granger junior high schoolgjh.sweetwaterschools.org/files/2012/07/school-site-plan.pdfprincipal: ms....

Granger Junior High School CDS Code: 3768411- 6059778

The Sweetwater Union High School District will fulfill the

promise of 100% student success.

2011-2012 SINGLE PLAN FOR

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

Title I

Schoolwide

SCE Schoolwide

SBCP (School based coordinated Programs)

Principal: Ms. Mary Rose Peralta

Coordinated Intervention Specialist: Mrs. Maria Elena Galleher

October 2011

SUHSD Board Approval: November 2011

Non-discrimination Statement

Sweetwater Union High School District programs and activities shall be free from discrimination based on gender, sex, race, color,

religion, ancestry, national origin, ethnic identification, marital or parental status, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation or the

perception of one or more of such characteristics. SUHSD Board Policy #0410

Los programas y actividades del distrito Sweetwater Union High School District deberán estar libres de discriminación basada en género,

sexo, raza, color, religión, ascendencia, origen nacional, identificación con un grupo étnico, estado civil o discapacidad física o mental,

orientación sexual o por la percepción de una o más o de dichas características. Política 0410 del Consejo de SUHSD.

Sweetwater Union High School District

2011-2012 Single Plan for Student Achievement

Granger Junior High School

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Student Community Profile

District and Site Mission and Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 4

School Community Description s Recent Accolades ............................................................................................................... 7

School Demographics/Staff & Students...................................................................................................................................... 8

Site Reporting Data Section – Required:

Academic Performance Index (API) – California Accountability measure ................................................................................ 10

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) – Federal Accountability measure ......................................................................................... 11

California English Language Development Test (CELDT) ....................................................................................................... 12

California Standards Test (CST) Scores: ELA, Math/Gen. Math, Algebra I, Geometry, (Optional): Science, Social Science, Algebra II; District

Average Site Data: All Students Significant Subgroups Content Clusters Analysis of Data, Next Steps………………………….…13

The California Alternative Performance Assessment (CAPA)………………………………………………………………………………..…33

PE Test Results/ Smart goals .......................................................................................................................................................................... 36

Assessment Surveys: Staff, Students and Parents ...................................................................................................................... 38

Student Support Section:

SUHSD Suggested Menu of services………………………………………………………………………………………………….47

Homework/Tutoring Time/Locations…………………………………………………………………………………………….49

Quarterly Targeted Intervention Plan…………………………………………………………………………………………….51

Action Plan

Include references to After School Programs, Attendance Plan, CIS, District PI, El Program, Extended Day or Year Activities, Funding Sources and all categorically funded Personnel, GATE, Highly Qualified Teachers, Homeless Students/Foster Youth, Interventions, Library Plan, Parent Involvement,

Professional Development, School Safety Plan, Special Education, Support toSchools, Technology Activities and Leasing, WASC Findings, Chancery/Data

Director, Compact for Success, Curriculum Accountability, ELA/Math Smart Goals, PI Actions, QEIA…………………………………………….55

Governance and Funding Section:

Draft of California Parent Involvement Standards .............................................................................................................................................. 82

Parent Involvement Activities and Support; Copies of Parent Compact and Parent Involvement Policy ......................................................... 83

Parent Group Committees: Title I/SCE GATE Program for English Learners (EL) ................................................................................... 87

School Site Council Membership........................................................................................................................................................................ 91

Categorical Programs: Grants/Funding Amounts……………………………………………………………………………………………….…92

Supplemental Programs/Personnel ..................................................................................................................................................................... 98

Categorical Office Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................................................ 100

Governance and Funding .................................................................................................................................................................................... 101

Recommendations and Assurances ..................................................................................................................................................................... 102

APPENDIX: Account code structure, Annual Measurable Objectives (2002-2014 AYP Targets) API vs. AYP Acronyms and Specialized Terms




3

2011-2012 Delta




4

Strategic Plan

An Invincible Sense of Promise

District’s Vision

The Sweetwater Union High School District will fulfill the promise of 100% student success.

Mission: (A declaration of the unique identity to which the organization aspires; its specific purpose;

and the means by which it will achieve its purpose.)

The mission of Sweetwater Union High School District, an international educational community that

embraces the strength of its diversity, is to ensure all students possess an invincible sense of promise

through a system distinguished by:

A variety of learning experiences that provoke exploration, creativity and inquiry.

A comprehensive network of student support systems.

Development of the skills necessary to succeed in higher education and the world of work.

Community involvement through a variety of partnerships.

A culture of integrity, respect, and trust.

A learning environment that ensures the well-being of each student.

The celebration of individual achievement.

Parameters: (Boundaries within which the organization will accomplish its mission; self-imposed

limitations.)

We will make all decisions and take all actions based strictly on the best interest of the student.

We will honor the dignity of each person.

We will make optimal use of technology throughout the system.

We will only engage in endeavors that directly support our secondary educational program.

We will not assume or impose limits on anyone’s ability.

A learning environment that ensures the well-being of each student.

We will not tolerate ineffective performance by anyone.

Objectives: (An uncompromising commitment to achieve specific, measurable, observable, or

demonstrable results that exceed its present capability.)

100% of the students in the Sweetwater Union High School District will graduate and succeed in

postsecondary education and/or in the career of their choice on a pathway to fulfill their promise.

Each student will progressively realize a vision for her or his future.

All students present themselves as a positive force in the community.




5

Beliefs: (An expression of fundamental values: ethical code, overriding convictions, inviolable

principles.)

We believe that:

diversity is a strength.

every individual has unlimited potential.

we are limited only by our expectations.

goodness will prevail.

every individual innately deserves respect.

all people have the right to have a voice in decisions that affect them.

every individual has the power to make a profound difference in the life of another.

a culture of inquiry protects our freedoms.

a person’s true character is revealed through his/her actions.

families are the primary influence on the development of a person.

each generation is responsible to future generations.

all things are possible.

personal responsibility leads to community prosperity.

individuals have the right to make choices and are responsible for the consequences.

integrity builds trust.

all adults are responsible for all children.

Strategies: (Bold resolutions that dedicate the organization’s resources and energies toward the

continuous creation of systems to achieve the extraordinary as expressed in the mission and

objectives.)

1. We will put in place diverse curriculum and learning experiences that meet the needs and

aspirations of each student.

2. We will develop the character of each student with emphasis on creating a sense of

empowerment and a commitment to participation in society.

3. We will ensure exemplary staff to accomplish our mission and objectives.

4. We will ensure effective family involvement in the education of all students.

5. We will create systems of support for students to ensure student achievement and well-being.

6. We will establish internal and external systems of communication that include all

stakeholders.

7. We will ensure exemplary learning environments throughout the district.

8. We will engage in effective collaboration with all community partners and within the district

to accomplish our mission and objectives.

9. We will organize the district strategically focusing all resources on student learning and

success.

10. We will explore the role of the adult program as a support system for the secondary school

programs mission and objectives.




6

Granger’s Mission: (A declaration of the unique identity to which the organization aspires; its specific

purpose; and the means by which it will achieve its purpose.)

The Mission of Granger Junior High School, a diverse community where academic

excellence flourishes, is to ensure all students realize their boundless potential through a

system of learning distinguished by:

o Enriching and rigorous academic curriculum

o An environment that honors and recognizes achievement

o Effective and timely support and intervention

o Providing a safe, welcoming and nurturing environment

o Building character, respect and trust

o A culture where success is the only option

o A strong partnership between family, school and community

Objectives: (An uncompromising commitment to achieve specific, measurable, observable, or

demonstrable results that exceed its present capability.)

100% of students will promote to their next level of education

All students are positive participants and actively engaged members of their community.

All students will indicate satisfaction with experiences at Granger Junior High School

Tactics: (bold resolutions that dedicate the organization’s resources and energies toward continuous

creation of systems to achieve the extraordinary.)

We will ensure well being and a vision for the future.

We will create a system of support and intervention to ensure discipline, inclusion and a safe

and welcoming environment.

We will ensure research based staff development.

We will ensure diverse learning experiences : enthusiastic, fun life-learning experiences,

technology and tools.

We will ensure a culture of success by creating structures to recognize and honor achievement.

We will ensure a sense of community by creating volunteer opportunities in the community,

life-long experiences and parent involvement.




7

School and Community Description

Granger Junior High School, founded in 1955, is located in National City, California. National City ranks amongst California’s poorest in

terms of family income. However, the community is relatively free of graffiti and litter, gardens are prevalent, and residents volunteer

time in the local schools, churches and other community organizations.

A variety of ethnic and national backgrounds are represented at Granger. About 69 percent of our students are of Hispanic descent.

Another 19 percent are Filipino. The remaining 12 percent are African or European-American, Pacific Islander, and American Indian.

The Granger facility includes permanent and temporary classroom structures, a full service cafeteria; adaptive room; band and choir

facilities; library; science and computer labs. We also have a parent center where parents go to volunteer.

Students are placed in rigorous, college preparatory classes. Teachers collaborate through Professional Learning Communities to develop

lessons that meet students’ learning needs. Students feel a special connection to the school by being placed in an interest based advisory

such as skateboarding, yoga, chess and Japanese. Our students benefit from a variety of extended day activities and supplemental

academic programs. This includes reading and math classes which are mandatory for students in the ‘far below basic’ category. There are

65,800 instructional minutes in the day, and there are 2 days for staff development per month.

Examples of programs available at Granger include:

Compact for Success

Medical Pathway Program

Accelerated Reading Program

Interest Based Advisories

Content Area Reading in Science

Accelerated programs in mathematics, language arts, social science, science and an extensive band/performance program.

Intramural sports program

Standards-based field trips to destinations throughout Southern California

On site presentations and visiting instructors and career speakers

Less than five-to-one ratio of students to fully networked computers with Internet access

A full before and after-school program offering a wide variety of academic, athletic, social and artistic classes and activities

A game room for after school entertainment

Academic Enrichment Class (AEC). A homework center after school.

Individual tutoring classes with teachers weekly

Saturday workshops

Site specific intersession

Granger has a mix of new and veteran teachers. New teachers are supported and mentored not only by the principal, but also by a district

wide network of master teachers who routinely visit and coach first and second year teachers in their classrooms. All teachers participate

in an extensive professional development program. Granger has also implemented a Data Coach to assist in the implementation and

assessment of a standards-based curriculum. These programs work to insure the implementation of research-based instructional strategies

in the classroom, and serve as a way to encourage collaboration between faculty members in all departments.

Granger strives daily to create and maintain a safe learning environment for its students. Safety is a regular topic of discussion. Granger

is a community-based school with a pro-active principal and administrative staff that forthrightly addresses safety issues with students,

staff and parents. This, combined with the caring attitude of a savvy, well trained, caring and knowledgeable staff makes Granger a safe,

fun and nourishing environment for students who are eager to learn.

Recent Accolades: Granger has gotten out of Program Improvement status and continues to be a performing school, being one of the few schools who have

met both their AYP and API targets. Granger has successfully implemented Algebra for all 8th graders and biology for all 9th graders.

Granger also received a $40,000 grant from the Chargers for a new sports facility. The District Gear Up report stated that Granger had the

highest participation and highest improvement in Algebra, and 85% of our students passed the CAHSEE the first time when they entered

Sweetwater High School as 10th graders. In 2010 we were selected as a model school- California Schools to Watch. Schools throughout

the state of California visit our campus. In 2011 we were named a California Business for Education Excellence Honor Roll School for

having demonstrated consistent high student academic achievement and making significant progress toward closing achievement gaps

among all students. We received the special designation of “Star School”. Star schools are those with socio-economically disadvantaged

students that have shown a significant increase in proficiency over four years and are outperforming expectations for every subgroup of

students. This year we were asked to apply for the prestigious NCUST grant (National Center for Urban School Transformation). We were

recommended by NCUST because our API scores for each demographic student group were above the statewide average for all students.




8

School Demographics – Staff

School Demographics – Students (Numbers available from CBEDS report, Chancery or site registrar)

Student Enrollment

Ethnicity (percentage) (CBEDS or CDE website at

http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/) *2011-12 includes students who claimed more than 2 races. Over 100%.

Amer. Indian/

Alaskan Native Asian Filipino

Hispanic or

Latino

African

American, not of

Hispanic origin

White, not of

Hispanic origin

Pacific

Islander

2009-2010 .6 1.0 17.9 72.6 3.2 2.9 1.8

2010-2011 1.4 .7 19.1 71.1 2.9 2.0 1.1 2011-2012 1.0 3.8 22.4 72.7 3.7 3.8 3.9

Student Data (Information can be found at CDE website at

http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ or Chancery) 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012

EL (Formerly LEP) - English Learners whose primary language is other than English. 334 330 345

Redesignated Students - Redesignated from EL to Fully English Proficient (R-FEP).) 417 425 370

Gifted and Talented Students (GATE) - Identified gifted and talented students 281 395 310

Free and Reduced Lunch Students - Receiving free/reduced priced meals based on

income qualification. 970 804 867

AVID (Advanced Via Individual Determination) – College readiness class. 219 218 282

Special Education Students -Are identified in an Individual Education Plan (IEP), 108 105 121

Attendance Suspensions & Expulsions

Principal’s office may provide. CDE website at: http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ Select: Expulsion, suspension, and truancy information with school data.

School Mobility Rate Promotion Rates (MS ), Graduation Rates (HS)

Year Percentage

2007-08 93

2008-09 94

2009-10 92

Research/Eval. Firstclass conference bulletin

SARC Info: http://www.suhsd.k12.ca.us/students_data.asp

or CDE website at: http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/ or CBEDS Report or Middle

Schools = % of students meeting promotion requirements (Counselor)

Certificated Certificated Classified Classified

Principal 1 Special Ed. Teachers 6 Clerk/Secretary 6 Student Program Fac.

Assist. Principal 2 School Nurse 1 Campus Assistant 1 Tester 1

Sch. Psychologist 1 Librarian 1 Custodian 3 Lab Facilitator

Classroom Teacher 37 Counselor 3 Cafeteria Workers 7

Resource Teacher CIS .6 Health Clerk

Instructional Aide 8

Total

Certificated: 53

Library Media

Assist Total Classified: 26

Year 7 8 9 Total Enrollment (M/F)

2009-2010 345 378 355 1,079 (572 male/562 female)

2010-2011 341 335 357 1,033 (555 male/523 female)

2011-2012 392 350 329 1,069 (532 male/539 female)

Year Absences/

Excused

Actual

Attendance

Year

Suspension Expulsions

Number Number

2008-09 97.91% 2008-09 173 1

2009-10 98.44% 2009-10 151 5

2010-11 98% 2010-2011 223 3

Year Number Percentage

2008-09 236 67%

2009-10 268 81%

2010-11 274 81%

Analysis of Student Demographic Data –

One positive trend is that our enrollment is increasing.

Another positive trend is that our promotion rate increased 14% points from 2009 to 20010.

There is not a downward trend in suspensions and expulsions.

http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/)%20%20*2011-12

http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/


http://www.suhsd.k12.ca.us/students_data.asp





9




10

Academic Performance Index (API) The API is a single number on a scale of 200 to 1,000 that indicates how well a school performed, based on spring state

testing. The purpose of the API is to measure the academic performance and growth of schools.

2008 API Base 2009 API Base 2010 API Base

2008 API (Base) 757 2009 API (Base) 778 2010 API (Base) 792

2008 Statewide Rank 6 2009 Statewide Rank 6 2010 Statewide Rank 6

2008 Similar Schools Rank 9 2009 Similar Schools Rank 10 2010 Similar Schools Rank 10

2008-09 Growth Target 5 2009-10 Growth Target 5 2010-11 Growth Target 5

2009 API Target 762 2010 API Target 783 2011API Target 797

2008-09 Growth 2009-10 Growth 2010-11 Growth

2009 Growth 782 2010 Growth 795 2011 Growth 817

2008-09Growth 25 2009-10Growth 17 2010-11Growth 25

Met Growth Target/Schoolwide Yes Met Growth Target/Schoolwide Yes Met Growth Target/Schoolwide Yes

Comparable Improvement Comparable Improvement Yes Comparable Improvement Yes

Both School wide and CI Both School wide and CI No Both School wide and CI Yes

Awards Eligible Awards Eligible Awards Eligible

Information compiled from the CDE reports at http://api.cde.ca.gov/

See APPENDIX, Page 80 for more information on API criteria.

2008 Subgroup

API (Base)

2008-09 Subgroup

Growth Target

2009 Subgroup

API (Growth)

2008-09 Subgroup Growth

Met Subgroup Growth Target

2009 Subgroup

API (Base)

2009-10 Subgroup

Growth Target

2010 Subgroup

API (Growth)



2010 Subgroup

API (Base)

2010-11 Subgroup

Growth Target

2011 Subgroup

API (Growth)



Amer Indian/Alaskan Native Asian/Asian American Black/African American Filipino/Filipino American 855 A 872 17 Yes 875 A 903 28 Yes 901 A 905 4 Yes Hispanic/Latino 729 5 758 29 Yes 753 5 769 16 Yes 766 5 794 28 Yes English Learners 729 5 727 -2 No 722 5 759 37 Yes 756 5 787 31 Yes

Disabilities 588 11 591 3 No 584 11 696 112 Yes

Socioeconomically Disadv 748 5 769 21 Yes 764 5 786 22 Yes 782 5 808 26 Yes

Based on enrollment, only statistically significant numbers are reported. Information compiled from the CDE reports at http://api.cde.ca.gov/

Analysis of API Data –

We met our goal surpassing 800 API points. We grew 25 points to attain 817 API.

Subgroups that have reached 800 are Filipino and Socioeconomically disadvantaged. Hispanics are close at 794.

Students with disabilities grew 112 points in 2010-11

http://api.cde.ca.gov/





11

Federal Accountability Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) - MIDDLE SCHOOL - Required by the federal Elementary & Secondary

Education/No Child Left Behind Act (ESEA/NCLB); AYP measures the performance of California schools and districts. In order to achieve this goal and meet annual

performance objectives, districts and schools must improve each year according to set requirements. Data reported show whether all groups of students in the school made

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).

School met all 2008 Adequate

Yearly Progress (AYP) Criteria? 2009 School met all 2009 Adequate Yearly

Progress (AYP) Criteria? 2010 School met all 2010 Adequate Yearly

Progress (AYP) Criteria? 2011

No Yes Yes

2009AYP Criteria Summary 2010 AYP Criteria Summary 2010 AYP Criteria Summary

Met 2009AYP Criteria

Met 2010 AYP

Criteria

Met 2011 AYP

Criteria

AYP Components ELA Math AYP Components ELA Math AYP Components ELA Math

Participation Rate Yes Yes Participation Rate Yes Yes Participation Rate Yes Yes

Percent Proficient Yes Yes Percent Proficient No Yes Percent Proficient Yes Yes API as additional

indicator Yes API as additional

indicator Yes API as additional

indicator Yes

Information compiled from the CDE reports at: http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ay/index.asp.

