Educ 615 Final Pba

Running head: SPECIAL EDUCATION INEQUITY IN ADVANCED ACADEMIC
SETTINGS
Special Education inequity in Advanced Academic Settings
Tracey Brown Rice
George Mason University
Part I: Equity Audit
Explanation of Selected Inequity:Abstract

SPECIAL EDUCATION INEQUITY IN ADVANCED ACADEMIC SETTINGS 2
This paper discusses the context and importance of integrated classrooms and the need
to provide Special Education students with the same opportunity to access Advanced
Academic curriculum, a, as their gifted peers. Integrating Special Education students
into Advanced Academic classroom settings and vice versa make up an inclusion
classroom learning environments. . Sapon-Shevin (1994) defined an inclusive school as
a place where everyone belongs, is accepted, supports, and is supported by his or her
peers and other members of the school community in the course of having his or her
educational needs met. Special Education students in Advanced Academic settings
would not hold any one students back, but instead, provide opportunities for all learners
to learn, grow, and challenge each other through a more diverse set of lenses (i.e.
background knowledge, content understanding, and problem-solving strategies). From
this experience, students, in particular, will learn how to better scaffold and reach their
peers. To support this need, Braddock Elementary statistics, from the 2016-17 school
year, are used.
The policy brief highlights Braddock Elementary 2016-17 statics from the
BLANK equity audit collection and analysis tool, proving the need and the need for
inclusionve classrooms. It also suggests Whole Language (Sapon-Shevin, 1994) and
Whole Schooling (Peterson and Beloin, 1998) is cited as a suggested alternative learning
models for schools whothat segregate their Sspecial Eeducation population and to . For
Fairfax County Public Schools, an action plan with specific steps and a timeline is
designed to achieve the goal of dually identifying Special Education students as
Advanced Academic students. improve segregated school conditions, an action plan
with specific steps and a timeline is designed to provide Special Education students with
more opportunities to be dually identified as Advanced Academic students.
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. 1
Policy Brief ....................................................................................................................... 3
Context and Importance ................................................................................................. 3
Whats being done? ....................................................................................................... 4
Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 6
Action Plan ....................................................................................................................... 7
My Current Situations and Importance .......................................................................... 7
Desired Outcomes ................................................................................ 10
Action Plan ........................................................................................... 11
Specific Steps and Corresponding Timeline ........................................................... 11
Resources and Permissions Needed ........................................................................ 12
Anticipated Obstacles and Proposed Solutions ....................................................... 13
Reflective Narrative ....................................................................................................... 14
What I Learned ........................................................................................................... 14
My Role as a Teacher .......................................................................... 14
My Next Steps as a Teacher Leader ................................................................ 15
References ....................................................................................................................... 16
Appendix ......................................................................................................................... 17
Equity Audit Collection and Analysis Tool ................................................................ 17
Policy Brief
Context My Context and Importanceand Importance
Integrating Special Education students into Advanced Academic classroom
settings and vice versa make up an inclusion classroom learning environment. Sapon-
Shevin (1994) definesdefined an inclusive schools as a place where ever11yone

belongs, is accepted, supports, and is supported by his or her peers and other members of
the school community in the course of having his or her educational needs met. Special
Education students in Advanced Academic settings would not hold any one students
back, but instead, provide opportunities for all learners to learn, grow, and challenge each
other through a more diverse set of lenses (i.e. background knowledge, content
understanding, and problem-solving strategies). From this experience, students, in
particular, will learn how to better scaffold and reach their peers. Research shows that
segregated, non-inclusive classrooms disrupt the learning community, as Removing
children who are publicly identified as different makes it more difficult to promote
multicultural education and a positive response to differences (Sapon-Shevin, 1994).
Not including students receiving Special Education services in Advanced Academic
settings affect students outlook on others and in turn, their communication and
occupational skills sets. When outside of school walls, students will eventually work
with a variety of learners and if not afforded opportunities to work and peers who possess
varying and/or a variety of labels, the likelihood of accepting and connecting with
different lenses (those who are different) will be little to none existent.
According to the U.S. Department of Education statics, Special Education
students are not being serviced in Advanced Academic settings, nationwide. In the
Digest of Education Statistics 2015 (2016, p. 124), 3,189,757 public school students in
the elementary and secondary setting were enrolled in a gifted and talented program,
during the 2011-12 school year. This equates to 6.4% of the public school population, at
the indicated levels (U.S. Department of Education, p. 125). In relation to Special
Education (SpEd) statistics, specifically students who received services through the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 6,464,096 elementary and secondary students
were serviced, during the 2011-12 school year (U.S. Department of Education, p. 123).
SpEd disabilities ranged from hearing, visual, and speech or language impairments to
Autism. And according to 2011 statistics alone, 61% of the 6,464,096 SpEd students
spent 80% or more in regular school; time inside general class (U.S. Department of
Education, p. 122). Thought the majority of Special Education students may have spent
time learning in a general education, inclusive setting, this shows that opportunities to
challenge students with disabilities in a gifted and talented setting did not take place or
perhaps, very few, undocumented efforts existed.
Whats being done?
Schools who once pushed for separated Advanced Academic and Special
Education settings are now starting to merge their educational programs. At Washington
Elementary, staff members are being educated on how to reach all students through the
use of ...cooperative learning, whole language, and authentic assessment. Programs that
promote peer tutoring and peer advocacy are also in place (Sapon-Shevin, 1994). Staff
members are learning how to scaffold content, focus on meaning and strategy instruction,
and use rich tasks that not only address the content, but provide students with
opportunities to show a their thinking in a variety of ways. As another key component,
parents are heavily involved. ...Parental involvement in Individualized Educational
Program meetings is mandated by law. Many gifted education programs have also
benefited from high levels of parental participation (sometimes required for a child's
acceptance in the program) (Sapon-Shevin, 1994). Parents are included in the parent-
teacher-student support triangle and by understanding whats going on with their childs
education, the road to inclusion is much smoother.
In low socioeconomic status background rural and urban learning environments
like my elementary schoolPeterson and Beloin (1998) shared their secret formula for
how they turned these settings into successful, inclusive schools. As a five step process
to, creatcreateed schools that follow the core principles and strategies of whole schooling:
1) Learning together, 2) Teaching well, 3) Support, 4) Adapting, and 5) Partnering for
schools in low socioeconomic, rural and urban learning environments.. The focus of this
school-wide approach is to engage and challenge each learner to his or her maximum
potential. Support is received from inside and outside of the school building, which
...includes the realignment of special education, bilingual, Title I, and gifted personnel to
engage in collaborative teaching with regular education teachers (Peterson and Beloin,
1998). In addition, a variety of strategies are being used to address students needs and
family and community partnerships are formed to sustain and excel student achievement
progress. When honing in Western International High School, a Detroit Public School,
Peterson and Beloin (1998) cited how the use of whole schooling and their mission to
focus on a more multi-cultural model of inclusive education has caused staff to focus on
less student labeling. For example, the Special Education Department took measures
...to stop being all things to the students with special learning needs, as their name was
changed to the Exceptional Education Department (Peterson and Beloin, 1998).
Departments, who once separately catered to Special Education and gifted needs, now
merged together in efforts to show the importance of community and a diverse group of
students accessing rigorous and meaningful curriculum in the same classroom setting.
Recommendations
Whole Language (Sapon-Shevin, 1994) and Whole Schooling (Peterson and
Beloin, 1998) models should be merged and highlighted as the crux of inclusion, where
meaning and strategy instruction along with support are the central focus and foundation.
It is here that more inclusive classrooms, where Special Education students are identified
as gifted and are placed in Advanced Academic settings, will form. In turn, students will
see beyond their rank and delve deeper into their learning within their newfound
community of diverse peers.
Also, I like the idea of changing the Special Education program name to be more
inclusive. When the Detroit Public School, Western International High School, decided to
change their Special Education Department name to Exceptional Education Department, I
think they were on to something. Special Education provides students with
accommodations to better access their grade-level curriculum while gifted, Advanced
Academics does a similar service by providing students with higher-level thinking
strategies to help students access and solve a variety of rich, open-ended tasks. At a
higher level, such as the entire state of Michigan and then throughout the 50 students and
America, this nuance tweak should be fought for to help everyone see students for
students though a more clear lens and how all students need individualized instruction,
whether an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) or individualized instruction
(scaffolded material) to strengthen their learning abilities.
Action Plan
Context My Current Situation and Importance
At my school, Braddock Elementary, we are moving towards becoming a Local
Level IV Advanced Academics Center. This entails students from all over Fairfax County
being bused or driven to my school to receive gifted instruction that places a strong
emphasis on higher level thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making (FCPS,
2017). Students considered for Level IV go through an Advanced Academics process
where their student portfolio, usually composed by the classroom teacher and Advanced
Academics teacher, and a county Central Selection Committee determines approval or
disapproval of students received a Level IV label. To date, students who have received
the Level IV label had a option to go to my schools Local Level IV feeder school,
Canterbury Woods Elementary, or choose to stay at Braddock, their base school, in a
general Advanced Academics classroom with varying levels. Other Advanced Academics
levels include Level II and III. These levels entail part-time support where students, who
are often selected by classroom teachers, work with the Advanced Academics Resource
Teacher in a small group on an enrichment task thats content or general higher-level
thinking based.
Before moving towards this administration goal, I feel that its important to
look at where we currently stands as a school in terms of our Advanced Academics
identification process. Similar to national statics, little to no Special Education student is
being dually identified as an Advanced Academic (AA) student. At the Kindergarten

