vanden high school

December 2013

Vanden High School

48-70565-4838801 CDS Code

Date of this revision: December 2013 The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic performance of all students to the level of performance goals established under the California Academic Performance Index. California Education Code sections 41507, 41572, and 64001 and the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) require each school to consolidate all school plans for programs funded through the School and Library Improvement Block Grant, the Pupil Retention Block Grant, the Consolidated Application, and NCLB Program Improvement into the Single Plan for Student Achievement. For additional information on school programs and how you may become involved locally, please contact the following person:

Contact Person: Sandra M. Reese

Telephone Number: (707) 437-8003

Address: 2951 Markley Lane, Fairfield

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Travis Unified School District

The District Governing Board will review this revision of the School Plan on March 11, 2014.

Vanden Single Plan for Student Achievement 2013-2014 - 2-

Table of Contents

I. School Overview a. School Vision and Mission 3

b. School Profile 4

II. Staff Development 5 III. Common Trends in Student Data 5 IV. Site Assessments 6

Form A: Planned Improvement in Student Performance 7 Form B: Centralized Support for Planned Improvements in Student Performance 13 Form C: Programs Included in the Plan 15 Form D: School Site Council Membership 16

Form E: Recommendations and Assurances 17 Appendix 1: Academic Performance by Ethnicity 18 Appendix 2: Academic Performance by Grade Level 21 Appendix 3: English-Language Arts Adequate Yearly Progress 23 Appendix 4: Mathematics Adequate Yearly Progress 24 Appendix 5: Academic Performance Index 2010-2011 Subgroup Summary 25 Appendix 6: A-G Eligibility Information 26 Appendix 7: EAP Test Results 27 Appendix 8: Seniors taking at least one AP course 28 Appendix 9: California English Language Development (CELDT) Data 29 Appendix 10: Parent Involvement Policy 30


Ia. School Overview: School Vision and Mission

In 1998, Vanden High School’s students, staff, parents and community members agreed upon the mission of Vanden High School. We are a community building personal and academic excellence, civic responsibility, and lifelong learning. The core values that bind Vanden together are integrity, caring, creativity, mutual respect and a code for communication. Based on this mission, the stakeholders at Vanden endured a lengthy process to determine expected schoolwide learning results (ESLR’s) that best demonstrated our mission and core values. Vanden High School’s ESLR’s are:

Personal Growth – Students who… set goals and develop strategies to achieve them become aware of individual strengths and values acquire knowledge of the aspects of a healthy lifestyle – mental, emotional, social and

physical Academic Proficiency – Students who… acquire and apply core knowledge communicate effectively using a variety of modes utilize technology effectively, appropriately and responsibly evaluate and appreciate the arts – visual art, dance, music, theatre and literature – from a

variety of cultures Community Responsibility – Students who… respect diversity and common values are involved citizens in a democratic society demonstrate responsibility and accountability Employability – Students who… work with others understand the correlation between school and future opportunities


Ib. School Overview: School Profile

Vanden High School is a unique learning community serving students and their respective from three communities: Vacaville-58%, Travis AFB-10%, and Fairfield-28%. Interdistrict transfer students [those who live outside the attendance area] accounted for 12% of the total enrollment of 1668 in 2012-13. The community of students is culturally and ethnically diverse: 24% Caucasian (White, Not Hispanic) 19% African American 19% Hispanic 12% Filipino 8% Asian 12% Declined to Report In addition to the standard K-12 program, Travis USD operates the Travis Education Center, the continuation high school for students who may be behind in credits or who choose an alternative program. Travis Community Day School is an adjunct to Solano County’s community court school. Children with special needs are served by a special education program, with classes tailored to an individual student’s particular disability. Regional Occupational Program (ROP) serves high school student and community members. An ongoing board goal since 1999 has been to "Enhance, create and modernize facilities to support life long learning." The implementation of this goal is continuing. Facilities projects that have recently been completed include the construction of new athletic fields for baseball and softball, Vanden High School includes the following facilities: 65 classrooms Library Counseling office Faculty room 1 Gymnasium 2 Conference Rooms 2 Cafeterias 1 computer lab, 7 classroom computer labs and 8 science laboratories. 2 baseball fields, 2 softball fields, 6 tennis courts, 3 fields for football/soccer, and 1 stadium with

a track 1 all-purpose athletic facility with weight room, aerobic room, 2 locker rooms, and 1 climbing

wall All of Vanden High School is networked. Every classroom has a computer that is connected to the Internet. Vanden has a full time computer technician to keep the networks up and running. Many specialized programs such as the Computer Assisted Drawing, are available to support specific courses. Audio and video technologies available include VCR's, DVD's, digital cameras, video cameras, and multimedia projectors. In addition, VHS has a comprehensive library and full time Teacher/Librarian and assistant. Online resources are available in the library.


II. Staff Development Staff development activities for the 2012/13 school year included:

De-escalation Techniques Office managed vs classroom managed training Objectives Formulation Aeries/ABI training Kagan Training JROTC recertification UCD History Project participation Boundaries training Math training/coaching through UC Davis in “Algebraic Thinking” Aeries training for administration and support staff Workability training in Special Education AP Certifications Solano Community College High School Counselor’s Conference Math training with UC Davis Whole staff training in CC text-based standards

Staff Development activities planned for the 2013/14 school year include:

ELA CC training for all staff Aeries/ABI training CPM Training for math teachers Aeries training for administration and support staff UC Davis Area 3 Writing Project collaboration UC David History Project collaboration Common core training with SCOE for SpEd Multiple CTE trainings offered through SCOE AP Training in Art Art Conference for Sculptors UC/CSU Conference for counseling staff Automotive Training CTE and the Common Core training


III. Common Trends from 2013 Academic/Assessment Data

1. The numbers of students testing in General Math sharply decreased from 171 to 108, while the percentage of students advanced or proficient in Algebra increased by 2%.

