New York State Education Department

New York City Department of Education

School Comprehensive

Educational Plan

(CEP)

(Abridged Version Based on the Empowerment Schools/Autonomy Zone Template)

2006-07


School:	Brooklyn New School – PS 146				Region/District:		8/15

School Address:		610 Henry Street Brooklyn NY 11231

School Telephone:			718.923.4750	Fax:		718.923.4780

SECTION I -- Reflective Essay

Write a 3-5 page essay reflecting upon your work in the school this year by responding to the following questions. This essay is designed to serve as a vehicle for you to understand your experiences this year in anticipation of developing collaborative goals with your staff for 2006-07. As you do this, review your PPR goals, NCLB/SED Adequate Yearly Progress performance targets, and any evidence gathered through the needs assessment you completed with your school community.

1. Identify the one or two major accomplishments you are most proud of achieving this year. How do you know you were successful? What evidence would you use to explain and understand your results?

2. Identify the one or two most critical dilemmas you encountered this year. How did you determine that these were the most significant challenges? What action have you taken towards addressing them, and what do you perceive still needs to be done to overcome them?

3. How has your school improved student achievement?

As applicable, please be sure to include in your response a description of your school’s approach to

a) professional development (in your school and within Networks)

b) teacher mentoring, and

c) summer institutes,

and the results or outcomes evident from each. What might you expand upon and/or do differently next year?

The Brooklyn New School’s reputation is attributed to the excellence of its teachers. The school is able to “build capacity” amongst its colleagues and staff, which is a key reason for Brooklyn New School’s success and viability. This experienced staff is empowered to collaborate and plan both as grade level teams and across the grade levels. Inasmuch as the voices of teachers and parents in decision-making continue to guide our practice, BNS thrives as the school that was envisioned back in 1987 when it first started.

The evidence of this is throughout the building and apparent every day. It is reflected in the grade level collaboration that is frequent and planned by grade level teams and not the administration. It is reflected in the biweekly meetings of the AIS team, the Child Study Team, and the 610 Henry Street building committee which was organized to support the staff as we moved to the second and third floors and now focuses on building-wide issues. It is evident in the professional development committee, which plans our Monday meetings. It is evident in the fact that we meet every Monday as agreed by the teachers, in order that we might accomplish what we need to get done. And it is evident in the rich curriculum, which is consistent from grade to grade and class to class and reflects our deep commitment to project based learning and child centered instruction. There is no greater testimony to this work than the school wide museums, which are rich in learning via projects and exhibits, and which allow our students to understand a topic through many modalities. We wowed our families, visitors, and ourselves this past year with unit of study culminating events, including the third grade China Museum, the fourth grade Native Americans Museum, the fifth grade Holocaust presentations, the second grade models of New York City showing its development over 400 years, and the kindergarten and first grade One Hundredth Day of School celebrations.

In the 2005 through 2006 school year our goals and objectives focused on three areas of concern:

Study Groups in Staff Development: Our staff has agreed to meet once a month in order that we maintain a constant dialogue around curriculum and learning issues. We dividing ourselves up into four study groups with each study group having a focus of interest to all of us. These foci included Schools Attuned and the work of Mel Levine, the Responsive Classroom, the Descriptive Review process, and Science.

Communication with Parents: Brooklyn New School has a very involved parent body, but we are working to expand this group. Parent involvement happens on a variety of levels, assistance in the classroom, participating in class trips, fundraising, committee work, attending SLT or PTA meetings or holding elected office. As the school has grown to 425 families, it is important to work on our ability to communicate and dialogue on school issues in a safe space that is accepting of diverse opinions. In addition, it is important to identify barriers to parent involvement and encourage as many parents as possible to participate. There is a need to make it easier for parents to participate wherever they feel most comfortable and to hear and respond to the various voices in our community. BNS hopes to take a look at these issues by hiring a facilitator to guide the parents and teachers through a retreat process this fall.

BNS/BCS, One Vision: Now that BCS has added a high school to its program, we need to maintain a working relationship with the staff of this school and to carefully meet with our colleagues. Our goal is a seamless curriculum: pre-k through 12! This can only happen with constant communication between the BNS staff and the BCS staff.

Despite the new extended-day schedule, our staff has agreed to stay late on Mondays, to continue our professional development program. Once a month, we have been successful at convening our four study groups. The Schools Attuned study group was led by Sarah Fettman, our IEP teacher, who is a Schools Attuned facilitator, and Janice Hamann, our special education supervisor. Participants included teachers trained in Schools Attuned and those who wished to learn more. We were fortunate to have our second study group in Descriptive Review facilitated by LIU professors, Jessica Trubek and Kathy McCullaugh. This study group has had the opportunity to participate in Descriptive Review work around our kindergarten and first grade students. The study group has also extended its work by inviting parents to three workshops in which the descriptive review process has been demonstrated. The third study group continued the work that some of our teachers did during a week long summer training in the Responsive Classroom. Two teachers, Matt Sheehan and Katherine Sorel, co-facilitated this study group, a group, which looked at the structure of our classrooms and how teachers can help students to internalize responsibility individually and as a group. The final study group was led by Barbara Taragan, our science coordinator. This group has done its own inquiry study around chemistry, enabling teachers to approach an open ended science investigation as we hope that the students will. By working together, the teachers are able to think about science from the position of the learner and can use this inquiry as a model for lessons in their classrooms.

Communication with parents continues to be a big part of the work that we do. Parent involvement is taking many forms with a few new committees forming, including the food project committee and the arts committee. The committees seem to be proactive and there is a sense of parents working together with staff to support the school. Alyce and Anna have written weekly letters expressing the values and vision of BNS and BCS.

This year, we again held a workshop for parents entitled “Giving Children Time to Learn”. About 40 parents attended, including those whose children had received promotion in doubt letters, those whose children were young, and others who were simply interested. The workshop lasted two hours and opened up much dialogue and thought about children and learning. We have also continued to work closely with LIU, using the Descriptive Review model. We have introduced parents to the Descriptive Review way of looking at children and it is clear that this process has helped them to become more observant and aware of their own child’s uniqueness and strengths. We have also maintained our Parents as Learning Partners morning. Last year we focused only on math, but this year included other curriculum areas such as science and literacy.

As regards the third goal related to issues of growth, BNS and BCS meet once a week for a joint cabinet meeting. Sometimes this meeting gets canceled due to other issues that crop up, but it is our belief that this meeting is essential to the retaining of a joint vision and mission and as well of a support system for all of us who are in this building. In July Cabinet members from both schools will participate in a two day retreat.

