San Francisco Unified School District

Academic Plan

for

Student Achievement

(2008-2009 School Year)

LOWELL HIGH SCHOOL

052970

CDS Code

October 20, 2008

Date of this plan/revision

Purpose of this Academic Plan

This academic plan meets the content requirements of amended Education Code Section 64001 (effective January 2002) for a single school plan for pupil achievement. Such a plan must be developed at each school that operates any programs funded through the Consolidated Application.

This academic plan provides a single, comprehensive school plan to improve the academic performance of students. Its use requires collection and analysis of student performance data, setting priorities for program improvements, rigorous use of effective solution strategies, and ongoing monitoring of results. The template provides a structured means to improve teaching and learning to meet state content and performance standards. To accomplish this purpose, the template includes elements found by educational research and professional practice to be essential to the success of plans to improve student academic performance. In addition, if all applicable portions of the template are properly completed, school plan content requirements will be met for all programs for which the school has an allocation in the Consolidated Application.

Schools operating School-Based Coordinated Programs must include instructional and auxiliary services to meet the special needs of English learners, educationally disadvantaged pupils, gifted and talented pupils, and pupils with exceptional need.

Acronyms and Terms Used in this Plan

Term	Meaning
ALEKS	Software program leased by Lowell to provide support in math to students who need assistance
AP	Advanced Placement (or Assistant Principal)
API	Academic Performance Index, a measure California uses to rate schools
AYP	Adequate Yearly Progress, a set of performance standards established by the federal government in the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.
“BC” Code	Classes that alternate in length from 40 minutes to 65 minutes.
CAHSEE	California High School Exit Exam
CSF	The California Scholastic Federation is an organization that recognizes academic excellence. Membership is based on grades earned each semester. Students can achieve a life membership certificate and financial aid information for college. Membership is only for grade levels 10-12 and students who receive 3 A's and 1 B in academic classes.
CSU	California State University
DHS	Digital High School – a state-funded program whereby technology is introduced into the school and used for teaching in accordance with guidelines
EDY	Educationally Disadvantaged Youth – students who score at or below the 40^th percentile
ELAC	English Learner Advisory Committee, a committee of staff and ELL student parents required for each school by the state under certain conditions.
ELL	English Language Learner
ESLR	Expected Schoolwide Learning Results – capabilities students are expected to develop by WASC (see below)
ETS	Educational Testing Services – organization that oversees the AP program in the U.S.
GATE	Gifted and Talented Education- a program whereby gifted and talented students are given differentiated opportunities and assignments.
IEP	“Individualized Education Plan” – a requirement for each Special Education Student
LAA	Lowell Alumni Association
LSA	Lowell Student Association (Student Government including Class Officers)
PTSA	Parent-Teacher-Student Association
Plato Program	Software program leased by Lowell to provide support in English Language Arts to students who need assistance
SAP	Student Assistance Program – meets with students and parents to implement academic support
SBC	Student Body Council – the Lowell student governing body
SDC	Special Day Class – a program for some Special Education students
SFUSD	San Francisco Unified School District
SOSS	Strategies of Successful Students
SRO	School Resource Officer
SSC	School Site Council –the policy-making body at Lowell
SST	Student Success Team – identifies students needing academic support
Special Education	A program whereby students with special needs are given an IEP (see above) and additional resources
STAR school	Underperforming schools in San Francisco which have been placed in a special intervention program by the state and SFUSD with the goal of improving their performance
UC a-g requirements	Courses required by the University of California for entry to UC
WASC	Western Association of Schools and Colleges – accreditation body for high schools and colleges
WSF	Weighted Student Formula – the method by which SFUSD allocates resources on a per student basis to schools

Priorities for 2008-2009

The School Site Council 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 targets. Below are the data conclusions for each of the five District Goals and the school’s key objectives and strategies for the upcoming 2008-2009 school year.

Goal 1: Academic Achievement

Significantly increase academic achievement and learning for all students, including closing the achievement gap, based on achievement data. Focus must be on reading and mathematics as measured by tests and other assessments as appropriate.