2. All subgroups showed a dip in overall achievement with African American students showing the least decline.

3. CAHSEE proficiency rates increased in nearly every subgroup in mathematics, while it dropped in nearly every subgroup in ELA

4. Grade 10 ELA had statistically significant drops when compared with grades 9 and 11 with 120 students dropping one or more levels.

5. While math scores rose (as measured in CST’s), math achievement is still lower than that of all other tested areas.

6. The achievement gap between subgroups still exists. African American, Hispanic, EL students and Student with Disabilities do not achieve at the same rate of proficiency as Filipino and White students.


IV. Site Assessments

Vanden High School uses several assessments tools which are used to evaluate student learning.

ASSESSMENT TYPE PURPOSE TESTED GROUP WHEN COMMENTS

CST/CMA/CAPA State- mandated

criterion-referenced test

Assess student achievement of state standards

Grades 9 – 11 Spring Allows comparison between groups, grades and similar schools

CAHSEE State- mandated


Students must pass this test in English and Math in order to receive HS diploma

Grade 10 February each year Primary assessment used in AYP calculation

CELDT State- mandated


Measure English language acquisition for English learners

Grades 9 – 12 Fall each year Used to assign language fluency and re-designate fluent students.

API Composite score

calculated by State

Used to determine overall program effectiveness

School, sub-groups Reported summer each

year

Used by state and District as an index of overall academic performance based upon the results of the STAR. Used to compare schools and student groups.

EAP Formative Assess college readiness in English and Math

Grade 11 (must be in Algebra II or higher in

Math) Spring each year

UC/CSU uses results to determine readiness or need for remediation.

AYP (Adequate Yearly

Progress) Composite Score

Used to determine overall program effectiveness

School, sub-groups School, sub-groups

Used by the state to assess if school is making adequate yearly progress


Form A: Planned Improvements in Student Performance The School Site Council (Leadership Team) has analyzed the academic performance of all student groups and has considered the effectiveness of key elements of the instructional program for students failing to meet API and AYP growth targets. As a result, it has adopted the following school goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of student groups not meeting state standards:

Area for Improvement: Improve student academic achievement in core curricula Goal 1: All subgroups will meet API growth targets and maintain schoolwide API at 800 or above using new API measurement standards as designated by the CDE. In addition, we will continue towork to reduce and eliminate the achievement gap between subgroups. Rationale: Not all subgroups have achieved an API of 800. Though there has been progress in reducing the achievement gap, it is still observable in API scores, most CST scores and the completion of UC/CSU required courses. This goal aligns with Travis USD LEAP goal # 1 and #3 to improve student performance in math and ELA. (Note: We do not know what the new API standards will be, but we hope to close the achievement gap overall – and therefore affect improvement in new API standards. GrowthTargets:

15% AP enrollment by African American Students Improvement in CAHSEE proficiency rates by subgroups by 5 percentage points Movement to 840 on current new API standards when known

ESLRs: Academic Proficiency, Employability

Tasks Person(s)

Responsible Timeline Assessment/Evidence Resources Expenditures Cost

Funding Source

Continue annual update on Department-wide Action Plans started in 2011-12 including development and implementation of pacing guides for courses in core curricula.

Dept. Chairs Instructional staff

Annually

Pacing guides developed for courses in ELA, Social Science, Science and Math as reflected on Action Plans

Common planning time Site and district categorical funding

None None N/A

Implement formative assessments and benchmarks in courses in core curricula.

Site and District Administration Dept. Chairs Instructional staff

2013 -14 Development2014/15 implementation

Formative assessments for each curricular area

Common planning time Site and district categorical funding

None None N/A

Departments will actively recruit students from all subgroups to enroll in Honors and Advanced Placement courses.

Instructional staff Department Chairs AP teachers

Annually Enrollment statistics Students Students’ 4-year plans

Release time None N/A

Evaluation of RTI structures for grade 9 implemented in fall of 2013

Leadership Team Administration Instructors

Ongoing Meeting Notes F-rate for students

Staff time None 1/5 FTE to continue

N/A


Support teachers in the analysis of assessment data through professional development.

Leadership Team Administration

2012-13 Common planning agendas

Common planning time None None N/A

Actions to mitigate student apathy during testing, including: 1. Recognition program to

celebrate achievement on CST tests, or meeting individual goals.

2. Specific targeted discussion with grade 11 students to help them see the benefit of doing well on CSTs and EAP.

Leadership Team Administration Core Teachers

2012-13 Stabilization of CST scores from grade 10 to grade 11.

Release time for teachers involved Rewards for students who qualify

Possible $ for meaningful rewards for students

TBD General Fund/ASB

Continue library collection development so that all students have access to literature and resources.

Teacher Librarian Leadership Team

Ongoing Collection development statistics

SLIB funds

Fiction and nonfiction print and electronic resources

$8110 SLIB funds

Area for Improvement: Implementation of Common Core Curriculum Standards (CCCS)

Goal 2: Increase staff and student exposure to and implementation of the common core in math, English, social sciences, and sciences.

Rationale: Common core must be fully implemented by the 2014-2015 school year

Growth Target: Students will receive instruction that is based on CCCS in all core subjects.

ESLRs: Academic Proficiency

Tasks Person(s)


Funding Source

Continue training of all English/math department members in CCCS and the whole staff as needed.

Director of C&I Chairs

Ongoing Department meeting minutes

Training opportunities

Release time/possible conferences

Unknown

Design units that are CCCS based .