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS MATHEMATICS

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011

Participation

95%

Proficient or

above 44.5%

Participation

95%

Proficient or

above 55.6%

Participation

95%

Proficient or

above 67.6%

Participation

95%

Proficient or

above 43.5%

Participation

95%

Proficient or

above 54.8%

Participation

95%

Proficient or

above 68.5%

Groups

Rat

e

Met

2009

AY

P

Cri

teri

a P

erce

nt

Met

2009

AY

P

Cri

teri

a R

ate

Met

2010

AY

P

Cri

teri

a P

erce

nt

Met

2010

AY

P

Cri

teri

a R

ate

Met

2011

AY

P

Cri

teri

a P

erce

nt

Met

2011

AY

P

Cri

teri

a R

ate

Met

2009

AY

P

Cri

teri

a P

erce

nt

Met

2009

AY

P

Cri

teri

a R

ate

Met

2010

AY

P

Cri

teri

a P

erce

nt

Met

2010

AY

P

Cri

teri

a R

ate

Met

2011

AY

P

Cri

teri

a P

erce

nt

Met

2011

AY

P

Cri

teri

a

Schoolwide 100 yes 48.5 yes 100 yes 52.7 yes 100 yes 59.4 yes 100 yes 37.1 yes 100 yes 58.9 yes 100 yes 62.5 yes

African Amer. 52.4 38.1

Asian

Filipino 100 yes 69.2 yes 100 yes 78.3 yes 100 yes 80.3 yes 100 yes 59.8 yes 100 yes 84.5 yes 100 yes 78.7 yes

Hispanic/Latino 100 yes 42.7 yes 100 yes 45.4 yes 100 yes 53.5 yes 100 yes 32.2 yes 100 yes 52.2 yes 100 yes 58.0 yes

Pacific Islander

White

Socioecon. Dis. 100 yes 45.2 yes 100 yes 50.6 yes 100 yes 56.8 yes 99 yes 34.8 yes 100 yes 58.1 yes 100 yes 60.5 yes

English Learner 100 yes 31.3 no 100 yes 44.1 no 100 yes 51.7 100 yes 34.3 yes 100 yes 52.7 yes 100 yes 56.0 yes

Students w/ Dis. 100 37.8 38.8 100 29.2 47.6 yes

Analysis of AYP Data –

We met all our subgroup goals ELA and Math.

In math students with disabilities increased from 29% proficient to 47% proficient, but only 1% increase in ELA.

In ELA our English Learners increased from 44% proficient to 51% proficient. In math from 52% to 56% proficient.






12

California English Language Development Test Report (CELDT) - Middle School - All Assessments – All Students The CELDT addresses state-adopted English Language Development Standards that covers listening/speaking, reading, and writing skills for grades two through twelve.

*Granger Jr.

Overall

Proficiency

Middle School

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 7th 8th 9th Total

Tested

7th 8th 9th Total

Tested

7th 8th 9th Total

Tested

Advanced 47 8 3 58 18 10 8 36 19 11 3 33

29% 9% 3% 17% 17% 10% 8% 12% 19% 12% 3% 12%

Early Advanced 49 36 28 113 34 37 37 108 31 31 29 91

30% 39% 31% 33% 33% 36% 37% 35% 31% 34% 31% 32%

Intermediate 53 35 39 127 38 39 37 114 37 34 39 110

33% 38% 44% 37% 37% 38% 37% 37% 37% 38% 42% 39%

Early Intermediate 11 10 10 31 11 12 10 33 10 8 15 33

7% 11% 11% 9% 11% 12% 10% 11% 10% 9% 16% 12%

Beginning 3 3 9 15 3 6 8 17 4 6 7 17

2% 3% 10% 4% 3% 6% 8% 6% 4% 7% 8% 6%

Number Tested 163 92 89 344 104 104 100 308 101 90 93 284

Data compiled from CDE website at: http://celdt.cde.ca.gov/.

2011 CELDT – Time in U.S. 0-3 Years 4-5 Years 6+ Years

Advanced # % # % # %

Early Advanced

Intermediate

Early Intermediate

Beginning

2011 CST ELA – Time in U.S. 0-3 Years 4-5 Years 6+ Years

Advanced # % # % # %

Proficient

Basic

Below Basic

Far Below Basic

Analysis of CELDT Data –

The majority of students who took the CEDLT are in intermediate or early advanced.

The goal is to move students up to advanced and above by providing extended day and extended year opportunities. Students will be

placed in an ELD advisory where they will be given extra support, and they will remain for 7th

period, tutoring or homework help.

http://celdt.cde.ca.gov/




13

California Standards Test (CST) SCORES - This Criterion Reference Test measures

progress on state-adopted content standards. Student scores are reported as performance level.

English Language Arts (ELA) California Standards Test (CST) SCORES - Middle School - The CSTs for English–

language arts, mathematics, science, and history–social science are administered only to students in California

public schools. Except for a writing component that is administered as part of the grade seven English–language arts

tests, all questions are multiple-choice. These tests were developed specifically to assess students' knowledge of the

California content standards. Student scores are reported as performance level. *Granger Jr. English Language Arts (ELA)

2011 State Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 436,301 24 33 26 11 6

8 441,055 30 27 26 11 7

*9 478,023 28 27 26 11 7

2011 District Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 5,312 22 38 26 10 5

8 5,389 30 29 26 9 5

*9 6,281 27 32 28 9 4

2011 Feeder School Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR) Feeder School

(select top2/3 schools)

PI

School

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

El Toyon 06 62 21 32 39 6 2

Ira Harbison 06 96 33 27 31 8 0

Las Palmas 06 89 29 33 30 6 2

Lincoln Acres 06 95 15 26 39 17 3

Palmer Way 06 81 17 33 35 12 2 Rancho De La Nacion 06 48 27 31 36 6 0 CDE reports available at http://star.cde.ca.gov/

2011 School Reporting Clusters – ELA – All Students

Reading Writing

Word Analysis and

Vocabulary

Development

Reading

Comprehension

Literacy Response

and Analysis

Written Conventions

Writing

Strategies

# Possible Mean % Correct





Grade 7

11

72

18

71

13

68

16

65

17

57

Grade 8 9

65

18

69

15

65

17

65

17

67

Grade 9 8 67 18 70 16 63 13 68 20 62

http://star.cde.ca.gov/




14

California Standards Test (CST) SCORES - This Criterion Reference Test measures progress

on state-adopted content standards. CDE reports available at http://star.cde.ca.gov/

ALL Students

Table 1. CST - English Language Arts, Reported by Percentages - Student scores are reported as

performance levels.

Grade Year Advanced Proficient Basic Below Basic Far Below Basic

7 2009 17 32 34 14 3

2010 13 35 32 13 8

2011 18 42 28 8 4

8 2009 17 26 35 15 6

2010 23 33 29 10 5

2011 27 32 26 10 4

9 2009 11 33 37 15 4

2010 17 37 31 13 3

2011 24 33 29 9 5

SUBGROUPS

Table 2. CST – English Language Arts, Reported as Percent Proficient and Above

Data reported are the number of students tested and the percent of students achieving at the proficient or

advanced level (meeting or exceeding the state standards). (Adjust reporting years to show available

data for most current three-year trend).

Subgroups

2009 2010 2011

# of Students Tested/% Prof. & Above # of Students Tested/% Prof. & Above # of Students Tested/% Prof. & Above

7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %

Male 165 48 165 41 151 43 164 45 160 54 146 50 144 60 158 58 138 57

Female 182 49 180 46 152 46 149 50 173 57 156 58 165 60 142 60 169 59

Econ Disadv 290 46 285 40 262 42 268 47 287 53 250 54 256 57 246 59 247 55 Non-econ Disadv 56 63 60 62 41 61 45 49 46 72 53 57 52 73 54 61 60 67

English Learner 99 11 97 6 89 6 91 19 82 26 68 22 94 23 75 23 77 5

GATE 73 88 64 84 77 77 139 81 77 91 60 90 161 82 139 86 89 96

African-Amer. 5 * 7 * 11 73 10 * 5 * 3 * 7 * 7 3 *

Filipino 71 72 68 62 56 60 68 74 69 77 64 72 65 80 67 70 71 77

Hispanic 252 42 254 40 222 38 222 39 241 49 224 50 215 53 211 56 222 57

White 8 * 9 * 9 * 5 * 4 * 6 * 7 * 6 * 4 *

Stud. w/disabilities 10 * 13 * 29 7 9 * 7 * 8 * 4 * 8 * 1 *

Std. w/no disabil. 337 50 332 45 274 49 304 48 325 57 295 55 302 61 292 59 306 55

Analysis of ELA Data –

In all grade levels the percentage of advanced and proficient students is going up.

The economically disadvantaged students are closing the gap with the non-economically

disadvantaged students. For example, in 2009 the disadvantaged 7th

grade students were 46%

proficient compared with 63% of the non-econ disadvantaged students. In 2011 that gap

narrowed significantly- 55% compared to 67%.

Hispanics, our largest sub group, is making gains. 8th

graders went up from 40% proficient in

2009 to 56% in 2011.





15

Standards-based Tests in Spanish (STS) - Middle School - The STS consists of multiple-choice

tests that assess reading/language arts and mathematics in Spanish. The Spanish-speaking English learners in grades two

through eleven who either were receiving instruction in Spanish or had been enrolled in school in the United States for less

than 12 months when testing began were required to take the STS in addition to taking the CST and/or CMA. School districts

had the option of administering the STS to Spanish-speaking English learners who had been enrolled in school in the United

States for 12 months or more and were not receiving instruction in Spanish. *Granger Jr.

Reading-Language Arts


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 1,657 10 25 34 4 7

8 1,417 Scores Reported as Average % Correct – 56

*9 2,348 Scores Reported as Average % Correct – 55


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 146 13 30 32 20 5

8 150 Scores Reported as Average % Correct – 58

*9 180 Scores Reported as Average % Correct – 59

2011 School Report – All Students - CDE reports available at http://star.cde.ca.gov/


Grade/Subgroup Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 2

Females 2

Males

Econ. Dis.

Not Econ. Dis.

Eng. Learner (<12

mos. in US)

Eng. Learner (>12

mos. in US)


Tested

Scores Reported as

Average %

Correct

8 1

9

Females

Males 1

Econ. Dis.

Not Econ. Dis.

Eng. Learner (<12

mos. in US)

Eng. Learner (>12

mos. in US)

Analysis of STS Reading-Language Arts Data –

Data not available for analysis.






16




17

California Modified Assessment (CMA) – Middle School

The CMA is a standards-based test for students with an individualized education program who meet the eligibility criteria adopted by the

State Board of Education. The ESEA/NCLB Act of 2001 calls for a range of assessments appropriate to students' abilities. The CMA

provides an appropriate assessment for a small percentage of students allowing them to demonstrate their knowledge of skills in the

California academic content standards for English–language arts (ELA) (grades three through nine only), mathematics (grades three

through seven), and Algebra I (for eligible students in grades seven through eleven), and science (grades five, eight, and ten only). Scale

scores and performance levels are available only for CMA results for English–language arts for grades three through eight, mathematics for

grades three through seven, and science for grades five and eight in 2010. For 2010, CMA results are reported as percent correct for

English–language arts for grade nine, Algebra I for grades seven through eleven, and life science for grade ten. Scale scores and

performance levels will be available for those subjects and grades beginning in 2011.

*Granger Jr.

English Language Arts (ELA)


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 24,647 11 20 21 28 20

8 23,320 11 19 23 31 17

*9 16,718 5 13 21 36 25


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 469 20 25 20 22 13

8 486 19 22 28 22 10

*9 510 8 21 24 33 14

2011 Feeder School Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

Feeder School

(select top2-3 schools)

PI

School

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

Ira Harbison 6 8 * * * * *

Las Palmas 6 5 * * * * *

Lincoln Acres 6 15 13 53 20 13 0 CDE reports available at http://star.cde.ca.gov/

CMA English-Language Arts (ELA)

2011 School Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)


Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

07 31 19 32 23 16 10

08 34 12 30 18 27 12





18

California Modified Assessment (CMA) SCORES – Middle School *Granger Jr.

Table 1. CMA - English Language Arts - Reported by Percentages – All Students


7 2010 13 26 29 19 13

2011 19 32 23 16 10

8 2010 18 15 18 41 9

2011 12 30 18 27 12

*9 2010

2011 12 30 18 27 12

Table 2. CMA – English Language Arts - Reported as Percent Proficient and Above - Subgroups Data reported are the number of students tested and the percent of students achieving at the proficient or advanced level

(meeting or exceeding the state standards).

Subgroups

2010 2011

# of Students Tested/% Prof. & Above # of Students Tested/% Prof. & Above

7 8 *9 7 8 *9

# % # % # % # % # % # %

Male 20 30 23 36 20 19 53 24 37 19 37

Female 11 55 14 25 7 12 50 10 * 14 50

Econ Disadv 29 38 36 33 27 29 48 31 45 31 39

Non-econ Disadv 2 1 2 * 3 * 2 *

English Learner 23 30 23 24 16 19 26 23 35 23 35

GATE 10 *

African-Amer. 3 4 1 5 * 1 *

Filipino 1 2 1 * 1 *

Hispanic 26 38 30 33 22 27 48 28 43 28 36

White 1 2 1 * 1 *

Title I/SCE

Stud. w/disabilities 30 40 36 33 27 31 52 34 47 31 45

Analysis of CMA ELA Data –

The percentage of advanced and proficient 7th

and 8th

grade students increased from 2010 to

2011.

Females are outperforming males (50% proficient compared to 37 %)

English Learners in 7th

grade did not improve, but 8th

graders did.

Feeder school Lincoln Acres has the largest amount of CMA students (15) and 66% are either

proficient or advanced.




19

California Alternative Performance Assessment (CAPA) – Middle School - Students with

significant cognitive disabilities who are unable to take the CSTs even with modifications participated in the STAR Program

by taking the CAPA. The CAPA is an individually administered performance assessment with all tasks linked to the

California English–language arts, mathematics, and science content standards. *Granger Jr.

English Language Arts (ELA)

2011 State Report – Level I - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 1,237 54 24 9 7 5

8 1,238 56 26 9 5 4

*9 1,257 56 20 11 8 5

2011 State Report – Level IV - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 3,409 37 42 14 6 1

8 3,236 39 41 12 6 1

2011 State Report – Level V - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

*9 3,429 45 32 18 4 2


Grades Students Tested Scores Reported as % At or Above Proficient

Level I 7-11 120 88

Level IV 7-8 136 94



Level I 7-11

Level IV 7-8 13 100

Analysis of CAPA ELA Data –

100% of our Level IV students who took the CAPA were proficient or advanced compared to

the district’s 94% .




25

California Standards Test (CST) - The CSTs for English–language arts, mathematics, science, and history–

social science are administered only to students in California public schools. Except for a writing component that is

administered as part of the grade seven English–language arts tests, all questions are multiple-choice. These tests were

developed specifically to assess students' knowledge of the California content standards. Student scores are reported as

performance level. *Granger Jr. CST Math (7)/General Math (8/9)


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

07 400,506 18 32 28 17 5

08 150,111 7 25 31 25 13

*09 50,812 3 15 28 33 22


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

07 4,910 18 36 28 15 3

08 2,335 6 27 33 24 9

*09 1,071 2 12 31 36 19

2011 Feeder School Report – Mathematics - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

Feeder School


PI

School

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

Ira Harbison 06 96 33 27 31 8 0

Las Palmas 06 89 29 33 30 6 2

Lincoln Acres 06 95 15 26 39 17 CDE reports available at http://star.cde.ca.gov/

2011 School Reporting Clusters – Math (7)/General Math (8/9) – All Students

Rational Numbers

Exponents,

Powers and Roots

Quantitative

Relationships &

Evaluating

Expressions

Multistep

Problems,Graphing

Functions

Measurement &

Geometry

Statistics, Data

Analysis &

Probability #

Possible

Mean %

Correct

#

Possible

Mean %

Correct

#

Possible

Mean %

Correct

#

Possible

Mean %

Correct

#

Possible

Mean %

Correct

#

Possible

Mean %

Correct

Grade 7

14

65

8

73

10

65

15

64

13

64

5

72

Grade 8 14 35 10 26 11 40 10 39 11 25 9 38

*Grade 9 14 38 10 35 11 45 10 51 11 31 9 47





26

California Standards Test (CST) SCORES - This Criterion Reference Test measures progress


ALL Students

CST – Mathematics, Reported by Percentages – Student scores are reported as performance levels. The

five performance levels are Advanced (exceeds state standards); Proficient (meets state standards); Basic (approaching state

standards); Below Basic (below state standards); and Far Below Basic (well below state standards). Students scoring at the

Proficient or Advanced level meet state standards in that content area. (Adjust reporting years to show available data for

most current three-year trend).


07

2009 13 24 39 21 3

2010 14 35 32 15 5

2011 21 42 24 11 2

SUBGROUPS

Table 2. CST – Mathematics, Reported as Percent Proficient and Above




Subgroups

2009 2010 2011


07 08 09 07 08 09 07 08 09

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %

Male 139 40 139 50 112 60

Female 154 33 123 47 125 62

Econ Disadv 247 34 227 50 196 61 Non-econ Disadv 46 50 35 43 40 73

English Learner 102 13 101 30 91 45

GATE 38 84 92 79 94 87

African-Amer. 4 * 3 * 7

Filipino 50 68 46 65 35 74

Hispanic 221 30 198 45 179 61

White 7 * 4 * 4

Stud. w/disabilities 10 * 10 * 4

Std. w/no disabil. 337 50 252 49 231 63

Analysis of CST Math Data: –

The percentage of advanced and proficient students has gone up.

Males and females have gone up 10 percentage points plus in each of the last three years.

Our largest sub group, Hispanics, have increased from 30% proficient to 61% proficient.

Our economically disadvantaged students are closing the achievement gap by increasing from

34% proficient to61% proficient.





27

California Standards Test (CST) Middle School - The CSTs for English–language arts, mathematics,

science, and history–social science are administered only to students in California public schools. Except for a writing

component that is administered as part of the grade seven English–language arts tests, all questions are multiple-choice.

These tests were developed specifically to assess students' knowledge of the California content standards. Student scores are

reported as performance level.*Granger Jr.

Math - Algebra I


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

07 35,974 49 34 11 4 1

08 278,773 17 30 24 22 7

*09 258,612 4 19 26 35 16


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

07 409 39 41 16 4 0

08 3,372 18 39 24 16 3

*09 3,110 4 28 32 28 8

2011 School Reporting Clusters – Algebra I – All Students Number Properties,

Operations, Linear

Equations

Graphing & Systems of

Linear Equations Quadratics & Polynomials

Functions & Rationale

Expressions

# Possible Mean %

Correct # Possible

Mean %

Correct # Possible

Mean %

Correct # Possible

Mean %

Correct

Grade 07 17 80 14 80 21 78 13 54

Grade 08

17

64 14

58

21

59

13

41

Grade *09 17 59 14 48 21 52 13 36

Reporting Clusters are available in Data Director




28

California Standards Test (CST) SCORES – This Criterion Reference Test measures progress


ALL Students

Table 1. CST – Algebra I, Reported by Percentages – Student scores are reported as performance levels.