level, no SpEd student is labeled as gifted and out of the 851 students at my school, only
9 students (9/851) or 1.1% of the study body population are dually identified as SpEd and
AA students. Only a few students per grade-level, in grades 1-5, are being dually labeled
and the majority of SpEd students are being indirectly denied access to the gifted learning
environments. As another problem, only a limited number of dually identified students
may feel a sense of community in the Advanced Academic setting. Seeing how
underrepresented SpEd students are in each grade-level Advanced Academic setting, and
as a whole school, these students are still most likely being identified by their label
opposed to their thinking abilities by their peers (and classroom teacher), seeing them less
than equals.
Grade Level Number of Percentage of Number in group Percentage of

students placed students in group receiving SpEd students in
in Advanced receiving Services placed group receiving
Academics Advanced in Advanced SpEd services
Academic Academics (number of students
services in group receiving
(number of students SpEd services
in the group divided divided by the
by total number of number of students in
students in the the group in the
school) entire school)
Kindergarten 0/141 0% 0/0 0%
First 20/125 16% 1/20 5%
Second 28/155 18.1% 0/28 0%
Third 47/154 30.5% 2/47 4.3%
Forth 32/145 22.1% 2/32 6.3%

Fifth 24/131 18.3% 4/24 16.7%
Total Number 851 students 17.5% average 9/851 dually 1.1% of the
of Students per grade level identified students student body
I can see in the data that in all grade levels, there is a very low population of
dually identified, Twice Exceptional (2e) students. School-wide, the number of 2e
students equates to 9/851 or 1.1% of the 2016-17 school year student body population.
When comparing this percentage (1.1%) to the average number of students receiving
Advanced Academic services per grade-level, 17.5%, Special Education students still
makeup a very small portion of identified gifted students. This is very shocking to me.
I wonder if Special Education students are given an equal opportunity to access higher-
level curriculum or are discounted due to already receiving a service? This also raises
questions about my schools Advanced Academics selection process for labeling students.
And seeing how no Kindergarten student is receiving Advanced Academic services,
dually identified or not, I wonder if this is due to the school focus being on getting
acclimating to the learning environment? As an overall goal, I want to increase the
number of Special Education students who are considered and identified to receive
Advanced Academic services.

Inequity in the number of Special Education students dually identified as

Advanced Academic students
31%
22%
18% 18%
16%
0%
Kindergarten First Second Third Fourth Fifth
Desired Outcome
Thinking about needed changes, I want to improve my schools outlook on
scaffolding and how to identify students to be labeled and placed in Advanced Academic
settings. At biweekly literacy and math Collaborative Learning Team (CLT) meetings
and monthly science CLTs, targeted, content-based ways to reach all learns for the given
unit will be shared. This will help the mindset of teachers evolve and better see how to
provide individualized instruction (differentiate) for students to maximize their learning
opportunities to excel and soar. In turn, the goal is for teachers (and supporting staff) to
identify gifted and gifted potential behavior based on content meaning and strategies
displayed by students, specifically on rich, open-ended tasks opposed to previous school
year and present labels. Current student abilities and potential will take precedence over
just carrying on student labels (i.e. SpEd) and limited mindsets for students based on how
they are currently identified. As the end result, teachers will be more susceptible in
identifying Special Education students to be placed in Advanced Academic learning
environments.
Specific Steps and Corresponding Timeline
1. Starting Tuesday, April 18, 2017, Whole Language (Sapon-Shevin, 1994) and
Whole Schooling (Peterson and Beloin, 1998) models will be combined and
highlighted as the crux of inclusion, where teachers will be exposed to why and
how meaning and strategy instruction along with support help all students to
succeed. This will be done on a biweekly basis, as CLTs take place on Tuesdays
and Thursdays, school-wide. Here, information for helping teachers broaden their
lens and see student growth and abilities opposed to their current label will be
emphasized in conjunction with how to differentiate opposed to rescue students
(DeShaw, 2017) to maximize student opportunities to be challenged in the
classroom setting (a precursor to identified students who would best fit in
Advanced Academic settings when meeting at the end-of-the-year to review
placement cards and form draft classes for the upcoming 2017-18 school year).
2. By Friday, April 28, 2017, I will connect with my schools Advanced Academics
Resource Teacher to see what criteria exists for labeling students with an
Advanced Academics label, so that she and I can work with the third grade team
and other team leaders to share the criteria. This will provide all grade-level
support to think about their students, who has the potential to succeed in an
Advanced Academic setting, and be ready to share their wishes they want added
to the current school-wide criteria for labeling students with a gifted label.
3. By May 4, 2017, during grade-level CLTs, grade-level and content specific
criteria for selecting students to be in the Advanced Academics classroom and
receiving services will be set after hearing the current criteria. This part of the
timeline may get confusing and overwhelmed. To alleviate this, a need for social-
emotional, readiness, and achievement (test) scores needs to be emphasized to all
grade-levels by each CLT facilitator to limit the vastness of suggestions.
4. By early June 2017, scaffolded grade-level or a revised schoolwide Advanced
Academics criteria list will be shared before with the school before its time to
complete placement cards and form draft classes for the upcoming 2017-18
school year.
Resources and Permissions Needed
The whole concept of my action plan is education. With all of the high demands
placed on educators, a reminder in that it is okay to go against current practices for