A major accomplishment of this academic year has been our focus on the child as learner through Descriptive Review and Schools Attuned. This work has been so consistent that it has become a common vocabulary for the staff, parents, and students in the school. This focus allows teachers to study student work and enables them to support children’s learning by analyzing needs, strengths, and readiness. The Descriptive Review process is a non-judgmental way of looking at student work using descriptive rather than evaluative language. The Schools Attuned model provides ways to identify and support areas of weakness through accommodations and a focus on students’ strengths.

Evidence of this common language is seen throughout the school and our community. For example, at the end of this school year, Grade 3 children wrote letters to their Grade 4 teachers describing themselves as learners. They were able to talk about both their strengths and weaknesses using the specific Schools Attuned vocabulary. This is not unlike the progress reports of teachers, which also describe student learning through this lens. Because of this, parents are able to understand their child as a learner rather than being limited to thinking in quantified terms about their child’s accomplishments. The Descriptive Review workshops for parents gave participants the opportunity to hear a teacher and or a parent describe a child through the Descriptive Review process. For many parents, this was an eye-opening experience.

Next year, we are excited to have the opportunity to further codify our assessment strategies by using our work in Descriptive Review and Schools Attuned to develop alternative assessments aligned with state standards. This work will help us to further identify strengths and weakness of our students on specific skills. We will develop plans to support the learning of each student and continue to work on our intervention plan. This summer, two more teachers at the Brooklyn New School were trained in Schools Attuned, which means that approximately 80% of our teachers have received this professional development. We will continue our in-school professional development around Schools Attuned and Descriptive Review as we work together with the staff on assessment tools, which will help us meet the needs of all of our students.

There are a few areas of concern. The first is the ongoing one around standards and promotion in doubt. Research shows that holdover has not been effective and teachers should be able to meet the learning needs of a wide range of students. In addition, we recognize that holdover makes the most sense when it is done in the early years, but that the kindergarten teacher is often not ready or able to suggest repeating as an intervention for such young students, all of whom are too young to fail. We feel that the BNS community needs to think hard about this issue and that parents and teachers need to develop a better handle on its implications. Are we holding children over because our standards are too high in the upper grades or are we holding children over because we think they need more time to play? It is a provocative question that we must grapple with as we look at how the NCLB and standards have affected even our progressive classrooms. We think it is very obvious to upper grade teachers when a student is not ready for the curriculum and somewhat more difficult for parents and teachers to determine this in our early childhood classrooms. To this end, we devoted a number of staff meetings to an open ended discussion of the implication of hold over in a school like ours.

The second area of concern is communication with parents. This year the SLT has written an open ended survey for parents and staff. Although common understanding cannot happened over night, we need to make every effort to listen to parents and at the same time, to continue to clearly communicate to the entire community, our school’s values and goals. The survey results will influence the school priorities for 2006-2007. In addition, the SLT will host a retreat for parents and teachers, which will be focused on community building. It is the goal of this retreat to look at ways for improved communication.

A further concern relates to growth and will require meetings with the administration of the two schools in our building. It is important that we manage our schools with an eye to each school’s unique needs and character, but at the same time, it will be necessary for BNS and BCS to think together about how we can support each program so that we are a unified and building-wide force. In this regard, we need to work together as a team. On July 25^th and 26^th, the BNS and BCS Cabinet will participate in a retreat to further codify this common vision.

Another dilemma that we struggle with revolves around meeting the learning and social needs of students who enter our school in the upper grades. We have been reasonably successful at providing targeted instruction for our at-risk students, but we find that many of our students who enter in Grades 2 through 5 are not ready for the curriculum that they are confronted with at BNS. We need to admit these students for a number of reasons. First, our budget demands it and secondly, we are a school that is perceived as one that can support the needs of all children. However, we also have to help their families to see how far behind some of these children are. Once again, communication becomes imperative. Our targeted instruction is successful as far as it goes, but we can be overwhelmed by the number of students with pressing needs and have to decide whether to service these students with push-in and/ or pull-out services. Our AIS team is committed to improving communication and collaboration with the classroom teachers in order to plan interventions that most effectively support the needs of these struggling students.

Our biggest area of concern has been the inadequate intervention in mathematics. To rectify this situation, we have provided professional development in Structural Arithmetic, a learning program that addresses mathematical delays. We have also developed a new position in the school to support teachers as they work with students struggling in mathematics. Lastly, we plan to use some of our empowerment money to hire additional intervention providers so that our struggling students can have increased small group instruction.

The ongoing professional development of our staff, including the work in Schools Attuned, Descriptive Review, Wilson Reading, and Structural Arithmetic have resulted in improved methodology for instruction and improved student achievement. In addition, teachers benefit from participation in summer institutes such as the Marilyn Burns math workshop and the Empire State Partnership Conference, and bring back their experiences to their colleagues and their students. The grade level team collaboration provides support to all teachers, but especially allows beginning teachers to learn from their colleagues. It is all of these structures, which we have in place that promote individual student growth.

SECTION II --COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT (Information gathering & pattern analysis)

Drawing upon your reflective essay, gather information and evidence to more fully understand and identify indicators you can use to continue to evaluate your major accomplishments and your efficacy in addressing dilemmas. You will use this analysis to inform the development of your 2-4 school goals for 2006-07.

As you collect evidence, notice what patterns emerge? What strengths or weaknesses are evident? Draw upon the following sources of data:

§ Achievement of NCLB/SED Adequate Yearly Performance targets

§ Evidence of success towards PPR goals

§ Input from School Leadership Team, staff and your network

§ Additional quantitative and qualitative data about student performance, teacher capacity, organization/systems

If you did not meet performance targets or make expected progress towards other school goals in the PPR, dig deeper to provide further understanding, e.g. are there patterns by grade, teacher, student group that may explain low student achievement or course pass rates? What is the profile of students not meeting standards or graduating on time? Likewise, if you exceeded expected targets or other school goals for this year, dig deeper to understand what contributed to this success.

As mentioned in Section I, the School Leadership Team conducted a survey of our community. The survey was distributed to families, administrative staff, security officers, lunchroom staff, teachers, and administrators. The purpose of the survey was to help guide the SLT in determining the goals for the 2006/2007 school year.

This is a not a scientific survey and as such, the results are not scientific. Prior to reviewing the surveys, the survey work group met with Louise Daniels (BNS parent of a third grade student) and consulted with a retired sociologist to discuss possible ways to approach the review and reporting process.

Based on the suggestions we received, the work group approached this task using a combined method of descriptive analysis/review but we also utilized numbers. We thought it would be helpful to discuss the results in a few different ways: report the trends found in the responses; provide descriptions of each trend as noted in the surveys; and provide the wide range of responses to the questions received even though they are not trends. We also thought it made sense to break the information down by individual grade and staff because there are significant differences in the responses based upon those distinctions.