The five performance levels are Advanced (exceeds state standards); Proficient (meets state standards); Basic (approaching

state standards); Below Basic (below state standards); and Far Below Basic (well below state standards). Students scoring at

the Proficient or Advanced level meet state standards in that content area. (Adjust reporting years to show available data for



7

2009 66% 30% 4% 0 0

2010 55% 42% 2% 2% 0

2011 41% 48% 10% 1% 0

8

2009 15% 41% 26% 14% 4%

2010 16% 46% 24% 10% 3%

2011 10% 40% 25% 19% 7%

9

2009 0 20% 34% 33% 13%

2010 2% 19% 38% 32% 9%

2011 1% 38% 21% 30% 11%

SUBGROUPS

Table 2. CST – Algebra I, Reported as Percent Proficient and Above




Subgroups

2009 2010 2011


7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %

Male 29 100 135 50 89 19 26 96 130 61 66 20 33 88 132 45 74 39

Female 27 93 154 61 85 20 27 96 141 64 62 23 40 90 116 55 77 39

Econ Disadv 45 96 242 57 156 20 44 95 232 63 111 22 60 92 202 48 127 40 Non-econ Disadv 11 100 47 53 18 17 9 39 56 18 17 13 77 46 61 24 33

English Learner 88 38 71 8 5 84 43 47 11 3 74 28 68 28

GATE 35 100 33 79 10 * 47 89 45 89 6 * 67 90 93 72 7

African-Amer. 1 * 7 * 5 * 2 * 3 * 1 * 7 7 3

Filipino 21 100 48 67 19 42 22 95 51 86 15 20 30 90 44 75 12 58

Hispanic 33 94 219 53 143 17 26 96 201 56 109 22 37 86 186 45 133 38

White 1 * 8 * 4 * 1 * 4 * 3 * 3 5 1

Stud. w/disabilities 1 * 7 * 19 5 1 * 1 * 7 9 8

Std. w/no disabil. 55 96 282 57 155 21 52 96 270 62 122 21 72 89 239 50 143 40

Analysis of CST Algebra Data: –

7th

grade Algebra students have been decreasing in advanced but increasing in proficient. (These are students who

come in advanced from the elementary school.)

9th

grade algebra students increased significantly from 19% proficient or advanced in 2010 to 39% in 2011. The state

scored 23% and the district scored 32%. We are above both.





29

California Standards Test (CST) –- The CSTs for English–language arts, mathematics, science, and

history–social science are administered only to students in California public schools. Except for a writing component that is

administered as part of the grade seven English–language arts tests, all questions are multiple-choice. These tests were

developed specifically to assess students' knowledge of the California content standards. Student scores are reported as

performance level. Math – Geometry


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

09 140,164 14 35 29 18 4


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

09 2,434 11 35 35 17 1

10 2,525 2 17 37 36 7

11 1,466 0 11 31 45 13

2011 School Reporting Clusters – Geometry – All Students Logic & Geometric

Proofs

Volume & Area

Formulas

Angle Relationships,

Constructions, & Lines

Trigonometry





Grade 9

23

60

11

57

16

55

15

60




30



ALL Students

Table 1. CST – Geometry, Reported by Percentages – Student scores are reported as performance levels.

The five performance levels are Advanced (exceeds state standards); Proficient (meets state standards); Basic (approaching

state standards); Below Basic (below state standards); and Far Below Basic (well below state standards). Students scoring at

the Proficient or Advanced level meet state standards in that content area. (Adjust reporting years to show available data for



08

2009 18 55 28 0 0

2010 27 55 14 5 0

2011 23 49 19 6 2

09

2009 1 16 53 25 4

2010 2 24 47 24 3

2011 7 21 41 29 3

SUBGROUPS

Table 2. CST – Geometry, Reported as Percent Proficient and Above




Subgroups

2009 2010 2011


7 8 9 7 8 9 7 8 9

# % # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %

Male 23 83 41 22 23 74 63 22 24 67 44 23

Female 17 59 50 14 21 90 76 29 23 78 76 30

Econ Disadv 27 70 80 18 38 79 116 23 41 71 93 23 Non-econ Disadv 13 77 11 17 6 23 39 6 27 44

English Learner * 12 20 * 33 18 1 14 7

GATE 31 77 45 * 31 87 27 33 45 71 48 46

African-Amer. 4 18 1 1 1 1

Filipino 19 79 22 16 18 94 34 24 21 62 41 34

Hispanic 21 67 63 * 24 75 95 27 23 78 72 24

White 1 3 3

Stud. w/disabilities 1 1

Std. w/no disabil. 40 91 91 18 44 82 132 26 46 74 120 28

Analysis of CST Geometry Data: –

8th graders have gone down in proficiency from 82% in 2010 to 72% in 2011.

9th graders have steadily increased in proficiency from 17% to 26% to 28%.

Females are outperforming males in the 8th grade.





31

California Modified Assessment (CMA) – Middle School - The CMA is a standards-based test for

students with an individualized education program who meet the eligibility criteria adopted by the State Board of Education. The

ESEA/NCLB Act of 2001 calls for a range of assessments appropriate to students' abilities. The CMA provides an appropriate assessment

for a small percentage of students allowing them to demonstrate their knowledge of skills in the California academic content standards for

English–language arts (ELA) (grades three through nine only), mathematics (grades three through seven), and Algebra I (for eligible

students in grades seven through eleven), and science (grades five, eight, and ten only). Scale scores and performance levels are available

only for CMA results for English–language arts for grades three through eight, mathematics for grades three through seven, and science for

grades five and eight in 2010. For 2010, CMA results are reported as percent correct for English–language arts for grade nine, Algebra I for

grades seven through eleven, and life science for grade ten. Scale scores and performance levels will be available for those subjects

and grades beginning in 2011. *Granger Jr.

Mathematics


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 24,052 5 18 19 31 26


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 460 10 27 20 27 16

2011 Feeder School Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

Feeder School


PI

School

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

Ira Harbison 6 7

Las Palmas 6 8

Lincoln Acres27 6 7 CDE reports available at http://star.cde.ca.gov/





32

California Modified Assessment (CMA) SCORES – Middle School *Granger Jr.

Table 1. CMA – Mathematics - Reported by Percentages – All Students


7 2010 17 14 17 31 21

2011 27 40 17 10 7

Table 2. CMA – Mathematics – Reported as Percent Proficient and Above – Subgroups - Data

reported are the number of students tested and the percent of students achieving at the proficient or advanced level (meeting

or exceeding the state standards).

Subgroups 2010 2011

7 7

# % # %

Male 19 26 18 72

Female 10 12 58

Econ Disadv 26 31 28 64

Non-econ Disadv 3 2

English Learner 21 29 19 53

GATE 10

African-Amer. 3

Filipino 1

Hispanic 24 29 27 67

White

Title I/SCE

Stud. w/disabilities 28 32 30 67

Analysis of CMA Mathematics Data –

The percent of proficient and advanced students in the CMA more than doubled from 31% in

2010 to 67% in 2011.

All subgroups increased in proficiency; males from 26% to 72%, economically disadvantaged

from 31% to 64% and Hispanic from 29% to 67%.




33

California Alternative Performance Assessment (CAPA) – Middle School - Students with

significant cognitive disabilities who are unable to take the CSTs even with modifications participated in the STAR Program

by taking the CAPA. The CAPA is an individually administered performance assessment with all tasks linked to the

California English–language arts, mathematics, and science content standards. *Granger Jr.

Mathematics

2011 State Report – Level I - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 1,232 33 35 16 9 7

8 1,236 35 37 15 8 6

*9 1,251 32 35 14 11 7

2011 State Report – Level IV - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 3,407 33 36 18 11 2

8 3,231 38 34 15 11 2

2011 State Report – Level V - All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

*9 3,423 29 36 24 9 2



Level I 7-11 120 80

Level IV 7-8 136 78



Level I 7-11 4

Level IV 7-8 8

Analysis of CAPA Mathematics Data –





34

Standards-based Tests in Spanish (STS) – Middle School - The STS consists of multiple-choice

tests that assess reading/language arts and mathematics in Spanish. The Spanish-speaking English learners in grades two

through eleven who either were receiving instruction in Spanish or had been enrolled in school in the United States for less

than 12 months when testing began were required to take the STS in addition to taking the CST and/or CMA. School districts

had the option of administering the STS to Spanish-speaking English learners who had been enrolled in school in the United

States for 12 months or more and were not receiving instruction in Spanish.

Mathematics 2011 State Report – All Students (CDE California Standardized Testing and Reporting -STAR)

GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 1,630 9 21 28 28 14


GRADE Students

Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

% Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 146 15 21 26 26 12




Tested

%

Advanced

%

Proficient

%

Basic

%

Below

Basic

%

Far Below

Basic

7 2

Females 2

Males

Econ. Dis.

Not Econ. Dis.

Eng. Learner (<12

mos. in US)

Eng. Learner (>12

mos. in US)


Tested

Scores Reported as

Average %

Correct

8 1

9

Females

Males

Econ. Dis.

Not Econ. Dis.

Eng. Learner (<12

mos. in US)

Eng. Learner (>12

mos. in US)

Analysis of STS Mathematics Data –







35




36

California Physical Fitness Report Summary of Expectations: The Fitnessgram, developed by the Cooper Institute for Aerobics Research,

assesses six major health-related areas of physical fitness including aerobic capacity (cardiovascular endurance), body composition

(percentage of body fat), abdominal strength and endurance, trunk strength and flexibility, upper body strength and endurance, and overall

flexibility. A score of 6 indicates that a student is in the healthy fitness zone in all six performance areas, and meets standards to be

considered physically fit. Information can be found at the Standards and Assessment Division's California Physical Fitness Test site.

Grade 7

SCHOOL #

ACHIEVED

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

# % # % # % # % # %

Total

District

6 of 6

5 of 6

4 of 6

3 of 6

2 of 6

1 of 6

0 of 6

1,897

1,539

1,199

774

486

218

38

30.8

25.0

19.5

12.6

7.9

3.5

0.6

1,896

1,543

1,195

772

452

173

40

31.2

25.4

19.7

12.7

7.4

2.8

0.7

2,014

1,610

1,113

720

450

199

98

32.5

26.0

17.9

11.6

7.3

3.2

1.6

2,339

1,696

1,004

633

325

138

38

37.9

27.5

16.3

10.3

5.3

2.2

36

2,452

1,413

782

476

204

55

21

45.4

26.2

14.5

8.8

3.8

1.0

.4

Physical Fitness test results posted at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/pf/pftresults.asp

SCHOOL #

ACHIEVED

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

# % # % # % # % # %

GJ 6 of 6

5 of 6

4 of 6

3 of 6

2 of 6

1 of 6

0 of 6

128

93

72

44

25

7

1

34.6

25.1

19.5

11.9

65.8

1.9

0.3

122

83

79

42

20

14

0

33.9

23.1

21.9

11.7

5.6

3.9

0.0

117

93

65

42

43

6

8

31.3

24.9

17.4

11.2

11.5

1.6

2.1

164

94

56

38

20

7

1

43.2

24.7

14.7

10.0

5.3

1.8

.3

93

77

73

53

25

10

0

28.1

23.3

22.1

16.0

7.6

3.0

0

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/pf/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/pf/pftresults.asp




37

PE Test Results

Grade 9

SCHOOL #

ACHIEVED

2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010

# % # % # % # % # %

Total

District

6 of 6

5 of 6

4 of 6

3 of 6

2 of 6

1 of 6

0 of 6

1,764

1,753

1,301

864

531

295

122

26.6

26.4

19.6

13.0

8.0

4.4

1.8

1,745

1,742

1,413

901

550

269

52

26.2

26.1

21.2

13.5

8.2

4.0

0.8

2,356

1,727

1,061

738

443

190

497

33.6

24.6

15.1

10.5

6.3

2.7

7.1

3,415

1,957

727

416

173

68

40

50.3

28.8

10.7

6.1

2.5

1.0

.6

3,229

1,898

711

464

276

102

30

48.1

28.3

10.6

6.9

4.1

1.5

.4

Physical Fitness test results posted at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/pf/pftresults.asp

SCHOOL #

ACHIEVED

2005-2006 2006-2007 2006-2007 2008-2009 2009-2010

# % # % # % # % # %

GJ 6 of 6

5 of 6

4 of 6

3 of 6

2 of 6

1 of 6

0 of 6

115

90

66

36

26

9

2

33.4

26.2

19.2

10.5

7.6

2.6

0.6

97

70

45

34

23

8

0

35.0

25.3

16.2

12.3

8.3

2.9

0.0

117

81

54

36

25

3

6

36.3

61.5

78.3

89.4

97.2

98.1

1.9

176

85

28

20

8

1

2

55.0

26.6

8.8

6.3

2.5

.3

.6

159

75

53

22

6

5

0

49.7

23.4

16.6

6.9

1.9

1.6

0

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/pf/pftresults.asp




38

Summary of Needs Assessment Surveys

Some form of needs assessment (such as the Categorical Online Needs Assessment Survey, interviews, observations etc.),

must be conducted and updated yearly. This is required by the state’s Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) as one means

of demonstrating stakeholders’ involvement in the development of the School Site Plan. To fully address the summary of

perception data below (to maintain strengths and remedy needs) the identified needs must be incorporated into the activities

section of the strategic action plan. It is suggested that the summary below be “bulleted” and include a reflection/action

plan the readers would find in the strategic action plan in more detail on pages or section.

Students

Data was gathered in May, 2011 Data was gathered from at least two sources (check

all that apply:

(Month) (Year) Surveys: Categorical On-line Needs Assessment

Senior Survey CA Healthy Kids Survey

Other Survey:

Number of responses: 781 Interviews Observations

Surveys conducted in both English and Spanish

STRENGTHS: According to responses of students, major schoolwide strengths (shown in %) are:

88% know where they can go to get help with their homework at school. (81% in ’09)

90% say that school is a safe place to be (88% in ’09)

78% say that teachers treat students fairly and with respect (75% in ’09)

92% say they have support for learning at home. (81% in ’09)

87% say teachers prepare them to work cooperatively with other students. (83% in ’09)

84% say they are required to complete writing assignments in most of their classes, not just in

English class. (86% in ’07)

86% understand their teachers’ grading policy. (82% in ’09. This has moved up from a weakness

to a strength. In 2005 almost 25% of students said they did not understand their teachers’ grading

policy.)

88% say they do their best to complete homework on a regular basis. (82% in ’09)

85% say they know what classes they need to take to get into college. (85% in ’09)

91% say their teachers expect high achievement from them. (89% in ’09)

82% say their teachers explain the purpose of the lessons they teach. (78% in ’09)

89% say their teachers use a variety of teaching techniques and activities in their classes. (85%

in ’09)

89% say they are encouraged to ask questions and participate in class discussion.

NEEDS: According to responses of students, major schoolwide needs (shown in %) are:

33% feel they are not safe from insults and verbal abuse (44% in ’09, 40% in ’07, 45% in ‘06,

50% in ‘05)




39

33% feel the school does not do a good job preparing students to use technology (42% in ’08,

32% in ’07, 30% in ‘06, 28% in ‘05)

36% of students do not enjoy reading outside of school (44% in ’09, 38% in ‘07).

36% say they do not eat breakfast regularly. 40% in ’09, (35% in ’07)

20% say they do not eat lunch regularly at school. (28% in ’09, 26% in ’07)

Students interviewed said the library needed higher level books and a greater variety.

REFLECTION/ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS (referenced in actions written in strategic action

plan). To assess progress, compare results with previous year’s data if desired:

To prevent insults and verbal abuse 7th

grade students will have a 8th

or 9th

grade mentor & work

on eliminating bullying through the Link Crew Program. (Goal 2.1.3)

To encourage reading at home we will invite parents to literacy nights and provide parents and

students with books.(6.1.2)

To prepare students to use technology:

o Students will have access to computers and other essential technological equipment…

(4.1.4)

o Technology, visuals and manipulatives will be used in all classrooms… (4.1.4)

Student Comments:

What do you like about your school?

Fun activities, great school spirit, Granger has so much energy. Music during lunch, raffles.

I’m safe here.

Fun and friendly.

A lot of great field trips.

Sports programs and clubs, game room…

Triple S club, skate club.

I like teachers respectation.

I like there is time to re take and re do tests.

Tutoring helps for upcoming tests.

Assemblies that encourage us to do better in school.

Teachers encourage us to speak up.

Teachers push you really hard for you to strive to do better.

They don’t force you to a lower standard.

They don’t leave us alone. If we get a bad grade they take us into tutoring.

Teachers are nice and the school wants us to be successful in life and achieve our goals so they

are there to help us.

What changes would you make to improve your school?

Uniform policy is too strict. “loosen the leash on the uniform policy… Our uniforms could use

more color.”

No shirt tucking. “The shirt tucking makes me feel bloated and lowers my self esteem.”

More money for band, more electives, more language classes. “Some kids are passionate about

singing and dance, but Granger isn’t paying much attention… We need jazz band and video

production.”




40

Don’t scream at us. Teachers should not be in grumpy mood all the time. “Teachers and APs

should not yell in your face and make you cry…When you yell at us we go into a worse state.”

Better tasting and healthier lunches. “We need more variety… It is nasty and greasy, but I eat it

or else I would starve.”

Less bullying. “Treat everyone with respect, especially those who are short and under weight like

me… Teach different cultures so kids could be respectful of other races.”

Cleaner campus.

Too strict. Too many rules. “Honestly, this school is becoming too strict, and it makes people not

want to come to school. We are not idiots.”

Need more computers.

Listen more and give us a chance to explain.

Not letting girls out on the field is racist.

Put in a soccer field.

Make lessons fun and interesting, and please have a sense of humor.

Give me an opportunity to get all my credits, and tell me HOW to do it.

I would like tutors that actually helped, not just walk around for 2 hours wasting time, learning

nothing. I learn nothing in Rising Stars, they don’t help me raise my grade. I would be so happy

if I had a private tutor that helped me raise my grades, then I would want to stay after school.




41

Staff:

Data was gathered in March, 2011 Data was gathered from at least two sources (check

all that apply:



Other Survey: PLC Survey




94% say they work collaboratively with colleagues to meet their department’s/school’s needs.

(80% in ’09)

97% say our school provides relevant and rigorous programs and curriculum. (94% in ’09)

94% say our school effectively uses analysis of student data. (80% in ’09)

100% say we provide a safe and secure environment. (97% in ’09)

94% say they expect quality work of all students. (91% in ’09)

98% say our school encourages all students to take classes that will prepare them for college. c

94% say they encourage parent involvement & input. (89% in ’09)

100% say they are committed to doing the best job they can everyday to help all students meet

the graduation requirements. (100% in ’09)

97% say they work in a supportive school environment. (was a weakness in ’09)

94% say our school has a good public image. (was a weakness in ’09)

95% say they ask students to summarize on a regular basis. (PLC)

95% say they ask students to take notes on a regular basis. (PLC)

100% say they work on vocabulary development strategies on a regular basis. (PLC)

92% say they use closure activities on a regular basis. (PLC)


24% say our site’s staff development is not relevant and implemented effectively. (31% in ’09)

33% say they do not communicate often with parents about class or school activities. (28% in

‘09)

27% say district staff development is not implemented effectively at my site.