identifying Advanced Academic (AA) students is needed. Within the literacy, math, and
science CLT settings, permission from each facilitator is needed to get on at least a few
agendas to discuss how identifying students for Advanced Academics would look per the
given grade-level content lens. From this collected data, general and content specific
patterns and trends can be identified and help from the Advanced Academics Resource
Teacher is needed to fine-tune the updated AA selection process and student criteria.
Aside from sharing ongoing reminders about how to advocate for student enrichment in
collaborative settings, a final, end-of-school-year reminder is needed. Permission from
the principal and/or facilitator is needed to speak about any inequities noticed when
drafting classrooms for the upcoming school year, at each grade-level placement card
meeting. In addition, help is needed by the principal and other facilitators, who attend
more than one or all grade-level placement card meetings is needed to share any
Advanced Academic and other noticeable inequities, as make them more equitable across
all grade-levels.
Anticipated Obstacles and Proposed Solutions
During the upcoming grade-level placement card meetings, there will still be non-
classroom teachers who are set in their structured ways, in terms of how classrooms have
been formed in the past. To move beyond this thinking, teachers need to be encouraged
to continually advocate for their students by name, need, holistic abilities, and potential
opposed to solely on Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) and Cognitive Abilities
Test (CogAT) scores, which are often used to determine Advanced Academic placement.
And even if 1-2 SpEd students are afforded the opportunity to be either an Advanced
Academic classroom or enrichment group the upcoming school year, thats a victory, as
supporting staff members are starting to thinking more about student potential than their
preset label(s)!
Reflective Narrative
Context What I Learned
By delving into this Equity Study, I have learned how to research and
disaggregate data at a deeper level. I learned to look beyond ethnicity and spoken
language(s) to really identify a sense of fairness and connectedness within my
classroom and throughout my school. In terms of student Special Education and English
as a Second Language (ESOL) accommodations, I was able to see how many of these
students are actually being represented and challenged in enriched (Advanced Academic)
settings down to how many serve on the Student Council Advisory and as school safety
patrol. And by seeing little to no representation, not just in the Advanced Academic
setting, my awareness level raised and now, I am able to better advocate for more
students when opportunities are presented.

My Role as a Teacher
During the duration of the 2016-17 school year, my role is to continue to
advocate for all students, especially those in third grade. Thinking about labels in
general, I must advocate to help promote student achieve. What this looks like may vary,
as some students need more social-emotional help while others, more of an academic
scaffold or challenge. And in centering about the word fair, I am now more capable of
advocating for students in terms of looking at the current data or group make-up and
presenting the need to the person in charge. For example, a student may need a creative
outlet that centers around engineering and technology. Seeing that I can speak to the
demographics of my schools Robotics Club, I am now better equipped to cite the need of
the group in comparison to the need of the student on various levels.
Context My Next Steps as a Teacher Leader
Next school year, I am preparing to move out of the classroom and into a math
resource teacher position. With this position shift, I will sit on the leadership team and in
other meetings with my coach counterparts and principal. In turn, will be better able to
serve as a student, teacher, parent liaison, seeing inequities through many lenses, but too
problem-solving with these lenses to develop scaffolded plans to move towards a more
equitable state. In addition, I too will focus heavily on math vertical articulation. Noted
patterns and trends found when disaggregating assessment data and when pushing into
classrooms will be noted and in turn, plans will be put in place to help increase student
achievement.
Resources
Deshaw, T. (2017). Are you scaffolding or rescuing? Retrieved from
http://www.theowlteacher.com/scaffoldingrescuing/.
Fairfax County Public Schools. (2017). Full-time advanced academics program, grades
3-8 (level IV). Retrieved from
https://www.fcps.edu/academics/middleschoolacademics78/advancedacademi
cs/fulltimeadvancedacademicprogramgrades.
Frattura, E., & Capper, C. (2007). Leading for social justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: poor
Corwin Press.
Peterson, M. and Beloin, K. (1998). For better or worse: Building inclusive schools in
poor urban and rural communities. Retrieved from
http://www.wholeschooling.net/WS/WSPress/ForBetterorWorse.html.
Sapon-Shevin, M. (1994). Why gifted students belong in inclusive schools. Educational
Leadership, 52(4), 64-70. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/publications/educationalleadership/dec94/vol52/num04/Wh
yGiftedStudentsBelonginInclusiveSchools.aspx.
U.S. Department of Education 2015 (2016). Digest of Education Statistics. National
Center for Education Statistics, 51, 122-125. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016014.pdf.
Appendix
Equity Audit Collection and Analysis Tool
We have found that most districts do not gather or report all of this information. It may be
possible, however, to find such data or to calculate this information by hand. Please note
that some data may only be applicable to elementary, middle, or high schools. If your
school does not use a particular label, replace that category with a related category that
your school uses.
Section A. General Data and Analysis Data Source Ongoing

(Report total number [fraction] and percentage Thoughts/Notes
for each as applicable
1. Number of students 851 Civil Rights Data Number of Head Start

in your school Collection via students excluded
ED.gov: from student total,
data not kept on
http://ocrdata.ed.go
school server
v/DistrictSchoolSea
rch ; combined
Braddock ES grade-
level data sorter
student count
2. Number of 82/138 = 59.4% http://www2.fcps.e School website

teaching staff in your (certified teacher du/BraddockES/ directory count (total
school (certified and staff / total number of (school website) number of staff) used,
noncertified) staff members) as the BES school
profile only shows
Breakdown: full-time staff data for
6- kindergarten Data paired w/ the current and past

teachers Braddock ES school years.
school profile:
6- kindergarten IAs
http://schoolprofiles.
6- first grade teachers fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?
p=108:8:::::P8_RET
8- second grade URN_PAGE:50
teachers
7- third grade teachers
5- fourth grade
teachers
6- fifth grade teachers
1-School Based
Technology Specialist
(SBTS)
3- art teachers
3- music teachers
3- P.E. teachers
2- librarians
10- SpEd teachers
8- SpEd IAs
2- General IAs
6- ESOL teachers
50/138 = 36.2%
(noncertified teacher
staff / total number of
staff members)
3. Number of students New to Braddock Braddock ES grade- Total number of

in your school who 2015: 82/852 = 9.6% level data sorters and 2015-16SY enrolled
transferred or moved of our community New to Braddock students gathered by

into the school last school population spreadsheet; adding the number of
academic year, 2015- students identified in
16SY (disaggregate 27/82 female each grade-level data
by race, disability, 55/82 males sorter spreadsheet.
gender, ESL, and 75/82 ESL students
FRL) 11/82 Asian students
10/11 male
1/11 female
3/82 White students
All males
68/82 Hispanic
students
42/68 males
26/68 female
4. Number of students 1/22 students* *Per being evicted,

in your class who one student changed
transferred or moved Male schools and then
into the school last ESOL student returned to my
academic year, 2015- Hispanic school/class later on
16SY (disaggregate 3rd grade student in the year
by race, disability,
gender, ESL, & FRL)
Section B. Status of Labeling at Your School Data Source Ongoing

1. Students labeled 151/851 students = Braddock ES grade- Gifted correlates w/

gifted at your 18% level data sorters students
school AAP status.
Breakdown:
K grade: 0/141
students = 0%
1st grade: 20/125

students = 16%
2nd grade:28/155
students = 18.1%
3rd grade: 47/154

students = 30.5%
4th grade: 32/145

students = 22.1%
5th grade: 24/131

students = 18.3%
2. Students labeled 224/851 = 26% Braddock ES 2016- At-risk term

at risk at your 17 Literacy Data viewed through our
school (updated March school-wide literacy
data lens, meaning
2017; school-wide
students are reading
data) significantly below
grade-level
3. Students labeled w/ K- 13/141 = 9.2% Braddock ES grade- Students w/ a SpEd

a disability at your 1st- 14/125 = 11.2% level data sorters label used in data, to
school 2nd- 15/155 = 9.7% (Primary Service include speech
3rd- 20/154 = 13% services, which falls
column)
4th- 23/145 = 15.9% under SpEd services
5th- 32/131= 24.4%
Data rounded to the
117/851 students = nearest tenth
13.7%
4. Students labeled 378/421 = 90% Braddock ES grade-

