School
Accountability Report Card Reported for School Year 2008-09 Published During 2009-10
Executive Summary School Accountability Report Card, 2008-09
Pine Hollow Middle School
|
Address:
|
5522 Pine Hollow Rd. , Concord
CA 94521-4799
|
Phone:
|
925-672-5444
|
|
Principal:
|
Shelley Bain
|
Grade
Span:
|
6 - 8
|
This executive summary of the
School Accountability Report Card (SARC) is intended to provide parents and
community members with a quick snapshot of school accountability. The data
presented in this report are reported for the 2008-09 school year, except the
School Finances and School Completion data that are reported for the 2007-08
school year. For additional information about the school, parents and community
members should review the entire SARC or contact the school principal or the
district office.
About This School
|
Located at the foot of Mount Diablo,
Pine Hollow
Middle School serves the communities
of Concord and Clayton in Contra Costa
County. Founded in 1964, Pine Hollow was the
only middle school serving the area until the mid-1990’s,
when Diablo View Middle School
was opened. Our major feeder
schools are Highlands, Silverwood and Ayers
Elementary. The majority of Pine
Hollow students matriculate to Clayton
Valley High
School, a 3 minute car drive away. A small number (15 or so) go to Northgate High School. Most students arrive at school on
foot, but the County
Connection bus line
also serves our community. From
the million dollar homes on the hill to subsidized apartment housing, Pine
Hollow reflects the diverse community Concord
has become.
|
Student Enrollment
|
Group
|
Percent
|
|
African
American
|
4.84
%
|
|
American
Indian or Alaska
Native
|
0.94
%
|
|
Asian
|
6.85
%
|
|
Filipino
|
5.91
%
|
|
Hispanic
or Latino
|
26.88
%
|
|
Pacific
Islander
|
0.54
%
|
|
White
(not Hispanic)
|
53.36
%
|
|
Multiple
or No Response
|
0.67
%
|
|
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
|
26.00
%
|
|
English
Learners
|
8.00
%
|
|
Students
with Disabilities
|
10.00
%
|
|
Total Number of Students
|
744
|
Teachers
|
Indicator
|
Teachers
|
|
Teachers
with full credential
|
29
|
|
Teachers
without full credential
|
5
|
|
Teachers
Teaching Outside Subject Area of Competence
|
11
|
|
Misassignments
of Teachers of English Learners
|
0
|
|
Total
Teacher Misassignments
|
0
|
Student Performance
|
Subject
|
Students Proficient and Above on California Standards Tests
|
|
English-Language
Arts
|
54%
|
|
Mathematics
|
41%
|
|
Science
|
52%
|
|
History-Social
Science
|
37%
|
Academic Progress
|
Indicator
|
Result
|
|
2009
Growth API Score (from 2009 Growth API Report)
|
773
|
|
Statewide
Rank (from 2008 Base API Report)
|
6
|
|
2009-10
Program Improvement Status (PI Year)
|
|
School Facilities
Summary of Most Recent Site Inspection
Repairs Needed
Corrective Actions Taken or Planned
Curriculum and Instructional Materials
|
Core Curriculum Areas
|
Pupils Who Lack Textbooks and Instructional Materials
|
|
Reading/Language
Arts
|
0.0%
|
|
Mathematics
|
0.0%
|
|
Science
|
0.0%
|
|
History-Social
Science
|
0.0%
|
|
Foreign
Language
|
0.0%
|
School Finances
|
Level
|
Expenditures Per Pupil (Unrestricted Sources Only)
|
|
School
Site
|
$4,777.94
|
|
District
|
$4,879.73
|
|
State
|
$5,512
|
NAEP Reading,
Grade 4
|
Level
|
Result
|
|
Average
Scale Score - State
|
209
|
|
Average
Scale Score - National
|
220
|
|
Achievement
Level - Basic
|
30%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Proficient
|
18%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Advanced
|
5%
|
NAEP Reading,
Grade 8
|
Level
|
Result
|
|
Average
Scale Score - State
|
251
|
|
Average
Scale Score - National
|
261
|
|
Achievement
Level - Basic
|
41%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Proficient
|
20%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Advanced
|
2%
|
NAEP Mathematics, Grade 4
|
Level
|
Result
|
|
Average
Scale Score - State
|
232
|
|
Average
Scale Score - National
|
239
|
|
Achievement
Level - Basic
|
72%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Proficient
|
30%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Advanced
|
5%
|
NAEP Mathematics, Grade 8
|
Level
|
Result
|
|
Average
Scale Score - State
|
270
|
|
Average
Scale Score - National
|
282
|
|
Achievement
Level - Basic
|
59%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Proficient
|
23%
|
|
Achievement
Level - Advanced
|
5%
|
School
Accountability Report Card Reported for School Year 2008-09 Published During
2009-10
The School Accountability Report
Card (SARC), which is required by law to be published annually, contains
information about the condition and performance of each California public school. More information
about SARC requirements is available on the California Department of Education
(CDE) SARC Web page. For
additional information about the school, parents and community members should
contact the school principal or the district office.