27% say we do not have effective programs for GATE students.

18% say they do not know if their instruction included high rigor & support for all of their

students.


plan). To assess progress, compare results with previous year’s data, if desired:




42

Last year 28% of staff said they did not feel recognized for good work. Each month 5 staff

members were recognized for their work. In 2010, 88% of the staff said they felt recognized- an

improvement of 16 percentage points.

In order to make professional development more effective:

o Teachers will meet once a month during shortened days within their departments…(Goal

I, 4.1)

o Continue Professional Development Cafes & feedback (surveys). (Goal 1.1.1)

o Teachers will be given the opportunity during the monthly faculty meetings to discuss

implementation of school-wide strategies…((Goal I, 4.2)

o Teachers will have the opportunity to attend site specific professional development

classes… or to attend district and county-wide workshops. (Goal 1.1.1)

Staff Comments: “What support do you need to help you be more effective?”:

We need money and resources to support GATE students.

We need district support and money to extend the school day and year.

Remove disruptive students from the classroom.

We need better communication between the front office and teachers.

We need more money, computers, teachers & supplies.

Consultants are a waste of money.

We need more one on one coaching to develop the first best lesson.

SSC Feedback:

Consultants are very cost effective. In the past we paid teachers a 1/6th

stipend for coaching & it

was much more expensive. We have also seen positive results in our scores and walk throughs.

We would like to ask parents to commit more time to volunteer at the school. The more

opportunities parents have to learn the system and teaching strategies, the more we can extend

learning into the home. Learning opportunities must be extended beyond the school day, in order

to close the achievement gap.




43

Parents

Data was gathered in March, 2011 Data was gathered from at least two sources (check

all that apply:



Other Survey ________




99% say they feel welcomed at their child’s school. (97% in ’09)

98% say they are adequately informed about how their child is doing in school. (92% in ’09)

96% feel that their child is safe at school. (90% in ’09)

99% believe the school meets the academic needs of the students (90% in ’09)

99% believe the school expects quality work of its students (97% in ’09)

99% understand the school’s report cards and progress report (96% in ’09)

100% believe what their child is learning in class is preparing him/her for future jobs/career

(97% in ’09)

98% say the school has a good public image. (A weakness last year)


12% say they have not received information on the California State content standards for each of

the subjects their child is taking at school (16% in ‘09)

13% say school personnel does not respond to requests in a timely manner.

19% believe that the teachers do not provide them with strategies to use at home (20% in ’09)

17% say their child’s counselor is not readily available to answer questions.

57% do not know if the GATE program is appropriate or challenging.


plan). To assess progress, compare results with previous year’s data if desired:

Train staff to be inviting and welcoming to the parents who call or come on campus.

To meet academic needs of students:

o Provide a “College Making it Happen Night” at Granger, (Goal II, 2.5).

o AVID will take students on college campus tours, (Goal 4.1.13).

o Below-grade level students will attend mandatory after school tutoring, (Goal 5.1.1 &

5.1.6).

o Students missing assignments will be assigned to Academic Enrichment Class, (Goal

5.1.6).

o Teachers will organize re-teaching sessions for their students who have not reached

mastery level standards, (Goal 3.1.13).




44

o Order higher level books for the library and for classroom libraries, (Goal 4.1.12)

To provide more supervision on campus: (The majority of parents feel their children are safe on

campus- 88% and 90% feel there is adequate supervision.)

o a campus assistant will be present on campus, (Goal 2.1.1), and

o recreational and character-building activities will be provided before and after school

(Goal 5.1.7).

To provide a safer community: The perception of parents is that our community is less safe than

it was 1 year ago. In 2005 14% of parents felt their child was safe going to and from school. In

2006 18% of parents are concerned. No data in 2007)

o Mentors will be provided through Link Crew, (Goal 2.1.3).

o Staff will attend inservices on campus safety and security, (Goal 2.1.6)

o Parents will be given opportunities to learn about safety in monthly workshops, (Goal

2.1.6).

o Our community was successful in encouraging the city not to renew the “Cozy Corner”

liquor license, which was the concern of many parents.

To provide parents with strategies to use at home: (In 2005 14% of parents believed that their

child’s teacher did not give them strategies to use to help their child learn at home. This number

increased to 22% in 2006 and 20% in 2007).

o CBET English classes will be provided for parents to increase their communication skills,

(Goal 6.1.4).

o Monthly bulletins “Griffin Grams” will be sent home to parents containing a wide variety

of information, (Goal 6.1.1).

o Quarterly the Granger Newsletter will be mailed home to all parents…(Goal 6.1.1).

o Once a month parent meetings will be held to inform and educate parents on helping their

children succeed, (Goal 6.1)

o Host parent meetings to educate them on the services available for their child and

strategies to assist their child, (Goal 6.1),

Parent Comments:

SSC Input: AR should continue without penalizing students that do not meet required reading goals, as

we know some students are avid readers while others are just getting into the groove of reading for

pleasure. All students should not be acknowledged for the effort & their citizenship grade should not be

affected. Bring in more science /technology hands-on opportunities, mentoring, peer mediation & focus

groups.

Parent Meetings/Input: Insist that students have proper manners. Teach all students keyboarding.

Teach students to be more confident & participate more in class. Get more parents to participate. All

parents are well informed. I would like opportunities to participate with my daughter. The raffles & non

uniform days are good to motivate students. There is a problem with students who have 7th

period but

also need tutoring at the same time. We need to give students a class on good manners & how to dress

well. Continue calling us and keeping us informed. Provide classes on future careers.

What do you like about your child’s school:




45

It has changed from years back.

My daughter loves coming to school.

Good security. My child is always on best behavior because she does not want to upset Ms.

Johnson.

Great service and politeness.

Teachers who share their email and communicate with us.

They provide support when our child is failing.

They keep us well informed.

Good teachers.

Extra activities like the cheerleading squad has motivated my daughter.

They make us feel like we belong/ We are welcomed.

Many incentives to perform well.

Great school, parent meetings & workshops.

What changes would you make to improve your child’s school?

More GATE classes.

Finish remodel & get rid of old dirty buildings.

Better welcome at the office level. Know everything that is going on in the school & where

to direct parents./ Be more inviting at entrance. The 1st impression is indifference to bad each

time I come on campus.

ASP should provide accelerated activities. Teach in a different manner than during the school

day.

More extra curricular activities such as sports & music./Offer piano lessons.

Prevent theft on campus.

New computers & training for students. Improve on line grading. All teachers should use it.

What topics for presentations would you like the school to offer?




46

How to get kids excited about learning.

Healthy cooking classes, parenting classes & English Classes.

Family day- activities for parents & child.

Teach proper guidelines for raiding youth: rules at home, proper manners…

How could communication between school, staff and parents be improved?

Teachers, not just office staff, can call to personally invite parents.

Be more considerate & friendly when answering phone calls.

Better attitude of individuals interfacing with the public upon entering campus.

More phone calls and emails from teachers.




47

SUHSD SUGGESTED MENU OF SERVICES

Student Name: __________________________________ ID#: ______ Grade: _____

Program: ___ SpEd ___ ELD ___ Bilingual ___RFEP ___ At-Risk

___ GATE ___ Homeless ___ 504

Initial Placement:

____ Support Class ELA ____ Support Class Math _____ READ 180 _____ SEI

____Mainstreamed (SpEd) ____ CAHSEE Support _____ Other :______ ____ Acc/Hn/AP/IB

Initial Data:

Spring 09-10 ELA CST = ________________ Spring 09 Math CST = _______________ Spring 09-10 ELA grade= _______________ Spring 09-10 math grade = ________________ 09-10 CELDT score (overall) = ___________

Date of SST/CIS Team meeting:_________

Level 1 For all students generally meeting expectations

ACADEMIC INTERVENTIONS SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS

_____ Ensure appropriate placement ____ Talk with parents

_____ Classroom Differentiation ____ Meeting with Counselor

- Relearning ____ Meeting with Nurse - Extra time ____ Invite to join school club or sports - Supplemental resources ____ Link Crew type program - Multiple measures ____ Other: _________________________

_____ PLC interventions based on CFA’s (attach)

_____ Homework Club/Tutoring

_____ Work with IA

____ Other : _________________________

Monitoring: Implementation and Results of Intervention:

Level 2 For students not meeting expectations and needing additional support

ACADEMIC SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL

_____ Standards Based Tutoring/Reteaching ____ Weekly Progress Reports

_____ Intersession tutorials ____ Attendance Contract

_____ Credit Recovery ____ Referral to AP, mtg with parent

_____ Saturday Academies ____ Saturday School

_____ CAHSEE Revolution ____ Peer Mediation / Counseling

_____ CAHSEE 380 ____ Referral to Family Resource Center

____ EL Modules ____ ELAP units ____ Behavior Contract

_____ Destination Math ____ In-school Suspension

_____ Summer School ____ Targeted Behavioral Advisory

_____ Academic Contract ____ Work with Student Program Facilitator _____ AVID ____ Study Skills ____Other : ________________ _____ CAHSEE or Support class placement

_____ Targeted Academic Advisory

____ Other : ________________________





48

Level 3 For students needing intensive, differentiated support

ACADEMIC INTERVENTIONS SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS

_____ Tier 2 SST ____ Tier 2 SST

_____ Assessment ____ Support Groups

_____ Change of Schools ____ CPS Referral

_____ ISHS / Alt Ed / PAH ____ Home Visits

_____ Teacher / Staff 1-1 Mentor ____ Suspension

____ Other : ________________ ____Other : ________________





49

Subject Location Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

Algebra Support 607 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30

Algebra Support 605 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30

Algebra Support 401 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30

Math 7 Support 403 3:30-4:30

Math 7/8 Support 604 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30

English Support 301 3:30-4:30

English Support 210 7:00-8:00 AM 7:00-8:00 AM 7:00-8:00 AM 7:00-8:00 AM 7:00-8:00 AM

Reading Support/AEC Caf 3:30-5:00 3:30-5:00 3:30-5:00 3:30-5:00

Reading Support/ELD 207 3:30-4:30

Reading Support/ELD 409 3:30-4:30

Reading Support/Science 410 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30

Reading Support/Science 409 3:30-4:30



Reading Support/Science 408 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30




Reading Support/Soc Sci 501 3:30-4:30

Reading Support/Soc Sci 302 3:30-4:30

Reading Support/Soc Sci 210 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30 3:30-4:30

English 301 3:30-5:30 8:00-12:00

Math 7 Support 606 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Math 8 Support 603 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Academic Support Schedule

Free Bussing 5:00 & 6:00 pm

Mon - Fri

http://search.msn.com/images/re




50

Subject Location Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

Math 7 Support 806 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Math 8 Support 603 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Algebra Support 607 3:30-4:30



Math 7 Support 606 3:30-4:30

Math 7 Support 806 3:30-4:30

Math 8 Support 603 3:30-4:30

Geometry Support/7 Period 602 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Math 8 Support/7 Period 601 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Read 180 Support /7 Period 206 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Read 180 Support/7 Period 402 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Reading Support/7 Period 501 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20 3:20-4:20

Algebra Workshop 607 8:00-12:00

Algebra Workshop 605 8:00-12:00

Math Workshop 806 8:00-12:00

Math Workshop 604 8:00-12:00

Reading Workshop 307 8:00-12:00




51

QUARTERLY TARGETED INTERVENTION PLAN

I. District Goals Related to AYP attainment (for District Program Improvement be sure to include English Learners and

Special Education): Reading/ ELA : Math : GRADE 7: 79% of the students will score proficient or above on their CST scores to meet the Federal AYP target.

Algebra: Grade 7, 8 and 9 combined Algebra: 79% of students will score proficient or above on their CST scores to meet Federal

AYP targets.

Geometry: Grade 8 and 9 combined: 79% students will score proficient or above in the CST scores.

Intermediate Algebra: 95 % of student will score proficient or above in the CST scores to meet Federal AYP.

II. Current Reality (site data summary of CST/CAHSEE/EOC etc….)

ELA -7 Quarterly Test : Currently our students are showing slow progress in cluster 1. “Revise writing to improve organization and word

choice after checking the logic of the ideas and the precision of vocabulary” 2.“Use strategies of note taking, outlining, and summarizing to

impose structure on composition drafts” 8% of English Learners were Proficient or Advanced during the spring quarterly benchmarks.

ELA - 8 Students are showing slow progress in cluster reading comprehension ‘Analyze test that uses proposition and support patterns”

and Writing Strategies ”Review writing for word choice; appropriates organization; consistent point of view; and transitions between

paragraphs, passages and ideas”. 10% English Learners were Proficient or Advanced during the spring quarterly benchmarks.

ELA – 9 Students are sluggish in clusters reading comprehension and writing strategies. There are only two English learners who were

Proficient or Advanced during the spring quarterly benchmarks.

III. Site Objectives These should be developed through PLCs and may include benchmarks to measure progress toward

attainment of district goals (look at site data to pinpoint content clusters or sub-groups for improvement):




52

ACTIONS/INTERVENTIONS

MONITORING

(WHICH STUDENTS AND HOW WILL

THEY BE MONITORED TO DETERMINE

SUCCESS OF INTERVENTION)

RESULTS

(QUANTITATIVE; BASED ON

MONITORING OF INTERVENTION AND

ASSESSMENT RESULTS)

7th, 8

th and 9

th: weekly common formative

assessments: data used to target EL students

needing intervention that week.

Number of EL students passing Standards-based

chapter and target-skills assessments.

1 hour targeted after-school tutoring (Standards-

specific) based on weekly assessment. All

students have a test retake to show mastery of

non-mastery target from that week.

CST Basic EL student weekly intensive7th and 8

th

grade targeted students

Pre/post test of targeted ELA Standards(writing

convention, literary response and analysis, and

vocabulary)

All 7th and 8

th grade students between 300 and

350 on ELA CSTSs were enrolled in a Spring

week-long intensive class. Around 120 students

attended for 20 hours of additional instruction

over ELA standards.

Rising Stars Intervention for EL students with Fs

at progress reports.

Reduce number of failing students and increase

number of passing students.

Rising Stars tutored in failing subject areas daily

after-school. Students must be passing all

classes to be promoted out of Rising Stars

program.

Leveled independent reading (AR) and testing

and use of Academic Word Walls and targeted

high-incident vocabulary in all classrooms.

Increase in student reading levels school-wide.

Pre/post test of reading and vocabulary: gates-

MacGinnite and post-reading test for specific

student-selected books.

EL students have access to academic word walls

in every classroom. Students also have ongoing

vocabulary assessment in all subject areas.

Discourse and rhetoric model adopted for all

grades, all students.

Daily formative assessments, consistent use of

checks for understanding, and use of common

rubric for writing and speaking in all subject

areas(by both students and teachers).

EL students are able to dialogue with EO and

FEP partners, use sentence frames, use common

rubrics to evaluate writing and speaking

proficiency, and restate, question, and paraphrase

understandings of curriculum and discourse.

- Insert chart of CFA results by teacher

- Insert chart of walkthrough results




53


MONITORING




RESULTS



ASSESSMENT RESULTS)

1b – A pre-test will be given each semester in

writing strategies. Students not scoring

proficient will receive additional feedback on

their writing assignments.

- Extended day tutoring will be available to EL

students for editing /revising their writing

assignments.

- Post assessments will be given at the end of each

semester to assess growth in the area of writing

strategies.

- Data on students who attended tutoring

- Insert chart of pre and post assessments by

teacher and student.

7th, 8

th and 9

th: weekly common Quizzes with 5

questions plus 1 or 2 questions from previously

leaned standards for reviewing.

Weekly intervention by tutoring for students with

less than 70% scores.

Number of all, especially EL students passing

Standards-based chapter assessments.

1 hour targeted after-school tutoring(Standards-

specific) based on weekly Quizzes. All students

retake quiz to show mastery of the specific

standard taught.

Based on CST and quarterly assessments, Basic

students were identified and offered one week of

spring break intercession to improve the math

skills.

Algebra and Geometry students (85) were

offered extra help during the Spring break.

Rising Stars Intervention for math students with

Fs at progress reports.

Reduce number of failing students and increase

number of passing students.

Rising Stars tutored in failing subject areas daily

after-school. Students must be passing all

classes to be promoted out of Rising Stars

program.

All students have access to academic word walls

in every classroom. Students also have ongoing

vocabulary assessment in all subject areas.




54


MONITORING




RESULTS



ASSESSMENT RESULTS)

Discourse and rhetoric model adopted for all

grades, all students.

Daily formative assessments, consistent use of

checks for understanding, speaking in all subject

areas(by both students and teachers).

EL students are able to dialogue with EO and

FEP partners, use sentence frames, to evaluate

speaking proficiency, and restate, question, and

paraphrase understandings of math questions.




55

Action Plan

Goal 1A: Proficiency in English Language Arts

Action Plan 1A.1: Standards-based Instruction

Growth Target / Evidence: (related to student achievement ) We will know this Action Plan has been successful by:

Target: AYP proficiency targets in ELA and API target will be met. Result as of 6-12: We are currently meeting all AYP targets.

Evidence: API and AYP scores

Met all AYP and API subgroup targets in

ELA.

ACTION STEPS Person Responsible Start Date Completion Date

1A.1.1

During PLCs teachers will develop common lessons, common

finals, and common assessments within departments to

implement the rhetorical approach. Teachers will ensure the

alignment of class assignments to state and district standards.

PLC Leader 7/28/2006 5/28/2012

Comments: Extra duty$3,000, Duplicating $500, Software $900, Supplies $1,000, Books & magazines, Student agendas $2,000, Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP.

1A.1.2

English Learners will have an E.L. Advocate to support their

learning. English Learners will also attend mandatory tutoring

after school to improve their English skills.

Assistant Principal

ASP Coordinator

8/2/2005 5/5/2012

Comments: .2 FTE, Achieve 3000 and technology $5,000.Supplies, $1,000, Duplicating $150, . Extra Duty $2,500. Budgets: SCE, Title I, LEP. .2 FTE, ASES

$2,500, Support to Schools $4,000,

1A.1.3

Students will receive vocabulary instruction, including high

frequency words in all classes & subject areas.

Department Chairs 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Comments: Word walls $500, Supplies $50, Achieve 3000 software and technology: $15,000. . Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

1A.1.4

Students will receive reading & writing instruction within the

curriculum of all subject areas.

Admin 7/20/2006 5/20/2012

Comments: Consultants $9,000, books $300, Spiral notebooks $900. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP




56


1A.1.5

A school wide literacy program will be implemented using

Accelerated Reader/ Renaissance Learning & other research

based literacy strategies. Supplemental reading materials in core

classes & silent reading material in advisory will be provided.

Categorical Coordinator 7/20/2005 5/20/2012

Comments: School license, Software $500, Books $3,000, Supplies $700, Technology, computers and misc/peripheral technology: $6,000, Duplicating $800.

Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

1A.1.6 English teachers will collaborate with AVID teachers. AVID Coordinator 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

AVID will be a support class for ELA.

