CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP AT THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL

1. CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP AT THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL FOREST GROVE HIGH SCHOOL PRESENTERS: Jack Musser, Superintendent John O’Neill Jr., Principal

2. FOREST GROVE HIGH SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS • 1,900 Student Population; Grades 9-12 • 61% Caucasian, 36% Latino, 3% Other • 42% Free and Reduced Lunch • 14% ELL Population • 14% Special Needs Population

3. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AREAS OF NEED (AS IDENTIFIED IN 2002-2003) • Reduce drop out rate & increase passing rates • Build relationships between staff & students • Help kids feel “connected” • Ease the transition of Freshmen into FGHS • Need to identify students failing in a timely manner. • Increase reading and math skill levels of students

4. SCHOOL DATA EXAMINED 2002-2003 • 47% of previous year’s Freshmen below a 2.0 GPA • Nearly half of all drop outs were ninth graders • Low reading and math skills for sophomores: • 50% met state reading benchmarks • 31% met state math benchmarks • 80% correlation between 9th grade students reading below grade level and earning below a 2.0 GPA • Need for disaggregated data in a timely manner

5. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2003-2007 • Apply for Smaller Learning Communities Grant (U.S. DOE) • Create Teams at the 9th and 10th grade levels • Restructure ELL Program • Institute Intervention Meetings • Refine and Expand Alternative Education Program • Create Advisory Program- 4 year relationship • Create Links Transition Program • Create remedial intervention programs (Workshop Courses) • Create capacity for on-going assessments • Align core curriculum in: English, Math, Science, Social Studies • Create six CAM Academies • Increase communication with parents

6. SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN School Wide Staff Development Plan 2002-2006 2002-2003 What Works In Schools: Translating Research into Action- By Robert J. Marzano 2003 2003-2004 Differentiated Instruction 2004-2005 SOS (Student Owned Strategies) 2005-2006 SIOP (Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol) 2006-2007 Writing Across the Curriculum

7. CREATION OF REMEDIAL INTERVENTION PROGRAMS • Math Workshop • Utilizes PLATO math software to individualize student learning • Creation of a 40 station 9th grade lab & 40 station 10th grade lab • Utilization of State Sample Math Tests and teacher generated standards-based math problems which familiarize students with format of multiple choice questions

8. READING WORKSHOP • Utilizes Accelerated Reading Program (www.renlearn.com) along with PowerLessons, oral readings, journaling and Daily Reading Logs. • Individualized student reading levels are determined by STAR Reading assessment software. Students read novels at their instructional levels utilizing Sustained Silent Reading for 40 to 60 minutes per 88 minute block. • When students finish their novel, they take a computerized ten question comprehension assessment and vocabulary assessment (new for our school this year). • Students earn points for the number of books read and the percent correct on vocabulary and comprehension tests.

9. SYSTEMIC SCHOOL-WIDE FACTORS Based on Marzano, 2000a* • Rank Factor #1: • Opportunity to Learn • Freshmen Students below a 239 are enrolled in a regular math and English as well as Math and Reading Workshop support electives. • This structure maintains mainstream access along with individualized instruction through integrated approach.

10. Rank Factor #2: • Time • By requiring a regular math and English class as well as the Workshop elective classes, students receive double the time to learn and master skills tied to state standards.

11. Rank Factor #3: • Monitoring • All students are monitored on an on-going basis. • Oregon’s on-line TESA state assessment provides three opportunities a year. • We use the long version first for strand information and the short evaluations prior to the end of the first semester and at the end of the assessment window in the Spring. • We also use PLATO assessments teacher generated assessments to help guide instruction. • We use Mastery in Motion (MIM) software to provide disaggregated data to teachers for assessment and work-sample feedback. • We have created a new classified position responsible for running our two TESA Labs and providing disaggregated data to teachers and others upon request.

12. Rank Factor #4: • Pressure to Achieve • Students are required to remain in Math and Reading Workshop electives until they pass the state exam with a score of 239 or higher. • Both regular and elective math teachers have on-going conversations with their students about their progress. • Once passed, the required elective is replaced with an elective of the student’s choice.

13. Rank Factor #5: • Parental Involvement • Regular parental updates are provided by teachers through the use of EdLine web-based software, which provides a calendar of upcoming assignments, grades on specific assignments, missing assignments, attendance, and a course syllabus.

14. Rank Factor #6: • School Climate • School-wide celebrations are held for academic and activity success. • We conduct nine school-wide assemblies a year and academic achievement is celebrated in nearly all of them

15. Rank Factor #7: • Leadership • Monitoring of student achievement progress is on-going throughout the year. • Two school improvement retreats of three days each have been held over the past four years to set school-wide goals and monitor progress. • All stake-holders are represented at these retreats: students, parents, BSC, LSC, Leadership Team, school board members, district administration, all site administrators, workshop representatives, etc.

16. Rank Factor #8: • Cooperation • Any program is only as good as the people you have running it. • Our Workshop teachers are some of the best we have on site. • All workshop teachers believe all students can learn and they take personal responsibility for student growth and achievement. • Our District Administrative Team is VERY supportive and has upheld high expectations. Source: Marzano, R.J. (200a*). A new era of school reform: Going where the research takes us. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED45455)

17. HIGHER EXPECTATIONS • Students will stoop or strive to established expectations • Our board has passed board policy requiring a 239 passing score in order to opt out of a workshop class. • Our board has also passed promotion standards for our eighth graders. • Eighth grade students must achieve a 2.0 grade point average for the year, passing math and language arts.

18. HIGHER RESULTS: • Higher passing rates on state assessments for all subgroups; • Higher passing rates in core classes for 9th and 10th graders by first semester • Lower Drop-out rate: • - 01-02 School Year = 7.7% • - 05-06 School Year = 2.4% • Oregon Report Card overall rating: • - 01-02 School Year = Satisfactory • - 05-06 School Year = Strong (2nd Year)

19. Table 1 FOREST GROVE HIGH SCHOOL READING & LITERATURE PERFORMANCE ON GRADE 10 ASSESSMENT STUDENTS MEETING OR EXCEEDING STATE STANDARD

20. 2005-2006 FGHS Comparative Scores State Reading & Literature: Meets or Exceeds * FGHS only- excludes alternative school

21. Table 2 FOREST GROVE HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE ON GRADE 10 ASSESSMENT STUDENTS MEETING OR EXCEEDING STATE STANDARD

22. 2005-2006 FGHS Comparative Scores State Mathematics: Meets or Exceeds * FGHS only- excludes alternative school

23. FAILURE RATE BY COURSE: Course: 00-01 05-06 English 9 20% 14% Physical Science 23% 6% World Studies 24% 7% English 10 28% 13% Biology 22% 19% American Studies 27% 9%

24. Closing the Achievement Gap Math Gap between Hispanic and Caucasian Students: Eighth Grade: 8 point rit gap Tenth Grade: 4 point rit gap Math Gap between ELL and Caucasian Students: Eighth Grade: 13 point rit gap Tenth Grade: 8 point rit gap

25. Closing the Achievement Gap Reading Gap between Hispanic and Caucasian Students: Eighth Grade: 9 point rit gap Tenth Grade: 5 point rit gap Reading Gap between ELL and Caucasian Students: Eighth Grade: 16 point rit gap Tenth Grade: 8 point rit gap