Data Conclusions for Goal 1

Questions to cover:

1. What are the key data findings observed from last year’s CST? What achievement gaps exist (can be grade-level gaps, subject-subject, by racial subgroups, EL vs. non-EL students, Special Ed vs. non-Special Ed students, EDY vs. non-EDY students, etc.). [Note: The overall performance of English learners, Special Ed, and socio-economically disadvantaged students should be addressed in Goal 2; however, any achievement gaps that exist for or within these subgroups should be addressed here in Goal 1.]

2. What patterns or trends have been observed over multiple years?

3. What additional school data was analyzed, if any (i.e. data gathered from benchmark assessments, pre/post tests administered, surveys, attendance data, etc.) and what are the key patterns or trends observed?

Key Findings:

Because of the low numbers of African American and Latino Students, it is difficult to come to meaningful conclusions regarding the achievement gap at Lowell. Currently there are 184 Latino students (6.99% of total student population) and 72 African American students (2.74% of the total student population).

Based on the 2007 CST scores we have available to us from Cruncher, we observe the following: Asian and White students scored 95.5-97.8% advanced or proficient in math and ELA while Latinos scored ELA 79.52% and Math 65.06%; African-Americans scored ELA 74.24% and Math 45.45% advanced or proficient. In all cases, according to the data from last year, the achievement gap appeared to widen.

Because of the small numbers, a focused and targeted attention towards providing academic and counseling support for Latinos and African Americans at Lowell should produce an improvement in CST scores.

Other data reviewed: D and F final grades for Fall 2007. According to the 2/5/08 district printout, 57 Latinos, 22 African Americans, 107 Chinese, and 32 White students received at least one D/F semester grade.

Considerable effort has been made to improve tutoring at Lowell. Beginning in the Spring of 2008, a requirement to becoming a CSF tutor is participation in a peer resources training on best practices in tutoring. A mandatory after school student support program has also been established to provide mentoring and tutoring for struggling students.

The peer mentor program targeting 9^th grade students continues to support 9^th grade students in their transition to high school. There is indication that a continuation of academic monitoring by student mentors for 10^th grade students would be helpful.

Key Objectives for Goal 1

[Based on the data conclusions above, identify the key objectives (one to three) for Goal 1 for the school.]

Objective 1: Reduce the number of “D” and “F” grades by at least 5 % (RSP students by at least 10%) without lowering standards. Teachers will review “D/F” list and monitor students’ progress and refer students to the Student Assistant Program as needed. Also, provide early interventions, parent contact, and increase tutoring opportunities.

Objective 2: Increase total number of students taking AP exams by 5%. Increase

underrepresented students taking AP exams by 10 percentage points.

Objective 3: All teachers of SPED students will be aware of the their individual accommodations.

Key Strategies for Goal 1

[What key strategies will be implemented in order to achieve the objectives above? Please be as specific as possible in describing how these strategies will lead to improved student achievement.]

Key Strategy 1: Increase monitoring of under-performing students by counselors, deans, and teachers: identify all students receiving a “D” or “F” grade in any academic subject no later than after the first 6 weeks and continue to monitor throughout each semester. Make resource centers more useful: continue to coordinate CSF tutoring more efficiently. Teachers will utilize multiple modalities teaching and aligning grading policies, clarifying and sharing expectations with students.

Key Strategy 2: Administration and department chairs will analyze AP Course enrollment and test data over the last few years, reevaluate prerequisites for enrollment, and develop a plan to increase student participation.

Key Strategy 3: General education teachers will collaborate with SPED teachers regarding student accommodations and share syllabi.

Goal 2: Academic Equity

Ensure that all students have access to a comprehensive education by providing a high-quality program of studies in the Core Curriculum areas (English/language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, visual and performing arts, health and physical education), world languages, and school-to-career and technical programs where appropriate.

Data Conclusions for Goal 2

Questions to cover:

1. What special programs (Special Education, GATE, Honors, AP, ELD, language immersion, arts magnet, etc.) are offered at your school?

2. What are the key data findings observed for students participating in these programs from last year’s CST? [Note: If academic achievement for students in these programs was disaggregated by racial subgroup and any achievement gaps were observed, these gaps should be discussed in Goal 1.]