This summary specifically deals with the family surveys only.

FAMILY RESPONSES

The total completed surveys from BNS families are 99. It is possible that more than one person in a family responded. It is also possible that some families with more than one child completed two surveys. It appears that most families with more than one child completed one survey with comments pertaining to all the children in the family.

In reading the report, keep in mind that the numbers referred to do not necessarily refer to the number of individuals. Rather, it is the frequency a certain topic was mentioned. For example, teachers were mentioned approximately 85 times in the surveys reviewed. This does not mean that 85 individuals commented on the teachers but simply that teachers were mentioned 85 times.

The breakdown by grade is as follows:

Grade Total Responses Number with children in another grade

Unidentified 2

Pre-K 6 5

K 22 6

1^st 14 1

2^nd 14 2

3^rd 12 2

4^th 14 3

5^th 18 1

Below is a summary of the survey trends.

Diversity: Diversity was mentioned approximately 64 times in response to one or more of the following questions: as a way of describing BNS (Question 1), as a reason for choosing BNS (Question 2), or as what is going well for your child (Question 3); strengths of the school (Question 4). It is obvious from the survey responses that the school’s diversity was an important factor for many families in choosing the BNS for their children and it is also described as one of the strengths of the school community. Diversity was mentioned more often in grades K, 2, 3, and 4.

Some comments made about diversity include: “It’s almost like being in the United Nations on a smaller scale”; “diversity in student body and teaching staff”; “Beautiful mix of ethnicities and economic backgrounds”;

Teachers: Teachers were mentioned in a positive way approximately 85 times in response to one or more of the following questions: as a way of describing BNS, (Question 1); as a reason for choosing BNS (Question 2), or as what is going well for your child (Question 3); strengths of the school (Question 4). BNS teachers are clearly one of the top strengths of the school according to the survey results. Overall, the teachers seem to be well liked by the students as well.

Some of the descriptions of BNS teachers include: very strong, teachers love learning, respectful, unified, collaborative, kind, caring, great, progressive thinking, dedicated and excellent.

School Environment/Culture: The school environment/culture is an identified topic in many of the responses and has been expressed in a variety of ways. It came up in the following ways: as a way of describing BNS (Question 1), as a reason for choosing BNS (Question 2), and it is also described as a strength of the school community. Overall the descriptions are very positive and the school culture plays a significant role for many families.

Some of the descriptions include: sense of community; warm; caring; nurturing, welcoming, friendly, democratic, challenged/challenging; inclusive; wonderful; supportive; progressive; non stressful; chaotic; productive; creative; open parent involvement, child’s home away from home; noncompetitive; and family oriented.

Curriculum/Learning Environment: Many survey responses referred to curriculum. In fact, curriculum was mentioned 206 times. Approximately 30 of the curriculum comments focused on the need for improvement in some areas of curriculum. The majority of comments were positive and supportive of the curriculum. The comments concerning the need for improvement were spread out over a number of different areas. A summary of the concerns raised are: need a stronger art & Spanish program, need stronger music curriculum, more math, need thematic curriculum, not creative enough, need more science, child is bored, math & music are too simple, math not challenging enough, not serious about spelling, parents do not connect with math, writing is not going well, and need more physical education.

Some of the positive comments about the school curriculum include: very good art, creative learning, concern about testing, good curriculum hands on, integrated, child centered, best education, engaging, innovative, collaborative, interesting math strategies, social studies & math are wonderful, music and movement are great, child learning, learning math & spelling skills, learning to socialize, outdoor play, holistic education, trip centered, balance of progressive and structured curriculum, established curriculum, emphasis on critical thinking and creativity, good writing program, exciting science projects, and project based curriculum.

Additional topics mentioned

The surveys completed did cover an array of topics. Though we may not define these issues as trends, the work group feels it is important to note all the topics mentioned so the SLT and the BNS community at large, are aware of what issues members of our community are thinking about.

Parent Involvement: Parent involvement was mentioned 19 times. The majority of comments recognized the importance of parent involvement and felt the school environment encourages parent involvement. At least one response stated a concern that sometimes parents may be discouraged from getting involved in the school because of politics and one thought that tension between school administration and parents might discourage parent involvement. Another expressed that there are sometimes too many requests for volunteer work at the school. Approximately two people expressed concerns that a small group of parents sometimes dominate a disproportionate amount of time.

Class Size: Class size was mentioned 15 times. The comments were about class size in upper grades as well as the benefits of reduced class size in the lower grades. At least two responses raised concern about children not getting attention due to larger class sizes.

Relationship between BNS & BCS: BCS was mentioned as a concern approximately 15 times. The comments include concern about the following: BCS students as poor role models in terms of their behavior, BCS students congregating in front of the school building, BCS students cursing, and a perceived lack of discipline of BCS students. The underlying feeling that comes across is some families feel uncomfortable or intimidated by the presence of BCS students.

Communication: Communication was mentioned approximately 9 times. Some expressed the need for better communication between parents and administration; at least one felt communication with teachers could improve. Some suggestions to improve communication included having open dialogues about such topics as testing and working toward more open communication. Others felt communication throughout the school is working and at least two commented on Anna’s weekly letters as very much appreciated and helpful.

Safety: Safety issues were raised 7 times in a variety of contexts. Concerns about safety include: trips, pick up, lunch/recess, school yard, building condition, building generally, thefts in the school, pollution due to highway. A few comments concerned a lack of adult supervision in the yard. This included concern that often it is difficult to find an adult to handle fights or rough play between children. At least one response stressed a concern about child safety at pick up after school. Another expressed concerned about the easy access to enter the building after regular school hours. One comment concerned the pollution due to the highway and in a humorous note suggested a tunnel as a way to resolve the problem.

A few more thoughts expressed by members of our community:

The survey workgroup feels it is critical to share the many voices we have heard through the completed survey. A significant number families with children in lower grades of answers to Question 3 included the following: child is happy, feeling of safety and belonging, learning to socialize, making friends, likes school and classmates, learning to read, gaining confidence, child is blossoming and loves learning. In the upper grades learning, supportive environment, friends, as well as notes about students new to the school who have improved in all aspects of educational experience, teaching methods and respect for children, and the conflict resolution program. Quite a number of responses to this question replied that everything is going well.

One response expressed concern about intervention services indicating that the family is not quite sure what services the child should be receiving and concerned that the services may be sporadic and inconsistent. A few individuals mentioned the need for inclusion classes.

