Alameda School Plan 2007/08

Alameda High School was a 9-12 school with an enrollment of 1,900+ in 2007/08. To review Alameda's state Academic Performance Index scores since 2000 click here.

Disclaimer: Single School Plan were hand typed and transcribed from source documents. Please pardon the typos as the webmaster is a poor typist. While an effort was made to spell acronyms, here is a reference guide for those acronyms.

Single School Plan Components

What Did You Learn from 2006/07 Cycle of Inquiry?

1. Looking at your data, what general trends do you see? What does the data tell us about how the focus group did? How much progress did they make? How does this compare to the growth of other subgroups? Is the student achievement gap closing?

Alameda High School continues to focus on supporting and improving the academic performance of all its students and the instructional program. The California Standards Test- English Language Arts (CST-ELA) data for the past four years indicates a trend, which can be best described as an increase in student performance for all student groups. However, despite the increase in student performance for the strategic student groups, African American/black and Latino students, it does not significantly decrease the existing, historic achievement gap.

The historic achievement gap continues to be expressed by the existing pattern of discrepant student achievement between two consistent groups of students. The highest levels of achievement made by white and Asian students and the lowest levels of achievement made by African American/black and Latino students, as documented by the CSTs. Within the two lowest performing ethnic groups, the female students outperform their male counterparts.

The number of incoming 9th graders reading two or more years below grade level has decreased each year, as defined by CST-ELA and GRADE data. The adopted intervention programs REACH, High Point, ************** and Fusion (SIM) have significantly improved the reading and ELA achievement levels for those students that attended a minimum of 80% of the academic program, as evidenced by program assessments and common departmental-course assessments. There continue to be students that would benefit from literacy intervention beyond their ninth grade year.

The Math and Science CST scores indicate a similar pattern of student achievement. White and Asian student groups significantly outperform their African American/black and Latino student counterparts.

The CST-Math and Science, common assessments and course enrollment analysis indicates that African American/black and Latino students dominate basic and lower level math and science courses. Their representation in higher level math and science courses is minimal.

The historic achievement gap continues with a significant discrepancy between the success of white and Asian student groups and the African American/black and Latino student groups. The evidence clearly indicates a need for continuous and consistent efforts to close the achievement gap and to ensure the academic success of the African American/black and Latino students, and their equitable representation in higher level courses at AHS.

2. What evidence/data do you have regarding the level of implementation of the teacher/instructional practice and/or school wide practices that you planned in your last COI? (Include data from walk-throughs, teacher self-assessment, etc.) Include information about what was not implemented as well as what was implemented.

Prior single school plans (SSP) reflected an intent to meet the literacy needs of target and strategic students. AHS participated in the district-wide literacy efforts utilizing the REACH and High Point programs. There have been staff members, who participated in literacy training with Kate Kinsella. Professional dialog and vocabulary continue to permeate the literacy discussions and instructional program initiated/sparked by the Kinsella workshops. Staff members continue to express interest in attending Kinsella Literacy workshops.

AHS has been involved in the Strategic Instructional Model (SIM) since 2006. One staff members were trained during the summer of 2006. The master schedule included two literacy sections. Seventeen teachers participated in SIM training during the summer of 2007. The current master schedule includes four sections of literacy, with each blocked with a section of English 9 and one section of second year literacy, also blocked with a section of English 10.

The majority (all but one) of the seventeen staff members who participated in SIM training this past summer have been conscientiously and strategically implementing and incorporating the appropriate SIM strategies and techniques into their instructional programs; with fifteen participating in the coaching component of the program. (One teacher is not participating due to illness and the second teacher is still a novice and would like more time to develop strategies and techniques as part of the instructional planning process, but feels unable to include them this year.) Additionally, they have been sharing information about their implementation with the members of their departmental teams and informally collaborating with colleagues in other departments interested in the SIM strategies and techniques. Additional staff members have inquired about participating in future literacy training. (SIM or Kate Kinsella)

Based on the established criteria, student data, performance and professional input, the site literacy team identifies additional need for at least three more blocked sections of literacy/English 9 and one more blocked section of Literacy 2/English 10. These sections were not available for implementation given the fiscal restrictions, which limited the instructional allocations to AHS. The combination of competing student needs, demographics, past practice and fiscal issues resulted in the implementation of a compromise plan and section allocation to literacy.

There has been a consistent and collaborative effort by the English department and the ELD team to consistently implement strategies designed to support and improve student study and literacy skills. Dialog about student literacy within and between departments has increased. There is evidence, which indicates that a significant professional dialog about student literacy and the achievement of target and strategic students is embedded in collaborative efforts. There is evidence of significant efforts within departments to meet the instructional needs of target and strategic students.

The math department has focused its collaborative and individual efforts to study and improve the math achievement levels and representation in higher level courses of African American/black and Latino students. Currently, there is significant collaborative focus and work to develop instructional units, which utilize various learning modalities and technology to support algebra 1 students. The evidence suggests that if all students, most especially target and strategic student groups, were more successful with algebra 1, they would be encouraged and interested in continuing their studies in math beyond algebra 1.

The science department has focused its collaborative and individual efforts to study and improve the student achievement levels and representation in higher level science lab courses of African American/black and Latino students. There is currently significant collaborative focus and work to develop instructional units, which utilize various learning modalities and technology to support student success. The evidence suggests that if all students, most especially target and strategic student groups, were more successful with science, they would be encouraged and interested in continuing their studies in science into the more advanced courses.