3. Are any racial subgroups underrepresented or overrepresented in certain programs (i.e. low African American students in GATE, Honors, and/or AP programs, high numbers of EL students in Special Education)?

4. What patterns or trends have been observed over multiple years?

5. What additional school data was analyzed (can be data gathered from benchmark assessments, pre/post tests administered, surveys, attendance data, etc.) and what are the key patterns or trends observed?

Key Findings:

AP courses are offered in 31 content areas. In 2007, 2786 AP tests were administered to 1,171 students. The average pass rate was 92.1%.

The Special Education Department at Lowell offers an array of programs and supports for students with disabilities. There is a Resource Program (28 students) who take an RSP study skills class and 5 to 6 general education classes. In any given year, there are RSP students in honors and AP classes. There are two SDC (Special Day classes) programs for students (28 students) with learning disabilities. These classes provide core instruction for the students. SDC students take electives in general education but typically would not take honors or AP. There are 2 SDC classes (20 students) for severely autistic and high functioning autistic students. Again, these students take core in the SDC and electives in general education. Presently, there is one student in the high functioning autism class in Honor's English. There are 2 CAT (Community Access and Transition) (20 students) classes for students with severe impairments who are 18-22 years of age. These CAT students do not take any classes in general education at Lowell.

Presently, Lowell has 36 students classified as ELL. Of these, 6 are also special education students. Of the 36, 10 are 9^th grade students coming from private schools who are ready to be reclassified. In the spring of 2007 Lowell had 51 English learners. Of these, 32, or 64%, scored proficient or higher on the English/Language Arts CST; while 46 EL students, or 92%, scored proficient or higher on the Math portion of the CST.

While data from 2007 indicate that 44% of the student body (1,171 of 2,671) took an Advanced Placement exam that year, only 25% of African-American students (18 of 72) and 23% of Latino students (42 of 184) took an Advanced Placement course that year. And while the average student who took an Advanced Placement exam in 2007 took 2.38 such exams, the average African-American student took 1.5 AP courses and the average Latino student took 1.98 AP courses that year.

The percentage of Latino students scoring proficient or higher on the English Language Arts CST is 80%, and the percentage of African American students scoring proficient or higher is 71.4%. The percentage of Latino students scoring proficient or higher on the math CST is 77.8% and the percentage of African American students scoring proficient or higher is 57.1%.

Percentage of Seniors who have Passed at least one AP Exam.

Year	Percentage
2007	82.4 %
2006	78.9%
2005	91.4%
2004	63.9%

Key Objectives for Goal 2

[Based on the data conclusions above, identify the key objectives (one to three) for Goal 2 for the school.]

Objective 1: All students will be encouraged to enroll in at least one AP or honors course during their tenure at Lowell and African American and Latinos enrollment in AP classes will increase by 25%

Key Strategies for Goal 2

[What key strategies will be implemented in order to achieve the objectives above? Please be as specific as possible in describing how these strategies will lead to improved student achievement.]

Key Strategy 1: In order to prepare all students to take AP and honors classes, teachers will continue to align curriculum with state standards and within the same course. Counselors will meet with BSU and La Raza students to encourage and mentor students to take AP classes.

Key Strategy 2: In aligning courses, common assessments will be developed and analyzed to improve instruction and to assure equity across courses. Increased time for teacher collaboration and staff development will be provided to improve instruction.

Goal 3: Instruction Improvement

Improve the instructional delivery to all students using best practices for student learning as reflected in Focus on Learning recommendations, compliance, whole school reform models, school-wide programs, school-based curricular instructional or programmatic improvements.

Data Conclusions for Goal 3

[Please state your data patterns and trends. In addition, describe other school level data you may have gathered and analyzed.]