I. Data and Access
DataQuest
DataQuest is an online data tool
located on the CDE DataQuest Web
page that contains additional information about this school and comparisons of
the school to the district, the county, and the state. Specifically, DataQuest
is a dynamic system that provides reports for accountability (e.g., Academic
Performance Index [API], Adequate Yearly Progress [AYP]), test data,
enrollment, graduates, dropouts, course enrollments, staffing, and data
regarding English learners).
Internet Access
Internet access is available at
public libraries and other locations that are publicly accessible (e.g., the
California State Library). Access to the Internet at libraries and public
locations is generally provided on a first-come, first-served basis. Other use
restrictions include the hours of operation, the length of time that a
workstation may be used (depending on availability), the types of software
programs available on a workstation, and the ability to print documents.
II. About This
School
Contact Information (School Year 2009-10)
This section provides the schools
contact information.
|
School
|
District
|
|
School
Name
|
Pine
Hollow Middle
|
District
Name
|
Mt.
Diablo Unified
|
|
Street
|
5522 Pine Hollow Rd.
|
Phone
Number
|
925-682-8000
|
|
City,
State, Zip
|
Concord , CA
94521-4799
|
Web
Site
|
www.mdusd.k12.ca.us
|
|
Phone
Number
|
925-672-5444
|
Superintendent
|
Richard Nicoll
|
|
Principal
|
Shelley Bain
|
E-mail
Address
|
josephl@mdusd.k12.ca.us
|
|
E-mail
Address
|
bains@mdusd.k12.ca.us
|
CDS
Code
|
07- 61754- 6004220
|
School Description and Mission Statement
(School Year 2008-09)
School Description and Mission
Statement (School Year 2008-09)
|
Pine Hollow is a middle school in Concord, California,
serving 740 sixth through eighth graders. Pine Hollow Family members come from
diverse social and economic backgrounds and experiences to spend 3 years
together as Pine Hollow Mustangs.
Each Mustang’s journey begins in one of the three 6th
grade teams who core their Language Arts/Social Studies and Math/Science
classes. We utilize a
collaborative teaching model at all grades with special education students
fully integrated into general education classes. We offer an elective rotation wheel of
exploratory classes for 6th graders, and elective classes in
visual and performing arts, leadership, and foreign languages for 7th
and 8th graders.
Students have access to two computer labs and a “tech
zone” in the school library; in addition each classroom has computers
which provide internet access for students. Within the school day, we offer
reading and math support, and many teachers provide lunch time
“symposiums” in English and Science. After school, teachers are
available to help students with assignments. Our P.E. department has a unique
program challenging students to achieve “shirt” status by taking
on leadership roles, improving school-wide grades, and making a difference in
their school and community. We have a counselor or psychologist on campus 2
days a week to support student emotional and social growth. A student
leadership class organizes whole school activities, student recognition, and
school spirit days. The music
department offers students the opportunity to perform at concerts and
regional festivals. Many teachers offer after school help with homework, reading
and math skills. The Pine
Hollow Middle
School family is committed to creating and
nurturing a positive, safe, and supportive environment in which all students
can grow intellectually, socially, physically and emotionally. We welcome and
appreciate the involvement of our community in a variety of areas.
Our goal is to
continue to raise academic achievement for our community of learners,
offering multiple programs for support. We continue to focus on the
development and implementation of pacing guides and common benchmark
assessments in order to improve the success of all learners.
Our goal is to teach
respect and tolerance for all individuals by providing many opportunities for
our family members to have positive interaction with one another. Through an atmosphere
of trust and positive relationships, students develop the tools they need to
reach their full potential. By teaching students to have pride in themselves
and their school, and to accept responsibility for their learning and their
behavior, we achieve our vision and create future success for all Pine Hollow
students.
|
Opportunities for Parental Involvement
(School Year 2008-09)
Opportunities for Parental
Involvement (School Year 2008-09)
|
PTSA, Music
Department, Site Council, Library Assistance, Classroom Fieldtrips and
activities, 8th Grade Picnic Day and Dance, Campus Beautification,
Fundraising, Safety Committee, Parent Patrol.
|
Student Enrollment by Grade Level (School
Year 2008-09)
This table displays the number of
students enrolled in each grade level at the school.