ELL or bilingual at primary grade ESOL level data sorters
your school students, K-2
383/430 = 89% upper

grade ESOL students,
3-5
5. Students with any N/A at this time

other kind of label at
your school
6. Total number of All students are

students who are labeled: 851/851 =
labeled at your 100%
school
Section C. Discipline Data Data Source Ongoing


1. Students in your 15/852 students = Conversations w/ 2015-16SY data; data

school who were 1.8% school counselor highlighted, as data
suspended in the past could be invalid or
year (disaggregated skewed due to data
Braddock ES
by race, disability, shared in a face-to-
gender, ESL, and school profile: face conversation
FRL) http://schoolprofiles.
fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?
p=108:8:::::P8_RET
URN_PAGE:50
(total number of
enrolled students,
852, used)
2. Students in your 5/852 students = 0.6% Conversations w/ 2015-16SY data; data

school who were school counselor highlighted, as data
expelled the past could be invalid or
school year skewed due to data
Braddock ES
(disaggregated by shared in a face-to-
race, disability, school profile: face conversation
gender, ESL, and http://schoolprofiles.
FRL) fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?
p=108:8:::::P8_RET
URN_PAGE:50
(total number of
enrolled students,
852, used)
3. SOL grade level Grade 3 Data: Braddock ES Upper grade, 3-5 data
achievement Reading: 77.6% pass School Profile*
(disaggregated by rate (59/76 students http://schoolprofiles.
race, disability, who took the
gender, ESL, and assessment passed)
FRL) p=108:8:::::P8_RET
Computer Adaptive URN_PAGE:50
Math Test: 90% pass
rate (90/134 students
who took the
assessment passed)
Grade 4 Data:
Reading: 46.6% pass
who took the
assessment passed)
Math Test: 59.4%

pass rate (82/138
students who took the
assessment passed)
Grade 5 Data:
Reading: 55.9% pass
who took the
assessment passed)
Math Test: 55.7%

pass rate (54/97
assessment passed)
Science: 49.1% pass

who took the
assessment passed)
VA Studies (History):
83.9% pass rate (52/62
assessment passed)
4. Graduation rate 100% http://schoolprofiles Students are very

(disaggregated by .fcps.edu/images/pd rarely held back in
race, disability, fs/Retentions2015.p 5th grade to repeat
gender, ESL, and the grade-level before
df
FRL) transitioning to Poe
Middle School, our
feeder school
5. Drop-out rate N/A in my elementary

(disaggregated by school setting
race, disability,
gender, ESL, and

FRL)
6. Participation in N/A in my elementary

ACT/SAT/AP exams school setting
(disaggregated by
race, disability,
gender, ESL, and
FRL)
7. Test results of N/A in my elementary

Act/SAT/AP exams school setting
(disaggregated by
race, disability,
gender, ESL, and
FRL)
Section D. Social Class Data Source Ongoing

1. Students receiving 648/852* students or Braddock ES *2015-16SY data

FRL in your school 76% of my school School Profile*
population http://schoolprofiles.
p=108:8:::::P8_RET
URN_PAGE:50
2. Students receiving 52,000 / 186,000 = FCPS Division *data to date

FRL in the district 26% (estimated Profile:
(FCPS) number of FRL served https://www.fcps.edu
students)
/about-fcps
3. Students identified 117/851 students = Braddock ES grade-

for special education 13.7% level data sorters
in your school (Primary Service
Breakdown:
column)
K- 13/141 = 9.2%
1st- 14/125 = 11.2%
2nd- 15/155 = 9.7%
3rd- 20/154 = 13%
4th- 23/145 = 15.9%
5th- 32/131= 24.4%
4. Of the number of NG
students identified for
special education,
what fraction and
what percentage
receive FRL
5. How does the N/A becase

response to Item 4 information NG
compare to Item 1 in
this section? The
answers should be
similar to be
equitable. If, for
example, 60% of
special education
also qualify for FRL,
and your educational
setting has 20% of its
students receiving
free/reduced price
lunches, than
students who receive
FRL are
overrepresented in
special education. In
other words, a
student from a lower
socioeconomic class
family would be three
times more likely to
be labeled for special
education.
6. Students identified NG
as gifted in your
setting who receive
FRL. Compare the
response to Item 1.
7. Students identified NG
at-risk in your
setting who receive
FRL. Compare your
response to Item 1.
8. Report two 8/22 (36.4%) students SIS- Student -FYI: All students
additional pieces of in my class have Information have various
academic parents who work System, where adversities they face
achievement in your multiple jobs or and at-home
student attendance is
setting as they relate receive assistance (i.e. challenges
to social class. (Note: help from family taken and student
Social class here members in terms of profiles can be seen -Students w/
refers to social groups babysitting or clothes along w/ my Smartphones not
based on economic from a local church) to observations. reported because
status.) make ends meet (low though expensive,
SES families). there is no correlation
between having one
14/22 (63.6%) and any particular
students live in a 2 SES.
parent home and are
considered middle or
barely middle class,
have a little more than
students who live in
single-family homes.
9. Collect social class 6/7 (85.7%) PTA

comparison data on at board members=
least two other areas middle class parents
in your school and/or who are mostly white
classroom (e.g., moms, with some
parent-teacher Hispanic
organization representation.
participation, student
council, safety patrol, 1/7 (14.3%) of the
band). members could be
considered high class,
as he is a very
profitable business
man and has helped
my school partner up
with many, local
business partners for
monetary support
0/22 (0%) students are

considered members
of a high class.
10. What do these Adversities do not

social class data impede the learning in
mean? In your my classroom, which
analysis, include the is composed of
strengths and areas of students from low SES
improvement for and very few SES
serving students of homes! Students have
low socioeconomic responded well to me
status. first building up their
self-efficacy and trust,
which was translated
into their academics.
Section E. Discipline Data Data Source Ongoing

1. Students of color in 21/22 students are Teacher Evaluation All students in my

your class. (Note: The Hispanic = 95% data and SIS (FCPS classroom are of
term students of attendance/student either Hispanic or
color refers to 1/22 is White = 4.5% Asian decent except
profile website)
students who identify for one student, who
as having non- is from Palestine, but
European heritage.) per his school profile
ethnicity code is
labeled as White.
2. Students of color in -Hispanic: 578/852 = School Profile* *Demographics based

your school 14.6% http://schoolprofiles. on 2015-16SY-
fcps.edu/schlprfl/f? demographics similar
-White: 74/852 = to this current, 2016-
p=108:8:::::P8_RET
8.7% 17SY.
URN_PAGE:50
-Black: 55/852 = 6.5% paired with school
grade-level literacy
-Asian: 124/852 = data sorters
14.6%
-Other: 21/852 =
2.5%
3. Students labeled 1/22 = 4.5% SIS (FCPS Speech falls under the
for special education (speech student) attendance/student umbrella of SpEd

in your class. profile website)
4. Students labeled 117/851 students = Braddock ES grade-

for special education 13.7% level data sorters
in your school. (Primary Service
Breakdown:
column)
K- 13/141 = 9.2%
1st- 14/125 = 11.2%
2nd- 15/155 = 9.7%
3rd- 20/154 = 13%
4th- 23/145 = 15.9%
5th- 32/131= 24.4%
5. Of the number of 1/22 = 4.5% (White) My knowledge/SIS Only one student in

students identified for (student attendance my classroom is
special education in and profile data) identified as a student
your class, what who receives SpEd
fraction and what (speech) services.
percentage are
students of color?
6. Of the number of 117/851 students = Braddock ES 2016-

students identified for 13.7% 17 Literacy Data
special education in (updated March
your school, what Breakdown:
2017; school-wide
fraction and what K- 13/141 = 9.2%
percentage are 7/13 Hispanic data)
students of color? 1/13 Asian
4/13 White
1/13 Biracial
1st- 14/125 = 11.2%

