ACCREDITATION FOR GROWTH
TECHNICAL REVIEW OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

                     RESPONSE TO THE SCHOOL # 3

Date of Review:         August 29, 2008        
 

School Name:             Holmdel High School
 

Staff Reviewer:          Jacqueline L. Gilbert
 

Projected Visit Dates: October 20 -23, 2008      
 

Next Steps:    

General Comments about All Objectives:

•  Thank you for the baseline data. Your objectives are now approved.
  
  I wish you the best for the Validation team visit in November.  

Please don’t hesitate to call if you have any questions or concerns as you finalize you self study and prepare for the team visit.

Objective #1: As submitted by the school

• By 2015, all students at Holmdel High School will demonstrate improved academic performance, with a focus on the non-honors student population, as measured by:

• LAL HSPA Scores (disaggregated by honors/non-honors)

4% increase for the honors population
6% increase for the non-honors population
                         Baseline Year:  2005          - 2008
Baseline Data: LAL HSPA honors average score = 250
LAL HSPA non-honors average score =   234

• Math HSPA Scores (disaggregated by honors/non-honors)

4% increase for the honors population
6% increase for the non-honors population
Baseline Year: 2005-2008
Baseline Data: Math HSPA honors average = 266
                       Math HSPA non-honors average = 237

• Final English 3 Grades:  5% increase in the final grade for both the honors and non-honors student population.   

                         Baseline Year: 2005 – 2008
                         Baseline Data: non-honors final grade average = 78.5
                                                honors final grade average = 83.8

• Final Math Grades: 5% increase in the final grade for both the honors and non-honors student population.

Baseline Year: 2005-2008
Baseline Data: non honors final grade average = 81.6
                       honors final grade average = 86.3

• GPA of all students broken down by grade: 5% increase in the GPA.

Baseline Year: 2005-2008
Baseline Data: 3 year GPA average for each grade
                      Grade 9  –  3.28
                      Grade 10 – 3.30
                      Grade 11 – 3.36
                      Grade 12 – 3.35

Student Performance Objective #1:  Technical Review Criteria

• Is the objective stated as a desired end result in student performance? (What do we expect our students to know? What do we expect them to do with what they know? And/or What qualities or characteristics do we want them to demonstrate?)

Yes, improved academic performance for all students (with a focus on non honors students) has been identified as the end result.

• Is the objective related to improvement in an area of academics?  (Note:  If none of the student performance objectives relate to academics, the school needs to be prepared to explain why academics are not a priority for growth over the next five years. In addition, public schools need to be prepared to provide an explanation if their improvement objectives and plan do not include areas of student performance mandated for improvement under the requirements of NCLB.)

Yes, academics have been chosen.  Performance on the HSPA, which is the NJ test that measures attainment of NCLB requirements, is one of the assessments.  

• Is the year of realization of the objective stated as seven years from the year of the team’s visit?

Yes, the year of realization is correctly stated as 2015.

• Has the school identified how it will measure progress toward the objective over the next seven years, i.e.:

• Are the most recent baseline data included for each assessment? (MSA requires that at least one measure has baseline data in place by the time the team arrives.)

The most recent baseline data (an average of the past three years) has been established for all assessments. 

     2)  Is the baseline year in which the data for each assessment were collected included?
Yes.  It will be an average of 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 data.

• Are challenging and appropriate seven-year performance targets set for each  

  assessment used to measure achievement of the objective?
It appears that meaningful targets are set for the assessments. 
Ultimately the Validation Team will further ascertain the challenge they pose to the school during the Team visit.   
     

• Has the school identified multiple forms of assessment to measure accomplishment of       this objective when appropriate and available?

Yes.

• Are disaggregated data included when appropriate?

The data for the HSPA and courses grade assessments in LAL and Math are disaggregated by honors and non honors students.  The assessment for GPAs are disaggregated by grade level.

• Is the objective measured by both external and internal assessments when appropriate and available?

Yes. The assessments represent an appropriate balance of internal and external assessments.

·       Do the assessments address expectations for as many of the school’s students as possible?
Yes, all students are included.

·        Do the assessments relate to culminating expectations for students at or near the end of their experiences in the school?
Yes. 

Suggestions for Revising Student Performance Objective #1:
You now have an objective that addresses academic performance for all students that emphasizes LAL and mathematics.  The objective is approved.

Objective #2: As submitted by the school

   2.    By 2015, 90 % of the students at Holmdel High School will   demonstrate a connectedness to the school (positive school climate) as measured by:                             
 

• Student Surveys – The Pride Factor Survey

Baseline Year:  2007-2008
Baseline Data: Culture – 62%
                       Motivation – 58%
                       Recognition – 59%
                       Performance – 66%

• Decrease incidents of insubordination and class disruptions from 131 in 2008 to 100 in 2015.

Baseline Year: 2007-2008
Baseline Data – 131 incidents

Student Performance Objective #2:  Technical Review Criteria

• Is the objective stated as a desired end result in student performance? (What do we expect our students to know? What do we expect them to do with what they know? And/or What qualities or characteristics do we want them to demonstrate?)

Yes, students will demonstrate connectedness to the school.

• Is the objective related to improvement in an area of academics?  (Note:  If none of the student performance objectives relate to academics, the school needs to be prepared to explain why academics are not a priority for growth over the next five years. In addition, public schools need to be prepared to provide an explanation if their improvement objectives and plan do not include areas of student performance mandated for improvement under the requirements of NCLB.)

No, but it does not have to be, as Objective #1 addresses academic achievement.

• Is the realization of the objective stated as seven years from the year of the team’s visit?

Yes.

• Has the school identified how it will measure progress toward the objective over the next seven years, i.e.:

• Are the most recent baseline data included for each assessment? (MSA requires that at least one measure has baseline data in place by the time the team arrives.)

Baseline data for the “Pride” survey as well as insubordination and class disruptions have been established. 

• Is the baseline year in which the data for each assessment were collected included?

The baseline year for both measures is 2007-2008.

• Are challenging and appropriate seven-year performance targets set for each assessment used to measure achievement of the objective?

The target for the “Pride” survey appears particularly ambitious, which indicates a real commitment to improving the school’s climate and students’ connectedness. The target for disciplinary incidents appears to be appropriate.   

The Validation Team will further ascertain the challenge it poses for the school.

• Has the school identified multiple forms of assessment to measure accomplishment of this objective when appropriate and available?

Yes.  Two assessments have been identified. 

• Are disaggregated data included when appropriate?

No.  The school has not indicated that it will disaggregate the data for either assessment.

• Is the objective measured by both external and internal assessments when appropriate and available?

Yes.

• Do the assessments address expectations for as many of the school’s students as possible?
  Yes, all students are included. 
• Do the assessments relate to culminating expectations for students at or near the end of their experiences in the school?
  No.  However, “connectedness” may be referred to or reflected in the school’s mission or
   profile of graduates.

Suggestions for Revising Student Performance Objective #2:
As Objective #2 involves all students; has an internal and an external assessment; includes at least one assessment with baseline data currently in place; and sets an appropriate target for the assessment, this objective meets the minimum criteria for technical review and is approved.

The school has decided not to include additional assessments.