There were a number of responses stating that the administration and staff are great. At least two referred to Anna’s vision and leadership as strengths of the school. Additional comments focused on administration being accessible. Approximately two referred to a great and accessible parent coordinator. One expressed concern that the principal needs to make the first effort in communicating with parents individually.

A few people mentioned the importance of the library and expressed the need for more visits and/or visits to the library. There were a few comments about concern about standardized testing. At least one individual raised a concern about black children being held back. One person feels there is too much recess time; another feels there is not enough. People seem to like the time outside and some would like more time.

The lunchroom was not a major concern but there were some comments about it. Children do not have enough time to eat, it is chaotic and could be cleaner, need more healthy foods, improve environment to encourage a relaxed and enjoyable meal, and need more staff.

A few families expressed concern about the physical building condition including, air quality, lack of air conditioning throughout the building, cleanliness including the bathrooms. At least two comments on the growth of the schools and whether we are growing too quickly. A few responses focused on the small size of BNS and expressing a desire to maintain our small size.

Priorities & Goals for 2006-2007

Generally, people seem to support and believe in the mission of the school. A few expressed concern that some families do not share the mission and philosophy of the school and that we need to improve communication about this.

From September 2005 to June 2006, the BNS School Leadership Team read last year's CEP with a goal of furthering parental and staff understanding of curriculum development, school-wide issues, and areas of strength and weakness. Monthly meetings explored a range of topics including intervention, CTT, the discrepancy between the test scores of our different ethic groups, budget, and the development of budgetary priorities, integration of arts into the curriculum, parental involvement, and inclusion of under-represented voices, and improving communication.

At our last School Leadership Team meeting in June, Anna presented some suggested goals and priorities for the following academic year. These include the following:

· Expanded intervention programs and services: A staff position to work with the 4^th & 5^th graders with the Empowerment Zone funding, focusing on math. Beth Foresta will be the math intervention coordinator next year. A suggestion was made that the staff take the opportunity to review the overall math curriculum and not just focus on students struggling with math. BNS will continue to try to educate families about the math curriculum and this will continue to be a priority. However, the emphasis is that staff members are trying to reach those children with difficulties through intervention.

· Design a structure and plan for implementing portfolio and other alternative assessment tools instead of testing students every 6 weeks in Grades K-5.

· Increased collaboration with the Progressive Education Network of NY (PENNY)

· Professional Development to extend Project Based Learning, including child-based learning and presentation to authentic audiences. BNS staff recently attended a presentation by Ron Berger on Inquiry-based Learning.

· Develop forums for increasing dialogue and understanding of school philosophy and curriculum.

· Additional thoughts on priorities & goals: transparency concerning the budget and how the Empowerment Zone money will be spent; art should continue to be a priority, increased dialogue and understanding of the interrelationship between BNS and BCS.

At the conclusion of this meeting, it was agreed that these priorities, alongside the parental surveys, would guide our work in 2006 – 2007.

In 1-3 pages, provide an overview of the relevant qualitative and quantitative data you gathered and explain your findings. Attach your 2006-07 School Goals (SECTION III--see attached worksheet) and any other documentation of additional information gathering and pattern analysis you conducted (e.g., standardized test scores disaggregated by grade and major student subgroups, student portfolios).

At the Brooklyn New School, we believe that quantitative data offers us limited information in regard to student performance. Our goal is not to improve test scores, but rather to teach the whole child. Most of the time, performance on city and state tests reflects the work that students do every day in school and we believe that when children do take tests, it is important that their scores are accurate reflections of their understanding of the curriculum. We are not interested in preparing a student to get a 3 or a 4 on an exam, without making sure that the student has true understanding of that which he has been taught. We discussed our approach to qualitative assessment through Schools Attuned and Descriptive Review in Section I of this document. Now we will take a look at student performance on standardized exams, with the understanding that this information presents a narrow perspective of student performance.

Reading test scores at the Brooklyn New School have remained consistent in recent years.. In 2003, 75.9% of the third to fifth grade students scored at performance Levels 3 and 4 on the ELA tests. In 2004, 75% of the third to fifth grade students performed at Levels 3 and 4 on the ELA tests. In 2005, 84.4% of the third to fifth grade students performed at Levels 3 and 4 on the ELA tests.

For the past three years in preparation for the fourth grade ELA exam, teachers and students participated in a focused genre study on reading and writing tests. As well, small group work for at risk students was provided as an academic intervention to improve test performance. In 2003, the ELA genre study resulted in 41.1% of our students meeting the standards, 25% exceeding the standards, 28.6% just below the standards and 5.4% below the standards. A total of 66.1% of Grade 4 students met the standards in the ELA exam. In 2004, 74% of the Grade 4 students met or exceeded the standards, with 59% of the students scoring at Level 3 and 15% scoring at Level 4. Less than 1% of our students scored at Level 1 and 25% scored at Level 2. In 2005, the ELA genre study resulted in 54.9% of our students meeting the standards, 25.6% exceeding the standards, 19.5% just below the standards and 0% below the standards.

Math test scores have also remained consistent in recent years. In 2003, 66.5% of the students scored at performance Levels 3 and 4. In 2004, 68.1% of our students in Grades 3 and 5 scored at Levels 3 and 4 on the citywide math tests.. Student performance in the New York State math test is similarly consistent. In 2005, 76.9% of Grade 3 and Grade 5 students scored at Levels 3 and 4 on the citywide and state math tests. In 2003, 80.7% of our students in Grade 4 scored at Levels 3 and 4; and in 2004, 85.2% of the students met or exceeded standards, scoring at Levels 3 and 4. In 2005, 92.2% of the students scored at Levels 3 and 4.

Based on our analysis of the Annual School Report Card, the ATS Testing Reports, and our new standards-based report cards, we have identified areas of concern.

Every year Brooklyn New School admits approximately 10% new students at each grade level. Most of these students come to us with minimal skills. We begin the year by administering reading and math assessments to determine appropriate interventions. It is our belief that these interventions will allow for the long term academic success of these students, but it often takes more than one year for the evidence of these interventions in standardized test performance.

We are pleased that so few of our children are testing at Proficiency Level 1 in reading and math. We are working to move children from Proficiency Level 2 into Proficiency Level 3. At the same time, it is our hope that more of our children will be able to exceed the standards and perform at Proficiency Level 4. The school report card from 2005 indicates that 48.5% of our third and fifth grade students met the standards in reading at Proficiency Level 3 and 35.9% met the standards in reading at Proficiency Level 4. In math 44.5% of our third and fifth grade students met the standards at Proficiency Level 3 and 32.4 met the standards at Proficiency Level 4.