|
Grade Level
|
Number of Students
|
|
Grade
6
|
242
|
|
Grade
7
|
268
|
|
Grade
8
|
234
|
|
Ungraded
Secondary
|
0
|
|
Total
Enrollment
|
744
|
Student Enrollment by Group (School Year
2008-09)
This table displays the percent of
students enrolled at the school who are identified as being in a particular
group.
|
Group
|
Percent of Total Enrollment
|
|
African
American
|
4.84
%
|
|
American
Indian or Alaska Native
|
0.94
%
|
|
Asian
|
6.85
%
|
|
Filipino
|
5.91
%
|
|
Hispanic
or Latino
|
26.88
%
|
|
Pacific
Islander
|
0.54
%
|
|
White
(not Hispanic)
|
53.36
%
|
|
Multiple
or No Response
|
0.67
%
|
|
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
|
26.00
%
|
|
English
Learners
|
8.00
%
|
|
Students
with Disabilities
|
10.00
%
|
Average Class Size and Class Size Distribution
(Secondary)
This table displays by
subject area the average class size and the number of classrooms that fall into
each size category (a range of total students per classroom).
|
Subject
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
|
Avg. Class Size
|
Number of Classrooms
|
Avg. Class Size
|
Number of Classrooms
|
Avg. Class Size
|
Number of Classrooms
|
|
1-22
|
23-32
|
33+
|
1-22
|
23-32
|
33+
|
1-22
|
23-32
|
33+
|
|
English
|
25.9
|
7
|
15
|
9
|
26.8
|
6
|
12
|
8
|
31.8
|
2
|
7
|
24
|
|
Mathematics
|
27.6
|
7
|
8
|
11
|
31.5
|
5
|
3
|
18
|
33.1
|
1
|
5
|
17
|
|
Science
|
31.0
|
1
|
12
|
7
|
32.9
|
|
6
|
12
|
32.9
|
|
7
|
15
|
|
Social
Science
|
33.7
|
|
5
|
15
|
31.1
|
4
|
6
|
13
|
34.6
|
|
5
|
19
|
III. School Climate
School Safety Plan (School Year 2008-09)
This section provides information
about the school's comprehensive safety plan.
|
Our school Safety Plan
focuses on positive behavior strategies and social skills development. Parent
Patrol, extra campus supervision, support calls for students, and adding
curriculum to teach positive behaviors support a safe learning environment
conducive to learning. The PTSA helped to fund a comprehensive security
camera system that is fully operational and acts as a deterrent to vandalism.
The existing Safety Plan contains specific steps for dealing with intruders,
fire, bomb threats and natural disasters. Our plan also has procedures for:
child abuse reporting, suspension and/ or expulsion, teacher notification of
dangerous pupils, sexual harassment and bullying, safe ingress and egress of
pupils, and school discipline.
Teachers are trained in these procedures each fall, and continually
update and improve items as needed throughout the year.
|
Suspensions and Expulsions
This table displays the rate of
suspensions and expulsions (the total number of incidents divided by the total
enrollment) at the school and district levels for the most recent three-year
period.
|
Rate
|
School
|
District
|
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
|
Suspensions
|
20.5
|
41.8
|
14.8
|
11.4
|
14.5
|
15.4
|
|
Expulsions
|
0.3
|
0.3
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
0.2
|
0.2
|
IV. School Facilities
School Facility Conditions and Planned
Improvements (School Year 2009-10)
This section provides information
about the condition of the school’s grounds, buildings, and restrooms,
and a description of any planned or recently completed facility improvements.
|
The District takes
great efforts to ensure that all schools are clean, safe, and
functional. To assist in this effort, the District uses a facility
survey instrument developed by the State of California Office of Public
School Construction. The results of this survey are available through
the Maintenance and Operations Department.
District maintenance
staff ensures that the repairs necessary to keep the school in good repair
and working order are completed in a timely manner. A work order
process is used to ensure efficient service and that emergency repairs are
given the highest priority.
Additionally, the
District participates in the State School Deferred Maintenance Program, which
provides State matching funds on a dollar-for-dollar basis, to assist school
districts with expenditures for major repair or replacement of existing
school building components. Typically, this includes roofing, plumbing,
heating, air conditioning, electrical systems, interior or exterior painting,
and floor systems.
|
School Facility Good Repair Status (School
Year 2009-10)
This table displays the results of
the most recently completed school site inspection to determine the school
facility’s good repair status.
|
Item Inspected
|
Repair Status
|
Repair Needed and Action Taken or Planned
|
|
Exemplary
|
Good
|
Fair
|
Poor
|
|
Systems: Gas Leaks, Mechanical/HVAC, Sewer
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
New HVAC recently completed
|
|
Interior: Interior Surfaces
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanliness: Overall Cleanliness, Pest/ Vermin Infestation
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Electrical: Electrical
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Restrooms/Fountains: Restrooms, Sinks/ Fountains
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Safety: Fire Safety, Hazardous Materials
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
Structural: Structural Damage, Roofs
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
External: Playground/School Grounds, Windows/ Doors/Gates/Fences
|
N/A
|
X
|
|
|
Turf
replacement planned
Lock
upgrade planned
Security
system upgrade planned
|
|
Overall Rating
|
Good
|
N/A
|
V. Teachers
Teacher Credentials
This table displays the number of
teachers assigned to the school with a full credential, without a full
credential, and those teaching outside of their subject area of competence.