6/14 Hispanic
1/14 Asian
3/14 White
2/14 Biracial
2/14 Black
2nd- 15/155 = 9.7%

11/15 Hispanic
3/15 Asian
1/15 White
3rd- 20/154 = 13%

17/20 Hispanic
1/20 Asian
1/20 White
1/20 Black
4th- 23/145 = 15.9%

15/23 Hispanic
3/23 Asian
4/23 White
1/23 Black
5th- 32/131= 24.4%

28/32 Hispanic
0/32 Asian
2/32 White
1/32 Black
1/32 Biracial
7. How do the My class make-up

responses to Items 5 goes against the grain,
and 6 compare to as the majority of my
Items 1 and 2 in this school is Hispanic and
section, respectively? also, the majority of
SpEd students are
Hispanic.
8*. Students 7/22 = 31.8% are *Labeled as the 2nd

identified as gifted labeled as gifted or #6 in this section;
in your classroom L2 sequence continues
who are students of thereafter
color. Compare the Out of my 7 identified
response to Item 1. students, 4/7 (57%) L2 means students are
are Asian and 3/7 being monitored and
(42.9%) are Hispanic. cited as having a gift-
they are specifically
being monitored to
see if they would be a
good fit in the
advanced academics
full-time classroom
setting in the
upcoming year(s).
9. Students identified All students who are Braddock ES 2016-

as at-risk in your considered at-risk 17 Literacy Data
school who are are students of color : (updated March
students of color. 224/224 = 100% 2017; school-wide

Compare your data
response to Item 2.
10. Certified teaching 82/138 = 59.4% Braddock ES Though the number

staff who are people (teacher staff / total website and of diverse, certified
of color in your number of staff knowledge of staff teachers is a lower
school: Compare this members) percentage than that
demographics
to Item 1. of my schools
50/82 or 61% = white diverse students, this
38/82 or 46.3% = number has steadily
people of color, to increased these past 2
include: years, during my time
K IAs - 5 at Braddock ES.
1st- 2
2nd- 6
3rd- 3
4th- 2
5th- 3
SpEd/SpEd IAs- 12
ESOL- 3
Art- 1
SBTS- 1
11. Uncertified staff 56/138 = 41% Braddock ES

who are people of total number of school website
color in your school: uncertified staff in the directory &
Compare this to Item building, which
knowledge of staff
1. include:
Custodian staff
Office workers
Cafe workers
Parent liaison
etc.
Breakdown:
51/138 or 37% of all
staff members are
uncertified staff and
people of color
12. People of color 2/13= 15.4% https://www.fcps.ed WOW! This is

serving on the school representatives are u/school- astounding, as people
board (FCPS). people of color and board/school- of color are
both of these members drastically
board-members
are Asian underrepresented- I

hope to serve at this
capacity one day.
13. Report two Robotics club- mostly J. Matthews,

additional pieces of white and Asian, Robotics liaison
academic which speaks to the
achievement data in minority populations
T. Sivells, BEST
your at my school- 11/15
school/classroom as (73.3%) members are liason
they relate to race Asian while 4/15 are
and/or ethnicity. White (26.7%)
Tuesday/Thursday
Technology and
Literacy (BEST) club-
the majority of club
members are hispanic,
which speaks to my
schools population
majority: 86/106
students (81%)
14. Collect racial Cafeteria My observations and *Cafeteria

comparison data on at Volunteers*: knowledge of my volunteers monitor
least two other areas - (50%) Black school climate the cafeteria traffic,
in your school and/or - (50%) Hispanic safety, organization,
classroom (e.g., and cleanliness.
parent-teacher
organization Parent Liaisons in the
participation, student building:
council, safety patrol, - (50%) Korean
band). - (50%) Hispanic
15. What do these As strengths, my Advocate for this

racial data mean? In school is catering to change!
your analysis, include the at-risk and (Mental/personal
the strengths and bubble students via note)
areas of improvement integrating interest and
for serving students learning to boost
of color. effort, using
tech/literacy content in
the BEST program.
As an area of
improvement,
Robotics needs to be
more diverse and
through open to all,
more effort is needed
to reach people of
color and peek their
interest.
Section F. Discipline Data Data Source Ongoing

1. How many English 21/22 (95.5%) = Braddock ES grade-

Learners are in your English Language level data sorters &
class and what Learners. Teacher Evaluation
languages do they
20/21 (95.2%) speak data
speak?
another language,
other than English, at
home.
Dual languages
include:
Spanish- 15/21
(71.4%) students
Urdu 1/21 (47.6%)
Vietnamese 4/21
(19%)
Korean 1/21 (47.6%)

students
2. How many English 29 languages Braddock School This is frequently

Learners are in your website emphasized and
school and what prided at the
languages do they administration level
speak? in terms of our unique
and diverse school
population of
students!
3. How many 117/851 students = Braddock ES grade-

students in the school 13.7% level data sorters
are labeled for special
education?
4. Of the number of K- 13/141 = 9.2% Braddock ES grade-

0/13 = 0% ELs level data sorters
special education,
what fraction and 1st- 14/125 = 11.2%
what percentage are 12/14= 85.7% ELs
ELs?
2nd- 15/155 = 9.7%
15/15= 100% ELs
3rd- 20/154 = 13%

16/20= 80% ELs
4th- 23/145 = 15.9%

23/23 = 100% ELs
5th- 32/131= 24.4%

28/32= 87.5% ELs
5. How does the Many students are

response to Item 4 dually identified as a
compare to Item 1 in recipient of SpEd and
this section? ESOL services, which
is in part due to having
a high Hispanic/people
of color population-
overlapping of
services is likely
6. Students identified K grade: 0/141 Braddock ES grade- Changed ELs to

as gifted in your students = 0% level data sorters SpEd in the
school who are SpEd. 0/0= 0% gifted label question, as a see a
Compare the response w/ SpEd label potential inequality
to Item 1. and understanded
1st grade: 20/125 population (SpEd
students = 16% students in the gifted
1/20 = 5% gifted label setting)
w/ SpEd label
2nd grade:28/155
students = 18.1%
0/28 = 0% gifted label
w/ SpEd label
3rd grade: 47/154

students = 30.5%
2/47 = 4.3% gifted
label w/ SpEd label
4th grade: 32/145

students = 22.1%
2/32 = 6.3% gifted
label w/ SpEd label
5th grade: 24/131

students = 18.3%
4/24= 16.7% gifted
label w/ SpEd label
7. Students identified School at-risk data Braddock ES 2016- Grade-level data

as at-risk in your in comparison to the 17 Literacy Data (w/ analyzed- below
school who are ELs. entire school: DRA data) grade reading levels
Compare your 224/851 = 26% compared w/ ESOL
response to Item 1. status column- Feb.
School at-risk data DRA Q2 window data
in comparison to my used
schools EL
population:
Out of this number of
students (224), 179
Hispanic students
ESOL students-
179/224 = 79.9%
8. Certified teaching 82/138 = 59.4% http://www2.fcps.e School website

staff who are (certified teacher du/BraddockES/ directory count (total
bilingual in your staff / total number of (school website) number of staff) used,
school. Compare this staff members) as the BES school
to Item 1. profile only shows
full-time staff data for
Out of all the certified Data paired w/ the current and past
staff members, 66/82 Braddock ES school years.
(80.5%) are bilingual school profile:
http://schoolprofiles.
Spanish spoken by fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?
65/66 (98.5%) of the p=108:8:::::P8_RET
bilingual staff URN_PAGE:50
Vietnamese spoken by
1/66 (1.5%) of the
bilingual staff
This also means