Teacher leaders within departments

Ongoing Completed units CPD Time Possible copy expenditures

Unknown Site

Adopt math textbook/program for new CCSS in mathematics

Director of C&I Math teachers

Spring/2014 Receipt of new texts Release Time

New textbook purchase

Estimated at $80 per book

State CC allotment


Area for Improvement: Math proficiency Goal 3: Increase student achievement on CAHSEE, CST's (those tested) Rationale: Student achievement in mathematics did improve last year, but continues to be below achievement levels of all other tested areas. Growth Target: Increase math proficiency on 10th grade CAHSEE census; Alg 2 and HS Summ Math CST's ESLRs: Personal growth, Academic Proficiency

Specific Steps Person(s)

Responsible Timeline Assessment/Evidence Resources Expenditures Cost Funding Source

Department-wide implementation of Pacing Guides for CC in Algebra I/Int Math 1, Geometry/Int Math 2, Algebra II, Trig/Pre-Calc, Calculus, Statistics, and AP Statistics

Department Chairs Department Members

Fall 2014 for 1st and 2nd courses

Pacing Guides State Standards Department Time

Possible Release/paid time

$5000 for release days

Grant Funding

Implement use/analysis of Benchmark Tests for Algebra I, Geometry.

Department Chairs Department Members

2013-14 Benchmark Tests Analysis worksheets

Director of Curriculum and Instruction UC Davis Math Project Department Time

Included in the district-wide grant


DoDEA Algebraic Thinking Grant

Fine tune placement processes for grade 8 students

Department Chairs GW Staff Principal

Spring 2014 Placement and diagnostic test and results

Director of Curriculum and Instruction Counselors / Admin GW Staff Department Time

Possible release days for math chairs to review placement info

$200 for release time

Site and/or grant

Provide ongoing Professional development on the use of math related technology

Director of Curriculum and Instruction

Spring 2014 Integration of technology

Brightlink Staff Department Staff



DoDEA Algebraic Thinking Grant

Evaluate and adjust Math Lab program implemented in 2012-13

Math Department Principal

Spring 2014 Student grades Teacher Input

Department Staff Principal

None None N/A

Continue/expand Department Alignment of practice

Department Principal

Ongoing Course Syllabi ABI


None None N/A

Bring Credit Acquisition into alignment with common practice

Department Principal

Completed by end of 2014

Course Syllabi ABI


None None N/A

Development and adoption of Business Math class

Director of C&I Math teachers Principal

Spring 2014 Curriculum Guide Master Schedule Course Syllabus

Release time to review texts and write course

Textbooks/release time

$80 per book

District Office


Area for Improvement: Intervention for failing 9th grade students Goal 4: Develop and implement intervention program for failing 9th grade students. Rationale: Data indicates that 21% of current sophomores did not earn 60 credits last year and 114 of 443 freshmen (25%) earned at least one F Growth Target: Decrease the % of 9th grade students earning F’s by 20% and increase number of freshman earning full credits by 10% ESLRs: Personal growth, Academic Proficiency

Specific Steps Person(s)


Funding Source

Evaluation of RTI structure (Choices) implemented in 2013-14

Leadership Team

Administration Intervention

Teachers

Spring 2014

Master Schedule F-rate for grade 9 students

Staff time None None N/A

Refine placement process for grade 9 students in Math Lab

Department Chairs GW Staff Principal

Spring 2014 Placement and diagnostic test and results

Director of Curriculum and Instruction Counselors / Admin GW Staff Department Time

Possible release days for math chairs to review placement info

$200 for release time

Site and/or grant

Improve response time for Intervention with failing grade 9 students

Teachers Counselors Administrators

Ongoing Credit acquisition rates F-rate data

CPD time

Area for Improvement: Curriculum Alignment Goal 5: Teacher collaboration at course level to align basics of course Rationale: Currently, many of the same courses, taught by different teachers, have different curriculum Growth Targets: Student achievement between teachers of the same course as measured by CST/benchmark/final achievement ESLRs: Academic Proficiency, Personal Growth

Tasks Person(s)

Responsible Timeline Assessment Resources

Expenditures

Cost Funding Source

Align basic tenets of courses, as defined by department which might include but is not limited to units of instruction, essential assignments & assessments, and pacing.

Departments Implement for fall of 2013.

Benchmark tests / CST’s

Time for meeting None None N/A


Area for Improvement: Structural support for struggling students

Goal 6: Improve performance for underperforming populations, and reduce students who are credit deficient.

Rationale: We continue to have a population of struggling students whose needs are not being met. Growth Target: Decrease F-rate of students by 10% as compared with 2012-13 School Year – as defined by students with one or more Fs Increase opportunities of support within a student’s school day to target struggling populations Increased Communication to parents of struggling students ESLRs: Academic Proficiency

Tasks Person(s)

Responsible Timeline Assessment Resources Expenditures Cost

Funding Source

Implement 9th grade Support Structure through Master Schedule

Principal Leadership

Beginning Fall 2013

Reduction in 9th grade failure rate. Decrease in # of 9th grade students who receive less than 60 credits

N/A

Possible increase in period allotment from district

1/5 – 2/5 FTE

Period allotment from District

Implement math support classes

Benchmark tests / CST’s

Beginning Fall 2013

Reduction in student failure rate in math. Increase in student achievement as measured by benchmarks and CST’s

N/A


1/5 FTE DoDEA Grant

Improved 504 protocols and procedures

Principal Fall 2012

Increased achievement by 504 population as measured by credit acquisition, and CST performance.