In 2005, 98.6% of our White students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 97.2% of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math; 78.7% of our Hispanic students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 77.7% of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math; 77.7% of our Black students achieved Proficiency Level 3 and 4 in reading and 77.4% of them achieved Proficiency Level 3 in math. We are carefully looking at this data and general school performance to target interventions for students who are not meeting grade level proficiency. For the past two years, Brooklyn New School has received a Gap Closing award in regard to these test scores.

In 2005, 84.4% of our low income students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 84.6% of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math.

In 2005, 65% of our special education students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 66.2% of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math. 85.9% of our general education students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 86.2 % of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math.

Our ELL population is so small that it is inappropriate to analyze this data. Two ELL students were tested in 2005 and neither of them achieved proficiency. Five children took the math test and 80% achieved proficiency.

Finally, there is not a significant difference in the performance of our male and female students. Among our female students, 83.8% achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 83.4 % of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math. Data reveals that 85% of our male students achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in reading and 86.1 % of them achieved Proficiency Levels 3 and 4 in math. It appears from this year’s data that a few more girls than boys have struggled with these exams, indicating that we need to be careful to pay attention to their needs.

SECTION III – 2006-07 School Goals

Based on your analysis of strengths, needs, and capacity, what 2-4 goals will enable your school to meet your targets and achieve strong student outcomes? One universal goal must be to develop or strengthen a system for continuous improvement at your school. To develop this goal, draw upon your experience with the information gathering and pattern analysis required in Part II. For each goal, use the format below to explain your rationale for selecting the goal and to outline your implementation plan as outlined below (fill out a worksheet for each of your goals; if you have less than four goals, use only the number you need.) School goals must be owned by your staff and vetted by your entire school community. Please share them with your School Leadership Team and staff before submission.

GOAL #1: What system for continuous improvement at your school will you develop or strengthen?	Expanded intervention programs and services with increased focus on mathematics.
RATIONALE: How did your analysis of school strengths, student learning needs, and teacher capacity inform your identification of this system?	Teachers have expressed concern about their inability to meet the needs of their most struggling students. It is for this reason that we are focusing on more intervention for the upper grade children. We are also concerned about the lack of mathematical understanding demonstrated by some of our older students.
TASKS FOR THIS YEAR: What work needs to be done this year to make progress towards the implementation of this system? Outline specific tasks, strategies, activities, and timeline.	A staff position to work with the 4^th & 5^th graders. Beth Foresta will be the math intervention coordinator next year. Review the overall math curriculum and not just focus on students struggling with math. Educate families about the math curriculum Increased use of Wilson Fundations in early childhood and Wilson Reading in the upper grades. Supplement TERC with Structural Arithmetic in early childhood classrooms.
BUDGET ALIGNMENT: Outline what changes you will make to your budget to insure effective implementation.	Use of Empowerment Zone funds for intervention position. Use of intervention funds for a math focused position. Use of Empowerment funds to purchase supplementary Wilson and Structural Arithmetic materials.
RESOURCES NEEDED: What partnerships and/or service contracts will you seek with external providers, and others at DOE to help you to develop or strengthen this system?	Visiting network schools to study other intervention strategies. Extend Schools Attuned training and work with LIU around Descriptive Review.
INDICATORS OF PROGRESS &/OR ACCOMPLISHMENT: How will you document and measure its efficacy?	Assessment tools in ELA and Math will help us to document and measure student progress.
GOAL #2: What is your desired outcome? Be concrete and specific, and ensure that you will be able to use measurable evidence towards attainment. Be sure to identify the target population, if relevant, and a specific timeline.	Design a structure and plan for implementing portfolio and other alternative assessment tools instead of testing students every 6 weeks in Grades K-5.
RATIONALE: How did your analysis of school strengths, student learning needs, and teacher capacity inform your selection of this goal?	Staff interest in authentic and portfolio assessment has been ongoing. Participation in the Empowerment Zone creates an opportunity to network with our colleagues and to develop authentic assessment tools.
TASKS FOR THIS YEAR: What work needs to be done this year to make progress towards this goal? Outline specific tasks, strategies, and activities	Need to establish consensus regarding the form of assessment tools. Need to schedule meetings with network teachers and administrators to align assessment tools with curriculum and grade level. Need to research alternative assessments. Need to support teachers in the implementation of authentic assessment tools.
BUDGET ALIGNMENT: Outline what changes you will make to your budget to insure effective implementation.	Per session money for teachers and per diem money for substitutes to allow for school visits. Funds to pay an outside provider to support us in the development of authentic assessment tools.
RESOURCES NEEDED: What partnerships and/or service contracts will you seek with external providers, and others at DOE to help you to achieve this outcome?	Partnerships with LIU, AUSSIE, Teachers College, and network colleagues will help BNS to develop these assessment tools.
INDICATORS OF PROGRESS &/OR ACCOMPLISHMENT: How will you document and measure progress?	Implementation of authentic assessment tools in BNS. Alignment with network schools in the establishment of agreed upon assessment tools.
GOAL #3: What is your desired outcome? Be concrete and specific, and ensure that you will be able to use measurable evidence towards attainment. Be sure to identify the target population, if relevant, and a specific timeline.	Professional Development to extend Project Based Learning, including child-based learning and presentation to authentic audiences.
RATIONALE: How did your analysis of school strengths, student learning needs, and teacher capacity inform your selection of this goal?	It is our belief that child centered inquiry-based curriculum should be the framework for student learning. While this has been part of our practice since the founding of our school in 1987, a recent presentation by Ron Berger inspired teachers to want to plan together and extend their curriculum to include authentic problem-solving tasks and presentations to audiences concerned about these tasks, including parents and community organizations.
TASKS FOR THIS YEAR: What work needs to be done this year to make progress towards this goal? Outline specific tasks, strategies, and activities	Allow teachers opportunity to meet, plan, and develop curriculum. Early childhood learning specialist, Rene Dinnerstein, will work with the Grade 1 teachers to support collaboration and planning, as well as to codify the first grade curriculum. Visit other schools where project based learning is successfully practiced. Research opportunities for authentic presentation.
BUDGET ALIGNMENT: Outline what changes you will make to your budget to insure effective implementation.	Per session and per diem money. Money for trips and supplies. Budget allocation for early childhood learning specialist.
RESOURCES NEEDED: What partnerships and/or service contracts will you seek with external providers and others at DOE to help you to achieve this outcome?	Outreach to community based organizations, including Added-Value and Lefferts Homestead. Further professional development in Inquiry-based curriculum. Continued work with the PENNY schools on group professional development. Pooling of resources among these schools.
INDICATORS OF PROGRESS &/OR ACCOMPLISHMENT: How will you document and measure progress?	Performance of students through authentic activities including, but not limited to, performances, school based museums, project presentations to authentic audiences, and so forth.
GOAL #4: What is your desired outcome? Be concrete and specific, and ensure that you will be able to use measurable evidence towards attainment. Be sure to identify the target population, if relevant, and a specific timeline.	Improved communication between school leadership and parents, supporting a range of productive and meaningful opportunities for parent involvement.
RATIONALE: How did your analysis of school strengths, student learning needs, and teacher capacity inform your selection of this goal?	Examination of the SLT parent survey results BNS/BCS Cabinet meeting discussions PTA meeting discussions Formation of special interest parent groups within the school Meetings with individual parents BNS staff comments during staff meetings, grade level meetings, and one-to-one meetings with teacher and principal.
TASKS FOR THIS YEAR: What work needs to be done this year to make progress towards this goal? Outline specific tasks, strategies, and activities	Hold a facilitated Retreat this fall for parents, teachers and staff, focused on dialogue and understanding. Continue and expand parent workshops around: Schools Attuned and Descriptive Review; authentic assessment; school philosophy and curriculum. Increase parent involvement with PTA, School Leadership Team (SLT), and other committees, working to foster diverse parent activism and an appreciation of the importance of parents’ voices. Continue building the SLT into a meaningful place for exploring and helping resolve important issues. Publication of Parent Handbook. Continue principals weekly letter as tool to communicate, involve, and inform.
BUDGET ALIGNMENT: Outline what changes you will make to your budget to insure effective implementation.	Per session and per diem to allow teachers to participate in parent workshops during and after school.
RESOURCES NEEDED: What partnerships and/or service contracts will you seek with external providers, and others at DOE to help you to achieve this outcome?	Collaboration with network schools and PENNY schools regarding parent communication. Involvement with local politicians to support school needs. A facilitator for the Fall Retreat (supported by Friends).
INDICATORS OF PROGRESS &/OR ACCOMPLISHMENT: How will you document and measure progress?	Increased parent involvement, drawn from throughout our community. Productive SLT and PTA meetings. Capacity to navigate disagreements in a constructive way, rather than by dividing into adversarial camps. Unified parent body. Parent comfort with and understanding of their child as a learner, including his/her learning style, learning strengths, weaknesses, needs, and accommodations and interventions necessary for success in school.