66/138 (47.8%) of all
staff members are
bilingual.
9. Uncertified staff 56/138 = 41% Braddock ES

who are bilingual in total number of school website
your school: Compare uncertified staff in the directory &
this to Item 1. building, which
knowledge of staff
include:
Custodian staff
Office workers
Cafe workers
Parent liaison
etc.
Breakdown:
51/138 or 37% of all
staff members are
uncertified staff and
people of color
Spanish spoken by
46/56 (82.1%) of the
uncertified, bilingual
staff
Vietnamese spoken by
3/56 (5.4%) of the
staff
Chichewa spoken by
2/56 (3.6%) of the
staff
10. Bilingual people 2/13= 15.4% https://www.fcps.ed Hypothetical data, as

serving on the representatives are u/school- members are not
(FCPS) school board. people of color and board/school- known personally,
both of these members info. is not shared
board-members
are Asian. within their bios, and
I dont want to
If both members are assume.
bilingual, then 2/13 or
15.4% of the school
board speak another
language.
11. Approximately Approx. 90% My knowledge of The majority of my

what percentage of communication schools written and
school-family received in my oral (i.e. KIT
communications is messages)
teacher mailbox &
translated? communication is
sent home in Friday translated into Eng.
Folders and Spanish
12. Report two - Number of ELs in Observation of -Girl Scouts

additional pieces of my school based Girl meeting attendance addresses students
academic Scouts Troop: 2/8 or and one troop social-emotional
achievement in your 25% needs, which is just as
member is in my
school as they relate important and ties in
to ELs. -Number of ELs who taught grade-level with academic needs.
participate as anchors
on the daily school Observation of the -*2 sets of students
news show: 2/4* or news show and alternate being on the
50%. personally news show, as
knowing/have taught anchors.
participants in
previous years
13. Collect EL Student council: The school -Student council

comparison data on at 15/17 (88.2%) are EL counselors, who consists of 2 reps per
least two other areas students reside over the grade-level (K-5) and
in your school (e.g., our school reps:
student council
parent-teacher President, VP,
organization Safety patrols: (SCA) and J. treasurer, sec.,
participation, student 19/30 (16.3%) are EL Matthews, the Sergeant-at-arms
council, safety patrol, students liaison over the
band). safety patrols -The number of

safety patrols
fluctuate, as They
come and go (i.e.
move or transfer
schools) and range
between 30-35
students- lower end
number used.
14. What do these Strengths: My knowledge/

language data mean? EL students are well analysis;
In your analysis, represented throughout https://www.fcps.ed
include the strengths the school and within
u/school-
and areas of offered school
improvement for programs, to include: board/school-
serving English Student council (SCA) board-members
Learners. and the safety patrols (school board data)
program.
Areas of
improvement:
More Hispanic
representation is
needed outside of my
school walls. For
example, out of the 13
FCPS school board
members, there is no
Hispanic or Black
representation. In my
school and schools
around the county, this
representation is
needed, as for one,
students and families
can see themselves in
this role and be able to
better relate (i.e. via
culture and language)
at a deeper level.
Section G. (Dis)abilities Data Source Ongoing

1. Number of students 1/22 = 4.5% My knowledge My speech student,

labeled with paired with school which falls under
disabilities in your literacy data/SIS- SpEd services
class.
Student Information
System for taking
attendance and
viewing student
profiles
2. Students labeled 151/851 (17.7%) Braddock ES 2016-

with disabilities in students are labeled 17 Literacy Data
your school. with having a
disability at my
school.
K- 13/141 = 9.2%
1st- 14/125 = 11.2%
2nd- 15/155 = 9.7%
3rd- 20/154 = 13%
4th- 23/145 = 15.9%
5th- 32/131= 24.4%
3. Fraction and K grade: 13/141 Braddock ES 2016- Codes:

percentage of students 17 Literacy Data -LD: Learning
students by disability LD: 12/13 (92.3%) Disability
label (i.e., EBD, LD,
CD, etc.) SLI: 1/13 (7.7%) -NC: Non-CAT
-Nce-r(dd):school
1st grade: 14/125 code in [SpEd]
students Primary Service data
LD: 3/20 (15%) column
NC: 7/20 (35%) -PS:school code in

[SpEd] Primary
Nce-r(dd): 1/20 (5%) Service data column
PS: 1/20 (5%) -SLI:

Speech/Language
SLI: 2/20 (10%) Impaired
2nd grade:15/155
students
LD: 7/28 (25%)
APE: 1/28 (3.6%)
AUT: 1/28 (3.6%)
NC: 5/28 (17.9%)
SLI: 1/28 (3.6%)
3rd grade: 20/154

students
LD: 14/20 (70%)
NC: 1/20 (5%)
SLI: 5/20 (25%)
4th grade: 23/145

students
LD: 16/23 (69.6%)
AUT: 1/23 (4.3%)
ID: 1/23 (4.3%)
NC: 4/23 (17.4%)
SLI: 1/23 (4.3%)
5th grade: 32/131

students
LD: 24/32 (75%)
ED: 1/32 (3.1%)
NC: 5/32 (15.6%)
SLI: 2/32 (6.3%)
4. Students labeled 129/581 (22.2%) of Braddock ES -The majority of our

with a disability who the student body is literacy data sorter students participate in
participate in full fully included in the full inclusion, even
inclusion in your general ed. classroom students in our SpEd
school. setting. heavy, grade-level
classrooms do not all
Also, 129/151 (85.4%) have IEPs
of SpEd students are
participate in full -Non-CAT (NC)
inclusion. students excluded
from this data
-Self-contained
students not identified
on my schools
literacy spreadsheet
5. Students labeled 22/581 (3.8%) of the Braddock ES These are our Non-
with a disability who student body is literacy data sorter CAT (NC) students,
are partially included partially included in who generally push
in the general the general ed. into the classroom
education classroom. classroom setting- setting to receive
these are the Non-CAT science/social studies
(NC) students. instruction
K grade: N/A
Also, 22/151 (14.6%)
of SpEd students are 1st grade: 7 Non-
partially included in CAT (NC) students
the general education
classroom setting. 2nd grade: 5 Non-
CAT (NC) students
3rd grade: 1 Non-

CAT (NC) students
4th grade: 4 Non-
CAT (NC) students
5th grade: 5 Non-

CAT (NC) students
22 total NC students
6. Students labeled 0/151(0%) SpEd Braddock ES All students have

with a disability who students at BES literacy data sorter access to the general
are not included in ed. classroom setting.
the general education 0/581 (0%) total
classroom with their students at BES
grade-level peers.
7. Collect additional -Safety Patrols w/ My observation of

special education SpEd label: 1/30 meetings and J.
comparison data on at (3.3%) Matthews, the safety
least two other areas
patrol liaison
in your school (e.g., - Number of SpEd
parent-teacher students in my school
organization based Girl Scouts
participation, student Troop: 0/8 or 0%
council, safety patrol,
band).
8. What do these The majority of My knowledge/

special education data special education analysis
mean? In your students are able to
analysis, include the collaborate with their
strengths and areas of peers and not feel
improvement for isolated when
serving students with learning, to addressing
disabilities. social-emotional
needs, which are just
as important as
accommodating
students academic
needs (strengths).
As areas of
improvement, more
opportunities should
be provided
throughout the school,
allowing more SpEd
representation in
school-wide programs,
as noted in the above
Girl Scouts and Safety
Patrol demographic
data.
Section H. Gender Data Source Ongoing