N/A N/A N/A N/A

Implement ESL /EL Support class

Principal Site EL coord

Beginning Fall 2013

Increased CELDT /CST scores

Site and district funds as available


1/5 FTE Period allotment from District

Increased teacher to parent communication

Teachers Fall 2012 Parent Survey N/A N/A N/A N/A


Area for Improvement: Student and teacher access to updated instructional technology Goal 5: Improve student, teacher and class access to current instructional technology and increase professional development opportunities for its use, and prepare for implementation of the Common Core. Rationale: As the school moves to embrace the Common Core standards, our technology needs will accelerate – requiring that we have a plan to meet those needs. Additionally, many teachers are using different platforms, operating systems and program versions, making it difficult to “talk” with technology. Finally, access to needed resources is often limited and or unwieldly. Growth Target: Increase # of classrooms with updated technology Increase technology-integrated instruction Facilitate ease with which teachers access needed technology resources. Increase student use of technology in the learning of curricula. Begin plan to meet needs of Common Core implantation ESLRs: Employability, Academic Proficiency

Tasks Person(s)

Responsible Timeline Assessment Resources Expenditures Cost

Funding Source

Investigate and apply for grants to enhance technology available.

Director of Assessment and Curriculum Site level committees

Annually Grant applications submitted

Staff Time None None N/A

Conduct needs assessment and cost analysis for site.

Principal Dept chairs/Leadership

Completed Spring 2013

Needs assessment document created and distributed

Staff Time None None District and Site funds

Assess technology needs related to Common Core implementation

District Tech Coord Principal Dept Chairs

Completed Spring 2013

Completed Technology Plan

Site funds to attend training opportunities

Unknown Unknown District

Provide ongoing professional development on use of technology integration and tools.

Leadership team District Administration

Fall 2012 and continuing annually

Common planning agendas

Common planning time Peer Teaching Algebraic Thinking Grant

Part of District-wide Grant



Upgrade available technology and purchase additional technology for instructional and student use.

Teacher Librarian Leadership Team

As funds become available

Technology Inventory Site and district funds as available.


Form B: Centralized Support for Planned Improvements in Student Performance

The School Site Council has analyzed the planned program improvements and has adopted the following program support goals, related actions, and expenditures to raise the academic performance of students not yet meeting state standards. Program Support Goal # 1 Pupil retention Block grant and EIA monies will be used to assist with the freshman RTI program during period 7 designed to assist a select group of at-risk freshman from becoming credit deficient. Groups participating in this goal (e.g., students, parents, teachers, administrators): Principal, 25 students, teacher of the class, Leadership, Dept chairs

Anticipated annual growth for each group: Students involved will raise CST scores by one band.

Means of evaluating progress toward this goal: Reduction of F’s as compared with 8th grade report cards; CST achievement.

Group data to be collected to measure gains: Incoming diagnostic tests in reading and mathematics compared with outgoing diagnostics.

Actions to be Taken to Reach This Goal Consider all appropriate dimensions (e.g., Teaching and Learning, Staffing, and Professional Development)

Start Date Completion Date

Proposed Expenditures Estimated Cost

Funding Source

See Goal 1 above

Planning during 2012-13 and Implementation during 2013-14

1 period in the master Schedule

1/5 FTE Pupil retention block/EIA

Program Support Goal # 2 Implementation of a structural support for EL students using EIA, Pupil Retention funds (PR Funds) Groups participating in this goal (e.g., students, parents, teachers, administrators): Principal, math department, EL students; Director of EL Coordinator

Anticipated annual growth for each group: Increase in subgroup scores in CST achievement

Means of evaluating progress toward this goal: GPA, CELDT scores, CST scores

Group data to be collected to measure gains: CELDT scores, CST data, GPA




Funding Source

See Goal 1 above



1/5 FTE Grant EIA/PR Funds


Program Support Goal # 3 Implementation of a structural math support program in Algebra using Dept of Defense grant monies Groups participating in this goal (e.g., students, parents, teachers, administrators): Principal, math department, 20 – 25 students; Director of Curriculum and Support

Anticipated annual growth for each group: Growth in Algebra I CST EOC results by 5 points.

Means of evaluating progress toward this goal: Achievement of C or better in Algebra I class for each semester.

Group data to be collected to measure gains: Incoming diagnostic tests; benchmark and final exams/CST results




Funding Source

See Goal 1 above



1/5 FTE Grant

Program Support Goal # 4 Vanden High School contributes site EIA funds to the Travis Unified School District to support the English Learner’s Coordinator’s salary. The coordinator supports Vanden High School by monitoring the EL program and supporting the school in the management of mandated reporting, testing, re-designation, and meetings. Groups participating in this goal (e.g., students, parents, teachers, administrators): All 9 – 12 EL students, teachers, principal, EL Coordinator, Directors of Curriculum and Assessment and Student Services, Parents serving on DLAC committee.

Anticipated annual growth for each group: Growth in Algebra I CST EOC results by 5 points.

Means of evaluating progress toward this goal: CELDT scores, progress reports, CST/CMA.EAP results; re-designation rates

Group data to be collected to measure gains: Tests administered in EL setting including textbook assessments, Rosetta Stone results, and specific and multiple skills assessments.




Funding Source

See Goal 4 above

1/2013 – 1/2014

TUSD EL Coordinator

$6,129 EIA


Form C: Programs Included in this Plan

Check the box for each state and federal categorical program in which the school participates and, if applicable, enter amounts allocated. (The plan must describe the activities to be conducted at the school for each of the state and federal categorical program in which the school participates. If the school receives funding, then the plan must include the proposed expenditures.)

State Programs Allocation

CAHSEE (Resource 0705) $20,000

Economic Impact Aid/ English Learner Program Purpose: Develop fluency in English and academic proficiency of English learners

$18,000

Pupil Retention Block Grant (Resource 0739) $

School and Library Improvement Program Block Grant Purpose: Improve library and other school programs.