Detailed information about teacher qualifications can be found on the CDE DataQuest Web page.
|
Teachers
|
School
|
District
|
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
2008-09
|
|
With
Full Credential
|
32
|
28
|
29
|
1639
|
|
Without
Full Credential
|
2
|
5
|
5
|
108
|
|
Teaching
Outside Subject Area of Competence
|
15
|
7
|
11
|
N/A
|
Teacher Misassignments and Vacant Teacher
Positions
This table displays the number of
teacher misassignments (teachers assigned without proper legal authorization)
and the number of vacant teacher positions (not filled by a single designated
teacher assigned to teach the entire course at the beginning of the school year
or semester). Note: Total Teacher Misassignments includes the number of
Misassignments of Teachers of English Learners.
|
Indicator
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
2009-10
|
|
Misassignments
of Teachers of English Learners
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Total
Teacher Misassignments
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vacant
Teacher Positions
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
Core Academic Classes Taught by No Child
Left Behind Compliant Teachers (School Year 2008-09)
This table displays the percent of
classes in core academic subjects taught by No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
compliant and non-NCLB compliant teachers in the school, in all schools in the
district, in high-poverty schools in the district, and in low-poverty schools
in the district. High poverty schools are defined as those schools with student
participation of approximately 75 percent or more in the free and reduced price
meals program. Low poverty schools are those with student participation of
approximately 25 percent or less in the free and reduced price meals program.
More information on teacher qualifications required under NCLB can be found on
the CDE Improving Teacher and
Principal Quality Web page.
|
Location of Classes
|
Percent of Classes In Core Academic Subjects
|
|
Taught by NCLB Compliant Teachers
|
Taught by Non-NCLB Compliant Teachers
|
|
This
School
|
90.3
|
9.7
|
|
All
Schools in District
|
95.2
|
4.8
|
|
High-Poverty
Schools in District
|
96.3
|
3.7
|
|
Low-Poverty
Schools in District
|
96.3
|
3.7
|
VI. Support Staff
Academic Counselors and Other Support Staff
(School Year 2008-09)
This table displays, in units of
full-time equivalents (FTE), the number of academic counselors and other
support staff who are assigned to the school and the average number of students
per academic counselor. One FTE equals one staff member working full time; one
FTE could also represent two staff members who each work 50 percent of full
time.
|
Title
|
Number of FTE Assigned to School
|
Average Number of Students per Academic Counselor
|
|
Academic
Counselor
|
1.0
|
744
|
|
Library
Media Teacher (Librarian)
|
0.5
|
N/A
|
|
Psychologist
|
|
N/A
|
|
Social
Worker
|
|
N/A
|
|
Nurse
|
|
N/A
|
|
Speech/Language/Hearing
Specialist
|
1.0
|
N/A
|
|
Resource
Specialist (non-teaching)
|
|
N/A
|
|
Other
|
|
|
VII. Curriculum and Instructional Materials
Quality, Currency, Availability of Textbooks
and Instructional Materials (School Year 2009-10)
This table displays information
about the quality, currency, and availability of the standards-aligned
textbooks and other instructional materials used at the school, and information
about the school’s use of any supplemental curriculum or non-adopted
textbooks or instructional materials.