Key Findings:

Overall performance remains strong, with AYP and API goals being met and 2007 Growth API 4 points above Base at 938. Ninety-four percent of students were proficient or above in ELA while proficiency (or above) levels in Math varied from 79% to 95% depending on CST taken. In math, the lowest rates were in Algebra (80%) and Geometry (79%). In Science, CST results in all 3 major areas (Biology, Chemistry, and Physics) increased by an average of 9 percentage points over last year. The lowest rates for proficient and above were in Chemistry (80% but up from 68% last year) and Physics (81% vs 72% last year). In Social Studies, World History had 77% proficient or above while US History had 82% proficient or above. For Physical Education, 88% of 9^th grade students passed 5 of 6 components of the State Physical Fitness Test in the fall of 2007. In Advanced Placement a record number (2786) of exams was given. Seventy three percent of the exams were graded 4 (of 5) or higher, which is the highest success rate in at least the past 5 years. 2555 AP exams were scored at 3 or above, a 9.4% increase from last year.

Professional Development has stressed intra and interdepartmental collaboration. By scheduling back-to-back PD days, we were able to schedule 810 minutes of PD, approximately half of which was scheduled for interdepartmental workshops conducted by Lowell teachers.

______________________________________________________________________________

Key Objectives for Goal 3

[Based on the data conclusions above, identify the key objectives (one to three) for Goal 3 for the school.]

Objective 1: Provide support (including intervention as necessary) to students at all levels to maximize development of their full potentials. By doing this, each department should achieve a 5% reduction in the number of students scoring below proficient on the applicable CSTs.

Objective 2: Provide teacher support through mentoring, professional development, appropriate class size, and appropriate student placement. This increased support should yield more effective teaching, better preparing students for the rigors of AP courses. Our goal is to increase the number of exams scored 4 or above by 4%.

______________________________________________________________________________

Key Strategies for Goal 3

[What key strategies will be implemented in order to achieve the objectives above? Please be as specific as possible in describing how these strategies will lead to improved instructional practice at the school.]

Key Strategy 1: Fill gaps in the academic and life skills for all students.

Key Strategy 2: Provide teacher training and collaboration time so that best instructional practices can be spread within and among departments.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Goal 4: School Climate

Ensure safe, secure school and learning environment relative to cleanliness, management of the facility and student behavior.

______________________________________________________________________________

Data Conclusions for Goal 4

[Please state your data patterns and trends. In addition, describe other school level data you may have gathered and analyzed.]

Key Findings:

The data for Lowell students who are out-of-class and seeking adequate study space at any point in time during the school day (600 + students), compared to the number of readily available seats and desk space in the library 165 student study spaces in main library and library computer lab; 35 spaces in Meyer Library now available to students but not seriously alleviating the problem) shows that there is a severe lack of adequate study space available for Lowell students at any point in time in the day. Many students “camp out” on hallway floors, creating a myriad of problems (including noise, disruption of nearby classes, poor study patterns, etc.) for both students and faculty in nearby rooms. In a survey of students conducted for WASC, 65% of student respondents said that additional study space is the one area of the library most needing improvement. There is an average of 2700 entries per day into the Lowell Library. The data supports a need for 200-300 additional seats/desks of study area if students’ study needs are to be met, and if issues about students studying on hallway floors are to be alleviated. There is currently a severe shortfall in spaces for students to work and study at Lowell.

In past years’ student surveys, the cleanliness of restrooms has been an issue of discontent among many students. With improved ventilation, painting and more frequent cleaning, the most recent surveys of students show that bathrooms are no longer a major issue among students. Also, the number of complaints turned in to the main office has greatly declined. Restrooms have insufficient signage regarding disability access.

In 2006-2007, approximately 1 in 4 (based on 2600 students) Lowell students utilized the Wellness Center at least once (759 students), and with a total of 1,572 student visits, some students used the Center’s services more than once. The total hours of service were 5,383. The utilization of the Wellness Center’s services is up from the previous year by approximately 6.5%. The top category for service was general counseling.

In the 1 year period between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2007 there were 32 reported criminal offenses within a 500 ft radius of Lowell High School. Of those offenses, there were 4 assaults, 3 robberies and 12 larceny/thefts. Many offenses occurred in the vicinity of Stonestown Mall or Lakeshore Plaza, both places where Lowell students congregate off-campus. There were also a number of other criminal offenses within a few block radius of the school which did not involve Lowell students. The rate of student suspensions rose and is declining. There were 9 in 2004, 13 in 2005, 21 in 2006, and 3 in 2007. There were 9 incident reports in 2007 involving Lowell students.

