# Archived Information

Title: Closing the Achievement Gap Study Overview

\[Slide 1\]

Closing the Achievement Gap

Study Overview

\[Slide 2\]

# Purpose of the Study

To identify high schools in selected states that have shown success,
over a period of years, in closing the achievement gap between minority
and non-minority students.

# \[Slide 3\]

# State Selection Criteria

## Standards-based or norm-referenced assessment in mathematics or English/language arts/reading in grade 10, 11, or 12 

## Data available for at least 4 years 

## The assessment had not changed over that period

## Assessment results disaggregated by race, ethnicity at the school level

\[Slide 4\]

# States Meeting Criteria

##  Arkansas

##  California

## The District of Columbia

## Delaware

## Kentucky

## Indiana

## Missouri

## Oregon

## South Carolina

## Texas

## Wisconsin 

\[Slide 5\]

# 

# Defining the Gap

"Gap": Difference between school-level percent passing rate and
state-level percent passing rate

\[Slide 6\]

# Gap Example: Mathematics Assessment

# 

# Figure 1: Table comparing percentages of African-American and white students' performance in a mathematics assessment, and measuring the between-groups difference in percentage points, for each year between 1999 and 2002. Columns from left to right are year, percent of African-American students passing (school level rate), percent of white students passing (also school level rate), and "Gap" (Gap column highlighted in gray). Rows from top to bottom are 1999, 2000, 2001, and 2002.

Year 1999: Thirty eight point six percent (38.6%) of African-American
and sixty nine point nine percent (69.9%) of white students passed the
mathematics assessment. The gap was thirty one point three (31.3)
percentage points.

Year 2000: Forty-six point seven percent (46.7%) of African-American and
seventy-two point eight percent (72.8%) of white students passed the
mathematics assessment. The gap was twenty-six point one (26.1)
percentage points.

Year 2001: Forty-nine point four percent (49.4%) of African-American and
seventy-one point two percent (71.2%) of white students passed the
mathematics assessment. The gap was twenty-one point eight (21.8)
percentage points.

Year 2002: Fifty two point seven percent (52.7%) of African-American and
seventy three point nine percent (73.9%) of white students passed the
mathematics assessment. The gap was twenty-one point two percentage
(21.2) points.

End of Figure 1.

\[Slide 7\]

Defining a Gap-Closing School

A school with consistently diminished achievement gaps between white and
minority students during each of four years.

\[Slide 8\]

Gap Measures

Gap: School Minority Scores, State White Scores

Many schools with four years of data in either reading or math have an
African-American gap in reading or math, or gaps in both subjects.
Additionally, many schools with four years of data in either reading or
math have a Hispanic gap in reading or math, or gaps in both subjects,
as well.

\[Slide 9\]

Number of Schools by States

California has one hundred and seventy three (173) schools, Indiana has
ten (10) schools, and Texas has one hundred and eighty nine (189)
schools.

\[Slide 10\]

Closing the Achievement Gap\
Focus Group Meeting

With the County Technology Academy Grants state lists serving as a
starting point, the following criteria was applied to identify the most
promising candidates:

Closed gap or achieved a gap decrease of at least **ten percentage**
points in two gap measures:

-   African American Reading

-   African American Math

-   Hispanic Reading

-   Hispanic Math

**For example**:

-   **El Camino** narrowed the gap for Hispanic students in both math
    and reading.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Florin** narrowed the gap for Africa American and Hispanic
    students in reading.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   
-   
-   
-   

\[Slide 11\]

# Closing the Achievement Gap Focus Group Meeting

-   Enrollment size of at least 750 students;

-   Minority enrollment of at least 30 percent (30%) of total
    enrollment; and

-   Holding power of at least 60 percent (60%).

\[Slide 12\]

# Schools Selected

# 

# Figure 2: A table showing one school each from Texas and Indiana and two schools from California, and their size, ethnic distribution, holding power, and level of improvement decreasing gaps in reading and math. Columns, from left to right, are: "State", "School Name", "Gap Decrease Mathematics \[in percentage points\]", "Gap Decrease Reading \[in percentage points\]", "Enrollment \[count\]", "Percent Minority", and "Holding Power." Rows, from top to bottom, are "Texas: Del Valle", "Indiana: North Central", "California: El Camino", and "California: Florin." 