Similar efforts are evident in other departments. Various indicators inform the belief that there is an increase in focus and efforts to improve the student achievement and success rates by strategic and target students. Some of those indicators are:

• The development and implementation of common assessments
• GPA
• Progress toward graduation
• Evidence from collaborative notes
• The current number of sections of literacy and expansion to include a second year of support
• Information from walk through and teacher observations
• Teacher self-assessments, discussions and documents
• New course implementation into the master schedule
• The changes in and consistent implementation of varied instructional practices
• The consistent use of embedded instructional strategies and techniques
• Continuous interest, requests and participation for PD Ie. SIM,
• K. Kinsella, from various department members
• Professional dialogue and vocabulary changes
• Increased student dialog, interest, and effort
• Improved attendance rates as evidenced by a reduction in truancy assembly invitations
• A reduction in student referrals
• An increase in SSTs
• An increase in active student contracts
• An increase in the type and number of student requests for support from the on site student health clinic
3. What evidence do you have that your focus on these students has positively impacted their learning?

The CST scores indicate some student success, but fall short of indicating any significant success. The embedded Fusion assessments, progress toward graduation, and various teacher assessments indicate varying levels of student literacy growth for program participants. Those students identified as being on the fringe of the strategic group and not placed in Fusion or continuing with literacy 2 showed minimal, if any significant academic growth, as indicated by CST scores, GPA, course credits/progress toward graduation, or common assessments.

Alameda High School has been experiencing a pattern of growth for multiple years, as reflected by the API rating. The 2005 API rating was an 8. The AYP was met. The 2006 API rating was a 9. The AYP was met. The 2007 API rating remains a 10, with an 817 base. AHS continues to have a base score above 800. However, there was a decrease in the 2007 base score, with a –17 growth reported. The AYP was met. A more detailed analysis has been indicated and is being conducted by the collaborative teams. This collaborative process includes instructional intervention, which will be reflected in the SSP update.

The Latino student population is approximately 11% and is a significant factor in the API rating. Many of the Latino students are also English Learner (EL) students and have impact on the API and AYP ratings as one of student significant student groups reported. This student group continues to be under-represented in courses at the advanced level.

The EL student population is 19% of the student population and is comprised of many ethnic groups. The largest group of EL students are Asian students. Asians have generally been represented in advanced level courses. Evidence indicates that those students represented in advanced level courses, especially in advanced math and science courses, tend to experience academic success.

The African American/black student population is 7% of the student population and is not considered to be a numerically significant in the API rating. Historically, their general performance on the CSTs has not been of significant consequence to the API rating or the AHS academic reputation.

There is a need for further analysis of the 2007 ratings, in order to more clearly understand the performance and success of each student population, and their impact on the general growth trend of AHS. There is a significant need to focus on the strategic and target student populations. It is not clear what the API and AYP ratings truly indicate for all AHS student populations.

There is evidence, which appears to indicate student improvement such as:

• Reduction in the number of sections of transition to algebra classes
• Focus on student learning and success – teacher conversations and collaborative notes
• Successful implementation of new instructional strategies and techniques-discussed and reported by teachers and students
• Student performance success and grade improvements
• Reduction in student referrals by target and strategic students
• Reduction in student truancy as evidenced by truancy assembly invitations
• Evidence from walk throughs and observations
• Documentation and discussions at IEPs, SSTs and 504s.
4. Is there anything else you learned in examining your data that will inform your revised problem statement?

The evidence indicates a need for the allocation and implementation of additional literacy and math sections, in addition to refinements and shifts in practices, the infusion of instructional strategies and techniques to support the success of strategic and target students, and the inclusion of courses designed to support strategic and target student groups with making successful and timely progress toward graduation.

There continues to be:

• students who would benefit significantly from a second year literacy program
• a need for new math courses or the redesign of existing courses to ensure student success and representation in higher level math courses
• a need for new science courses or the redesign of existing courses to ensure student success and representation in higher level science courses
• a need to increase the number of students enrolled in higher level science and math courses from under represented student groups
• a need to develop a family support system to encourage, support and increase successful family participation of target and strategic student groups
• a need to ensure equitable access to and successful academic outcomes for strategic and target student groups
• a need to increase and assure equitable post-graduate or post-separation options, choices and success for all student groups
• To be an increase in student success in classes where the instructor consistently utilizes instructional practices, strategies and techniques, which address various learning modalities

The improved strength of the instructional program and increased student achievement and success when consistent collaborative efforts have yielded instructional changes, practices, and increased student success for target and strategic student groups.

Fall 2007

1. What are your problem statements?

Problem Statements

Student Achievement Problems

Teacher Practice Problems

2. What are your inquiry questions?

Student Achievement Questions

Teacher Practice Questions

3. What are your measurable goals?
4. What are your major strategies?

Alameda 2006/07 Single School Plan

Alameda 2005/06 Single School Plan

Alameda 2004/05 Single School Plan

Alameda 2003/04 Single School Plan

Alameda High School

4 Year District API Base Data

Definitions

School Mobility Percent - Represents the percentage of students attending the school for the first time.

Parent Education Average - The average of all responses where "1" represents "Not a high school graduate", "2" represents "High School Graduate", "3" represents "Some College", "4" represents "College Graduate" and "5" represents "Graduate School".

School Classification Index - A mathematically computed index using other non academic API components to create indicator of similar demographics and school environment to be used for similar school rankings.

Disclaimer: All data has been hand created. If there are questions about the validity of the data, please contact the webmaster.

Single School Plan Home

TOP

Send mail to mikemcmahonausd@yahoo.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: February 8, 2007

Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community.