$

Total amount of state categorical funds allocated to this school $

Federal Programs under No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Allocation

Carl Perkins $

Total amount of federal categorical funds allocated to this school $

Total amount of state and federal categorical funds allocated to this school $


Form D: School Site Council Membership

Education Code Section 64001(g) requires that the SPSA be reviewed and updated at least annually, including proposed expenditures of funds allocated to the through the Consolidated Application, by the school site council. The current make-up of the school site council is as follows:

Names of Members

Pri

ncip

al

Cla

ssro

om

Tea

cher

Oth

er S

choo

l Sta

ff

Par

ent o

r C

omm

unity

M

embe

r

Sec

onda

ry

Stu

dent

Sandra Reese, Principal X

Linda Odelson, Librarian X

Rebecca McKee, English Representative X

Amy Hernandez, Math Representative X

Larry Sepulvida, Science Representative X

Yvonne Garcia, Social Science Representative X

Katherine Beltramo, Counselor X

John Poe, CTE Representative X

Joanne Scott, Special Education Representative X

Bruce Tipton, VAPA Representative X

Angelique Crawford, Parent X

Shauna Carr, Parent X

Trisha Carr, ASB Accounts Clerk X

Alixandra Parkhurst, Student X

Dwena Phillips, Student X

Nicole West, Student X

Numbers of members of each category 1 7 3 2 3

FormE: Recommendations and Assurances

The school site council recommends this school plan and proposed 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.

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

English Learner Advisory Committee

Community Advisory Committee for Special Education Programs

Gifted and Talented Education Program Advisory Committee

Vanden High Schooi/TUSD Technology Committee

Other (list) ~ \ · C'-"C\ 1 I s

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 LEA Plan.

5. This school plan is based on 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 at a public meeting on ______ _

Attested:

Sandra M. Reese Typed name of SCC Chairperson

Marleen Hurst Typed name of SSe secretary Signature of sse secretary



Appendix 1: Academic Performance in ELA and Mathematics by Ethnicity

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011

Tested Prof/Adv FBB BB Basic Prof Adv Tested Prof/Adv FBB BB Basic Prof Adv Tested Prof/Adv FBB BB Basic Prof Adv

All Students 1198 67% 1.5% 6% 25% 36% 31% 1208 70% 1% 6% 22% 38% 32% 1219 68% 2% 5% 25% 35% 33%

Black or African American

229 61% 2.5% 8.75% 27.5% 38% 23% 216 59% 2% 9% 30% 41% 18% 182 64% 2% 7% 27% 37% 27%

Filipino 145 68% 1.4% 2% 28% 39% 29% 142 79% 0% 5% 16% 40% 39% 136 81% 1% 4% 13% 40% 41%

Hispanic/Latino of any race

215 64% 1.4% 9% 27% 40% 24% 232 63% 1% 7% 29% 38% 25% 188 60% 1% 7% 32% 33% 27%

White 481 70% 2% 6% 22% 4% 36% 482 75% 2% 6% 17% 36% 39% 428 74% 2% 5% 20% 32% 42%

MATHEMATICS – ALGEBRA I 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 395 42% 2% 19% 37% 37% 5% 316 40% 5% 17% 38% 34% 6% 353 38% 4% 21% 37% 33% 5%


85 29% 5% 26% 40% 27% 2% 69 29% 6% 23% 42% 26% 3% 55 27% 9% 22% 42% 27% 0%

Filipino 44 46% 0% 20% 34% 41% 5% 31 42% 10% 10% 39% 32% 10% 30 60% 0% 7% 33% 57% 3%


74 38% 0% 16% 46% 34% 4% 73 41% 4% 22% 33% 36% 5% 58 31% 5% 16% 48% 28% 3%

White 157 49% 3% 17% 32% 44% 5% 107 43% 7% 10% 39% 36% 7% 121 44% 4% 24% 28% 36% 8%


MATHEMATICS – ALGEBRA II 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 205 26% 7% 29% 37% 20% 6% 235 36% 6% 20% 38% 28% 8% 236 29% 5% 22% 44% 21% 8%


38 18% 11% 34% 37% 13% 5% 35 34% 6% 26% 34% 23% 11% 29 13% 0% 38% 48% 10% 3%

Filipino 28 29% 11% 11% 50% 18% 11% 27 45% 0% 11% 44% 41% 4% 39 43% 5% 13% 38% 33% 10%


30 26% 10% 33% 30% 23% 3% 47 32% 11% 34% 23% 28% 4% 34 21% 6% 21% 53% 18% 3%

White 86 27% 6% 31% 36% 20% 7% 93 33% 6% 16% 44% 25% 9% 101 30% 6% 21% 44% 20% 10%

MATHEMATICS – GEOMETRY 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 275 36% 2% 26% 36% 30% 6% 283 34% 2% 25% 39% 30% 4% 294 30% 3% 27% 40% 28% 2%


49 43% 0% 35% 22% 39% 4% 48 25% 0% 40% 35% 25% 0% 52 8% 4% 44% 44% 6% 2%

Filipino 35 32% 0% 17% 51% 29% 3% 37 33% 0% 27% 41% 30% 3% 28 25% 4% 36% 36% 25% 0%


51 37% 6% 29% 27% 31% 6% 49 20% 6% 35% 39% 16% 4% 52 33% 4% 25% 38% 31% 2%

White 107 35% 1% 22% 42% 27% 8% 122 43% 2% 16% 39% 36% 7% 117 38% 3% 21% 38% 36% 2%

MATHEMATICS – GENERAL MATH 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 110 30% 8% 25% 36% 27% 3% 167 46% 4% 17% 33% 35% 11% 137 42% 7% 13% 39% 34% 8%