Del Valle in Texas had a four (4) percentage point reduction in
difference between minority (not specific) passing rates and white
passing rates on the math test. No data regarding a minority-white
passing rate gap on the reading test is listed. The school has a holding
power of eighty-five percent (85%) and has one thousand, seven hundred
and ninety six (1,796) students, of whom ninety-six point six percent
(96.6%) are Hispanic and two point six percent (2.6%) are white.

North Central in Indiana had a fifteen (15) percentage point reduction
in difference between minority (not specified) passing rates and white
passing rates on the math test, and a ten (10) percentage point
reduction in difference between minority (not specified) passing rates
and white passing rates on the reading test. The school has a holding
power of eighty nine percent (89%) and has three thousand, one hundred
and fifteen students, of whom thirty four point eight percent (34.8%)
are African American, two point six percent (2.6%) are Hispanic, and
sixty point three percent (60.3%) are white.

El Camino in California had a twenty four (24) percentage point
reduction in difference between minority (not specified) passing rates
and white passing rates on the math test, and a fourteen (14) percentage
point reduction in difference between minority (not specified) passing
rates and white passing rates on the reading test. The school has a
holding power of ninety five percent (95%) and has two thousand, nine
hundred and thirty five (2,935) students, of whom fourteen point eight
percent (14.8%) are African American, thirty one point six percent
(31.6%) are Hispanic, and forty point nine percent (40.9%) are white.

Florin in California had a ten (10) percentage point reduction in
difference between African American passing rates and white passing
rates on the reading test, and a fourteen (14) percentage point
reduction between Hispanic passing rates and white passing rates on the
reading test. No data regarding a minority-white passing rate gap on the
math test is listed. The school has a holding power of eighty five
percent (85%)and has two thousand, three hundred and one students, of
whom twenty one point seven percent (21.7%) are African American,
seventeen point two percent (17.2%) are Hispanic, eighteen point zero
percent (18.0%) white, and forty-three point one percent (43.1%) other
ethnicities.

# 

School characteristics are for the year 2001 to 2002, the latest year
for which data is available from Common Core of Data (C.C.D.).

End of Figure 2.

# \[Slide 13\]

# 

# www.schooldata.org

## 

The National Longitudinal School Level State Assessment Score Database
N.L.S.L.S.A.S.D., is an effort funded by the U.S. Department of
Education to collect data from state testing programs across the
country, and contains assessment scores for approximately eighty
thousand (80,000) public schools in the U.S. for years up to the school
year 2002 to 2003.

\[Slide 14\]

Del Valle High School

Exemplary Campus

\[from\] 1987 to 2004

\[Picture of front of school: Building is gray, two story, rectangular
windows, one rounded window visible in photo. School covered with roof
labeled with "Del Valle High School" in Gothic letters. Sidewalk in
front of roof. Conquistador school mascot symbol above roof on wall. To
the right of the conquistador, "950 Bordeaux", a reference to the
school's street address, shows.\]

\[Slide 15\]

Del Valle High School: Demographics and Challenges

# 87.3% (eight seven point three percent) free or reduced-price lunch

-   97% (ninety-seven percent) Hispanic

-   Less than two (2) miles from Mexico

-   325 students are Mexican immigrants

-   125 in English for Speakers of Other Languages (E.S.O.L.)

-   2.8% (two point eight percent) dropout rate for \[school year\] 2000
    to 2001.

\[Slide 16\]

Del Valle High School Graduation Requirements

-   4 years of math

-   4 years of Social Studies

-   4 years of Science

-   4 years of English

\[Slide 17\]

Educational Reform

In 1992, Site Based Management

> In 1993, National Standards Movement
>
> In 1997, State Standards Become "TEKS" (Texas Essential Knowledge and
> Skills)

\[Slide 18\]

Tests, Tests, Tests and more Tests

TABS (Texas Assessment of Basic Skills)

TEAMS (Texas Educational Assessment of Minimum Skills)