Comments: Extra duty$2,000, AVID Summer Institute $2,000, supplies $500. Budgets: Title I, SCE

1A.1.7 English teachers will use the Understanding by Design (UBD) Department Chair 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

template to design their common lessons, which include

goals, Assessment evidence and learning activities.

Comments: Extra duty$1,000, supplies $500. Budgets: Title I, SCE

1A.1.8 English teachers will write a Daily Learning Target (DLT) Department Chair 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

Daily, in order to help students focus on the learning. The

DLT will include the five main components.

Comments: Professional development $1,000, supplies $500. Budgets: Title I, SCE

1A.1.9 English Learners will be placed in SEI classes, to support Department Chair 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

their English proficiency.





57

Goal 1A: Proficiency in English Language Arts

Action Plan 1A.2: Intervention Programs


Target: AYP proficiency targets in ELA and API target will be met. Result as of 6-12: We are currently meeting all AYP targets.

Evidence: API and AYP scores

Met all AYP and API subgroup targets in

ELA.


1A.2.1

English Learners, Special Education Students & any student not

meeting the standards will attend mandatory tutoring after school

to ensure that each student is receiving the content as well as

improving in English language skills. ELD tutoring only will

also be provided.

B & A S Coordinator 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Comments: South Bay Community Services $50,000, ASES, After School All Stars $30,000, Supplies $1,500, FTE- ASP coordinator,

ASP Clerk, Tester. Achieve 3000 and technology $15,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP.

1A.2.2

Granger will positively impact the districts P.I. status in the

following ways: All Special Ed students will receive support

classes after school, co-teaching in English 7, 8 & Collaboration

in English 9. Counselors will monitor students & work with

parents to make sure these students receive timely intervention.

Counselors 8/20/2008 5/28/2012

Cost funding/comments: South Bay Community Services $50,000, ASES, After School All Stars $30,000, Supplies $1,500, FTE- ASP coordinator, ASP Clerk,

Tester. Achieve 3000 and technology $15,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP.

1A.2.3

Ensure that students who fail a class have the opportunity to take

a 7th

period class, a credit recovery class and participate in the

Rising Star program so that their academic progress may be

closely monitored.

B & AS Coordinator 8/20/2008 5/28/2012

Cost/Funding: Comments: Extra duty$2,000, Tutors $8,000, Supplies $1,000, Credit recovery $6,000: Budgets: Title I, SCE, ASES, Support to Schools.




58

1A.2.4

Supplemental Program Funding will be used at Granger to

continue its extensive after school intervention program and

Saturday workshops. Daily support classes for Read 180

students will also be provided.

After School

Coordinator 8/20/2008 5/28/2012

Comments: Budgets: Support to Schools, $20,000, ASES, South Bay Community Services $50,000




59

Goal 1B: Proficiency in Mathematics

Action Plan 1B.1: Standards-based Instruction


Target: AYP proficiency targets in Math and API target will be met.

Result as of 6-12 We are currently meeting all AYP targets.

Evidence: API 817


1B.1.1

English Learners and ELD students will be supported in Math

and core classes through the use of SDAIE strategies, including

adding a focus on vocabulary development.

Principal/coaches 8/20/2007 4/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Cost/Funding/Comments: Supplies $5,000, Books $3,000, Dictionaries $800, Software $500, Extra Duty $2,00, Spiral Note Books

$8,500.Achieve 3000 and technology: $10,000. Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE.

1B.1.2

Teachers will use Marzano teaching strategies daily in their

classrooms, with an emphasis on summarizing, note-taking,

positive reinforcement & similarities & differences.

Administration 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Comments: Comments: Extra duty$500, Supplies $500, Books $1,500. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

1B.1.3


finals, and common assessments within departments to

implement the rhetorical approach. Teachers will ensure the

alignment of class assignments to state and district standards.

PLC Leader 7/28/2006 5/28/2012


1B.1.4

Math teachers will collaborate with AVID teachers. AVID will

be a support class for math. AVID Coordinator 7/28/2006 5/28/2012

Comments: Extra duty$2,000, AVID Summer Institute $2,000, supplies $500. Budgets: Title I, SCE




60


1B.1.5

Math teachers will use the Understanding by design (UBD)

template to design their common lessons, which include goals,

assessment evidence and learning activities.

Department Chair 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty $1,000, supplies $500, Budgets: Title I, SCE

1B.1.6

Math teachers will write a Daily Learning Target (DLT) daily, in

order to help students focus on their learning. The DLT will

include the five main components.

Department Chair 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

Comments: Professional development $1,000, supplies $500, budgets: Title I, SCE




61

Goal 1B: Proficiency in Mathematics

Action Plan 1B.2: Intervention Programs


Target: Meet API and AYP goals

Result as of 6-12: Met AYP goals in math.

Evidence: API 817

1B.2.2

Granger will positively impact the districts P.I. status in the

following ways: All Special Ed students will receive support

classes after school, co-teaching in Math 7 and Algebra.

Counselors will monitor students & work with parents to make

sure these students receive timely intervention.

Counselors 8/20/2008 5/28/2012

Comments: FTE, Extra duty, Duplicating $200, Supplies $800, books $50, spiral notebooks $1,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, Special Ed., .2 FTE, ASES $4,000,

Support to Schools $5,000.

1B.2.3

Supplemental Program Funding will be used at Granger to

continue its extensive after school intervention program and

Saturday workshops. Daily support classes for Math 7 and

Algebra will also be offered.

After School

Coordinator 8/20/2008 5/28/2012

Comments: Support to Schools, $20,000, ASES, South Bay Community Services $50,000

1B.2.4

Ensure that students who fail a class have the opportunity to take

a 7th

period class, a credit recovery class and participate in the

Rising Star program so that their academic progress may be

closely monitored.

B & AS Coordinator 7/28/2005 5/28/2012

Comments: Extra duty$2,000, Tutors $8,000, Supplies $1,000, Credit recovery $6,000: Budgets: Title I, SCE, ASES, Support to Schools.




62

Goal 2: Parent, Student and Community Involvement

Action Plan 2.1: Equitable Inclusion


Target: High rate of parent involvement

Result as of 6-12: High parent meeting turn out.

Evidence: Parent survey


2.1.1

Ensure parent knowledge of classroom strategies through a

English/ social science night.


Cost/Funding/Comments: Comments: Extra duty $1,000, parent supplies & refreshments $900. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

2.1.2

To ensure the importance of a literary rich home environment,

we will invite families to 2 Literacy Nights where they will be

given the tools they need at home.

Librarian 7/20/2007 5/30/2012

Comments: books, supplies, parent refreshments, $2,000 Title 1, SCE

2.1.3


Math/ science night.


Comments: Comments: Extra duty $1,000, parent supplies & refreshments $900. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

2.1.4

Teachers will up-date their grades on Power Teacher on a weekly

basis, so that students and parents can check their progress on the

Parent Connect Program.

Principal 7/20/2007 5/30/2012

Comments: copies, supplies, $500. Title I, SCE




63


2.1.5

Create a comprehensive bullying prevention program and train

teachers, students and parents.

Campus Assistant 7/27/2005 6/5/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty $1,000, Parent meetings $500, Supplies 500. Budgets: Support to Schools

2.1.6

Ensure a Link Crew program for all 7th

graders to have a peer

tutor from the 8th

& 9th

grade & expand Link Crew accessibility

by providing referrals to staff, students & parents.

ASB Advisor 7/20/2006 2/28/2012

Comments: Duplicating $200, parent meetings $250, Extra duty $1,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

2.1.7

Use an automated phone system to contact parents, students and

staff

Categorical Clerk 7/20/2007 6/4/2012

Comments: phone system $2,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP




64


2.1.8

Granger will have monthly parent meetings for School Site

Council, TitleI/SCE, ELAC and GATE.


Cost/Funding/Comments: Supplies, copies, books, refreshments: $4,000. Title I, SCE, LEP

2.1.9

Granger will conduct yearly elections for parents to participate in

District Advisory Committees (DAC), School Site Council

(SSC) and other committee positions.


Comments:Copies, parent meeting refreshments, $200. Title I, SCE, LEP

2.1.10

A School-Parent-Student Compact will be approved each year

that promotes a partnership to share responsibility for

guaranteeing that state standards are met and that the graduate

will be a productive member of society, prepared for a career or

continuing education.


Comments:Copies, $300: Title I, SCE, LEP

2.1.11

Every year parents will receive the Parent Involvement Policy to

encourage and welcome parents into a collaborative partnership

that is central to improving school programs and student

achievement.


Comments: Copies, mail, $1,500. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP




65

Goal 2: Parent, Student and Community Involvement

Action Plan 2.2: Post-Secondary Preparation


Target:

Result as of 6-12

Evidence


2.2.1

Ensure collaboration with SDSU through the Compact for

Success Partnership program. Parents and students will attend

these workshops and field trips.

Counselors 7/27/2006 3/5/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Supplies $1,000, Transportation $1,500, Duplicating $200, Parent meetings $500. Budgets: Title I, SCE, AVID.

2.2.2

Students will participate in career exploration through

participation in the career fair and Career Pathways Saturday

Workshops.

Technology Teacher 7/27/2007 3/5/2012

Comments: Extra duty$1,000, Duplicating $100, Supplies $200, , Budgets: LEP.

2.2.3

Exposure to A-G requirements for graduation and admission to a

four year university.

Counselors 7/27/2007 4/5/2012

Comments: parent meetings, supplies, books. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP




66

Goal 3: Professional Development

Action Plan 3.1: Research-based Professional Development


Target: 100% of staff will collaborate to ensure implementation of school wide strategies with fidelity. Result as of 6-2012: 80% -95% of staff implement school wide strategies with fidelity.

Evidence: PLC survey and Categorical

Survey.


3.1.1

We will ensure continuous professional development; site

specific, assessment for learning workshops, district and county-

wide conferences for the purpose of providing our students with

highly qualified teachers and research based instruction.


Cost/Funding/Comments: Cafes $8,000, Peer Observations $2,500, Extra Duty 2,500, Duplicating $150, Supplies $500, Travel $10,000. Budgets: Title I, LEP,

SCE, ASP conferences, Subs $300,

3.1.2

Core classroom teachers will learn AVID strategies and

implement them school-wide.

AVID Coordinator 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: AVID summer Institute $2,000, PLC extra duty $1,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE

3.1.3

All teachers will receive SEI training to meet the needs of

English Learners.


Comments: Conferences $1,000, extra duty $2,000. Budgets: Title 1, SCE, LEP

3.1.4

All new teachers will be part of the BTSA professional

development.

Principal 7/20/2006 5.20/2012

Comments: No cost

3.1.5 All teachers will receive training on how to write Understanding Principal 7/20/2010 5.20/2012




67

by Design (UBD) lessons.

Comments: Comments: Conferences $1,000, extra duty $2,000. Budgets: Title 1, SCE, LEP

3.1.6 All teachers will receive Daily Learning Target (DLT) Department Chair 7/20/2009 5/25/2012

Training.


3.1.7

We will ensure continuous professional development; site

specific, assessment for learning workshops, district and county-

wide conferences for the purpose of providing our students with

qualified teachers and research based instruction.


Cost/Funding/Comments: Cafes $8,000, Peer Observations $2,500, Extra Duty 2,500, Duplicating $150, Supplies $500, Travel $10,000. Budgets: Title I, LEP,

SCE, District Professional Development, ASP conferences, Subs $300,

3.1.8

Create a mentor program for all new teachers. The principal will

work with new staff to ensure that standards are being

implemented. We will work on the slogan “success is the only

option.”

Admin 7/28/2007 5/22/2012

Comments: Extra duty$2,000, Supplies $2,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

3.1.9

Provide common preparation periods.

Counselors 7/20/2007 5/22/2012

Comments: No cost involved.

3.1.10

Develop a system to assess current teachers’ skills through

student test results (Data Director) End of Course Exams & CST

results.


Comments: supplies $6,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE.

3.1.11

To ensure curriculum accountability we will review lesson plans

with teachers, a study of the lesson, on a regular basis.

Admin 8/20/2006 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra Duty 1,000, Peer observations $500. . Budgets: Title I, SCE.




68

3.1.12

Develop a system of collaboration to enable departments time to

meet through assessment for learning workshops, faculty

meetings & paid after school meetings.

Academic Coaches 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Comments: Extra duty$4,000, Supplies $500, Books $600. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

3.1.13

Work with district to ensure all students are taught by highly

qualified teachers, who are supported through the district and site

professional development programs, and the District-Wide

Academic Support Team (DWAST).

Admin/DWAST 7/20/2004 5/20/2012

Comments: Professional Development $5,000, Supplies $2,000, Travel $1,000. Budgets: ELAP, Title I, SCE, LEP

3.1.14

Teachers will participate in a reflective coaching process and

peer coaching process organized by Learning is Power and the

DWAST to facilitate the exposure of teachers and students to

effective teaching & literacy development strategies, & to

provide teachers with feedback on their use of these strategies.

Admin, Consultants 7/27/2006 5/20/2012

Comments: Consultants $26,000, Extra Duty $1,000, Supplies $500, Books $800. Budgets: Title I, SCE.




69

Goal 4: Monitoring and Assessment

Action Plan 4.1: PLC Assessments


Target: All teachers will collaborate in the PLC process.

Result as of 6-12: teachers meet twice a month and during common prep periods.

Evidence: Teacher survey, administration

walk-throughs.


4.1.1

To become a true PLC, teachers will participate in a peer

coaching/peer observation process as proposed by the district to

align all instruction within departments and lead all students to

mastery.

Coaches 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra Duty $3,000. Budgets: Title 1, SCE.

4.1.2


finals, and common assessments within departments. Teachers

will ensure the alignment of class assignments to state and

district standards.

Department Chairs. 7/28/2006 5/22/2012


4.1.3

Teachers will participate in a Professional Learning Community

(PLC) site leadership team. Principal 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty$1,000, Conferences $2,500, Books & Supplies 1,000. Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE.




70

Goal 4: Monitoring and Assessment

Action Plan 4.2: Use of Data


Target: Teachers will receive data on assessments and use it to inform instruction.

Result as of 6-12: Math and science departments analyze data weekly and give weekly quizzes.

Evidence: After school participation and

increases in CST results.


4.2.1

Ensure each classroom share the same high expectations by

providing student data (using Data Director) to monitor student

progress and expect mastery in the standards. Students below

grade level will participate in mandatory after school tutoring

and re-teaching classes. A Data Coach (CIS) will be used to

collect and analyze data for immediate intervention.

Data Coach 8/20/2010 5/28/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Data Coach .6 CIS, Clerk, Consultants, Extra Duty $2,000, Scantrons $7,000, Duplicating $250, Software $500. Budgets: Title I,

LEP , SCE, District Professional Development, Special Ed., 21st Century.

4.2.2

Using Chancery we will ensure student and teacher attendance is

always high during school as well as in the after school program.

Attendance Coordinator 7/27/2008 6/5/2012

Comments: .6 FTE attendance coordinator. Budgets: Title 1, SCE. ASES

4.2.3

A data coach, using Data Directory & Chancery, will perform

item analysis on common assessments & use this analysis to

work with core teachers to pace & direct instruction towards

mastery. Each core department will work with the data coach

after each common assessment is administered.

Data Coach 7/27/2008 6/5/2012




71

Comments: Data Coach salary, Scantrons $7,000, scanner $800, duplicating $1,000, software $800, Supplies $400. . Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

4.2.4

Ensure that the attendance plan is revised annually to maintain

the structures in place that maintain the highest standards at

GJHS. These structures include Saturday school, B/ASP &

connect ed. calls.

Data Coach 8/8/2008 5/28/2012

Comments: Practice SAT . Preliminary SAT Scoring Service(PSSS) test $5,000, scantrons $2,000, duplicating $350, printers $1,000, Note Books $4,000.


4.2.5

Using Data Director, provide students with a visual assessment

of academic progress on a frequent basis.

Data Coach 8/8/2008 5/28/2012

Comments: Practice SAT . Preliminary SAT Scoring Service(PSSS) test $5,000, scantrons $2,000, duplicating $350, printers $1,000, Note Books $4,000.





72

Goal 5: Site and District Requirements

Action Plan 5.1: Site Requirements


Target: Granger will meet all site and district requirements.

Result as of 6-12: All plans in place and uploaded onto CPM server.

Evidence: CPM files


5.1.1

Homeless students and foster youth will be supported at Granger

through connecting them with a outside agency that works with

the family to find a home placement. Counselors will monitor

these students to make sure they receive timely interventions

and the support they need to succeed.

Counselors 8/1/2007 6/5/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments:

5.1.2

Ensure that the school safety plan/ASP safety plan is revised

annually by the school safety committee, and shared with the

staff.


Comments: Professional Development $500, Supplies, $800, Duplicating $150, .2 FTE SOS, Extra Duty $600. Budgets: SCE, Title I, ASES

5.1.3

Use the School Library Plan as the guide to expenditures. Librarian 7/28/2005 5/22/2012

Comments: Title I, SCE

5.1.4

Coordinated Intervention Services (CIS) coordinator will be in

charge of intervention services and state and federal programs.

CIS Coordinator 7/28/2008 5/22/2012

Comments: FTE: Title I, SCE




73


5.1.5

Grangers Single Plan for Student Achievement will be reviewed

and approved by the SSC. We will ask for input from parents,

teachers and staff.

CIS Coordinator 9/20/2005 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments:FTE .2, Budgets: Title 1

5.16

Granger staff will participate in CIA meetings. Principal 8/10/2005 5/22/2012

Comments: Extra duty pay, $1,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE

Comments:

Comments:




74

Goal 6: We will create systems of support and intervention to ensure discipline, inclusion, academic achievement, and a safe and welcoming

environment for all students.

Action Plan 6.1: We will create a school wide process where academic success is mandatory for all students.


Target: 100% of students promote to the next grade level. Result as of 6-2012: 75% of students promote to the next grade level.

Evidence: Counselors report.

6.1.1

Ensure that students receive the needed interventions (academic,

attendance or behavioral/emotional) by creating a systematic

process and communicating the process or procedures to the

staff. (SOS)


Comments: Extra duty $5,000, Supplies, $500, Duplicating $150, .2 FTE SOS, Budgets: SCE, Title I, Special Ed.

6.1.2

Students will be provided with recreational activities before and

after school, which includes field trips.

B & AS Coordinator 8/1/2005 6/5/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: South Bay Community Services, After School All Stars $30,000, 21st Century $5,000, ASES $8,000

6.1.3

To ensure student input the principal will continue to meet with

the Principal Student Council the last Thursday of every month.

Admin 8/20/2006 5/28/2012

Comments: Duplicating $200, Supplies $400, books $500. Budgets: SOS




75

Goal 7: We will ensure diverse learning experiences: enthusiastic, fun, life-learning experiences, technology & tools.

Action Plan 7.1: Staff will have the supplies, materials and knowledge they need to provide an enriched environment for all students.


Target: 100% of students will receive enriching activities along with their rigorous coursework. Result as of 6-2012: 70% of students participate in enrichment activities.

Evidence: Teacher, Parent & Student

survey.


