SIP Template for Board Approval:

Round Lake High School 2009-2010, 2010-2011

Section I-A Data Analysis- Report Card Data

DATA:

Reading:

Round Lake HS reported All and three subgroups for Adequate Yearly progress under No Child Left Behind in 2009.  These include White, Hispanic, and Economically Disadvantaged.  In reading, the White subgroup made Safe Harbor, with 56.7% meeting standards.  All and the subgroups failed to make AYP or Safe Harbor, with All at 39.6%, Hispanic at 28% and Economically Disadvantaged at 32.8%. 

Trend data shows student performance in reading for All and each of the subgroups to be fairly stable.  For All, the percent meeting AYP from 2006-09 is as follows: 2006: 36.9%, 2007: 34.6%, 2008: 34.5%, and 2009: 39.8%.  Over the same time span the percent of White students making AYP varied between 51.9% and 57.1%; Hispanic students between 22.1% and 28.6%; and Economically Disadvantaged between 26.4% and 33.7%.  On the plus side, the 2009 scores were at the top of the range for each of the subgroups.

Math:

• Round Lake HS students have improved their math performance substantially over the past four years, but still have failed to make AYP or Safe Harbor. 
• In 2009, All were at 44.4% making standards, White: 54.3%, Hispanic: 38.3%, and Economically Disadvantaged: 45.2%.  
• Over the past four years, 2006-2009, the results for All students have improved from 35.2% making AYP in 2006 to 45% in s2009. 
• Similarly, the Hispanic subgroup has improved from 24% to 39.1% over the same time span. 
• The improvement by the Economically Disadvantaged subgroup has also improved substantially from 24.1% to 38.5%. 
• The White subgroup has also improved from 50.7% to 54.8%.

In 2009, Round Lake HS students exceeded the AYP graduation benchmark of 78%, with 80.6% graduating.

FACTORS:

Round lake HS implemented several initiatives in the 2007-2009 SIP.  These included:

• Interventions for reading (literacy) for freshmen.  These students will take the PSAE in 2010.
• Implementation of a three-year math graduation requirement including college-prep level math (Algebra 1, Algebra 2, Geometry).    This change in graduation requirements shifted to student enrollments to core math courses (college prep).  Previously business math and CAD were acceptable math credit course prior to change in spring 2007.   WE expect to see improvements from this initiative in 2010.
• Changes in departmental leadership (spring 2008) and changes in school schedule (built-in collaboration started in 2008-2009)
• English, Math, Science, and Social Studies teachers are aligning their curriculum at all levels to CRS / Quality Core.  This is a work in progress.
• Course teams have begun collaboration within math department.  These teams are redesigning curriculum, instruction and assessment to align with Quality Core concepts and frameworks.

RLHS still needs to address the following issues:

• RLHS has no clear plan for reading and writing across the content areas (being addressed for 9^th grade level by PLC group in 2009-2010, 10^th grade in 2010-2011, 11^th grade in 2011-2012, and 12^th grade in 2012-2013).  High school teachers generally do not receive training on how to teach or improve reading (even English teachers).  We lack of a plan to develop reading strategies across content areas. 
• Local common assessments are not all linked to CRS and state standards
• Common and formative assessment data are not yet driving instructional decisions
• Lack of professional development regarding assessment data analysis (PLC Group has begun this work on 10/13/09 SIP day along with Exam View software and hardware acquisition in 2009 will address this need))
• Power standards have not been identified or assessed in content areas (begun in fall 2009; all content  areas are to complete first drafts of power standards by Jan. 2010)
• Lack of comprehensive 6-12 math alignment articulation

In addition, RLHS has the following external factors impacting curriculum and instruction:

Dependency on state funding due to relatively low local taxing revenue streams and property values versus surrounding communities

NEXT STEPS:

• Indentify power standards for content areas with expected learning outcomes for a culturally diverse student population (currently underway, power standards are due by January 2010)
• Develop common reading and writing plan (or instructional language) across all content areas (currently underway with HS Leadership Team and Instructional Cadre of PLC Group: November 3^rd SIP Day)
• Target specific professional development of common summative assessments and formative assessments (begun on October 13^th SIP day with Assessment Cadre)
• Target specific professional development for differentiated instruction and progress monitoring (Begun with SST / SAT groups and Instruction Cadre in 2009-2010)