TAAS (Texas Assessment of Academic Skills)

RPTE (Reading Proficiency Tests in English)

TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills)

# 

# \[Slide 19\]

# 

# What Hindered Progress?

-   Lack of understanding of accountability

-   Lack of understanding of common goal and a common vision for
    students

-   Changes at the Principal position (lucky number 7)

# 

# \[Slide 20\]

# 

Institution Response

-   Formation of Leadership Teams

-   Collaboration with University

-   Formation of CEIC (Campus Education Improvement Committee) Committee

-   Staff Development

-   Development of Campus Action Plan

\[Slide 21\]

Instructional Response

-   Higher Standards

-   No Remediation Classes

-   Focused Instruction

-   Block Schedule

A/B -- 4 by 4 Combination -- A/B....

\[Slide 22\]

Instructional Response (Continued)

.... a more focused approach

Student Profiles

Support teachers for math, reading, writing

Modified schedule

Specific targeted instruction

\[Slide 23\]

Data: For Your Information

\[Slide 24\]

Kid by Kid means KID BY KID

\[Slide 25\]

Example: A table representing twenty (20) students' eighth (8^th^) grade
writing, reading, math, science, and social studies scores, middle
school enrolled in, and five test scores from the Stanford Reading Pre
Test, the Stanford Reading Post Test, a Computer Pre Test, a Computer
Post Test, and a mock test of the Texas Academic Knowledge and Skills
reading test.

\[Slide 26\]

Another example: table of Texas Assessment of Academic Skills outcomes
for eighteen students: columns from left to right, student names left
blank, School Administrative Student Information (SASI) data, a "Per"
column, set of three columns from for eighth grade, September 1996, and
January 1997 scores. Then, to the right are scores for objectives five,
six, and seven, a column for scores of up to 39 points, the sum of the
previous three columns, against 40 possible points, an essay score, a
bold column of scores which may be total Texas Assessment of Academic
Skills scores, and a column of one single name repeated: Avila, possibly
a teacher's name.

\[Slide 27\]

Del Valle High School

Math Department

El Paso, Texas

Raising the Bar For Students

Three Year Plan

\[Slide 28\]

# Where Do We Start?

# 

\[Slide 29\]

BELIEVE THAT ALL KIDS CAN LEARN

\[Slide 30\]

Look at Standardized Scores:

Texas Assessment of Academic Skills, 1996:54% (fifty four percent)

Algebra One, 1996: 2% (two percent)

\[Slide 31\]

SHAME (reinforced with a cartoon of a woman with a shamed look on her
face)

\[Slide 32\]

-   Classroom assessments not aligned to TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge
    and Skills)

-   High failure rates

-   Too many students receiving grades of 70 to 75 in Algebra One and
    Geometry

-   Low standardized test scores

-   Inconsistent student knowledge, of students entering geometry and
    Algebra Two

\[Slide 33\]

Change Starts with Teachers...

\[Slide 34\]

# Hunger For Change...

## Teachers desire to do right by students.

## Teachers believe that students could do it.

## Teachers realize that they could be better teachers through alignment and working together

## 

## \[Slide 35\]

##  

# Yes, We're Hungry... 

# \[Slide 36\]

# 

# Goals For Math Department?

## Improve instruction through alignment of curriculum using state curriculum -- TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills)

## Align department tests to what is being taught

## Increase number of students who pass math classes with higher scores

## Increase standardized scores

## Attain exemplary scores in state exams -- Algebra One End-of-Course and TAAS (the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills)

## 

\[Slide 37\]

# Okay, What Is Next?

# 

# \[Slide 38\]

Principal

\[Slide 39\]

Implement

\[Slide 40\]

Algebra One All Year

\[Slide 41\]

A and B Schedules for All Sophomores

\[Slide 42\]

# 

# Math Support Teacher

# 

\[Slide 43\]

Ms. Lucero (Patty Lucero, math department chairwoman at Del Valle High
School)

\[Slide 44\]

What is the role of Support Teacher?