|
Core Curriculum Area
|
Quality, Currency, and Availability of Textbooks and
Instructional Materials
|
Percent of Pupils Who Lack Their Own Assigned Textbooks and
Instructional Materials
|
|
Reading/Language
Arts
|
|
|
SBE
Adopted 2002/MDUSD Adopted 2002
|
Publisher
|
#
Students
|
#
Books
|
|
6
|
Timeless
Voices, Timeless Themes
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
232
|
367
|
|
7
|
Timeless
Voices, Timeless Themes
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
241
|
315
|
|
8
|
Timeless
Voices, Timeless Themes
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
257
|
331
|
|
0.0%
|
|
Mathematics
|
|
|
SBE
Adopted 2009/MDUSD Adopted 2009
|
Publisher
|
#
Students
|
#
Books
|
|
6
|
Holt California
Mathematics Course 1: Numbers
to Algebra
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
232
|
425
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
Holt California
Mathematics: Course 1
Pre-Algebra
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
241
|
347
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
Holt California
Mathematics: Algebra 1
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
257
|
344
|
|
0.0%
|
|
Science
|
|
|
SBE
Adopted 2006/MDUSD Adopted 2007
|
Publisher
|
#
Students
|
#
Books
|
|
6
|
California Focus on Earth Science
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
232
|
380
|
|
7
|
California Focus on Life Science
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
241
|
351
|
|
8
|
California Focus on Physical Science
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
257
|
319
|
|
0.0%
|
|
History-Social
Science
|
|
|
SBE
Adopted 2005/MDUSD Adopted 2006
|
Publisher
|
#
Students
|
#
Books
|
|
6
|
Ancient
Civilizations
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
232
|
380
|
|
7
|
Medieval
to Early Modern Times
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
241
|
307
|
|
8
|
Independence to 1914
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
257
|
317
|
|
0.0%
|
|
Foreign
Language
|
|
|
FOREIGN
LANGUAGE
|
SBE
Adopted 2003/MDUSD Adopted 2004
|
Publisher
|
#
Students
|
#
Books
|
|
7
|
Spanish
|
Realidades, Level A
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
64
|
71
|
|
8
|
|
Realidades, Level B
|
Prentice
Hall School Division
|
30
|
42
|
|
7
|
French
|
Allez, Viens! En Avent! Holt French, Level 1a
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
28
|
41
|
|
8
|
|
Allez, Viens! En Avent! Holt French, Level 1b
|
Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
|
19
|
38
|
|
0.0%
|
VIII. School Finances
Expenditures Per Pupil and School Site
Teacher Salaries (Fiscal Year 2007-08)
This table displays a comparison
of the school’s per pupil expenditures from unrestricted (basic) sources
with other schools in the district and throughout the state, and a comparison
of the average teacher salary at the school site with average teacher salaries
at the district and state levels. Detailed information regarding school
expenditures can be found on the CDE Current
Expense of Education & Per-pupil Spending Web page and teacher salaries
can be found on the CDE Certificated
Salaries & Benefits Web page.
|
Level
|
Total Expenditures Per Pupil
|
Expenditures Per Pupil (Supplemental / Restricted)
|
Expenditures Per Pupil (Basic / Unrestricted)
|
Average Teacher Salary
|
|
School
Site
|
$8,146.23
|
$3,368.29
|
$4,777.94
|
$62,140
|
|
District
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
$4,879.73
|
$60,713
|
|
Percent
Difference – School Site and District
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
-2.09%
|
2.35%
|
|
State
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
$5,512
|
$67,049
|
|
Percent
Difference – School Site and State
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
-13.32%
|
-7.32%
|
Types of Services Funded (Fiscal Year
2008-09)
This section provides information
about the programs and supplemental services that are available at the school
and funded through either categorical or other sources.
|
School Improvement Program, Gifted
and Talented, ELD, Special Education, Library, Technology, Campus
Supervision.
|
Teacher and Administrative Salaries (Fiscal
Year 2007-08)
This table displays district
salaries for teachers, principals, and superintendents, and compares these
figures to the state averages for districts of the same type and size. The
table also displays teacher and administrative salaries as a percent of a
district's budget, and compares these figures to the state averages for districts
of the same type and size based on the salary schedule. Detailed information
regarding salaries may be found on the CDE Certificated Salaries & Benefits
Web page.
|
Category
|
District Amount
|
State Average For Districts In Same Category
|
|
Beginning
Teacher Salary
|
$44,650
|
$42,065
|
|
Mid-Range
Teacher Salary
|
$61,647
|
$67,109
|
|
Highest
Teacher Salary
|
$82,326
|
$86,293
|
|
Average
Principal Salary (Elementary)
|
$93,197
|
$107,115
|
|
Average
Principal Salary (Middle)
|
$95,806
|
$112,279
|
|
Average
Principal Salary (High)
|
$106,705
|
$122,532
|
|
Superintendent
Salary
|
$184,086
|
$216,356
|
|
Percent
of Budget for Teacher Salaries
|
39.40
%
|
39.40
%
|
|
Percent
of Budget for Administrative Salaries
|
5.30
%
|
5.50
%
|
IX. Student Performance
Standardized Testing and Reporting Program
The Standardized Testing
and Reporting (STAR) Program consists of several key components, including the
California Standards Tests (CSTs); the California Modified Assessment (CMA),
and the California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA). The CSTs show how
well students are doing in relation to the state content standards. The CSTs
include English-language arts (ELA) and mathematics in grades two through
eleven; science in grades five, eight, and nine through eleven; and
history-social science in grades eight, and ten through eleven. The CAPA
includes ELA, mathematics, and science in grades two through eleven, and for
science for grades five, eight, and ten. The CAPA is given to those students
with significant cognitive disabilities whose disabilities prevent them from
taking either the CSTs with accommodations or modifications or the CMA with
accommodations. The CMA includes ELA and mathematics for grades three through
eight and science in grade five and is an alternate assessment that is based on
modifiedachievement standards. The CMA is designed to assess those students
whose disabilities preclude them from achieving grade-level proficiency on an
assessment of the California content standards with or without accommodations.