28 18% 18% 21% 43% 18% 0% 35 32% 3% 20% 46% 29% 3% 10 20% 10% 20% 50% 10% 10%

Filipino 10 30% 0% 20% 50% 30% 0% 10 50% 0% 20% 30% 30% 20% 6 84% 0% 0% 17% 67% 17%


29 27% 7% 34% 31% 24% 3% 31 38% 3% 29% 29% 32% 6% 11 36% 0% 27% 36% 36% 0%

White 40 38% 5% 23% 35% 35% 3% 77 54% 4% 13% 30% 38% 16% 20 45% 5% 25% 25% 35% 10%


MATHEMATICS – HIGH SCHOOL SUMMATIVE MATH 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 146 51% 1% 12% 35% 34% 17% 143 47% 0 20% 32% 36% 11% 131 47% 4% 18% 31% 35% 12%


20 35% 10% 10% 45% 25% 10% 11 27% 0 27% 45% 18% 9% 15 20% 7% 27% 47% 20% 0%

Filipino 24 50% 0% 17% 33% 46% 4% 32 44% 0 22% 34% 41% 3% 30 46% 3% 13% 37% 23% 23%


15 60% 0% 7% 33% 40% 20% 15 40% 0 27% 33% 33% 7% 12 67% 0% 8% 25% 50% 17%

White 57 58% 0% 9% 33% 37% 21% 62 52% 0 18% 31% 37% 15% 57 50% 4% 21% 26% 39% 11%

Conclusions indicated by the data :

1. Achievement by African American students continues to be significantly lower than that of other sub-groups in all areas, with Geometry

showing as a notable exception, and Algebra II showing a significant dip. 2. The number of students who took the General Math Test decreased from 40% of the Freshman class to 25% of the freshman class 3. Despite an increase in the number of freshman students enrolled in Algebra 1, scores increased 2%. 4. Hispanic student performance increased 17 percentage points after a 13 point drop from the previous year. 5. Filipino students dropped 11 percentage points, likely being the cause of an overall dip of 3%


Appendix 2: Academic Performance in ELA and Mathematics by Grade

ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students

1198 67% 2% 6% 25% 36% 31% 1208 70% 1% 6% 22% 38% 32% 1219 68% 2% 5% 25% 35% 33%

Grade 9 438 72% 1% 5% 22% 38% 34% 397 72% 1% 4% 19% 34% 38% 425 77% 2% 3% 19% 34% 43%

Grade 10

365 63% 2% 7% 28% 35% 28% 421 67% 2% 7% 30% 35% 32% 413 64% 1% 6% 30% 35% 29%

Grade 11

395 65% 2% 8% 25% 35% 30% 390 63% 2% 8% 27% 36% 27% 381 64% 3% 7% 27% 36% 28%

MATHEMATICS – ALGEBRA I

2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011 Tested Prof/Adv FBB BB Basic Prof Adv Tested Prof/Adv FBB BB Basic Prof Adv Tested Prof/Adv FBB BB Basic Prof Adv

All Students 395 42% 2% 19% 37% 37% 5% 316 40% 5% 17% 38% 34% 6% 356 37% 4% 21% 38% 32% 5%

Grade 9 218 47% 1% 17% 34% 42% 5% 136 60% 2% 7% 31% 49% 11% 175 51% 1% 16% 31% 42% 9%

Grade 10 112 39% 3% 18% 40% 34% 5% 116 27% 9% 19% 46% 25% 2% 120 25% 3% 27% 45% 24% 1%

Grade 11 65 32% 3% 26% 38% 29% 3% 64 24% 6% 33% 38% 19% 5% 61 20% 13% 26% 41% 20% 0%

MATHEMATICS – ALGEBRA II

2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 205 26% 7% 29% 37% 20% 6% 235 36% 6% 20% 38% 28% 8% 238 29% 5% 23% 44% 21% 8%

Grade 9 21 62% 0% 10% 29% 29% 33% 33 72% 0% 6% 21% 42% 30% 31 68% 0% 0% 32% 42% 26%

Grade 10 64 28% 8% 23% 41% 23% 5% 91 47% 4% 12% 36% 38% 9% 100 35% 1% 17% 47% 24% 11%

Grade 11 120 20% 8% 36% 37% 17% 3% 111 14% 10% 31% 45% 14% 0% 107 11% 10% 35% 44% 11% 0%


MATHEMATICS – GEOMETRY 2012‐2013 2011‐2012 2010‐2011


All Students 275 36% 2% 26% 36% 30% 6% 283 34% 2% 25% 39% 30% 4% 299 29% 3% 26% 41% 27% 2%

Grade 9 96 53% 0% 14% 33% 44% 9% 73 56% 0% 12% 32% 48% 8% 92 57% 0% 3% 39% 52% 5%

Grade 10 111 34% 3% 26% 37% 29% 5% 135 33% 0% 21% 47% 29% 4% 120 21% 3% 36% 41% 21% 0%

Grade 11 68 13% 4% 43% 40% 12% 1% 75 14% 7% 45% 33% 13% 1% 87 11% 8% 38% 43% 10% 1%

MATHEMATICS – GENERAL MATH


Grade 9 110 30% 8% 25% 36% 27% 3% 167 46% 4% 17% 33% 35% 11% 140 44% 6% 14% 39% 34% 8%

MATHEMATICS – High School Summative Math


All Students 146 51% 1% 12% 35% 34% 17% 143 47% 0% 20% 32% 36% 11% 131 47% 4% 18% 31% 35% 12%

Grade 10 33 75% 0% 0% 24% 42% 33% 33 63% 0% 3% 33% 45% 18% 27 67% 0% 7% 26% 52% 15%

Grade 11 113 44% 2% 16% 38% 32% 12% 110 43% 0% 25% 32% 34% 9% 104 43% 5% 20% 33% 31% 12%

Conclusions indicated by the data:

1. All grade levels remained essentially static when compared over three years in ELA. 2. There continues to be an overall discrepancy between overall ELA scores and overall math scores. 3. Grades 10 and 11 showed significant improvement in Adv/Prof rates in Algebra 1. 4. Geometry scores remained static when compared to last year. 5. Grade 9 students continue to score the highest in all math courses.


