I schools have more access to professional 

development than their counterparts in non-Title I schools. 




SECTION 6 (Component 6 - 1114.b.1.F)- Parental Involvement) - Parent Compacts, Parental 

Involvement Policy, Agenda of Open House/Annual Meeting informing parents of Title I status – 

when school gave out orange booklets; sign-in sheets of parent meetings, flyers for parent meetings, 

parent surveys, evidence that the parent compact and parental involvement policy was made with 

the input of parents and reviewed and/or revised every year. 




2

SECTION 7 (Component 7 - 1114.b.1.G) Transitions – Samples of transitional activities for incoming 

students (feeder schools, receiving schools, kindergarten and pre-kindergarten.) 




SECTION 8 (Component 8 - 1114.b.1.H) - Teachers are involved in the decision-making) Sign-in 

sheets showing that teachers are involved in the decisions about how Title I funds are spent, needs of 

the students, and the strategies that are employed. 




SECTION 9 (Component 9 (1114.b.1.I) - Tutoring/Extended Learning Opportunities Provide a 

description of the activities in-class, after school, Saturdays, and during the summer for students who 

are having difficulty mastering standards. Do NOT list the names of students who are participating 

in SES. Describe the resources (personnel, materials and equipment.) 




SECTION 10 (Component 10 - 1114.b.1.J – Coordination of Services - Coordinate and integrate 

federal, state, and local resources. List school personnel funded by Title I-A; list district personnel 

funded by Title II-A (Directors of Math, Secondary Literacy, Humanities, and Workforce 

Development) list partial pay positions where the school has coordinated with the district. Schools 

with ESOL programs may list Title III-A. Schools that participate with STARS may list Title IV. 

Include model classroom teachers, MSNS coaches, Benwood teachers, Reading First literacy leaders, 

or any other personnel. 




*************** 

SECTION 9 School Improvement Plan – The School Improvement Plan should have all 10 Title I 

Components identified and highlighted. It should be easy for monitors to locate the 10 Components 

in the SIP. It should be submitted electronically and online. 



SECTION 10 Consolidated Federal Programs Application/Addendum – The Consolidated 

Application shows all federal grants – Title I, II-A, II-D, III_A, and IVA, and will be provided to you. 

The application is also online at the HCDE website (Consolidated Federal Programs.) 

http://www.hcde.org/site/title1/default.aspx. As you receive State approved addendum, you will place 

3

them in Section 12 with the application. Monitored in September and May. 

Coordinator’s Initials/Date ____________ Designee’s Initials/Date ____________ 


SECTION 11 Equipment Inventory 

• All equipment purchased with federal funds must be inventoried each year 

Include: Item description, HCDE Asset Tag #, Serial Numbers, Date of Purchase, Room # or 

location, and Price. Complete an Asset Form for new equipment, transferred equipment, and 

surplus equipment (no longer works) 




SECTION 12 Financial Documentation & Monitoring Document 

- Budgets/Updates 

- Transfer Requests 

- Requisitions/Copies of Packing Slips/Invoices 




Monitoring Document – Completed, dated, and signed by principal and coordinator 

at the bottom. The original document will be housed in the Title I office. A copy will be 

left in the notebook. 

_____________________________________ _______________________________ 

Principal Signature Date Coordinator Signature Date 

4

Federal Programs Monitoring Document 

ALL Title I Schools 

2009-2010 SY 

The Title I Red Documentation Notebook combines the federally required 10 Components of the School Improvement 

Plan with the Tennessee School Improvement Plan. When the federal programs technology coordinators monitor for 

documentation, the SIP and the Title I Documentation Notebook need to be available. When the state monitors visit your 

school, these are required documentation. The red Title I Documentation Notebook must be completed by the principal 

designee and available upon request at each Title I School. The red Title I Documentation Notebook consists of 15 

Sections. The months designated below are the months documentation should be placed in the notebook. Designee will 

initial in the blank preceding the month and the Coordinator should initial in the following blank. 

SECTION 1 (Component 1 – Needs Assessment – 1114.b.1.A) 

Test Data, Non-Academic Data (attendance, suspension, expulsions, discipline referrals,) minutes from 

leadership team meetings, parent surveys, teacher surveys, student surveys (at secondary level) 




SECTION 2 (Component 2 - 1114.b.1.B)– Effective Schoolwide Reform Strategies Identified) 

a) provide opportunities for all students to meet proficiency (Extended Learning Opportunities identified such as 

Career Ladder, Extended Contracts and SES) 

b) use effective, research-based methods and instructional strategies (Research to verify that strategies are effective.) 

c) include strategies to address the needs of all students in the school, but particularly the needs of low achieving 

students and those at-risk of not meeting the State’s student academic achievement standards. (Identify what is 

for all students – field trips, instructional materials, equipment, etc. Identify what is for at-risk students such as 

extended learning, SES, software, interventionists, Gateway coaches, graduation coaches, etc.) 

d) address how the school will determine if such needs have been met are consistent with, and are designed to 

implement the state and complex area improvement plans, if any. 