When the School Leadership Team set to work on the 2006-2007 CEP, one of our principal goals was to involve parents in its creation, in ways that would be both productive and meaningful. The following section was written in close collaboration between staff and parents, and incorporates new and thoughtful work from all the school’s arts instructors.

SCHOOL GOALS and OBJECTIVES for THE ARTS

Goal:

The major goal for the arts at BNS for 2006-2007 is to engage our children in the arts, teaching them skills while developing intuition, sensitivity, and imagination. In support of this goal, we aim in the coming year to expand both the physical resources and curricular opportunities available to our students. We believe that the arts provide intrinsic benefit in students’ lives, helping them perceive and think in new ways, both about themselves and the worlds through which they move. In particular, the BNS arts program offers struggling students additional opportunities to experience success, fostering increased confidence across the full range of curriculum. Guided by our school’s mission of applied learning as well as the New York City’s Blueprint for the Arts, our teachers challenge students to practice collaboration, work with discipline and persistence, and to take risks. Our integrated arts program provides tangible benefits across the school curriculum, bridging visual art, music, dance, and theatre with language arts, mathematics, social studies, technology and science.

Objectives:

Overall: Students will develop a global perspective and recognize the power of art to communicate beliefs and values.* Students will express themselves through art across the school curriculum. Students will see themselves as artists – as choreographers, composers, designers, musicians, directors, dancers, performers, singers, and painters. Students will gain an appreciation of art as a source of enjoyment and life-long learning.* The school will help provide opportunities for professional development for our arts instructors. The BNS Arts Committee will support the goals of the CEP, working in close collaboration with teachers, parents, and administration.

Visual Art: Through an exploration of art materials and techniques, students will exercise imagination, construct meaning, and depict their experiences.* Students will hone observation skills and discuss works of art.* Students will be exposed to art and artists from many different cultures and historical contexts, both in the classroom and through experiences at local cultural institutions.

Music: Students will develop an understanding of basic music concepts and be able to read rudimentary music notation. Students will make connections to the music they are performing, creating, and improvising. Students will develop an ease with creating music and performing in front of others.

Dance and Theatre: Students will expand and invigorate their dance and theatre learning through our partnership with Brooklyn Arts Exchange. Students will improvise, choreograph, and perform dance and theatre pieces. Through collective creation, students will be encouraged to respect the different aspects of their classmates including gender differences, cultural differences, learning styles and more. Through watching their students interact with teaching artists, and through creating dance/theater pieces with students and teaching artists, classroom teachers will be able to see their students in new ways and thus be enabled to find more creative entryways to their students' learning. Students will learn about working in small groups through play and dance making.

Description of Proposed Instructional Strategies for the Arts (that are based on scientifically based research):

Children in grades 1 through 5 will meet regularly with the visual art teacher and with the music teacher from September 2006 to June 2007. Students in kindergarten will meet twice a week with a BAX teaching-artist and the BNS music teacher from September 2006 to June 2007. All classes, pre-k through 5, will participate in short-and long-term BAX artist residencies that will be integrated into the school’s academic and social activities.

Strategies for visual art instruction include:

Grades pre-k- 1:Practice use of various drawing utensils. Murals using mixed media and paper mache. Painting and sculpture projects related to self and family curricula. Exploring and enjoying art for art’s sake. Studying animal habitats, animal bones, and insects. Exploration of collage. Studying weight and balance with wire sculptures and mobiles.

Grades 2-5: Painting with tempera and watercolor paint. The use of color drawing materials, printmaking, collage, sculpture and clay. Viewing, discussing, and writing about art history. Visits to art galleries and museums.

Strategies for music instruction include:

Grades pre-k-1: Students learn about pulse, rhythm, timbre, tempo, dynamics and pitch through game, song, playing instruments, dramatization as well as expressing these musical elements with their bodies.

Grades 1-2: Students learn solfege, hand signs, proper breathing techniques and singing in unison. Students learn to apply musical concepts to non-pitched percussion instruments and pitched percussion instruments such as xylophone.

Grade 3-4: Students develop knowledge and use of solfege, hand signs, proper breathing techniques and singing in unison and harmony. Students learn to apply musical concepts using recorders and various percussion instruments.