## Act as math resource person

## Model Lessons for Teachers

## Conduct Weekly meetings in Algebra One on Fridays 

## Conduct Geometry meetings twice a month

## Conduct monthly Department Meetings

## Actively involved in master schedule

## Have frequent discussions about student placement with Counselors and person in charge of master schedule

# 

# \[Slide 45\]

# 

Role of the Support Teacher: More?...

## Help create Lessons for Algebra One

## Help create Lessons for Geometry 

## Write department tests for Algebra One and Geometry

## Monitor and evaluate benchmarking

## Maintain records for all students

## 

# \[Slide 46\]

# Teacher Training

\[Slide 47\]

Teacher Training

## One week Algebra One Institute for all teachers

## One week calculator training for all teachers

## Carnegie Learning Systems one week training for Algebra One teachers

## Frequent training in alignment of curriculum, including summers 

##  

\[Slide 48\]

# The New Curriculum...

## Align curriculum (TEKS: Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) in core subjects

## Plan the instructional year 

## Conduct Level Meetings 

## Create common lesson plans

## Conduct frequent benchmarking to assess progress and areas of need

## Provide levels of support kid by kid

## 

\[Slide 49\]

## 

# On-Going Plan:

## Actively visit student placement 

## Revise lessons plans as needed

## Spiraling of tested items

## Modify department tests

## All teachers strive to become experts on what and how items are tested

## Alignment of state curriculum (TEKS: Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) to what is tested (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills)

##  

\[Slide 50\]

Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Results: 1996 to 2002

Figure 1: Grouped vertical bar graphs reporting the percentages (Y axis,
from zero percent to ninety six percent in increments of four percent,
0-96% in increments of 4%, percentage figures accompany the vertical
bars) of Texas students who took the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills
and passed the subtests in writing, reading, and math (X axis, groups,
from left to right) in the years 1996 to 2002 (X axis, within groups,
from left to right, bars start as pink for 1996 and transition to dark
red for 2002).

Percentages of students passing writing subtest fluctuated up and down
between 1996 and 2002, but the percentages did eventually increase from
eighty two percent (82%) in 1996 to ninety two percent (92%) in 1999,
and after a small loss to ninety percent (90%) in 2000, the percentages
increased back up to ninety two percent (92%) in 2002.

The reading and math subtests did follow a neat pattern of annual
increases in percentages passing the tests, although the reading subtest
rose more gradually and the math subtest rose more extremely.

In any case, the reading subtest passing rate rose from seventy two
percent (72%) in 1996 by four or six percentage points a year until the
passing rate reached eighty six percent (86%) in 1999, after which the
rate increased by one percentage point a year during 2000 and 2001 and
finally spiked from eighty eight percent (88%) to ninety-four percent
(94%) in 2002.

The math subtest passing rate started with only fifty four percent (54%)
passing in 1996. In 1997, the passing rate jumped eleven percentage
points to sixty five percent (65%). In 1998, the rate moved up modestly
to seventy percent (70%) but then spiked unevenly up to eighty five
percent (85%) in 1999. The rate moved up by the same modest five
percentage points to ninety percent (90%) in 2000. Even more modestly,
the passing rate inched up to ninety two percent (92%) in 2001 and
finally up to ninety-six percent (96%) in 2002.

End of Figure 1.

#  

\[Slide 51\]

Figure 2: This is a combined grouped vertical bar graph and table
measuring the percentages of (X axis, within groups, from left to right,
in the same order as the legend from top to bottom) Del Valle High
School (light blue bars) and the state of Texas (purple bars) students
passing the Algebra One end of course exam (Y axis: from zero to eighty
in increments of ten, 0-80 in increments of 10, with figures
accompanying each bar) for the years (X axis, groups, from left to
right) 1998 through 2002.