Student scores are reported as performance levels. Detailed information
regarding the STAR Program results for each grade and performance level,
including the percent of students not tested, can be found on the CDE Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR)
Results Web site. Program information regarding the STAR Program can be
found in the Explaining
2008 STAR Program Summary Results to the Public guide. Note: Scores are not
shown when the number of students tested is ten or less, either because the
number of students in this category is too small for statistical accuracy or to
protect student privacy. In no case shall any group score be reported that
would deliberately or inadvertently make public the score or performance of any
individual student.
Standardized Testing and Reporting Results
for All Students – Three-Year Comparison
This table displays the percent of
students achieving at the Proficient or Advanced level (meeting or exceeding
the state standards).
|
Subject
|
School
|
District
|
State
|
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
|
English-Language
Arts
|
48
|
52
|
54
|
50
|
51
|
55
|
43
|
46
|
50
|
|
Mathematics
|
34
|
43
|
41
|
44
|
45
|
47
|
40
|
43
|
46
|
|
Science
|
41
|
48
|
52
|
42
|
51
|
54
|
38
|
46
|
50
|
|
History-Social
Science
|
37
|
36
|
37
|
36
|
40
|
46
|
33
|
36
|
41
|
|
Note: Scores are not shown when the number of students tested is
10 or less because the number of students in this category is too small for
statistical accuracy or privacy protection. In no case shall any group score
be reported that would deliberately or inadvertently make public the score or
performance of any individual student.
|
Standardized Testing and Reporting Results
by Student Group (School Year 2008-09)
This table displays the percent of
students, by group, achieving at the Proficient or Advanced level (meeting or
exceeding the state standards) for the most recent testing period.
|
Group
|
Percent of Students Scoring at Proficient or Advanced
|
|
English-Language Arts
|
Mathematics
|
Science
|
History-Social Science
|
|
African
American
|
38
|
13
|
44
|
31
|
|
American
Indian or Alaska Native
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
Asian
|
69
|
67
|
67
|
53
|
|
Filipino
|
59
|
48
|
33
|
25
|
|
Hispanic
or Latino
|
42
|
31
|
38
|
29
|
|
Pacific
Islander
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
|
White
(not Hispanic)
|
60
|
44
|
59
|
41
|
|
Male
|
48
|
40
|
50
|
36
|
|
Female
|
61
|
42
|
54
|
38
|
|
Economically
Disadvantaged
|
40
|
29
|
36
|
28
|
|
English
Learners
|
8
|
12
|
0
|
0
|
|
Students
with Disabilities
|
26
|
22
|
25
|
0
|
|
Students
Receiving Migrant Education Services
|
|
|
|
|
Note: Scores are not shown when
the number of students tested is 10 or less because the number of students in
this category is too small for statistical accuracy or privacy protection. In
no case shall any group score be reported that would deliberately or inadvertently
make public the score or performance of any individual student.
California Physical Fitness Test Results
(School Year 2008-09)
The California Physical Fitness
Test is administered to students in grades five, seven, and nine only. This
table displays by grade level the percent of students meeting fitness standards
for the most recent testing period. Detailed information regarding this test,
and comparisons of a school’s test results to the district and state
levels, may be found on the CDE Physical
Fitness Testing (PFT) Web page. Note: Scores are not shown when the number
of students tested is ten or less because the number of students in this
category is too small for statistical accuracy or privacy protection. In no
case shall any group score be reported that would deliberately or inadvertently
make public the score or performance of any individual student.
|
Grade Level
|
Percent of Students Meeting Healthy Fitness Zones
|
|
Four of Six Standards
|
Five of Six Standards
|
Six of Six Standards
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
15.8
|
22.3
|
55.8
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
X. Accountability
Academic Performance Index
The Academic Performance Index
(API) is an annual measure of the academic performance and progress of schools
in California. API scores range from 200 to 1,000, with a statewide target of
800. Detailed information about the API can be found on the CDE Academic Performance Index (API) Web
page.