7.1.1

Train all teachers to effectively use all available technology & to

integrate this technology into classroom lessons.

Counselors 3/3/2006 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty$500, Professional Development $1,000, computers and misc: $15,000, Document cameras $6,000, Smart Boards

$15,000, projectors $3,000, software $1,000, Supplies $1,000, peripheral technology $4,500.. Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE

7.1.2

Ensure that all students succeed in core classes with the

assistance of tutors and access to technology and software.

Admin 7/27/2008 6/5/2012

Comments: Your Teacher.Com. $3,500, Tutors, flash drives $700, laptops $15,000, document cameras $3,000, peripheral technology $5,000, supplies $1,000.

. Budgets: Title 1, SCE, LEP, ASES, Consultants- Southbay Community Services $100,000.

7.1.3

Teach students to access available resources through diverse

learning experiences in the classroom, and create a learning

experience that accommodates student’s differing rates of

learning.

Consultants 7/27/2006 5/5/2012

Comments: Notebooks $2,000, Supplies $3,000, Transportation $2,500, Duplicating $200, Extra duty $500, Professional Development $800. Budgets: Title I,

SCE, AVID.

7.1.4

Students will be encouraged to attend enrichment activities that

go beyond the standards curriculum. Such projects include

special field trips such as Science Fair, Math Field Day,

Knowledge Bowl, universities and more.

Categorical Coordinator

B/ASP Coordinator

7/27/2005 5/20/2012

Comments: Transportation $3,000, Sub Pay $2,000, Misc., $1,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP, ASES $5,000

7.1.5 Students will receive vocabulary instruction, including high Department Chairs 7/28/2006 5/22/2012




76

frequency words in all classes & subject areas through the use of

technology. Comments: Word walls $500, Supplies $50, Achieve 3000 software and technology: $15,000. . Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

7.1.6

English Learners, Special Education Students & any student not

meeting the standards will attend mandatory tutoring after school

to ensure that each student is receiving the content as well as

improving in English language skills. ELD tutoring only will

also be provided.

B & A S Coordinator 7/28/2006 5/22/2012

Comments: South Bay Community Services $50,000, ASES, After School All Stars $30,000, Supplies $1,500, FTE- ASP coordinator, ASP Clerk, Tester.

Achieve 3000 and technology $15,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP, ELAP, Title III,

7.1.7

GATE students will receive differentiated instruction &

enrichment activities. Gate students will also receive direct

instruction in ABC workshops after school.

GATE Coordinator 7/28/2008 5/22/2012

Comments: Extra duty, Supplies $500, field trips $3,000, books $600. Budgets: SCE

Comments: Supplies $1,000, notebooks $2,000, books, extra duty $5,000, After School All Stars. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP.




77

Action Plan

Goal 8: We will ensure a culture of success by creating structures to recognize and honor achievement.

Action Plan 8.1: Create a structure where success is achieved and recognized on a daily basis.


Target: 100% of students who need intervention will receive it immediately. Result as of 6-2012: 85% students of all students receive immediate intervention.

Evidence: Master schedule, Academic

Support program schedule.


8.1.1

Create a culture where failure is not an option (mastery learning)

through timely & effective interventions as well as positive

reinforcement. These activities include before and after school

interventions for all sub groups and rewards activities for

students who improve academically.

B & A S Coordinator 8/3/2007 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: South Bay Community Services, After School All Stars, B & A S tutoring $30,000 , folders $3000, duplicating $400, supplies

$4,000.Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE, ASES $5,000

8.1.2

Develop a system where all students can set goals. Students as

well as parents will be given access to Parent Connect, the

school’s web site, a planner and other resources.

Advisory Coaches 8/8/2007 5/28/2012

Comments: Training, parent meetings, school newsletter, Advisory packets/duplicating $1,800, assemblies/supplies $500. Budgets: Title I, SCE.

8.1.3

Ensure that all students receive information about the school

culture of success.

ASB Coordinator 7/27/2006 6/5/2012

Comments: student planners- $3,000, Assemblies, pamphlets $500. Budgets: ASB Billing, Title I, SCE

8.1.4

Develop a system for monthly community events, including

parent meetings for Gate, English Learners & Special Ed.

Parent Liaison 7/27/2006 5/5/2012

Comments: Parent meeting supplies/refreshments $5,200, certificates $800. Budgets: Title I, SCE, A.S.P.




78

8.1.5

Ensure resources to create a system of recognition of our

students.


Cost/Funding/Comments: Certificates $500, duplicating $200. Budgets: ASB Billing, Title I, LEP, SCE

8.1.6

To ensure student success, students who are below grade-level in

English or Math will receive mandatory after school tutoring.

These students will have an extended day as well as a support

class during the school day.

After School

Coordinator

7/28/2008 5/22/2012

Comments: South Bay Community Services, After School All Stars, extra duty $12,000, tutors $6,000, supplies $5,000, Teacher FTE. Budgets: ASES, Title I,

SCE, LEP, Special ed.

8.1.7

To ensure student success, students who are not behaving in

class will be assigned to Character Development Class after

school. Students not behaving in class will not be taken out

during the regular day. The student will be picked up at 3:15 &

stay until 6:00 PM.

Character Development

Teacher

7/20/2006 5/30/2012

Comments: Teacher FTE, Late bus $7,000, supplies $500, books $50, Extra Duty, $8,000, Tutors, $5,000. Budgets: ASES




79

Goal 9: We will ensure a sense of community by creating volunteer opportunities in the community, life-long experiences and parent

involvement.

Action Plan 9.1: Ensure an active school environment where parents feel welcomed.


Target: 100% of parents will have the opportunity to volunteer at school. Result as of 6-2012: 5% of parents volunteer.

Evidence: Parent Survey.


9.1.1

Ensure effective parent communication by ensuring a system of

communication (Griffin Grams, Parent Newsletter, Griffin Times

On Line, Connect Ed. Power Teacher online grading, Parent

Connect.)

Parent Liaison 8/3/2007 5/30/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Duplicating $2,500, phone system, online grading lic. .Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP.

9.1.2

Ensure parents have a place on campus (parent center room 101)

they can use for collaboration & volunteer opportunities.

Parent Liaison 8/8/2007 5/28/2012

Comments: Duplicating $300, books $400, supplies $400, computers $2,000, printer $500.. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP, ELAP

9.1.3

Ensure a parent curriculum committee on campus.

Admin 7/27/2006 5/5/2012

Comments: Certificates $200, parent supplies & refreshments $600, duplicating $150, conferences $1,000. Budgets: Title I, SCE.




80


9.1.4

Students & parents will participate in student led conferences to

demonstrate mastery of all core standards & to involve parents.

Each student team will begin by presenting CST results.

Student led conference

team

8/2/2006 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty $2,000, Folders $500, crates $500, spiral notebooks $2,000, parent supplies & refreshments $500.. Budgets: Title I, LEP,

SCE,

9.1.5

Ensure that a reward system is in place to support student

success (honor roll, attendance, literacy, Rising Stars, Extended

day students…)

Parent Liaison 7/28/2007 5/22/2012

Comments: Griffin dollars $1,000, duplicating $500, certificates $500, supplies $1,600. Title I, SCE.

9.1.6


math/science night & English/ social science night.


Comments: Extra duty $1,000, parent supplies & refreshments $900. Budgets: Title I, SCE, LEP

9.1.7

To ensure the importance of a literary rich home environment,

we will invite families to 2 Literacy Nights where they will be

given the tools they need at home.

Librarian 8/2/2007 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Books $800, Spiral Notebooks $1,000, Parent supplies & refreshments $600. Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE

9.1.8

To encourage parent understanding of the school system and

learning strategies, the Parent Curriculum Committee will be

invited to do classroom walk-throughs.


Comments: , parent supplies & refreshments $200, duplicating $100, certificates $400, spiral notebooks $500. Title I, SCE, LEP

9.1.9

Parents will be encouraged to give us feedback on being a

“family friendly” school.


Comments: Duplicating $100, parent supplies & refreshments $300. Budgets: Title I, SCE.




81


9.1.10

Staff will receive training on the importance of parent

involvement and how to effectively communicate with parents,

with the goal of making parents feel valued and welcomed.


Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty $800, duplicating $100, books $400. Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE.

9.1.11

To ensure a welcoming environment, 9th

grade students & Link

Crew students will be encouraged to be morning greeters in

exchange for community service.


Comments: Parent supplies & refreshments $500, Griffin dollars $500, duplicating $500, certificates $200, supplies $200. ASB billing, Title I, SCE.

9.1.12

In order to reach out and connect positively with all parents &

neighbors we will have Coffee at the Curb events before school.


Comments: Extra duty $300, parent supplies & refreshments $800. Budgets: Title I, SCE

9.1.13

In order to effectively communicate with parents, staff will

respond to phone calls & emails within 24 hours. There will also

be a comment box in the front office, asking for parent feedback.

Parent liaison 8/2/2008 5/22/2012

Cost/Funding/Comments: Extra duty $400, parent supplies $200.. Budgets: Title I, LEP, SCE.




82

Draft of California Parent Involvement Standards (#’s 1-6 - Excerpted from the California State Action Plan for School, Family and Community Partnerships, November 2009)

1. Parenting - Help parents develop parenting skills to meet the basic obligations of family life and foster conditions at home which emphasize the

importance of education and learning.

2. Communicating - Promote two-way (school-to-home and home-to-school) communications about school programs and students’ progress.

3. Volunteering/Participating - Involve parents, with appropriate training, in instructional and support roles at the school and in other locations

that help the school and students reach stated goals, objectives, and standards.

4. Learning at Home - Provide parents with strategies and techniques for assisting their children with learning activities at home that support and

extend the school’s instructional program.

5. Decision Making and Advocacy - Prepare parents to actively participate in school decision making and develop their leadership skills in

governance and advocacy.

6. Connecting - Provide parents with skills to access community and support services that strengthen school programs, family practices, and

student learning and development.

7. *Relationship Building - Establishing a welcoming school environment, celebration events, and activities to establish positive relationships

among families, schools and community that can serve as a “gateway” for strengthening partnerships.

(*From the California Parent Center, SDSU Research Foundation, http://parent.sdsu.edu)

General Types of Parent Meetings

Legally Required Meetings – These meetings are required for legal compliance through State and Federal Programs (ELAC, SSC, Title

I/SCE), Education Code, Board Policy or Grant/Special Program Guidelines.

Required Documents: Agendas, Minutes, Posted Agendas (72 hours in advance), Required Topics, Sign-in Sheets

Trainings – These are trainings for parents usually conducted by an outside consultant, agency, or institute of higher education.

Required Documents: Evaluations, Sign-in Sheets

Informative Meetings – These meetings are held to inform parents on various topics including, but not limited to, specialized school

programs, graduation/promotion requirements, student achievement/success, etc.

Relationship-Building Meetings – These meetings generally give staff, parents, and students an opportunity to celebrate successes and

improve overall communication/relationships amongst stakeholders.

http://parent.sdsu.edu/




83

PARENT INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES & SUPPORT 2011-12 (*Note, estimated costs must total the Title I budgeted amounts for Parent Involvement.)

In support of the ESEA/ESEA/NCLB guidelines to promote parent involvement leading to maximized student achievement, please describe the

continuing (or new) parent involvement activities and meetings planned for the year. Dates, funding source and costs may be tentative

(and/or based on previous costs). Check whether site has a designated place/space for parents to work, meet and become informed on a

regular basis to foster parent involvement, volunteerism and connection to school:

Yes No

√ - If

Legally

Required

Meeting

Parent Activity: (i.e., meetings, trainings,

events, workshops, speaker or consultant

presentations, site plan discussions,

volunteerism, Open House, PTSO, Parent

Center, etc.)

Projected

Number of

Participants

(Average

per

Meeting)

Describe how the event will enhance

Parent Involvement at your site. Please note Parent

Involvement Standards (see previous page) addressed

through this event in parentheses (i.e., 2, 5, 6)

Date(s)

of

Event

Funding

Source

Estimated

Costs/

Breakdown

Computer Classes

20

Parents will be invited to the computer lab or to use the 2

computers in the parent center, and learn basic computer

literacy, keyboarding, how to navigate the Granger website,

sign up for a free e-mail account and send an e-mail to their

child’s teacher. (4, 6)

Every

Wedn

esday

Title 1

SCE

LEP

$200

$200

$150

Parent Teacher Breakfast 50 Parents and teachers are invited every other month to have

breakfast. This allows parents to communicate with teachers in

an informal setting.

Every

other

month

Title I

LEP

SCE

$200

$150

$100

School Site Council 3 Members provide advice on proposed school expenditures and

feedback on the Site Plan for Student Achievement.

Every

month

Title I

SCE

$800

$600

Title I/SCE Meetings 60 This meeting will be used to communicate all for the necessary

information for Title I purposes, as well as that of the

importance of parent involvement and raising students

achievement for students not meeting grade level standards on

the CSTs. (2, 5 & 6)

10/11

12/11

2/12

04/12

Title I

SCE

$1,000

$300

ELAC 50 This meeting will be used to EL-related topics with parents, to

discuss the importance of parent involvement and to present

information and extra opportunities at Granger for LEP

students, including that of after school tutoring and the use of

the English at home. We will also discuss the differentiated

needs of ELLs. (2, 5 & 6)

6

times

per

year

LEP

$1,000

Parenting Classes 50 This class is sponsored by our community partners and teaches

parents how to deal with teenage-related issues and other

family topics. (1,4,6 & 7)

Month

ly

Title I

SCE

LEP

$400

$200

$200




84

√ - If

Legally

Required

Meeting

Parent Activity: (i.e., meetings, trainings,

events, workshops, speaker or consultant

presentations, site plan discussions,

volunteerism, Open House, PTSO, Parent

Center, etc.)

Projected

Number of

Participants

(Average

per

Meeting)

Describe how the event will enhance

Parent Involvement at your site. Please note Parent

Involvement Standards (see previous page) addressed

through this event in parentheses (i.e., 2, 5, 6)

Date(s)

of

Event

Funding

Source

Estimated

Costs/

Breakdown

Parent Workshops

50 These meetings will serve to educate parents on how they can

support Granger and will include a variety of topics such as how

to read and understand your child’s standardized testing results,

how to encourage literacy at home, and how to prepare them for

college.

Quarte

rly

Title I,

SCE

LEP,

$300

$300

$400

GATE Meetings

40

This meetings will be used to discuss GATE related topics with

parents, to discuss the importance of parent involvement and to

present information and extra opportunities at Granger for

GATE students as well as meeting the differentiated enrichment

needs of GATE identified students. (2,5,& 6)

10/11

2/12

GATE $300

Principal’s Coffee 30 These meetings are held by the Principal and administrative

team to encourage open communication between Granger and

the community. They serve as a way for us to communicate

information, discuss changes, problems, etc with our parents,

and to keep them informed. (1,2,6 & 7)

1st

Thurs

day of

each

month

Title I

SCE

LEP

$500

$300

$300

Student-Led Conferences

1,000 All students are placed in small learning communities on an

interdisciplinary team. Each team on campus will conduct

student-led conferences at a minimum of one per semester

11/11,

05/12

Title I,

SCE

LEP

$500

$300

$500

Open House & Community Carnival 1,000 All students and parents from Granger and it’s feeder schools

will be invited to attend an all-campus event of Open House in

the fall semester and the Community Carnival in the spring

semester. Each event consists of both educational and

entertaining activities to establish a quality relationship between

Granger and it’s community.

10/11,

05/12

Title I,

LEP,

Site

Funds,

&

After

School

Funds.

$500

$1,000

Literacy Family Night 250 Parents will be invited to a spaghetti dinner and family literacy

night. Passages will be read and books will be distributed. (1 &

4)

11/11

4/12

Title I

SCE

LEP

$300

$300

$100

Coffee at the Curb 400 Coffee and breakfast bars will be past out at the front of the

school. Parents who drop their children off will be greeted and

asked if they would like to stop and talk to the principal and

teachers.

quarte

rly

Title I

SCE

$200

$300

*Required for Title I: Parent Involvement allocation for (2011-2012), approximately 1% of total Title I allocation: $4,800

*Required for SCE: Parent Involvement allocation for (2011-2012), approximately 1% of total SCE allocation: $2,600




85

Print Student Name: ____________________

School-Parent-Student Compact Granger Jr. High School


In order to provide the highest quality educational program for our students, the partners—parents, students, educators—must

equally share the responsibility for guaranteeing that state standards are met and that the graduate will be a productive member of

society, prepared for a career or continuing education. Parents and staff will volunteer to participate in home visits and community

based meetings. To accomplish our goals, the partners agree to commit to the following:

The school will: Provide a safe and enriching environment.

Include teaching methods for the individual students

Provide extra services to students with additional needs.

Clearly explain classroom and school rules.

Provide a high quality education aligned with state and district standards.

Monitor grades, attendance and behavior.

Provide frequent reports to parents.

Ensure that all students wear the school uniform.

The parents will: Ensure that students leave home with books and supplies each day.

Volunteer at the school, making a commitment of 3 hours per month.

Provide consequences at home when the student misbehaves at school.

Talk with students about classes, activities, homework, teachers and friends.

Remind students about school rules.

Ensure that students wear the school uniform.

Respond in a timely fashion to all requests, telephone calls and notes from the school.

Provide a quiet place and time to work on homework.

Visit classes on occasion, or accept a request from the school for a home visit.

Ask for and read school newsletters, student handbooks, activity calendars and flyers.

Attend school meetings and events, including Open House, Student Led Conferences and parenting classes.

The student will:

Attend school regularly.

Behave well at school.

Strive for daily academic success.

Monitor his or her grades.

Come prepared to learn with school supplies.

Wear the school uniform.

Complete school assignments on time.

Seek help with schoolwork when needed.

Maintain a binder or portfolio.

Prepare for and attend student led conferences and ninth-grade exit interviews.

In order to accomplish this goal of an educated graduate, the partners agree to mutually support and

respect all the people who make up the school community.

_____________________________________ _________________________________________

Principal Student

_____________________________________ _________________________________________

Parent Date




86


SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

“Creating a Welcoming Environment with an Open Door Policy”

Parent Involvement Policy

2011-2012 Dear Parents/Guardians,

School encourages and welcomes you into a collaborative partnership that is central to improving school

programs and student achievement. With this in mind, it is our policy to do the following:

Provide information about school programs through:

Open House & Community Carnival

Principal’s Coffee, Parent/Teacher breakfast

Categorical Parent Meetings (Title 1, SCE, English Learner, and GATE)

College Night, Literacy Night & Student Led Conferences

School Web Site and School Newsletter (Griffin Gram)

Personal contacts by teachers, counselors, and administrators

Connect Ed Phone

Provide parents timely information about:

Additional academic support such as Saturday Workshops, AEC, Mandatory tutoring, and

Support classes

Personal Learning Plan and course selection

Computer/internet training for parents

Achievement testing results

Student performance in classes

Interventions for students

Interpretation of individual student assessment results

School curriculum

Graduation/Promotion requirements

Invite all parents to attend the school’s Annual Notification Meeting where information is provided

relating to Title I/SCE and No Child Left Behind regulations, supplemental academic assistance,

district and state graduation requirements, School Compact, and the School Single Plan for Student

achievement.