In 1998 the school's performance lagged behind the state average:
Thirteen point four percent (13.4%) of Del Valle algebra one students
passed the final exam whereas thirty five point nine percent (35.9%) of
Texas algebra one students passed the final exam. In 1999, the school
surged ahead of the state of Texas: fifty two point four percent (52.4%)
of Del Valle algebra one students passed the final whereas only forty
three point four percent (43.4%) of Texas algebra one students passed
the final. The gap narrowed in 2000, but still proportionally more Del
Valle students taking algebra one passed the final, forty seven point
three percent (47.3%) than Texas algebra one students as a whole, forty
three point nine percent (43.9%). The school-state gap widened in 2001
when sixty eight point seven percent (68.7%) of Del Valle algebra one
students passed the final whereas only forty nine point two percent
(49.2%) of Texas algebra one students passed the final. An even wider
gap formed in 2002 when seventy three point six percent (73.6%) of Del
Valle algebra one students passed the final whereas only fifty seven
point eight percent (57.8%) of Texas algebra one students did.

# 

# End of Figure 2.

\[Slide 52\]

End Results

\[Slide 53\]

Teamwork

\[Slide 54\]

History Making Success

-   No Child Left Behind Model School

-   Exemplary Status

-   Seven tenths of one percent (0.7%) dropout rate

-   Texas Monthly 5 Star School

-   Pathfinder School

-   Texas Business and Education Coalition and Just for Kids Honor Roll

#  

# \[Slide 55\]

Figure 3: Grouped vertical bar graph comparing (X axis, within groups,
from left to right in each group and in the legend) Texas Assessment of
Academic Skills math scores and economically disadvantaged students as a
percentage of total enrollment (Y axis: zero to one hundred in
increments of ten percent, 0-100 in increments of 10, figures
accompanying each bar) for six high schools (X axis, groups, from left
to right): Franklin, Eastwood, Coronado, Hanks, Chapin, and Del Valle.

Franklin High School had a Texas Assessment of Academic Skills math
score of seventy seven (77) and twenty two percent (22%) of its students
were economically disadvantaged. Eastwood High School had a math score
of seventy three (73) and forty seven percent (47%) of its students were
economically disadvantaged. Coronado High School had a math score of
seventy one (71) and thirty three percent (33%) of its students were
economically disadvantaged. Hanks High School had a math score of
seventy (70) and fifty one (51%) percent of its students were
economically disadvantaged. Chapin High School had a math score of sixty
nine (69) and forty seven percent (47%) of its students were
economically disadvantaged. Finally, Del Valle High School also had a
math score of sixty nine (69) and eighty seven percent (87%) of its
students were economically disadvantaged.

End of Figure 3.

\[Slide 56\]

We Can, You Can

\[Slide 57\]

No Child Left Behind

\[scene of George W. Bush at the Presidential podium with three people
on his left and his wife Laura Bush off to the right with four people on
her right.\]

\[Slide 58\]

Florin High School

-   Established 1989

-   Restructured School Model:

    -   Site-based Decision Making

    -   Effective Schools Committees

    -   Interdisciplinary Focus

-   Diverse Student Population

    -   two thousand three hundred (2,300) students

    -   twenty seven (27) different languages, twenty nine percent (29%)
        English learners

    -   No racial minority

    -   Fifty six percent (56%) free and reduced lunch

\[Slide 59\]

Demographic Data \[Florin High School\]

"African American" 22% (twenty two percent)

"Asian" 35% (thirty five percent)

"Filipino" 5% (five percent)

"Hispanics" 19% (nineteen percent)

"Pacific Islander" 3% (three percent)

"White" 15% (fifteen percent)

#  

\[Slide 60\]

Key Features

-   Six (6) period day: traditional schedule

-   Late start Wednesdays (for student contact)

-   Tutoring After School

-   Variety of Intervention Programs

-   English Language Arts/Library Collaboration

# 

\[Slide 61\]

Creating a Comprehensive Approach to Building a Culture of Reading
Success

-   Outside Reading Program

-   Library Support

-   Intensive Intervention

\[Slide 62\]

Creating Readers Through an Outside Reading Program

Teachers:

-   recognized a disconnect between core literature and our
    multi-cultural student body

-   recognized that students were literacy impoverished

-   needed literature that was powerful and interesting to a diverse
    modern teen population

-   needed school-wide support: administrative and inter-disciplinary

# 

# \[Slide 63\]

Developing An Outside Reading Program

Involving Teachers

-   teachers read Young Adult literature

-   librarian and teachers choose titles based on student input and
    their own teaching