Academic Performance Index Ranks –
Three-Year Comparison
This table displays the
school’s statewide and similar schools API ranks. The statewide API rank
ranges from one to ten. A statewide rank of one means that the school has an
API score in the lowest ten percent of all schools in the state, while a
statewide rank of ten means that the school has an API score in the highest ten
percent of all schools in the state. The similar schools API rank reflects how
a school compares to 100 statistically matched “similar schools.” A
similar schools rank of one means that the school’s academic performance
is comparable to the lowest performing ten schools of the 100 similar schools,
while a similar schools rank of ten means that the school’s academic
performance is better than at least 90 of the 100 similar schools.
|
API Rank
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
|
Statewide
|
7
|
6
|
6
|
|
Similar
Schools
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
"N/A"
|
means
a number is not applicable or not available due to missing data.
|
|
"B"
|
means
this is either an LEA or an Alternative Schools Accountability Model (ASAM)
school. Schools participating in the ASAM do not currently receive growth,
target information, or statewide or similar schools rankings on this report
in recognition of their markedly different educational missions and
populations served. ASAM schools are covered under the Alternative
Accountability system as required by Education Code Section 52052 and not the
API accountability system. However, API information is needed to comply with
the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law. Growth, target and rank
information are not applicable to LEAs.
|
|
"C"
|
means
this is a special education school. Statewide and similar schools ranks are
not applicable to special education schools.
|
|
" * "
|
means
this API is calculated for a small school or a small LEA, defined as having
between 11 and 99 valid STAR Program test scores included in the API. APIs
based on small numbers of students are less reliable and therefore should be
carefully interpreted. Similar schools ranks are not calculated for small
schools.
|
Academic Performance Index Growth by Student
Group – Three-Year Comparison
This table displays, by student
group, the actual API changes in points added or lost for the past three years,
and the most recent API score. Note: "N/A" means that the student
group is not numerically significant.
|
Group
|
Actual API Change
|
Growth API Score
|
|
2006-07
|
2007-08
|
2008-09
|
2009
|
|
All
Students at the School
|
-27
|
16
|
21
|
773
|
|
African
American
|
|
|
|
|
|
American
Indian or Alaska Native
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filipino
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hispanic
or Latino
|
-25
|
7
|
33
|
728
|
|
Pacific
Islander
|
|
|
|
|
|
White
(not Hispanic)
|
-25
|
28
|
18
|
793
|
|
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
|
-12
|
22
|
25
|
696
|
|
English
Learners
|
|
|
|
|
|
Students
with Disabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
"N/A"
|
means
a number is not applicable or not available due to missing data.
|
|
"*"
|
means
this API is calculated for a small school, defined as having between 11 and
99 valid Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program test scores
included in the API. The API is asterisked if the school was small either in
2008 or 2009. APIs based on small numbers of students are less reliable and
therefore should be carefully interpreted.
|
Adequate Yearly Progress
The federal NCLB Act requires that
all schools and districts meet the following Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP)
criteria:
Participation rate on the
state’s standards-based assessments in ELA and mathematics
Percent proficient on the
state’s standards-based assessments in ELA and mathematics
API as an additional
indicator
Graduation rate (for
secondary schools)
Detailed information about AYP,
including participation rates and percent proficient results by student group,
can be found on the CDE Adequate
Yearly Progress (AYP) Web page.
Adequate Yearly Progress Overall and by
Criteria (School Year 2008-09)
This table displays an indication
of whether the school and the district made AYP overall and whether the school
and the district met each of the AYP criteria.
|
AYP Criteria
|
School
|
District
|
|
Overall
|
No
|
No
|
|
Participation
Rate - English-Language Arts
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Participation
Rate - Mathematics
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Percent
Proficient - English-Language Arts
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Percent
Proficient - Mathematics
|
No
|
No
|
|
API
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Graduation
Rate
|
N/A
|
No
|
|
"Yes"
|
Met
2009 AYP Criteria
|
|
"No"
|
Did
not Meet 2009 AYP Criteria
|
Federal Intervention Program (School Year
2009-10)
Schools and districts receiving
federal Title I funding enter Program Improvement (PI) if they do not make AYP
for two consecutive years in the same content area (ELA or mathematics) or on
the same indicator (API or graduation rate). After entering PI, schools and
districts advance to the next level of intervention with each additional year
that they do not make AYP. Detailed information about PI identification can be
found on the CDE Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) Web page.
|
Indicator
|
School
|
District
|
|
Program
Improvement Status
|
|
Not
In PI
|
|
First
Year of Program Improvement
|
|
|
|
Year
in Program Improvement
|
|
|
|
Number
of Schools Currently in Program Improvement
|
N/A
|
10
|
|
Percent
of Schools Currently in Program Improvement
|
N/A
|
18.2
|
XI. Instructional Planning and Scheduling
Professional Development
This section provides information
on the annual number of school days dedicated to staff development for the most
recent three-year period.
|
The district coordinates a variety of staff
development programs for teachers and administrators based on assessed needs
and state mandates. Two days prior to school and one buy-back day during the
school year are dedicated for staff development, determined by Pine
Hollow’s staff. On a
district level, the annual Leadership
Academy is hosted in
the spring to bring key staff and members of the community together and plan
for implementing district goals around student behavior, student academic
improvement, and parent/school/community partnerships. Teachers have been working
district-wide on departmental assessments and common pacing guides.