Invite the parents of our English Learners to attend an Annual Notification Meeting where

information is provided relating to California Economic Impact Aid/English Learner Program

(EIA/LEP) regulations, funding, supplemental academic assistance, graduation requirements, and the

School Improvement Site Plan

Encourage all parents to participate and volunteer at the school governance committees such as

School Site Council, DAC and ELAC, (but not limited to these).

School Site Council will review, modify and approve the Granger Site Plan.




87

TITLE I/*SCE *State Compensatory Education

PARENT GROUP COMMITTEE

Title I/SCE parental involvement engages in measurably raising student achievement for those students not meeting

grade level standards (scoring basic and below on CSTs). Ideally held 4-6 times a year (1 per year is required for

Title I), a series of meetings address best practices, targeted/schoolwide programs, supplemental services, student

progress, legal requirements, parent input and trainings opportunities. Depending upon bylaws, generally at the

first or last meeting Title I/SCE parents must select/elect officers for their site committee, as well as their District

Advisory Committee (DAC) representative and alternate - preferably parents with a student in the program. By

attending monthly DAC meetings, representatives report information back to their site committee. Although Title I

(Federally funded) and SCE (State funded) public meetings are open to all parents, the majority of voting members

should be comprised of parents with students in the program. DAC Agendas and meeting minutes in English and

Spanish are distributed monthly. Site meeting’s agendas and minutes are distributed depending upon number of

meetings held per year.

List Names of Committee Members: Parent

Check if parent

has child

in the program

Staff

Member Administrator Student

President (Parent): Guadalupe Estrada x x Vice President

(Parent): Mercedes Sanchez x x

DAC Representative

(Parent/Community

Member): Alma Coronado x x

Group Members: Alicia Ricca x x

Sandra Rios x x

Alicia Ricca x x

Maribel Garcia x x

Angelica Hernandez x x

Norma Delhoyo x x




88

GATE PARENT GROUP COMMITTEE

Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) parent meetings focus on engaging parental support in meeting the

differentiated program enrichment needs of identified GATE students. It is suggested that site GATE meetings be

held regularly (a minimum of at least once a semester, although additional meetings are encouraged to maintain

parent involvement) as a forum in which to provide opportunities for parents’ to share input/recommendations for

the GATE program, various leadership opportunities, to cover legal requirements and to explore ways of supporting

their children in making positive choices. GATE parents must select/elect officers for their site committee (generally

at the first or last meeting of the year, depending upon their bylaws), as well as a District Advisory Committee (DAC)

Representative and alternate; these GATE DAC meetings are held monthly. Elected representatives are preferably

parents with a student in the program. Following DAC monthly meetings representatives bring pertinent information

back to their site committees. GATE public meetings are open to all parents; however the majority of voting

members must be comprised of those with students in the GATE program. DAC Agendas and meeting minutes in

English and Spanish are distributed monthly. Site meeting’s agendas and minutes are distributed depending upon

number of meetings held per year.

List Name of Committee Members: Parent

Check if parent

has child

in the program

Staff


President (Parent): Isabel Pena x x Vice President

(Parent): Veronica Avalos x x

Secretary (Parent): DAC Representative

(Parent/Community

Member): Isabel Pena x x

Group Members: Patricia Coronado x x

Cathleen Sumabat x x

Dina De Guzman x x

Ruben Baeza x

Martha Carranza x




89

PROGRAM FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS (EL) PARENT GROUP COMMITTEE

The site’s English Language Advisory Committee (ELAC) meetings focus on engaging parental support in meeting

the differentiated program acceleration needs of identified English Language Learners (ELL students). The state

says that these parent meetings are to be held regularly (district recommends ideally once a month, or a minimum of

2 per semester) as a forum in which to provide: Opportunities for parents’ input/recommendations for the program,

various leadership opportunities, to cover legal requirements and to explore ways of supporting their children in

making positive choices. ELAC parents must select/elect officers for their site committee (at the first or last meeting

of the year, depending upon their bylaws), as well as a District English Learner Advisory Committee (DELAC)

Representative and alternate; the DELAC meets monthly. Elected representatives are preferably parents with a

student in the program. Following DELAC monthly meetings, representatives bring pertinent information back to

their site committees. ELAC public meetings are open to all parents; however the majority of voting members must

be comprised of those with students in the EL program. DAC and site agendas and meeting minutes in English and

Spanish are distributed monthly.

List Name of Committee Members: Parent

Check if parent

has child

in the program

Staff


President (Parent): Silvia Cazares x x Vice President

(Parent): Norma Felix x x

Secretary (Parent): DAC Representative

(Parent/Community

Member): Silvia Cazares x x

Group Members: Maribel Garcia x x

Elena Ortega x x

Norma Felix x x

Ruben Baeza x

Sonia Peraza x

Renee Ortega x

Martha Carranza x




90




91

SCHOOL SITE COUNCIL (SSC) MEMBERSHIP Education Code Section 64001 requires that the Comprehensive Single Site Improvement Plan be reviewed and updated at least annually,

including proposed expenditures of funds allocated through the Consolidated Application, by the school site council. SSC are open

meetings requiring agendas to be announced and posted on campus 72 hours in advance.

Names of Elected Members

Pri

nc

ipa

l

(Au

tom

ati

c

Vo

tin

g

me

mb

er)

Cla

ss

roo

m

Te

ac

he

r

(ma

jori

ty o

f

sta

ff)

Oth

er

(no

n

cla

ss

roo

m)

Sc

ho

ol

Sta

ff

Pa

ren

t o

r

Co

mm

un

ity

Me

mb

er

Se

co

nd

ary

Stu

de

nt

Mary Rose Peralta

Scott Grant

Derrick Almero

Lee Clark

Sue Gupta

Martha Bachar

Sherry Gogue

Elizabeth Vazquez

Gracie Gracia x

Sophia Sahagun

Edana Rosario

Brian Gutierrez x

*Numbers of members of each category

(Excluding alternates & non voting SSC advisors) Sample→

1 4 1 3 3

Each member must be elected only by their peers through a SSC ballot/election. (Students elect students, parents elect parents, teachers

elect teachers, and the non-teaching staff member must be elected by their peer group)

Per (CPM), students must not be identified above or on ballots by grade level; and parents must not be identified by committee (GATE,

Title I, EL, etc.) on above chart or on ballot.

ALTERNATES: Any elected “alternates” may be listed on the above chart if identified as “alternates” and but do not add alternates in the

total number of members’ columns.

Composition of a Secondary School Site Council

Teachers: 4

Parents or Community Members: 3

Principal: 1

Other Staff: 1

Students: 3




92

Categorical Programs/Grants/Funding Amounts

Federal Programs (ESEA/No Child Left Behind)

2011-2012

Title I, Part A RESOURCE CODE # 3010 Purpose: Title I, Part A federal funds help to meet the educational needs of low achieving students in California's highest-poverty schools.

Funds are used to support effective, research-based educational strategies that close the achievement gap between high-and low-

performing students and enable the students to meet the state's challenging academic standards. Title I-funded schools are either targeted

assistance schools or schoolwide program schools.

Site Allocation (including District Centralized Services) $284,526

Centralized Services (District Level)

-$128,520

DWAST Professional Development

Option A: School Site Council approves

these funds to be retained at the district level

for these direct services.

Option B: School Site Council chooses to

retain all of these funds and understands that

the site would receive no district support for

any of these services.

X

CIS .6

Site Allocation $156,006

Anticipated Expenditures(including carryover funds)

Personnel (include salary, extra duty, subs. and

benefits—see Personnel page for details): $122,000 Consultants (see Action Plan): 3.1.8, 5.1.1 $6,000

Materials and Supplies(see Action Plan for

details): tactic 2,3,3,5,6 $25,006 Travel (see Action Plan):

Parent Involvement (see Parent Involvement

page and Action Plan for details): Tactic 6 $3,000 Professional Development: (PI Schools are

required to spend 10% of their budget on

Professional Development)

$ Other:

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. RESOURCE CODE #3011 Purpose: Education-related aspects of the federal stimulus package provides additional Fiscal Year 2009 Title I, Part A funds to local

educational agencies for schools that have high concentrations of students from families that live in poverty in order to help teaching and

learning for students most at risk of failing to improve state academic achievement standards.

Projected Allocation Amount $



benefits—see Personnel page for details): $ Consultants (see Action Plan): $


details): $ Travel (see Action Plan): $


page and Action Plan for details): $ Other: $




93

Title II, Part A: Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Purpose: To increase student academic achievement by improving teacher and principal quality and increasing the

number of highly qualified teacher, principals and assistant principals. This includes class size reduction. District Funded

Site Allocation (including District Centralized Services) $


-$

DWAST Professional Development Option A: School Site Council approves







x

Title III, Part A: Language Instruction for Limited-English-Proficient (LEP) Students

RESOURCE CODE # 4203 Purpose: To provide supplementary programs and services to assist LEP and immigrant students in achieving grade-

level and graduation standards, as well as assisting LEP students with acquiring English.

District Funded

Site Allocation (including District Centralized Services)


DWAST Professional Development Option A: School Site Council approves







CIS Parent Involvement

Translation

Title II, Part D: Enhancing Education through Technology Training (Middle/Jr. High only) Purpose: To increase student academic achievement in grades four through eight by providing professional

development in educational technology.

District Funded

Other Federal Funds (Please list and describe)

Total amount of Federal Categorical funds allocated to this school $156,006




94

State Programs 2011-2012

Economic Impact Aid/ State Compensatory Education (EIA/SCE) RESOURCE CODE # 7090 Purpose: Help educationally disadvantaged students succeed in the regular program. Economic Impact Aid (EIA) provides supplemental

funds, kindergarten through grade twelve, to support additional programs and services for compensatory education services for

educationally disadvantaged students,



-$18,671

Parent Involvement Professional Development Option A: School Site Council approves







X




benefits—see Personnel page for details): $5,170 Consultants (see Action Plan):

3.1.8, 5.1.1 $29,800


details): Tactic 2,3,4,5,6 $16,033 Travel (see Action Plan): Tactic 3,4,5 $500


page and Action Plan for details): $700 Other: $4,700

Economic Impact Aid/ English Learner Program (EIA/LEP) RESOURCE CODE # 7091 Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic proficiency of English learners. EIA/LEP provides supplemental funds to support

additional programs and services for English learners.



-$15,970

Extended Programs Professional Development Option A: School Site Council approves







X

Parent Involvement

CIS




benefits—see Personnel page for details): $30,800 Consultants (see Action Plan): 3.1.8, 5.1.1 $15,000


details): $2,689 Travel (see Action Plan): Tactic 3,4,6


page and Action Plan for details):Tactic 6 $1,050 Other: Tactic 2,3,4,5,6

Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) RESOURCE CODE # 7336 AVID is a college preparatory program for students in the middle who are often economically disadvantaged and

underachieving. It provides support for secondary students to succeed in rigorous curricula, and increase their

opportunities to enroll in four-year colleges.

$18,852




95

CAHSEE Intensive Instruction/Services RESOURCE CODE # 7055 Funding supports intensive instruction and services for eligible students who are required to pass the California High

School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) and have failed one or both parts. As a condition of receiving funds, each LEA

must meet certain obligations and reporting requirements.

Tier III

Flexibility

Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) RESOURCE CODE # 7140 Purpose: This program provides supplemental resources for those students identified as gifted through a screening

process. The GATE program is designed to extend the learning opportunities for these students with additional

instructional activities and classes that are more rigorous and challenging than the regular core curriculum.

Tier III

Flexibility

Middle and High School Supplemental School Counseling Program (AB 1802)

RESOURCE CODE # 7080 The Middle and High School Supplemental School Counseling Program supports additional, appropriate counseling

services for students in grades seventh through twelve at risk of (1) not passing the California High School Examination

(CAHSEE) or (2) not accessing the standards curriculum because they are two or more grade levels below standards by

the seventh grade.

Tier III

Flexibility

Peer Assistance and Review (PAR)/Beginning Teacher Support (BTSA) Assist teachers through coaching and mentoring.

District Funded

Pupil Retention Block Grant - 10th

Grade Counseling RESOURCE CODE # 7390 Purpose: Prevent students from dropping out of school. The Pupil Retention Block Grant (PRBG) combines funding for

programs that target pupils who require additional assistance to succeed in school.

Tier III

Flexibility

School and Library Improvement Block Grant (SLIBG) RESOURCE CODE # 7395 Combines funds from School Library Materials and the School Improvement Program (SIP) into one block grant at both

middle and high school levels. The library portion supports the districtwide school library plan to purchase materials,

books, periodicals, AV materials, or computer software.

Tier III

Flexibility

School Safety and Violence Prevention (AB1113, AB 658) RESOURCE CODE # 6405 Increase school safety by providing training, resources and technical assistance to establish a school and community

environment which is physically and emotionally safe, well disciplined, and conducive to learning.

Tier III

Flexibility

Special Education RESOURCE CODE # 6500 Students with special need resulting from a handicapping condition or achievement levels significantly below those of

the majority of students, have equal access to the core curriculum provided for all students. The special services received

provide support and extension activities which enhance their participation in the regular program.

Report site

allocation

amount

$1,029

Tobacco-Use Prevention Education (TUPE) RESOURCE CODE # Eliminate tobacco use among students. TUPE funds are earmarked for health education efforts aimed at the prevention

and reduction of tobacco use. Activities may include tobacco-specific student instruction, reinforcement activities,

special events, and cessation programs for students.

H. S. 6670 $ M. S. 6660 $

List and describe other state and local funds if applicable to your site: $

Total amount of State Categorical funds allocated to this school $126,323




96

Other Programs/Grants 2011-2012

Allocation

After School Program (21st Century High School Grants or After School Education & Safety (ASES)

Middle School) RESOURCE CODE # Program funds local after school education and enrichment programs. Partnerships between schools and local

community resources provide literacy, academic enrichment and safe alternatives for students.

H. S. 5810

M. S. 6010



-$TBD

Professional Development Option A: School Site Council approves







X




benefits—see Personnel page for details): $116,000 Consultants (see Action Plan): $132,200


details): $16,041 Travel (see Action Plan): $4,000


page and Action Plan for details): $2,000 Other: $

International Baccalaureate RESOURCE CODE # 7286 The IB Program is a two-year comprehensive and rigorous pre-university curriculum leading to an IB diploma.

$

Coordinated Intervention Services Combined Tier III funding established a school based intervention specialist working with academically at-risk, English

Learner and Special Education students.

FTE:

Credit Recovery/Special Sessions (if applicable) FTE:

$

Reading is Fundamental (RIF) RESOURCE CODE # 0000 Provides essential literacy services to at-risk children to increase public awareness about the importance of reading for

children and families. Books purchased with this money are given to students at no charge.

$3,485

Smaller Learning Communities: (Ca. Partnership Academies, Specialized Secondary

Programs) RESOURCE CODE # 5811 The academy model is a three-year program, grades 10-12, structured as a school-within-a-school. Academies

incorporate integrated academic and career technical education, business partnerships, mentoring, and internships

$

Support to Schools (if applicable) FTE:

$92,935

Other Applicable Community/Parent Funding Sources included in Site Action Plan

$

Total amount of funds allocated to this school $366,661




97




98

Supplemental Programs – Personnel Classified (Office Assistants, Testers, Student Program Facilitators, Instructional Assistants, Computer Lab Facilitators)

FUNDING SOURCES

Name and/or Position Position Site Plan

Reference –

Page #

Hours

Per

Day

TITLE I

(3010)

Percentage

SCE

(7090)

Percentage

LEP

(7091)

Percentage

General

Fund Other funds

Sonia Peraza Tester 4.1.9, pg.67 6.5 70% 30% Sylvia Togno Categorical Clerk 2.1.1 pg. 54 8.0 100%

Ponce, Angelet ASP Clerk 4.1.9, pg.67 8.0 100% ASES

Certificated (based on 5 period day) – Include all Teachers, Coordinators, Academic Coaches, Counselors or Administrators that have one or more periods within

the school day. (Do not list employees paid by extra duty). Must support Eng/Language

Arts or Math Must support

Eng Lang Lrnrs

Name and/or Position Position/Subject

Area(s)

Site Plan

Reference –

Page #

Title I

(3010)

FTE

SCE

(7090)

FTE

LEP

(7091)

FTE

General

Fund Other funds Other funds

Maria Elena Galleher CIS 2.1.1 pg. 54 .2 .6 CIS.

Savannah Sturges Teacher- SP. ED. 2.1.15 pg. 57 .8 .2 CIS

Rich Grove After School 4.1.9, pg.67

.6 After school

.6 ASB Site

funds Jose Valdez Teacher- Math 2.1.15 pg. 57 .2 .8

Jason Haug Teacher- Math 2.1.15 pg. 57 .2 .8

Sean Murphy Teacher- Read 180 2.1.15 pg. 57 .2 .8

Sue Gupta Teacher- math 2.1.15 pg. 57 .2 .2 .6 “O” Room

Peter Vedborg Teacher- AVID support 2.1.15 pg. 57 .8 .2 Support to

Schools

Teacher – FTE Guide:

Each teaching period is equal to .2 FTE. A full day for a teacher at a school site is 6.75 hours. Some teachers at sites work 6 periods (no prep period) and are paid a 1/6th stipend which brings their FTE to 1.2

8/5/2011 Date Approved by SSC ______ Date of Revision to Board Approved Plan (if applicable)




99




100

SITE CATEGORICAL OFFICE EXPENDITURES (For Title I or SCE Schools with a designated Categorical Office.)

Include supplies/materials/equipment (capital outlay) and yearly service contracts to support the site categorical office, (Note: Furniture items are restricted categorical expenses. Consider appropriate resources for schoolwide vs. targeted students; expenditures must be spent predominately on direct services to students).

Proposed Expenditures

Estimated Cost

(Function 2100 Only)

Funding Source (s)

Breakdown

Office Supplies to support programs $2,000 Title I, LEP, SCE

2 Lap tops Projector DVD Cart Document Camera

$4,000 $1,000 $200 $600 $1,000

Title I, SCE

Color Printer Supplies/Maintenance $1,000 Title I, SCE




101

GOVERNANCE AND FUNDING

1. The School Site Council will hold 10 meetings in the 2011-2012 school year.

2. At Granger the School Site Council is charged with the responsibility of overseeing the following

state funds and program funds coordinated to form one comprehensive school plan:

EIA/SCE EIA-LEP GATE

State Block Grant SLIBG Title III/EL TITLE I

TUPE Safe/Drug-Free Schools Other (Specify)

Are your state funds coordinated into a School Based Coordinated Program (SBCP)? YES NO

Date of SSC approval of SBCP: September 7, 2011

3. The School Site Council receives input regarding design/modification of the School Site Plan in the

following ways:

Survey of SSC members Input/changes recommended by site staff

Changes recommended as a result of Input/changes recommended by ELAC/GATE,

Needs Assessment Survey data Title I Parent Advisory Groups

Meetings with stakeholders External Consultants

4. Parents are involved in decision-making at the site and district level by participation in:

Site Advisory Councils: Title I/SCE GATE EIA-LEP (ELAC) ( ) PTSA

School Site Council District Advisory Committee: DAC DELAC

5. At Granger at least 85% of the funds available for programs are spent for direct services to students.

6. Staff, contracts, resources, supplies and equipment paid for with consolidated programs (e.g. Title I,

SCE, GATE, LEP, SLIBG) funds supplement and do not supplant the basic program as evidenced

by:

Budgets (expenditures) Capital Outlay Conference Reports

Time Acct. Logs PARS (Position Action Request) Field Trip Document

Requisitions

7. For Title I/SCE Schoolwide Program schools, provide any parent comments of dissatisfaction with

the plan here (or attach separate sheet).