Reading:

• Create focus on best practice instructional strategies for all teachers and all learners
• Create comprehensive plan for reading and writing strategies across curriculum
• Provide curricular reading materials that match student interest and student reading levels
• Incorporate reading concepts and materials into all course teams
• Develop a comprehensive system of interventions for students who are not matching reading levels beyond basic literacy courses and provide enrichment opportunities for advanced readers

Math:

• Begin instituting vertical alignment between course teams
• Continue aligning math courses with Quality Core objectives and framework
• Continue to focus on core math courses for graduation requirements
• Establish more frequent and effective curriculum alignment and articulation between high school and middle schools
• Develop a professional cultural climate that focuses and invests in student success and the value of education for all stakeholders

Section I-B Data Analysis- Data and Analysis- Local Assessment Data

DATA:

• ACT results indicate students are making progress towards meeting CRS (College Readiness Standards).  The math ACT average score has improved from 17.4, with 17% of students making the math benchmark in 2003, to 19, with 30% making the math benchmark in 2008.
• ACT results indicate student performance in English is flat, with the average score of 16 , with 40% making the English benchmark in 2003 to an average score of 17, with 39% making the benchmark in 2008.
• Similarly, reading performance on the ACT has shown no improvement from 2003-2008, with the 2003 scores of 16.9 (25% making benchmark) and 2008 scores of 17 (26% making benchmark).
• Student gains in reading and math Explore to ACT scores also lag behind “recommended gain.”  While ACT recommends a score gain of 6 points in reading, RLHS students have gains of 4.2, 3.3, and 3.5 from 2007-2007.  I math, the ACT recommended gain is 5 points.  RLHS students have gained 4, 3.9, and 4.2 over the same time period.
• The average RLHS student enters ninth grade with skills substantially below the recommended college readiness benchmark for Explore.  The recommended benchmark for math is 17.  RLHS average scores for the past four years are: 2003, 13.6, 2004: 14.3, 2005: 14.1, and 2006: 14.4.  On the positive side, the scores have improved from 13.6 to 14.5, but still lag substantially behind the recommended 17.  In reading, average student scores are also well below the recommended score of 15, the scores over the same time frame of 12.8, 13.9, 13.1, and 12.8.  Unlike the math scores, reading scores have not shown improvement.  

The following observations are drawn form second semester 2009 grade distribution data:

English:

• Substantial numbers of students fail freshman and sophomore English. 
• The percent of students making high grades increases substantially by the junior year. 
• This may be due, in part, to the increasing numbers of students enrolled in Basic level classes by their junior year.  Once a student fails an English course, the likelihood of failing again appears to significantly increase.

• English I: A: 12%, B: 19%, C: 24.5%, D: 24.1%, F: 18.8%
• English II: A: 8%, B: 23.2%, C: 30.1%, D: 22.1%, F: 16.3%
• Am. Lit: A: 30.6%, B: 20.4%, C: 30.1%, D: 13.7%, F: 5.1%.
• Percent of students enrolled in English levels:
• 9^th Grade: Basic: 0%, Regular: 90%, Honors: 10%
• 10^th Grade: Basic: 15%, Regular: 75%, Honors: 10%
• 11^th Grade: Basic: 32%, Regular: 57%, Honors: 11%

• Student enrollment and grades achieved in 11^th grade English are associated with making AYP in reading.  
• Of the 16 students enrolled in English I, none made AYP regardless of grade earned for the class.
• Of the 45 students enrolled in English II, 6 made AYP. 
• All six of these students earned a “C” for the class. 
• Of the 50 students enrolled in American Lit Skills, 8 made AYP. 
• These were evenly spaced among “A” through “D” grades. 
• The class with the largest enrollment was American Lit, with 196 students. Of these, 104 made AYP, 92 did not make AYP. 
• Grade in the class was associated with AYP, but not as strongly as might be supposed, with substantial numbers of “A” and “B” students failing to make AYP:

American LIT: A: 39Y, 21N; B: 23Y, 17N; C: 30Y, 29N; D: 11Y, 16N; F: 1Y, 9N.  