1. Gender makeup of 82/138 = 59.4% of my School website Certified teacher staff

the teaching staff school falls under (http://www2.fcps.e includes teachers and
teaching staff du/BraddockES/), specialists in this row
and when used in this
knowledge of staff,
8 males/82 (9.8%) document.
teaching staff and School Profile
members (http://schoolprofiles
.fcps.edu/schlprfl/f?
74 females/82 p=108:8:::::P8_RET
(90.2%) teaching staff URN_PAGE:50)
members
Breakdown:
6- kindergarten
teachers
0/6 (0%) males
6/6 (100%) females
6- kindergarten IAs
0/6 (0%) males
6/6 (100%) females
6- first grade teachers

0/6 (0%) males
6/6 (100%) females
8- second grade
teachers
2/8 (25%) males
6/8 (75%) females
7- third grade teachers

0/7 (0%) males
7/7 (100%) females
5- fourth grade
teachers
0/5 (0%) males
5/5 (100%) females
6- fifth grade teachers

(16.7%) males
(83.3%) females
1-School Based
Technology Specialist
(SBTS)
1/1 (100%) males
0/1 (0%)- females
3- art teachers
0/3 (0%) males
3/3 (100%) females
3- music teachers
0/3 (0%) males
3/3 (100%) females
3- P.E. teachers
2/3 (66.7%) males
1/3 (33.3%) females
2- librarians
0/2 (0%)- males
2/2 (100%) females
10- SpEd teachers

1/10 (10%) males
9/10 (90%) females
8- SpEd IAs
1/8 (12.5%) males
7/8 (87.5%) females
2- General IAs
0/2 (0%) males
2/2 (100%) females
6- ESOL teachers
0/6 (0%) males
6/6 (100%) females
2. Gender makeup of 2/34 = 5.9% K-5 School website -Focused on K-5

the math teachers. teachers are male math (http://www2.fcps.e Classroom Teachers
teachers du/BraddockES/),
-*Upper grades 2-5
knowledge of staff,
32/34 = 94.1% K-5 and School Profile participate in Two-

teachers are female (http://schoolprofiles Way Immersion
math teachers .fcps.edu/schlprfl/f? (TWI), where 2
teachers on a grade-
p=108:8:::::P8_RET
level split the four
URN_PAGE:50) main subject areas,
Math Teacher teaching either math
Breakdown: & science or literacy
- kindergarten: & social studies.
6/6 (100%) females
- first grade:
6/6 (100%) females
- second grade*:
1/7 (14.3%) males
6/7 (85.7%) females
- third grade*:
6/6 (100%) females
- fourth grade*:
4/4 (100%) females
- fifth grade*:
1/5 (20%) males
4/5 (80%) females

the language arts teachers are male LA (http://www2.fcps.e Classroom Teachers
(LA) teachers. teachers du/BraddockES/),
-*Upper grades 2-5
knowledge of staff,
31/34 = 91.2% K-5 participate in Two-
teachers are female LA and School Profile Way Immersion
teachers (http://schoolprofiles (TWI), where 2
.fcps.edu/schlprfl/f? teachers on a grade-
p=108:8:::::P8_RET level split the four
LA Teacher teaching either math
6/6 (100%) females A male teacher was
added under 2nd
- first grade: grades heading, as he
6/6 (100%) females teaches the literacy

and social studies
- second grade*: portion of TWI while
2/7 (?%) males the other grade-level
5/7 (?%) females TWI teachers for 3-5
are females.
- third grade*:
6/6 (100%) females
- fourth grade*:
4/4 (100%) females
- fifth grade*:
1/5 (20%) males
4/5 (80%) females

the social studies teachers are male SS (http://www2.fcps.e Classroom Teachers
(SS) teachers. teachers du/BraddockES/),
-*Upper grades 2-5
knowledge of staff,
teachers are female SS and School Profile Way Immersion
teachers (http://schoolprofiles(TWI), where 2
SS Teacher teaching either math
6/6 (100%) females A male teacher was
added under 2nd
- first grade: grades heading, as he
6/6 (100%) females teaches the literacy
and social studies
- second grade*: portion of TWI while
2/7 (?%) males the other grade-level
5/7 (?%) females TWI teachers for 3-5
are females.
- third grade*:
6/6 (100%) females
- fourth grade*:
4/4 (100%) females
- fifth grade*:
1/5 (20%) males

4/5 (80%) females

the science teachers. teachers are male (http://www2.fcps.e Classroom Teachers
science teachers du/BraddockES/),
-*Upper grades 2-5
knowledge of staff,
teachers are female and School Profile Way Immersion
science teachers (http://schoolprofiles (TWI), where 2
Science Teacher teaching either math
6/6 (100%) females
- first grade:
6/6 (100%) females
- second grade*:
1/7 (14.3%) males
6/7 (85.7%) females
- third grade*:
6/6 (100%) females
- fourth grade*:
4/4 (100%) females
- fifth grade*:
1/5 (20%) males
4/5 (80%) females
6. Gender makeup of 5/5 (100%) = female My knowledge of *In 3rd grade, there is
AP teachers. AAP teachers my school climate 1 full-time AAP
classroom in addition
K- N/A to 1 of the TWI
1st grade- N/A teachers teaching
2nd grade- N/A AAP math to her
3rd grade- 2 AAP afternoon class (gen.
teachers* ed. math is taught to
4th grade- 2 AAP her morning class)
teachers
5th grade- 1 AAP -There are 2 full-time

teacher AAP classrooms in
Grade 4 and only 1 in
Grade 5
7. Gender makeup of Males have been Conversation w/ This data is skewed

discipline data. suspended (100%)- no school counselor per the above citing
record of female of my conversation
suspensions this with one of the school
school year. counselors
8. Gender makeup of 1 ED student/151* Braddock ES -Student is a 5th

students with an SpEd students = 0.7% literacy data sorter grader and the only
emotional disability. documented ED
1 ED student/851 (the student in the
entire student body)= building
0.1?%
9. Gender makeup of 3/3 (100%) = females My knowledge of

the administrative my school climate
team.
10. Gender makeup 10/13 (76.9%)- https://www.fcps.ed

of the school board. females u/school-
board/school-
3/13 (23.1%)- males
board-members
11. Report two Custodians: My knowledge of

additional pieces of 5/7 (71.4%) = female my school climate
academic
achievement in your 2/7 (28.6%) = male
school/classroom as
they relate to gender Technology Team at
my school, which
includes our SBTS and
Technology Support
Specialist, who assists
with technology and
fixing hardware and
multiple school sites:
2/2 (100%) = males
12. Collect gender Office staff: 5/5

comparison data on at (100%) females
least two other areas
in your school (e.g.,
parent-teacher School counselors:

organization 2/2 (100%) females
participation, student
council, safety patrol,
band).
13. What do these My school falls into My knowledge/

gender data mean? In the stereotype of being analysis
your analysis, include a female dominated
the strengths and career field (area of
areas of improvement improvement). As a
for serving male and strength, more males
female students. have been hired (2
total), one on the 2nd
and 5th grade team.
However, more male
teachers are needed, so
students can better
relate and even see
themselves becoming
a teacher to impact
others. As an area of
improvement, some
fields that exist
beyond the classroom
are male dominant.
For example, our
Technology Team is
100% (2/2) male. As a
strength, the school
board, and my admin
team, both areas of
power, are female
dominated, which goes
against the
stereotypical grain.
Section I. Gender Identity & Sexual Data Source Ongoing