Check here if none received




102

Recommendations and Assurances The School Site Council (SSC) recommends this school plan and its related expenditures to the district

governing board for approval, and assures the board of the following:

1. The school site council is correctly constituted, and was formed in accordance with district governing

board policy and state law.

2. The school site council reviewed its responsibilities under state law and district governing board policies,

including those board policies relating to material changes in the school plan requiring board approval.

3. The school site council sought and considered all recommendations from the following groups or

committees before adopting this plan (Check those that apply).

School Advisory Committee for State Compensatory Education Programs (Title I/SCE)

o Signature of Title I/SCE Chair or DAC/Title I Rep __________________________________

English Learner Advisory Committee

o Signature of ELAC Chair or DELAC Rep _________________________________________

Gifted and Talented Education Program Advisory Committee

o Signature of GATE Chair or DAC/GATE Rep _____________________________________

Other (list):

4. The School Site Council reviewed the content requirements for school plans of programs included in this

Single Plan for Student Achievement and believes all such content requirements have been met, including

those found in district governing board policies and in the Local Education Agency (LEA). Improvement

Plan

5. This school plan is based upon a thorough analysis of student academic performance. The actions

proposed herein form a sound, comprehensive, coordinated plan to reach stated school goals to improve

student academic performance.

6. This school plan was adopted by the school site council on: October 13, 2011

Attested:

Mary Rose Peralta October 13, 2011

(Typed name of school principal) (Signature of school principal) (Date)

Scott Grant October 13, 2011

(Typed name of SSC chairperson) (Signature of SSC chairperson) (Date)

Maria Elena Galleher October 13, 2011

(Typed name of categorical coordinator) (Signature of categorical coordinator) (Date)




103

Department of Categorical Programs

Single Plan for Student Achievement

APPENDIX

Other documents (as desired) Include: (for site use only), i.e. Counselors’ Plan, School Safety Plan,

Library Plan, Technology Plan, SARC, Attendance Plan; etc.

CDE Information:

Annual Measurable Objectives (2002-2014 AYP Targets)

AYP vs. API summary

SUHSD Categorical Programs Acronym List




104



ALL Students

CST – History, Reported by Percentages


08

2008 13 21 31 21 14

2009 20 21 27 15 16

2010 33 21 21 12 13

2011 26 24 28 12 11

CST – Science, Reported by Percentages


08

2008 44 27 13 7 10

2009 42 29 15 11 4

2010 52 23 15 6 4

2011 61 18 13 5 2

CST – Biology, Reported by Percentages


09

2008 9 31 40 11 9

2009 10 28 45 11 6

2010 19 33 35 10 3

2011 26 24 31 14 6


106

2005 Base (API Indicators)

The results of certain statewide assessments are indicators used in the API calculation. The results from

the 2005 Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program and the 2005 California High School

Exit Examination (CAHSEE) were used in calculating the 2005 API Base.

The Content Areas and Grade Levels of State Assessments Used in the API. This table lists the

content areas and grade levels of the assessments used in calculating the 2005 API Base.

Grades Tested

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

2005 STAR Testing

CST in ELA (includes

writing assessment for grade

4 and 7)

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

CST in Mathematics (Gen. Math; 8-9, Alg. I & II,

Geometry, Int. Math; 1, 2, or

3, H.S. Summ. Math Test)

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

CST in Science (Biology/Life Sciences,

Earth Science, Chem.,

Physics, Int./Coord. Science;

1, 2, 3, or 4)

x

x

x

x

CST in History/Soc.

Science (World Hist.;

grade 10, U.S. Hist.; grade

11)

x

x

x

CAPA (California

Alternative Performance

Assessment) in ELA/Math (Alternate Statewide

Standards)

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

CAT/6 (norm referenced

test in reading, language

spelling and math)

x

x

2005 CAHSEE - Administered in February and March 2005 (and May for make-ups), was included for grade 10 and for

grade 11 if the student passed the CAHSEE in 2005 or in the fall of 2004.

ELA (incl. writing

assessment)

x

Mathematics

x

California Department of Education, Academic Performance Index for 2005 Base, March 2006.

107

2006 “ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS” (AYP) CRITERIA SUMMARY

The federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 requires that all schools and local education agencies

(LEAs) meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) requirements. Under NCLB criteria, schools and LEAs are

required to annually meet or exceed criteria in four areas in order to make AYP.

The following table summarizes the AYP criteria, which apply to a school, local educational agency (LEA), or

numerically significant subgroup that has at least 100 students enrolled on the first day of testing and/or at least

100 valid test scores.

2006 AYP Targets, Standard Criteria

Standard

Criteria: (School, LEA, or

subgroup has at least

100 enrolled first day of testing and/or at

least 100 valid

scores).

Requirement 1 Requirement 2 Requirement 3 Requirement 4

Participation Rate on Statewide Assessments

Percent Proficient

(AMOs) on Statewide Assessments

API as Additional

Indicator

Graduation Rate Indicator

For school, LEAs,

and subgroups

For schools, LEAs,

and subgroups

For schools

and LEAs For schools

and LEAs

ELA & Math ELA Math

Elementary or

Middle Schools

95% (rounded to nearest whole

number)

24.4%

26.5%

560 API or

1 point growth N/A*

High Schools 95% (rounded to nearest whole

number)

22.3% 20.9% 560 API or 1 point

growth Meet at least one: 82.9%

+0.1% one-year change +0..2% two-year

average change

LEA

High School

Districts (with students in

any of grades 9-11

only)

95%

(rounded to nearest

whole number

22.3% 20.9% 560 API or 1 point

growth

Meet at least one: 82.9%

+0.1% one-year

change

+0..2% two-year

average change *Any elementary school, middle school, or elementary school district with students enrolled in grades nine through twelve must meet the

high school graduation rate criteria.

Notes: AMOs = Annual Measurable Objectives.

The standard criteria apply to subgroups for the Participation Rate (requirement 1) if the school of LEA has 100 or more

students enrolled on the first day of testing, and the subgroup has 100 or more students enrolled on the first day of

testing.

The standard criteria apply to subgroups for the Percent Proficient (requirement 2) if the school or LEA has 100 or more

students with valid test scores, and the subgroup has 100 or more student with valid test scores.

Subgroups are excluded from requirements 3 and 4.

California Department of Education, 2006 Adequate Yearly Progress Report, August 2006

110

UNOFFICIAL JOB SUMMARIES FOR SITE CATEGORICAL PERSONNEL

CATEGORICAL COORDINATOR/RESOURCE TEACHER Serves as an instructional leader, oversees, monitors and documents effectiveness and compliance of site's supplemental categorical programs and categorical funds. Works with School Site Council to develop the Single Plan for Student Achievement. Collects, analyzes and shares disaggregated student performance data with staff, parents and School Site Council. Assists with leading continuous schoolwide improvement efforts in literacy and numeracy through use of standards and researched based supplemental/intervention programs students need to master course standards. STUDENT PROGRAM FACILITATOR/COMMUNITY RELATIONS FACILITATOR Meets regularly with at-risk students to provide a variety of outreach and support services. Monitors and maintains records of attendance, participating student goals and progress, and refers students to appropriate outside agencies as needed. Confers with students, parents, District personnel and community to exchange information, resolve concerns, and coordinate activities that will enhance student progress. CATEGORICAL OFFICE ASSISTANT II Performs a variety of clerical duties in support of the categorical office or programs. Assures smooth office operations, responds to inquiries, inputs data, maintains records, and provides information related to categorical programs, schedules, activities, policies and procedures. Prepares assigned documents and routine correspondence, generates reports, does requisitions and receives supplies ordered. Assists with monitoring categorical budgets. COMPUTER LAB ASSISTANT Performs a variety of duties involved in the operation and maintenance of the site’s computer lab. Provides training and assistance to students and staff in the use of computers, software and related equipment. Troubleshoots and performs general maintenance and repairs to networked computers and peripheral equipment. Maintains records and routine reports, including log-on accessibility and student progress. EL ADVOCATE Develops and implements the district-designated, comprehensive program for English Learners (EL), coordinated with EIA/LEP, Title III, support for schools and the 1802 Counseling to support the unique needs of the English learners at each site (including those in ELD, Structured English Immersion (SEI), and regular classes). Monitors EL student achievement and interventions through analysis of data and student records, focuses on correct placement of students, and facilitates staff development around the academic needs of ELs. TESTING ASSISTANT – Bilingual Administers and scores language assessment and initial placement examinations for potential English Learners. Administers annual CELDT to returning ELs. Assists certificated staff in the accurate placement of English learners. Under the supervision of the site EL advocate, assists in the academic achievement monitoring of ELs and R-FEPs. Maintains testing, placement, intervention, and achievement records for ELs and R-FEPs. SOS ADVISOR Serves as the site liaison to the district Systems of Support Advisor Team. Works closely with community agency representatives, school student support/study team, school safety team, school counselors, school peer education advisor, and administrative staff to assist the site in implementing a sound, comprehensive prevention and intervention program for students. Disseminates prevention and intervention materials to appropriate staff at school. Recruits and documents participation in school and community prevention activities. Collects data and prepares reports to document completion of district program goal and objectives according to grant timelines.

111

API vs. AYP 2010-2011

Academic Performance Index State of California Accountability System – this is a “growth” system.

Applies to:

All schools, except ASAM schools only get an API score for federal accountability and do not

get growth targets or rankings

Based on:

CST scores in ELA, Math, History/Soc. Sci., Science. Improving scores of lower achieving

students earns a higher score.

CMA/CAPA

CAHSEE pass rate (>350)–

o (10th

/11th

/12th

grade)

Goal – API of 800 or above (on a scale of 200-1000); or growth of 5% of the difference between the

school score and 800 each year.

Sanctions:

Reported in media

Ineligible to apply for state award $ / Disting. Schools

State Monitoring: SAIT – School Assistance and Intervention Team (not currently funded)

Adequate Yearly Progress Federal Accountability System – this is a criteria based system.

Applies to:

All schools, but sanctions are for Title 1 funded schools only

Based on:

CST proficiency rate (ms) ELA/Math

CAHSEE proficiency rate ELA/Math, (>380), (hs-10th

grade only)

CMA/CAPA

Participation rate on testing

API

Graduation rate (hs only)

Goals –

ELA % proficient – 66.7% (hs) or 67.6% (ms)

Math % proficient - 66.1% (hs) or 68.5% (ms)

Participation - 95%

API – 710 or show growth

Grad. Rate – 83.3%

Sanctions:

Reported in media

Program Improvement Designation (PI) with penalties that increase after each year in PI

112

API vs. AYP 2010-2011

Índice de Rendimiento Académico

Sistema de Cumplimiento de Responsabilidad del Estado de California – es un sistema de “crecimiento”. Aplica a: Todas las escuelas, excepto las escuelas ASAM (Modelo de Cumplimiento para las Escuelas Alternativas) sólo obtienen un resultado de API para verificar el cumplimiento de responsabilidad federal y no reciben metas de crecimiento o clasificación por rango. En base a:

Los resultados de las pruebas de los estándares de California (CST*) en artes de lenguaje inglés, matemáticas, historia/ciencias sociales, ciencia. Se obtiene una mejor puntuación cuando los alumnos de bajo rendimiento mejoran sus resultados.

CMA (Evaluación Modificada de California)/CAPA (Evaluación Alternativa de Rendimiento de California).

CAHSEE tasa de alumnos que aprueban el examen (>350)– o (10º/11º

/12 º grado).

Meta – API de 800 o más (en una escala de 200 a 1000); o un crecimiento de 5% de la diferencia entre el resultado de la escuela y 800 puntos por cada ciclo escolar. Sanciones:

Se informa a los medios. Inelegible para solicitar fondos estatales de estímulo $/Escuelas distinguidas. Vigilancia del Estado: SAIT – Equipo de Asistencia e Intervención Escolar (actualmente no

recibe fondos).

Progreso Anual Adecuado

Sistema Federal de Cumplimiento de Responsabilidad – es un sistema que se basa en criterios. Aplica a: Todas las escuelas, sin embargo las sanciones son únicamente para las escuelas que reciben fondos de Título 1. En base a: La tasa de suficiencia en los CST (secundaria) artes de lenguaje inglés (ELA*) y matemáticas. CAHSEE tasa de suficiencia en ELA y matemáticas, (>380), (preparatoria-sólo para alumnos de 10º

grado) CMA/CAPA Tasa de participación de alumnos que presentan la prueba. API Tasa de graduación (sólo para preparatoria).

Metas – % de suficiencia en artes de lenguaje inglés ELA*– 66.7% (preparatoria) o 67.6% (secundaria). % de suficiencia en matemáticas - 66.1% (preparatoria) o 68.5% (secundaria). Participación - 95% API – 710 o muestra crecimiento. Tasa de graduación – 83.3%

Sanciones: Se informa a los medios. Denominación de Programa en Mejoramiento (PI) con sanciones que aumentan después de cada

año bajo clasificación de PI.

Common acronyms used by the California Department of Education (Updated 9-18)

ACRONYM STANDS FOR WEB ADDRESS

Acc Accelerated Instruction http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/g/

ADA Average Daily Attendance http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/

AMAOs Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/acct.asp

AP Advanced Placement http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/g/

API Academic Performance Index http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ap

APS Academic Program Survey http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/improvtools.asp#aps

APR Accountability Progress Report http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ar/

ASDEG Association of San Diego Educators of the Gifted http://www.asdeg.org

ASES After School Education and Safety Plan http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fo/profile.asp?id=1403

AST Academic Support Team

AVID Advancement Via Individual Determination http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/gs/ps/avidgen.asp

AYP Adequate Yearly Progress http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/ay/

BTSA Beginning Teacher Support Program http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fo/profile.asp?id=523

CAG California Association for the Gifted http://www.cagifted.org

CAHSEE California High School Exit Examination http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/

CAPA California Alternate Performance Assessment http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/capa.asp

CBEDS California Basic Educational Data System http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ss/cb

CDE California Department of Education http://www.cde.ca.gov

CELDT California English Language Development Test http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/el

CIS Coordinated Intervention Services

CMA California Modified Assessment http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmastar.asp

COE County Office of Education http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/sd/co/index.asp

CogAT Cognitive Abilities Test http://www.riverpub.com

CPM Categorical Program Monitoring http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/cc

CST California Standards Testing http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cstsciref.asp

DAC District Advisory Council – Title 1 / SCE

DAC GATE District Advisory Council – Gifted and Talented

Education

http://www.suhsd.k12.ca.us

DAS District Assistance Survey http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/documents/distassistsrvy

1.doc

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/g/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/ec/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/acct.asp


http://www.cde.ca.gov/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/improvtools.asp#aps

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ar/

http://www.asdeg.org/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fo/profile.asp?id=1403

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/gs/ps/avidgen.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sp/ay/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fo/profile.asp?id=523

http://www.cagifted.org/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/capa.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ss/cb


http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/el

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cmastar.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/cc

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/cstsciref.asp

http://www.suhsd.k12.ca.us/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/documents/distassistsrvy1.doc

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/documents/distassistsrvy1.doc

DELAC District English Learners Advisory Council

DSLT District/School Liason Team

DTAT District Technical Assistance Team

EL English Learner http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/el

ELA English Language Acquisition http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/ii

ELAP English Language Acquisition Program http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/ca/englishlang.asp

ELD English Language Development http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/el

ESLRs Expected Schoolwide Learning Results http://www.acswasc.org/process_ca_comprehensive.htm

FEP Fluent-English-Proficient http://www.cde.ca.gov/demographics

FTE Full-Time-Equivalent http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/gls_fte.htm

GATE Gifted and Talented Education http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/g/

GEAR-UP Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for

Undergraduate Programs http://www.ed.gov/programs/gearup/index.html

HPSGP High Priority Schools Grant Program http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/hp/

IB International Baccalaureate http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/g/

IEP Individualized Education Program http://www.calstat.org/iep/

ISS Instructional Support Services

LC Language Census http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ss/lc

LD Learning Disabled

LEA Local Educational Agency http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/sd

LEP Limited English Proficient

ESEA/NCLB No Child Left Behind http://www.cde.ca.gov/pr/ESEA/NCLB

NAG National Association of the Gifted http://www.nagc.org

PI Program Improvement http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ti/programimprov.asp

OLA Office of Language Aquisition

PLC Professional Learning Communities http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/dshsbpplc.asp

PSAA Public Schools Accountability Act http://www.cde.ca.gov/psaa

PTA Parent Teacher Association http://www.pta.org

R-FEP Redesignated Fluent-English-Proficient http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/lc/

QEIA Quality Education Investment Act http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/qe/

RtI Response to Intervention http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/documents/sldeligibltyrti

2.pdf

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/el

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/ii

http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/ca/englishlang.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/el

http://www.acswasc.org/process_ca_comprehensive.htm

http://www.cde.ca.gov/demographics

http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/gls_fte.htm


http://www.ed.gov/programs/gearup/index.html

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/hp/


http://www.calstat.org/iep/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ss/lc

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/sd

http://www.cde.ca.gov/pr/nclb/

http://www.nagc.org/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ti/programimprov.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/dshsbpplc.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/psaa

http://www.pta.org/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/lc/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/qe/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/documents/sldeligibltyrti2.pdf

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/documents/sldeligibltyrti2.pdf

SABE/2 Spanish Assessment of Basic Education http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr

SARC School Accountability Report Card http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/saa

SBCP School-Based Coordinated Programs

SDCOE San Diego County Office of Education http://www.sdcoe.net/

SEA State Education Agency http://www.cde.ca.gov

SES Supplemental Educational Services

(ESEA/NCLB) http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ti/supplemental.asp

SLC Smaller Learning Community http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/dshsbpslc.asp

SOS Systems of Support http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/sw/ss/

SSC School Site Council http://www.cde.ca.gov/ESEA/NCLB/sr/le/documents/spsaguid

e.doc

SPSA Single Plan for Student Achievement http://www.cde.ca.gov/ESEA/NCLB/sr/le/documents/spsaguid

e.doc

STAR Standardized Testing and Reporting http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr

TOSA Teacher on Special Assignment

STS Standard-based Test in Spanish

UCP Uniform Complaint Procedures http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cp/uc

WASC Western Association of Schools and Colleges http://www.acswasc.org

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/saa

http://www.sdcoe.net/


http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ti/supplemental.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/lp/vl/dshsbpslc.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/sw/ss/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/le/documents/spsaguide.doc