Recent staff development for Pine Hollow
teachers includes: using Edusoft, Aeries/Homelink,
and GLAD (Guided Language Acquisition Development). Site staff visited other
MDUSD middle schools to enhance collaborative instruction techniques.
The Wednesday morning “‘late start” provides
opportunity for grade level, department and team collaboration meetings.
Monthly staff meetings focus on curriculum development, implementation of
pacing guides and benchmark assessments and collaboration between general
education and special education, specifically centered on providing
appropriate accommodations within classes. As the host of the
district’s only middle school autism specific class, we continue to
develop professionally in order to serve our students with autism, managing
behaviors, providing accommodations and modifications, and ensuring Universal
Access.
|
XII. National Assessment of Educational
Progress
National Assessment of Educational Progress
The National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP) is a nationally representative assessment of what
America's students know and can do in various subject areas. Assessments are
conducted periodically in mathematics, reading, science, writing, the arts,
civics, economics, geography, and U.S. history. Student scores for reading and
mathematics are reported as performance levels (i.e., basic, proficient, and
advanced) and the participation of students with disabilities and English
language learners is reported based on three levels (identified, excluded, and
assessed). Detailed information regarding the NAEP results for each grade,
performance level, and participation rate can be found on the National Assessment of Educational
Progress Web page (Outside Source).
Note: Only a sample group of
California's schools and districts participate in the NAEP testing cycle.
Therefore, students in any particular school or district may not be included in
these results. The NAEP reflects state test results and is not reflective of
either the LEA or the individual school. Comparisons of student performance on
the NAEP and student performance on the Standardized Testing and Reporting
(STAR) Program assessments cannot be made without an understanding of the key
differences between the two assessment programs. For example, the NAEP only
assesses grades four, eight and twelve and for long-term trends assesses grades
nine, thirteen, and seventeen. Additionally, the NAEP only provides state test
results for grades four and eight. The California Standards Tests (CSTs) are
based on a different set of standards than the NAEP assessments. For example,
the NAEP is not aligned with California academic content and achievement
standards and, therefore, does not necessarily reflect the curriculum and
instruction to which students are exposed in the classroom. The NAEP assesses
reading and writing separately, while the CSTs assess English-language arts
(ELA), encompassing reading as well as writing conventions, spelling, and
grammar. Scores on the CSTs and other assessments are not directly comparable
to those on NAEP. The averages and percentages presented are estimates based on
samples of students rather than on entire populations. Finally, the questions
students respond to are only a sample of the knowledge and skills covered by
the NAEP frameworks. Information on the differences between NAEP and CST can be
found on the CDE National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP) Web page.
National Assessment of Educational Progress
Reading and Mathematics Results by Grade Level – Aggregated
This table displays the scale
scores and achievement levels on the National Assessment of Educational
Progress Results for reading (2007) and mathematics (2009) for grades four and
eight
|
Subject and Grade Level
|
Average Scale Score
|
State Percent at Achievement Level
|
|
State
|
National
|
Basic
|
Proficient
|
Advanced
|
|
Reading
2007, Grade 4
|
209
|
220
|
30
|
18
|
5
|
|
Reading
2007, Grade 8
|
251
|
261
|
41
|
20
|
2
|
|
Mathematics
2009, Grade 4
|
232
|
239
|
41
|
25
|
5
|
|
Mathematics
2009, Grade 8
|
270
|
282
|
36
|
18
|
5
|
National Assessment of Educational Progress
Reading and Mathematics Results for Students with Disabilities and/or English
Language Learners by Grade Level – Aggregated
This table displays the state and
national participation rates on the National Assessment of Educational Progress
for reading (2007) and mathematics (2009) for students with disabilities and/or
English language learners for grades four and eight.
|
Subject and Grade Level
|
State Participation Rate
|
National Participation Rate
|
|
Students With Disabilities
|
English Language Learners
|
Students With Disabilities
|
English Language Learners
|
|
Reading
2007, Grade 4
|
74
|
93
|
65
|
80
|
|
Reading
2007, Grade 8
|
78
|
92
|
66
|
77
|
|
Mathematics
2009, Grade 4
|
79
|
96
|
84
|
94
|
|
Mathematics
2009, Grade 8
|
85
|
96
|
78
|
92
|