Orientation Thoughts/Notes
(Report total number [fraction] and percentage
for each as applicable) Note: This section is
just as applicable to early
childhood/elementary teachers as it is to
secondary teachers. Please do not write NA for
any row.
1. Does your school No, as language in my Braddock Electronic copy saved

have any active schools handbook is Elementary in my teacher files of
policies that address geared towards using Handbook, updated my BES Handbook
sexual orientation and students, and
2015-16SY; Student
gender identity? Braddock families.
(LGTBQ) Rights &
If the term student is Responsibilities
differentiated, them (SR&R) document
either male or that students sign
female is used. with their
parents/guardians
Throughout my
and return to school
school, logical
consequences are at the beginning of
used, being at a the year
Responsive Classroom (https://www.fcps.ed
school, which range u/about-
from a Level 1 fcps/policies-
Warning to a Level 7 regulations-and-
Orange Form (being
notices/student-
written up and sent to
the office). rights-and-
responsibilities)
In the county-wide
SR&R, this falls under
the
Nondiscrimination
section
2. To what extent Like at the county Braddock ES

does your schools level, this falls under Handbook, which
anti-harassment Nondiscrimination includes our school
policy address and the Zero-
policies
LGTBQ issues? Tolerance rule, as
students can get
written up (what we
call logical
consequence #7,
Orange form, the
highest disciplinary
action level) for
bullying others.
3. How many staff are 0/138 (0%) of staff My knowledge This information is
open about their members not really publicized
LGBTQ identity to or displayed at my
other staff? To school- my principal

students? To families emphasizes that this
and the community? (school) is a business
and personal lives
should be kept
separate.
4. Does your Yes, if legally married. FCPS Health

school/district offer Plans/Benefit
partner benefits to its informational text
employees?
and literature
5. To what extent are School functions are My knowledge

invitations to school limited, but staff
functions, staff members are
gatherings, and so encouraged to bring
forth, inclusive of their families;
LGBTQ however, to my
relationships? knowledge, someone
requesting to bring
their same-sex spouse
to a function period
and let along being
denied has not been
publicized.
6.How and to what A fine line about this FCPS Family Life
extent does your topic is vaguely Education
schools curriculum addressed when literature via
address LGBTQ teaching upper grade
Blackboard (K-6
issues? Family Life
Education. For content)
example, Physical
Affection is a
relationship topic that
is addressed and
parents/guardians can
opt-out their child.
7. Does your school No, as this topic is My knowledge

have a Gay/Straight steered clear away
Alliance or some from, as the focus is
organization academics and student
supporting LGBTQ achievement
youth?
8. Are there books -There are books about My observation

available in the having 2 moms and conversations
library that address held with my
LGBTQ issues?
schools librarian
9. How many We are a zero- Braddock ES

disciplinary issues tolerance school and Handbook, which
have been related to this falls under includes our school
LGBTQ youth or bullying and after
policies
issues? (e.g., careful investigation,
bullying, name- the bully will get
calling, etc.) written up and either
serve in-school or out-
of-school suspension,
depending on the used
language, context, and
information found
during the admin-led
investigation
10. To what extent are Female students Braddock ES

students required to cannot wear spaghetti Handbook, which
adhere to a gender straps/tank tops or includes our school
specific dress code? short shirts/shorts that
policies/
are well above the
knee and no SR&R(dress code
midriff/swimsuit areas policy)
can be exposed.
No one can wear

profane language, to
include gang and
general symbols or
else the shirt has to be
changed or turned
inside out.
11. What do these My school is My knowledge

LGBTQ data mean? traditional in this
In your analysis, sense, as their is no
include the strengths known support;
and areas of however, there are no
improvement for known LGBTQ
serving this student students/staff members
group. to support
As to improve services
and outlets for this
potential population of
staff/students, more
than our 2 counselors
should be there for
support. Though there
may be an emotional
stand, there is also a
pride and acceptance
stance that should be
recognized without
judgment.

Educ 615 Final Pba

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Educ 615 Final Pba

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: SPECIAL EDUCATION INEQUITY IN ADVANCED ACADEMIC

Special Education inequity in Advanced Academic Settings

Tracey Brown Rice

George Mason University

Part I: Equity Audit

Explanation of Selected Inequity:Abstract

Policy Brief ....................................................................................................................... 3

Context and Importance ................................................................................................. 3

Whats being done? ....................................................................................................... 4

Action Plan ....................................................................................................................... 7

My Current Situations and Importance .......................................................................... 7

Desired Outcomes ................................................................................ 10

Action Plan ........................................................................................... 11

Specific Steps and Corresponding Timeline ........................................................... 11

Resources and Permissions Needed ........................................................................ 12

Anticipated Obstacles and Proposed Solutions ....................................................... 13

Reflective Narrative ....................................................................................................... 14

What I Learned ........................................................................................................... 14

My Role as a Teacher .......................................................................... 14

My Next Steps as a Teacher Leader ................................................................ 15

Equity Audit Collection and Analysis Tool ................................................................ 17

Context My Context and Importanceand Importance

Integrating Special Education students into Advanced Academic classroom

Shevin (1994) definesdefined an inclusive schools as a place where ever11yone

understanding, and problem-solving strategies). From this experience, students, in

segregated, non-inclusive classrooms disrupt the learning community, as Removing

multicultural education and a positive response to differences (Sapon-Shevin, 1994).

Not including students receiving Special Education services in Advanced Academic

According to the U.S. Department of Education statics, Special Education

the indicated levels (U.S. Department of Education, p. 125). In relation to Special

perhaps, very few, undocumented efforts existed.

Whats being done?

opportunities to show a their thinking in a variety of ways. As another key component,

parents are heavily involved. ...Parental involvement in Individualized Educational

education, the road to inclusion is much smoother.

In low socioeconomic status background rural and urban learning environments

1) Learning together, 2) Teaching well, 3) Support, 4) Adapting, and 5) Partnering for

changed to the Exceptional Education Department (Peterson and Beloin, 1998).

Whole Language (Sapon-Shevin, 1994) and Whole Schooling (Peterson and

community of diverse peers.

change their Special Education Department name to Exceptional Education Department, I

think they were on to something. Special Education provides students with

accommodations to better access their grade-level curriculum while gifted, Advanced

Academics does a similar service by providing students with higher-level thinking

whether an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) or individualized instruction

(scaffolded material) to strengthen their learning abilities.

Context My Current Situation and Importance

At my school, Braddock Elementary, we are moving towards becoming a Local

emphasis on higher level thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making (FCPS,

2017). Students considered for Level IV go through an Advanced Academics process

Academics teacher, and a county Central Selection Committee determines approval or

Canterbury Woods Elementary, or choose to stay at Braddock, their base school, in a

Teacher in a small group on an enrichment task thats content or general higher-level

look at where we currently stands as a school in terms of our Advanced Academics

identification process. Similar to national statics, little to no Special Education student is

being dually identified as an Advanced Academic (AA) student. At the Kindergarten

environments. As another problem, only a limited number of dually identified students

Grade Level Number of Percentage of Number in group Percentage of

First 20/125 16% 1/20 5%

Second 28/155 18.1% 0/28 0%

Third 47/154 30.5% 2/47 4.3%

Forth 32/145 22.1% 2/32 6.3%

Fifth 24/131 18.3% 4/24 16.7%