Examples: Title I funds will be used to implement 

differentiated instruction; align curriculum & instruction with state standards & spi's; provide after school tutoring 

for at-risk students; Saturday Writing Academy; ThinkLink purchase (needs assessments); parents supporting 

literacy; small groups addressing test-taking skills; technology supporting math intervention; reading interventionists 

to support at-risk students; collaborative grade level & vertical planning; school-wide literacy focus; balanced 

literacy/small group guided instruction in literacy and math; family partnership specialist; job-embedded staff 

development; model classroom teacher; writing across the curriculum; fostering Algebraic Thinking; incentives for 

attendance; collaborative planning; Computer lab for assessment-monitoring-reinforcement; extended day tutoring; 

flexible teaching schedules within Ninth Grade Academy; Student Advocate Program; etc. 




1

SECTION 3 (Component 3 - 1114.b.1.C) – Highly Qualified Teachers & Paraprofessionals) - List all 

teachers, educational degrees, paraprofessionals and how they have become highly qualified. Include 

the daily schedules of everyone paid by Title I. 




SECTION 4 (Component 4 - 1114.b.1.D) – Professional Development) Description of research-based, 

on-going professional development that has taken place throughout the 2009-2010 school year; signin 

sheets from sessions; copies of stipend sheets sent to the Title I office, copies of consultant 

agreements sent to Title I office, lists of conferences attended and how it met needs of teachers 

and/or students. Have the documentation to prove that the staff development is indeed research 

based. 




SECTION 5 (Component 5 - 1114.b.1.E) – Strategies to Attract and Retain Highly Qualified Teachers.) 

List the strategies in place to recruit and retain teachers in your building. For example – (1) Stipends 

paid in Title I schools are $15/hour as compared to $10/hour for district professional development. 

(2) Teachers in Title I schools have extra opportunities to work extended contracts than their 

counterparts in non-Title I schools. (3) Teachers in Title I schools have access to technology that 

exceeds their non-Title I counterparts, (4) Teachers in Title I schools have more access to professional 

development than their counterparts in non-Title I schools. 




SECTION 6 (Component 6 - 1114.b.1.F)- Parental Involvement) - Parent Compacts, Parental 

Involvement Policy, Agenda of Open House/Annual Meeting informing parents of Title I status – 

when school gave out orange booklets; sign-in sheets of parent meetings, flyers for parent meetings, 

parent surveys, evidence that the parent compact and parental involvement policy was made with 

the input of parents and reviewed and/or revised every year. 




2

SECTION 7 (Component 7 - 1114.b.1.G) Transitions – Samples of transitional activities for incoming 

students (feeder schools, receiving schools, kindergarten and pre-kindergarten.) 




SECTION 8 (Component 8 - 1114.b.1.H) - Teachers are involved in the decision-making) Sign-in 

sheets showing that teachers are involved in the decisions about how Title I funds are spent, needs of 

the students, and the strategies that are employed. 




SECTION 9 (Component 9 (1114.b.1.I) - Tutoring/Extended Learning Opportunities Provide a 

description of the activities in-class, after school, Saturdays, and during the summer for students who 

are having difficulty mastering standards. Do NOT list the names of students who are participating 

in SES. Describe the resources (personnel, materials and equipment.) 




SECTION 10 (Component 10 - 1114.b.1.J – Coordination of Services - Coordinate and integrate 

federal, state, and local resources. List school personnel funded by Title I-A; list district personnel 

funded by Title II-A (Directors of Math, Secondary Literacy, Humanities, and Workforce 

Development) list partial pay positions where the school has coordinated with the district. Schools 

with ESOL programs may list Title III-A. Schools that participate with STARS may list Title IV. 

Include model classroom teachers, MSNS coaches, Benwood teachers, Reading First literacy leaders, 

or any other personnel. 




*************** 

SECTION 9 School Improvement Plan – The School Improvement Plan should have all 10 Title I 

Components identified and highlighted. It should be easy for monitors to locate the 10 Components 

in the SIP. It should be submitted electronically and online. 



SECTION 10 Consolidated Federal Programs Application/Addendum – The Consolidated 

Application shows all federal grants – Title I, II-A, II-D, III_A, and IVA, and will be provided to you. 

The application is also online at the HCDE website (Consolidated Federal Programs.) 

http://www.hcde.org/site/title1/default.aspx. As you receive State approved addendum, you will place 

3

them in Section 12 with the application. Monitored in September and May. 

Coordinator’s Initials/Date ____________ Designee’s Initials/Date ____________ 


SECTION 11 Equipment Inventory 

• All equipment purchased with federal funds must be inventoried each year 

Include: Item description, HCDE Asset Tag #, Serial Numbers, Date of Purchase, Room # or 

location, and Price. Complete an Asset Form for new equipment, transferred equipment, and 

surplus equipment (no longer works) 




SECTION 12 Financial Documentation & Monitoring Document 

- Budgets/Updates 

- Transfer Requests 

- Requisitions/Copies of Packing Slips/Invoices 




Monitoring Document – Completed, dated, and signed by principal and coordinator 

at the bottom. The original document will be housed in the Title I office. A copy will be 

left in the notebook. 

_____________________________________ _______________________________ 

Principal Signature Date Coordinator Signature Date 

4

TITLE I INVENTORY 

WILL BE POSTED

orchard knob middle school - Hamilton County Department of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?