Lowell’s “open campus” policies not only leave students vulnerable to outsiders coming onto campus with criminal intent, but they also expose Lowell students to higher crime areas in the vicinity of the school, while visiting Stonestown Mall or Lakeshore Plaza at lunch or at other times. There is anecdotal evidence of further, unreported assaults. There is a need for meetings with the SRO, students, administration to improve discussion and walkthrough on safety concerns. Improved lighting and strategically-placed and monitored security cameras around the Lowell site can help to mitigate issues related to outsiders coming onto campus, and these improvements should be a high priority use of funding. However, Lowell’s administration can do little to protect its students once they leave the campus, except to possibly revisit the open campus policy. The risks will need to be weighed against the rewards of such an open campus policy so that an informed policy decision can be made going forward.

The school’s Emergency Procedures need to be reviewed and practiced and personnel need to be trained in the published procedures. All staff needs critical incident training. Life safety signage (e.g., building evacuation routes) is insufficient for the school site.

Key Objectives for Goal 4

[Based on the data conclusions above, identify the key objectives (one to three) for Goal 4 for the school.]

Objective 1: Ensure a safe, well-equipped, well-maintained learning environment for students and staff both inside and outside the classroom.

Objective 2: Provide resources for promoting the physical and mental well-being of students and staff, and for improved security measures. The percentage of students accessing information and services of the Wellness Center will increase by 2.5% yearly.

Key Strategies for Goal 4

[What key strategies will be implemented in order to achieve the objectives above? Please be as specific as possible in describing how these strategies will lead to improved school climate.]

Key Strategy 1: Improve the work-place environment so students and staff can study and work more comfortably and efficiently. Administrative team will visit other high performing high schools to examine the culture and climate.

Key Strategy 2: Support the Wellness Center, Peer Resources, and other resources that promote the physical and mental well-being of students. Make improvements to security measures to ensure student safety and identify the primary security issues.

______________________________________________________________________________

Goal 5: Parent and Community Involvement

Significantly increase the involvement of a broad base of parents and community at the school level. PTSA will increase parent workshops regarding wellness, school culture, college admissions, and other pertinent information by 10%.

______________________________________________________________________________

Data Conclusions related to Goal 5

[Please state your data patterns and trends. In addition, describe other school level data you may have gathered and analyzed.]

Key Findings:

Parents continue to complain that they have difficulty communicating with teachers.

Parents often do not follow the appropriate “chain of command” in dealing with issues.

Although a majority of teachers provide a method of contact for both students and parents/guardians on their syllabi, many parents/guardians never see the syllabi.

Although some parents are actively involved in the PTSA, the School Site Council, and related school activities, most do not participate in school events. As of February 19, 2008, only 450 people have paid their PTSA membership and average attendance at PTSA meetings ranges between 30 to 50 parents. Parents/guardians rarely attend SSC meetings, primarily due to the time of day that meetings are scheduled.

______________________________________________________________________________

Key Objectives for Goal 5

[Based on the data conclusions above, identify the key objectives (one to three) for Goal 5 for the school.]

Objective 1: Improve parent education regarding communication with teachers.

Objective 2: Maintain contact with a broad base of parents and community members.

Key Strategies for Goal 5

[What key strategies will be implemented in order to achieve the objectives above? Please be as specific as possible in describing how these strategies will lead to improved parent and community involvement.]

Key Strategy 1: Provide parents with various ways of communicating with teachers: E-mail, voicemail, written messages, school bulletins, and school Web site. Encourage parents/guardians to seek the help of counselors as intermediaries to help communicate with teachers and alleviate fears and pressures felt by students who may feel caught in the middle.

Key Strategy 2: Provide a variety of ways for parents and community members to interact with the school such as Open House, College and Financial Aid Nights, the VICCI (Volunteers in College and Career Information) Center, Lowell Beautification Days, Wellness Education Nights, and performing arts events. Encourage families (both parents/guardians and students) to become more involved in, and informed about, the student’s education by regularly attending PTSA and SSC meetings.