All 37 students enrolled in AP Language made AYP.

Math:

Success in freshman math appears to be a significant predictor of overall success in math.  RLHS students enroll in one of four math classes.  The grade distributions (see below) demonstrate dramatic differences in achievement patterns between honors and regular enrollments.  While honors students are highly likely of earning an “A” or “B”, students enrolled in Algebra 1 and Extended Algebra 1 have a much greater chance of earning a “D” or an “F”.

Extended Algebra:  A: 0%, B: 19.5%, C: 26%, D: 30.4%, F: 23.9%

Algebra I:                  A: 9%, B: 17.5%, C: 20.6%, D: 24.7%, F: 26.8%

Algebra I (H):           A: 23.2%, B: 26.7%, C: 32.1%, D: 16%, F: 2%

Algebra II (H)           A: 42.8%, B: 22.4%, C: 26.5%, D: 6%, F: 2%

The percent of students enrolled in basic  level classes increases from 13% in 9^th grade to 26%, in 10^th grade to 33% as juniors.

• As was the case with English and reading scores, student enrollment in 11^th grade math is also strongly associated with AYP. 
• Of 24 juniors enrolled in Algebra I, only one made AYP. 
• Of the 98 enrolled in Algebra II, only 10 made AYP, with little association between grade and AYP, as 5 of the 10 earned a “D” or “F”. 
• Of the 120 enrolled in Geometry, 61 made AYP, with 45 earning an “A”, “B”, or “C”.  Of the 128 students enrolled in honors level classes (Geometry H or College Algebra, all buy 4 made AYP.

FACTORS:

• Course expectations and assessments do not meet or reflect ACT/PSAE tested skill sets
• We do not currently have a timely system of interventions for failing students
• English/Math/Science/Social Studies not yet aligned to CRS and power standards
• Increasing enrollments of subgroups traditionally not making AYP

English:

• Grading systems are not consistent across course teams.  What constitutes a grade?  Are we grading proficiency or compliance?
• Assessment systems are not standardized: are assessments formative, summative or both?
• Differentiation / intervention for failing students: how do we address the reasons for failure?
• Lack of high expectations / staff attitudes towards student capabilities
• Attendance issues (Honors students attend at a far higher rate than students in regular level courses)

Math:

• Algebra 1 scaffolds successfully with Algebra 2
• Attendance is correlated with grades
• There is a correlation with homework completion rate and student grades

NEXT STEPS:

• Designate professional development (staff embedded) for a variety of assessment developments and analysis with respect to Quality Core and CRS (PLC Group)
• We need to address the instructional needs / practices for our current population (IPI / walk through data gathering: started in winter 2009)
• Continuously evaluate interventions for success
• Continue to align course curricula to CRS and power standards
• Continue to provide timely interventions for all students

English:

• Involve teachers more in the attendance of their students
• Align curriculum and assessments with CRS to meet AYP

Math:

• Involve teachers more in the attendance of their students
• Align curriculum and assessments with CRS to meet AYP
• Ensure students are taking courses to match AYP skills

Section I-D Data Analysis- Data and Analysis- Key Factors

• Continue articulation across all content areas and between grade levels
• Continue offering professional development aimed at addressing AYP and demographic needs
• Adopt Quality Core frameworks for curriculum development for core content areas
• Create data collection and analysis professional development opportunities to monitor student progress and make informed decisions regarding instructional strategies
• Create and refine RTI academic and behavioral interventions
• Conduct semester grade distribution analysis 

Section II-A Action Plan

            Objective I Description: To Meet AYP Objectives in Reading

While currently 39.8% of our students are making AYP in Reading, our objective is for all students (including every subgroups) to make AYP in Reading to at least 77.5% in 2010 and 85% in 2011 or safe harbor.

            Professional Development Strategies and Activities:

·         English 1/ELL/ESL/Special Education teams meet during collaboration times and SIP Day activities to align and revise freshman curriculum

·         English 2/ELL/ESL/Special Education teams meet during collaboration times and SIP Day activities to align and revise sophomore curriculum.