Appendix 3: English-Language Arts Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

2012-13

English-Language Arts Target 88.9 %

Met all percent proficient rate criteria? No

GROUPS Valid Scores

Number At or Above Proficient

Percent At or Above

Proficient

Met 2013 AYP Criteria

Alternative Method

Schoolwide 372 271 72.8% No Black or African American 61 35 57.4 No American Indian or Alaska Native 4 - - - Asian 17 14 82.4 - Filipino 37 30 81.1 - Hispanic or Latino 64 50 78.1 Yes SH Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 9 - - - White 161 118 73.3 No Two or More Races 19 15 78.9 - Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 88 52 89.1 No English Learners 13 4 30.8 - Students with Disabilities 39 12 30.8 -

2011-12

English-Language Arts Target 77.8 %

Met all percent proficient rate criteria? No

GROUPS Valid Scores

Number At or Above Proficient

Percent At or Above

Proficient


Alternative Method

Schoolwide 410 315 76.8 Yes SH Black or African American 75 48 64 No American Indian or Alaska Native 1 -- -- -- Asian 33 26 78.8 -- Filipino 45 40 88.9 -- Hispanic or Latino 74 51 68.9 No Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 5 -- -- -- White 167 138 82.6 Yes Two or More Races 10 -- -- -- Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 87 58 66.7 No English Learners 10 -- -- -- Students with Disabilities 41 9 22 --


1. School wide Proficiency Rate dropped 4 points when compared with 2011-12. 2. African American Proficiency rates dropped 7 points when compared with 2011-12 3. Hispanic Proficiency rates increased nearly 10 points when compared with 2011-12


Appendix 4: Mathematics Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)

2012-13 Mathematics

Target 88.7 %

Met all percent proficient rate criteria? No GROUPS Valid Scores Number At or

Above Proficient

Percent At or Above

Proficient


Alternative Method

Schoolwide 372 247 66.4 Yes SH Black or African American 61 34 55.7 Yes SH American Indian or Alaska Native 4 - - - Asian 17 14 82.4 - Filipino 37 29 78.4 - Hispanic or Latino 64 40 62.5 Yes SH Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

9 - -

White 161 108 67.1 No Two or More Races 19 13 68.4 Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 87 50 57.5 Yes SH English Learners 13 6 46.2 Students with Disabilities 39 11 28.2

2011-12 Mathematics

Target 77.4 %

Met all percent proficient rate criteria? No GROUPS Valid Scores Number At or

Above Proficient

Percent At or Above

Proficient


Alternative Method

Schoolwide 413 266 64.4 No Black or African American 79 38 48.1 No American Indian or Alaska Native 1 -- -- -- Asian 33 27 81.8 -- Filipino 45 35 77.8 -- Hispanic or Latino 73 42 57.5 Yes SH Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

5 -- -- --

White 167 115 68.9 No Two or More Races 10 -- -- -- Socioeconomically Disadvantaged 89 47 52.8 No English Learners 10 -- -- -- Students with Disabilities 41 7 17.1 --


1. School wide proficiency rates rose 2% over 2011-12 2. Achievement for African American students rose nearly 8 points over 2011-12 3. School wide achievement is more than 20 points below the target. 4. Students with disabilities showed a 10 point increase over 2011-12


Appendix 5: Academic Performance Index by Subgroup

Subgroup 2012 Base

2013 Growth

Target Met Target?

2011 Base

2012 Growth

Target Met Target?

2010 Base

2011

Growth

Growth Target

Met Target?

All Students 841 825 >800 Yes 829 832 +3 Yes 795 832 +37 Yes

African American

797 787 3 No 780 786 +6 Yes 739 786 +47 Yes

Asian 869 858 >800 Yes 861 865 869 865

Filipino 871 851 >800 Yes 868 866 -2 Yes 846 867 +21 Yes

Hispanic or Latino

824 803 >800 Yes 814 817 +3 Yes 776 817 +41 Yes

Pacific Islander

817 850 >800 Yes 835 799 728 835

White 854 836 >800 Yes 840 844 +4 Yes 809 841 +32 Yes

Two or more races

840 839 >800 Yes 848 828 831 848

Socioeconomic Disadvantaged

805 789 >800 No 789 795 +6 Yes 738 795 +57 Yes

English Learners

675 696 No 721 651 698 721

Students with Disabilities

647 630 8 No 623 629 582 627

Conclusions Indicated by Table: 1. An achievement gap exists: African American students continue to score below 800. 2. Nearly every group showed a drop in overall API


Appendix 6: A-G Eligibility Information

2010‐11 2011‐12

Total % % of class(325) Total % % of class

(367)

#/seniors completing a‐g requirements 121 37.23% 151 41.14%Black or African American 14 11.57% 0.04% 26 17.22% 7.08%Filipino 15 12.40% 0.04% 26 17.22% 7.08%White 54 44.63% 0.14% 52 34.44% 14.17%Asian 7 5.79% 0.02% 12 7.95% 3.27%Hispanic 14 11.57% 0.04% 15 9.93% 4.09%Other 17 14.05% 0.04% 20 13.25% 5.45%

2010‐11 2011‐12 Total % Total %

#/seniors completing a‐g requirements 121 151 Male 51 42.15% 68 45.03%

Black or African American 5 4.13% 8 5.30%Filipino 7 5.79% 14 9.27%White 21 17.36% 27 17.88%Asian 4 3.31% 7 4.64%