Grade 5: Students further develop knowledge and use of solfege, hand signs, proper breathing techniques and singing in unison and harmony. Students apply musical concepts with various percussion instruments in a unit of study that incorporates their own poetry.

All students are invited to perform at school-wide performance opportunities, including the Bienvenidos Festival celebrating Hispanic culture, Black History Month Celebration, Extravaganza, and Town Hall Meetings.

Strategies in dance/theatre instruction include:

Students will learn the fundamentals, history, and impact of hip hop culture on New York City arts through music, b-boy/girling (breakdancing), rapping and human beatboxing.

Pre-k: Students play theatre games that explore and incorporate the self and family curriculum.

Kindergarten: Students collectively and individually write poetry that is performed at the year-end curriculum share.

First and second grade: Students choreograph dances that relate to the math and New York City curriculum.

Third grade: Students write and perform poetry.

Fourth grade: Students work throughout the year to create an original script based on a curriculum theme, such as “creation myths.” They rehearse and perform a musical that incorporates their original text.

Fifth grade: Students create forum theatre pieces that explore the civil rights curriculum and are based on the teaching of Augusto Boal.

WHEN: Beginning Date, Frequency, Duration

September 2006-June 2007. Visits to art studio at least once a week. Music at least once a week. Creative movement classes in early grades at least once a week. Movement/theater with BAX teaching artists for seventeen weeks stints for each class once a year.

SUPPORT: Resources/Cost/Funding Source

Tax Levy Money: 004251, 004245. Project Arts: 004245, 084281, 084351. Empire State Partnership. 501©3 (Fundraising) Committee: Friends of BNS. Additional arts enrichment and resources: School Arts Committee, parents, extended community.

INDICATORS OF SUCCESS: Interval of Periodic Review, Instrument(s)/Projected Gains

Mid-school year and end-of-year. Increased student performance in ELA. Increased student participation in visual arts exhibits and school-wide performance opportunities. Increased achievement according to NYC’s Blueprint for the Arts indicators of success.

ACCOUNTABILITY: Person(s) or Positions Responsible

Principal, BAX teaching artists, art teacher, music teachers, creative movement teacher

*From NYC’s Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in the Arts

Appendix 2: Program Delivery for English Language Learners (ELLs)

NCLB/SED requirement for all schools

Part A: Language Allocation Policy (LAP) – Attach a copy of your school’s current year (2005-2006) LAP to this CEP.

Language Allocation Policy - 2005/2006

The Brooklyn New School, PS 146, is a child centered elementary school located in Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn. Its project based, hands on instruction attracts a multi-racial/ethnic student population. Among our 520 students, only 8 are classified as ELLs. Out of these, four are Spanish speakers, two speak Japanese, one speaks Hebrew and one speaks both Fulani and Wolof. All 8 of our English language learners are served through a push- in/pull-out ESL program with a New York State permanently certified ESL teacher, providing a nurturing, supportive environment where ELLs gain linguistic and communicative competence as well as self esteem and validation. We believe that when ELLs are given appropriate school experiences, intervention and high expectations, they can achieve at the same levels as their peers.

In 2005, our ten English language learners took the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test. Thirty percent of our ELLs passed the NYSESLAT and attained proficiency in English reading, writing, listening and speaking. In 2004, our ELLs took the NYSESLAT and thirty percent of our English language learners attained proficiency. Furthermore, in 2004, 60% of our tested ELLs scored in performance levels 3 & 4 in mathematics.

Based on parent choice letters and rejection of transfer to bilingual programs by parents of ELLs, our freestanding ESL program offers 100% of instruction in English. In order to meet the linguistic needs of our ELLs and to comply with Part 154 mandates, beginner and intermediate ELLs receive 360 minutes of ESL instruction and advanced ELLs receive 180 minutes. Our Balanced Literacy approach follows the workshop model of Teachers College. This standards-based instruction utilizes a variety of materials that integrate listening, speaking, reading and writing and foster critical thinking skills. The materials, aligned to the core curriculum, include native language sources and instructional technology to support both English and the mother tongue of our English language learners. If relevant, we use the native language for instruction. Furthermore, classrooms are print rich with colored word walls, pictures, student work and charts modeling correct language usage. Native language libraries are evident in all our classrooms. Teachers create opportunities for our Newcomers to listen to English and interact with peers in small groups as well as opportunities for newly arrived ELLs to participate in classroom projects that support language development. Our student partnerships foster positive relationships between newly arrived ELLs and their peers. Furthermore, all our English language learners are provided with a variety of instructional strategies to assist them in the development of academic language and literacy. The six major types of scaffolding – modeling, bridging, contextualization, schema building, text-representation and meta- cognition - are evident in all our classrooms. Our ESL teacher works with our staff to support scaffolding learning for ELLs in their classrooms. Effective practices such as graphic organizers, semantic maps, modeled writing, and read aloud foster academic language development. Furthermore, teachers receive professional development in the stages of language acquisition, second language learning, scaffolding learning for ELLs and integrating content and language goals for ELLs.

Targeted intervention in math and literacy takes place throughout the school year through our very comprehensive Academic Intervention Program. Long term ELLs are offered Reading Room support, individual and group tutoring, Schools Attuned, speech and language support, Great Leaps, Fundations, Wilson Reading, Homework Help and Saturday Academy. Students with Interrupted Formal Education (SIFE) are provided with early morning and after school programs and additional academic interventions such as Fundations and Wilson Reading during the day. Our plan for alternative placement in Special Education involves working with paraprofessionals, looking at IEP recommendations and offering peer tutoring as well as early morning and after school instruction. Once ELL students reach proficiency, they continue to be served twice a week for at least a year through our Academic Intervention Program.

Our Language Allocation Team consists of the following individuals: Principal Anna Allanbrook, Assistant Principal IA/Academic Intervention Coordinator Regina Godfrey, ESL teacher Michele Rayvid, IEP teacher Sarah Fettman, and several members of our staff who were English language learners when they were young, kindergarten teacher Mary Ann Laborda, 1^st grade teacher Maria Lazarini, 2^nd grade teacher Maria Cadillac, 3^rd grade teacher Shirley Soohoo and 4^th grade teacher Dolores Montero. Our team will review our Language Allocation Policy twice a year and make appropriate changes, when necessary.