·         English 3/ELL/ESL/Special Education teams meet during collaboration times and SIP Day activities to align and revise junior curriculum

·         All staff will be trained on common reading strategies during SIP day activities that may be used across all content areas.

·         Literacy teams meet during collaboration times or SIP Day activities to align and revise literacy curriculum.

·         High school courses will articulate curriculum with middle schools to align all to CRS standards and eliminate gaps in instruction.

·         Train staff in aligning curriculum to Quality Core standards, CRS, and ILS

·         Train staff in aligning assessments to Quality Core standards, CRS, and ILS

·         Train staff in assessment data analysis and connecting assessment proficiency to QC, CRS, and ILS proficiency.

            Parent Involvement Strategies and Activities:

·         Staff will provide parents with information about tutoring opportunities for students

·         The high school leadership will host monthly parent social gatherings and will communicate with parents about curricular and extracurricular programs regularly through printed and electronic newsletters

·         High school staff will contact parents regularly regarding student performance.

·         Student services staff including deans, counselors, and the attendance specialist will routinely contact and meet with parents regarding student attendance and achievement issues.

·         The guidance staff will conduct a seminar specifically designed for minority/low income students about honors/AP courses and the supports available for students enrolled in and wanting information about those courses.

·         Teachers will contact parents regarding specific achievement issues as required by district policy

·         Increase the number of parents representing high school students in the BPAC

·         Hold a social gathering for incoming freshman and their parents to acclimate them to the high school environment.

·         Administration will contact and consult with an outside community activist for connecting with the Hispanic community.

·         Provide regular QC, CRS, and ILS standard-based feedback about student proficiency\

·         Provide parents with comprehensive syllabi for each course, including assessments and standards.

Objective II Description: To Meet AYP Objectives in Math

While currently 45.0% of our students are making AYP in Math, our objective is for all students (including every subgroup) to make AYP in Math to at least 77.5% in 2010 and 85% in 2011 or safe harbor.

            Professional Development Strategies and Activities:

·         Algebra 1 course teams will continue to align Algebra 1 curriculum with CRS, Quality Core and IL Standards and make appropriate changes to course scope and sequence, and pacing.

·         Review freshman placement and grade distributions at the end of 1^st semester based on individual academic success.

·         Algebra 2 course teams will continue to align Algebra 2 curriculum with CRS, Quality Core and IL Standards and make appropriate changes to course scope and sequence, and pacing.

·         Geometry course teams will continue to align Geometry curriculum with CRS, Quality Core and IL Standards and make appropriate changes to course scope and sequence, and pacing.

·         Identify and visit high schools with successful Tier 1 and Tier 2 RTI tutoring programs.

·         Teachers will receive training on Quality Core Program from ACT summer intern.

·         Math and Science math teachers will meet monthly to align common vocabulary and concepts.

·         Small teams of math teachers will research best practices, design lessons, and share with department that include conceptual understanding, problem-solving, computation/mental  math, math facts, explicit vocabulary instruction, and common formative assessments.

·         Teachers will research and develop a process for creating individual student SMART goals based on data gathered on a monthly basis to motivate performance.

Parent Involvement Strategies and Activities:

• Staff will provide parents with information about tutoring opportunities for students
• The high school leadership will host monthly parent social gatherings and will communicate with parents about curricular and extracurricular programs regularly through printed and electronic newsletters
• High school staff will contact parents regularly regarding student performance.
• Student services staff including deans, counselors, and the attendance specialist will routinely contact and meet with parents regarding student attendance and achievement issues.
• The guidance staff will conduct a seminar specifically designed for minority/low income students about honors/AP courses and the supports available for students enrolled in and wanting information about those courses.
• Teachers will contact parents regarding specific achievement issues as required by district policy
• Increase the number of parents representing high school students in the BPAC
• Hold a social gathering for incoming freshman and their parents to acclimate them to the high school environment.
• Administration will contact and consult with an outside community activist for connecting with the Hispanic community.