Hispanic 5 4.13% 5 3.31%Other 9 7.44% 7 4.64%

Female 70 57.85% 83 54.97%

Black or African American 9 7.44% 18 11.92%Filipino 8 6.61% 12 7.95%White 33 27.27% 25 16.56%Asian 3 2.48% 5 3.31%

Hispanic 9 7.44% 10 6.62%Other 8 6.61% 13 8.61%


Appendix 7: EAP Test Results School Year 2012-2013

English College Readiness

College Ready College Ready ‐ Conditional Not College Ready

Year VHS State Average VHS State Average VHS State Average 2012 (381 tested) 33% 23% 25% 15% 42% 62% 2013 (387 tested) 34% 23% 23% 15% 43% 63%

Mathematics College Readiness: Algebra II


Year VHS State Average VHS State Average VHS State Average 2012 ( 98 Tested) 2% 7% 40% 22% 58% 71% 2013 (103 Tested) 7% 6% 34% 22% 60% 73%

Mathematics College Readiness: High School Summative Math


Year VHS State Average VHS State Average VHS State Average 2012 (107 tested) 20% 22% 71% 67% 9% 11% 2013 (110 tested) 20% 22% 70% 66% 10% 12%

Conclusions Indicated by the Data:

1. Vanden English students are outperforming state averages in 2013. 2. Scores in Algebra II and High School Summative Math continue to reflect state averages


Appendix 8: Seniors taking at least one AP course

2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 Total % % of class Total % % of class Total % % of class

#/seniors taking a least one AP class 128 131 139 Asian Indian ‐ 4 3.36% 1.02% 8 5.76% 2% Black or African American 23 17.56% 6.27% 10 8.40% 2.55% 17 12.23% 4.25% Filipino 31 23.66% 8.45% 26 21.85% 6.63% 21 21% 5.25% White 49 37.40% 13.35% 50 42.02% 12.76% 41 29% 10.25% Asian 11 8.40% 3.00% 9 7.56% 2.30% 16 11.51% 4% Hispanic 14 10.69% 3.81% 17 14.29% 4.34% 17 12.23% 4.25%


1. Numbers of seniors who have taken at least one AP class has increased slightly in the last year. 2. The number of Black/African American students as a percentage of the total increased 4 points. 3. Hispanic enrollment in AP classes has remained constant over the past few years.


Appendix 9: California English Language Development Data Grade - 9 Tested Proficient B EI I EA A

Test Description – CELDT Annual Overall 18 55% 1 1 6 7 3 Grade - 10 Tested Proficient B EI I EA A

Test Description – CELDT Annual Overall 13 62% 0 1 4 4 4 Grade - 11 Tested Proficient B EI I EA A

Test Description – CELDT Annual Overall 8 38% 0 1 4 3 0

Grade - 12 Tested Proficient B EI I EA A


ALL GRADES Tested Proficient B EI I EA A



1. Most tested EL students tested at the Intermediate level or Early Advanced levels. 2. CELDT testing students represent only about 2.5% of the student population. 3. 53% of all EL students are scoring at proficient levels (at least level 4)


Appendix 10: Parent Involvement Policy PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT POLICY

PART I. GENERAL EXPECTATIONS Vanden High school agrees to implement the following statutory requirements:

o The school will jointly develop with parents, distribute to parents of participating children, a School Parental Involvement Policy that the school and parents of participating children agree on.

o The school will notify parents about the School Parental Involvement Policy in an understandable and uniform format and, to the extent practicable, will distribute this policy to parents in a language the parents can understand.

o The school will make the School Parental Involvement Policy available to the local community.

o The school will periodically update the School Parental Involvement Policy to meet the changing needs of parents and the school.

o The school agrees to be governed by the following statutory definition of parental involvement, and will carry out programs, activities and procedures in accordance with this definition:

Parental involvement means the participation of parents in regular, two-way, and meaningful communication involving student academic learning and other school activities, including ensuring—

(A) that parents play an integral role in assisting their child’s learning;

(B) that parents are encouraged to be actively involved in their child’s education at school;

(C) that parents are full partners in their child’s education and are included, as appropriate, in decision-making and on advisory committees to assist in the education of their child;

(D) the carrying out of other activities, such as those described in section 1118 of the ESEA.

PART II. DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE SCHOOL WILL IMPLEMENT REQUIRED SCHOOL PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT POLICY COMPONENTS

1. Vanden High School will take the following actions to involve parents in the joint development and joint agreement of its School Parental Involvement Policy and its school wide plan, if applicable, in an organized, ongoing, and timely way under section 1118(b) of the ESEA:

• Vanden has three parents, representing various areas of the campus, serve on the Vanden High School Leadership Team. The team is responsible for organizing, evaluating, and updating the school plan. In addition, the team provides feedback to the school board regarding policies that impact Vanden High School.

• Information about the school plan is delivered in music booster and athletic booster club meetings.

• Vanden has three parent booster groups: athletics, music, and sober grad night. • Parents are invited to serve on the Discipline Committee • Parents are vital members on our W ASC focus groups.

2. Vanden High School will distribute the School Parental Involvement Policy in the annual summer mailing which is sent to all parents.

3. Van den High School will annually update its School Parental Involvement Policy to meet the changing needs of parents and the school.

PART III. ADOPTION

This School Parental Involvement Policy has been developed jointly with, and agreed on with, parents of children at Vanden High School.

This policy is adopted annually as part of the Single Plan for Student Achievement and will be in effect for the period of one year.

_L dl.z /);E./ (Signature of Authorized Official) (Date)

Vanden Single Plan for Student Achievement 2012-2013 -32-

vanden high school

Documents