Part B: CR Part 154 (A-6) Bilingual/ESL Program Description

Type of Program: ___Bilingual __X_ ESL ___ Both Number of LEP (ELL) Students Served in 2005-06: _____8_______________

I. Instructional Program (including brief description of program, # of classes per program, language(s) of instruction, instructional strategies, etc):

Based on parent choice, we offer our ELLs a freestanding English As a Second Language Program with 100% of instruction in English. Our ESL program provides our Beginning and Intermediate ELL students with 360 minutes of ESL instruction per week and our Advanced students with 180 minutes. Brooklyn New School has only 8 ELL students, but they speak a variety of languages, including Japanese, Spanish, Hebrew, Fulani and Wolof. We offer English language skill development and content area instruction using ESL methodology. Our push-in/pull-out model supports our standards- driven curriculum and utilizes the six different types of scaffolding techniques (modeling, bridging, contextualization, schema building, text-representation and meta-cognition) to assist our ELLs in the development of academic language and literacy.

II. Parent/community involvement:

Our welcoming school environment celebrates diversity and encourages parents of English Language Learners to become part of our school community by participating in informal morning breakfasts, writing celebrations, parent workshops and school trips. In addition, parents of ELLs are invited into our classrooms to share their culture, life experiences and language. Parents of ELLs are a valuable resource within the classroom and often assist our teachers with cooking, art projects and musical performances. As required by Part 154, we offer a Parent Orientation Workshop to parents of new ELLs in September and, when necessary, throughout the school year. We also offer two other workshops, which address such topics as Homework and Study Skills and Understanding Your Child’s Curriculum, to the parents of all ELLs during the school year.

III. Project Jump Start (Programs and activities to assist newly enrolled LEP students):

Our newcomers are welcomed into our school and made to feel comfortable and secure. Our buddy system pairs ELLs with students who speak the same language and also serve as good English models. Teachers create opportunities for our Newcomers to listen to English and interact with other students in small groups as well as opportunities for newly arrived ELLs to participate in classroom projects that support language development. Our classrooms are print rich, with pictures, word walls, student work, charts and visuals to help make meaning clear and model correct language usage. Furthermore, our native language libraries offer opportunities to encourage use of the native language of our ELLs, offering literature in all genres of fiction and non-fiction. Targeted academic intervention, such as the Wilson Reading Program, Fundations, and Great Leaps, are also offered to LEP students.

IV. Staff Development (2006-2007 activities):

As part of our continuing commitment to maintain and expand staff development, we will place staff development concerning the needs of English Language Learners at the top of our agenda. We will continue to offer ongoing study groups with a focus on support for ELLs in meeting ESL and ELA Standards. Furthermore, we will provide professional development in second language learning, including scaffolding learning for ELLs, and integrating content and language goals. As a community, we will examine our curriculum maps and units of study and design a template for integrating specific language structures, functions and vocabulary for our English Language Learners.

Part C: Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students – School Year 2006-2007

Form TIII – A (1)(a)

Grade Level(s) K-5 Number of Students to be Served: 8 LEP 0 Non-LEP

Number of Teachers 1 Other Staff (Specify)

School Building Instructional Program/Professional Development Overview

Title III, Part A LEP Program[1]

Language Instruction Program – Language instruction education programs funded under Title III, Part A, of NCLB, must help LEP students attain English proficiency while meeting State academic achievement standards. They may use both English and the student's native language and may include the participation of English proficient students (i.e., Two Way Bilingual Education/Dual Language program.) Programs implemented under Title III, Part A, may not supplant programs required under CR Part 154. In the space provided below, describe the school’s language instruction program for limited English proficient (LEP) students. The description must include: type of program/activities; number of students to be served; grade level(s); language(s) of instruction; rationale for the selection of program/activities; times per day/week; program duration; and service provider and qualifications.

Our Language Instruction education program funded under Title III, Part A, of NCLB will serve all of our LEP students in grades kindergarten to five, utilizing English instruction and materials that provides native language support. Based on the NYSESLAT scores of our ELLs, Title III instructional programs will address all areas of language development, but will have a strong focus on Writing. Instruction will take place before school, after school and on Saturdays in cases where ELLs join our Saturday Academy. Our permanently certified ESL teacher, Michele Rayvid, will work with our ELL students in small groups, engaging students in project- based learning. Our research-based program derives from sociocultural learning theory , which grows from the idea that learning precedes development. We have found that listening, speaking, reading and writing activities that engage students in collaborative, interactive learning are the most successful. Our children learn by doing. Before/after-school classes will take place four times a week, from September through June. Saturday morning classes will begin in October and end at the end of May.

Professional Development Program – Describe the school’s professional development program for teachers and other staff responsible for the delivery of instruction and services to limited English proficient students.

Our extensive professional development program for teachers and other staff involves ongoing staff conversations as to how Balanced Literacy is different for English Language Learners in terms of teaching and learning. Professional development in the areas of second language acquisition, scaffolding instruction and integrating content and language goals for ELLs is planned for this year, as well as ongoing study groups revolving around the works of Pauline Gibbons (Learning to Learn in a Second Language and Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning – Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroom).

Form TIII – A (1)(b)

Title III LEP Program

School Building Budget Summary

Allocation:
Budget Category	Budgeted Amount	Explanation of Proposed Expenditure
Professional staff, per session, per diem (Note: schools must account for fringe benefits)	$35,926.00	.5 ESL teacher
Purchased services such as curriculum and staff development contracts
Supplies and materials	$2,000	Computer, program supplies
Travel
Other
TOTAL	$37,926.00	There is a limited ELL population in our school.

Appendix 3: Language Translation and Interpretation

Requirement under Chancellor’s Regulations – for all schools

Goal: To communicate whenever feasible with non-English speaking parents in their home language in order to support shared parent-school accountability, parent access to information about their children’s educational options, and parents’ capacity to improve their children’s achievement.

Part A: Needs Assessment Findings

1. Describe the data and methodologies used to assess your school’s written translation and oral interpretation needs to ensure that all parents are provided with appropriate and timely information in a language they can understand.

Home language Surveys provide initial information regarding family translation needs; teachers provide additional information regarding the written translation and oral interpretation needs of the families of their students.

2. Summarize the major findings of your school’s written translation and oral interpretation needs. Describe how the findings were reported to the school community.

At this time, fewer than 1% of Brooklyn New School families require language translation and interpretation. The information was shared by the School Leadership team and included in the meeting minutes, which were provided to all families.

Part B: Strategies and Activities

1. Describe the written translation services the school will provide, and how they will meet identified needs indicated in Part A. Include procedures to ensure timely provision of translated documents to parents determined to be in need of language assistance services. Indicate whether written translation services will be provided by an outside vendor, or in-house by school staff or parent volunteers.

Our translation team, consisting of our bilingual parent coordinator, bilingual teachers, paraprofessionals and school aides, translates all weekly letters and flyers to parents in a timely manner.

School Leadership Team Co-Chairpersons

Principal