-   Young Adult Literature Advisory Group gives teachers a professional
    opportunity to read and discuss the books their students read to
    fill multi-cultural void

Inspiring Students

# 

-   students provided with multiple copies of literature that reflects
    their interests, cultures, and readability levels

-   librarian and teachers share new titles with students through book
    talks in the library

-   books are available both in classrooms and in the library

#  

# \[Slide 64\]

Developing An Outside Reading Program

Defining the program

-   Students are required to read one thousand (1,000) pages of
    self-selected literature per semester beyond the core curriculum
    (California State Reading Standard 2.0 (two point zero): by grade
    twelve (12), read two (2) million words annually)

-   Teachers dedicate class time (ten to twenty percent, 10% - 20%) to
    sustained silent reading (S.S.R.)

\[Slide 65\]

Developing An Outside Reading Program

Building a Culture of Reading

-   teachers model reading during sustained silent reading (S.S.R.)

-   teachers from other curricular areas encourage students to read
    during down time

-   students view the library as an inviting place

-   no excuses mentality: there are no non-readers; there are just
    students who have not found the right book.

# 

\[Slide 66\]

Developing An Outside Reading Program

Creating Accountability

-   outside reading requirement is consistent in all English classes for
    all students

-   outside reading requirement is part of students' English grade

-   students guided to select engaging books that are at or slightly
    above their individual reading levels

-   students meet with teachers for oral book interviews when they
    complete a book

-   students and teacher maintain "Books I have Read" list in students'
    portfolios which are passed on each year

#  

\[Slide 67\]

Evidence of Change

Differences in total Scholastic Assessment Test (S.A.T.) -- 9 Scores

Classes of 2002 and 2003

Figure 4: Table comparing (columns: from left to right) year 1999, 2000,
and 2001 Scholastic Assessment Test 9 (SAT 9) scores and the size of the
score change between the years (last column, far right) for the (rows,
from top to bottom) Class of 2002 and the Class of 2003.

The Class of 2002 had total SAT -- 9 scores of 28 points in 1999, 31
points in 2000, and 34 points in 2001, which represents an increase of 6
points between 1999 and 2001. The Class of 2003 had total SAT -- 9
scores of 30 points in 2000 and 32 points in 2001, which represents an
increase of 2 points between 2000 and 2001. The Class of 2003 had no
1999 SAT -- 9 scores because the 1999 SAT test pre-dated its attendance
in high school.

# 

# End of Figure 4.

\[Slide 68\]

Developing An Outside Reading Program: Key Components

-   staff participation

-   administrative support

-   on-going opportunity to reflect and modify the outside reading
    program

-   partnership with library

\[Slide 69\]

Library Support

-   provide access and an inviting environment

-   provide direction for ninth (9^th^) and tenth (10^th^) graders
    through "book talks"

-   purchase multiple copies of high-interest titles

-   make book boxes available in classrooms

-   celebrate reading

\[Slide 70\]

Intervention Program: Assessing Needs and Choosing a Program

-   A burgeoning need across the district

-   District pilots "Language!" -- 1997

-   Site teachers are trained

-   Pilot class developed at Site \-- 1999

# 

# \[Slide 71\]

## 

# Characteristics of a Successful Intervention Program

## Research Based-Systematic Program

## Well Trained Teachers

## Coaching Support

## Mastery Approach

## Carefully Selected Students

## Extended Time In Class

## Integrity in Presentation of Materials

## Clear Entrance and Exit Criteria

\[Slide 72\]

# Developing An Intervention

## 

## Step One: Creating A Class

## Training the teachers

## Developing a support team

## Setting up materials

## texts for teachers and students

## extra supplies (three hundred dollars (\$300) per teacher)

\[Slide 73\]

# Developing An Intervention

## Step Two: Finding the Students

## Scholastic Assessment Test 9 / California Standards Test (C.S.T.) Scores

## Individual Testing

## encoding (LANGUAGE!)

## decoding (LANGUAGE!)

## comprehension (Degrees of Reading Power (D.R.P.))

\[Slide 74\]

# Developing An Intervention

## Step Three: Monitoring Student Progress

## Pre- and Post- Testing

-   encoding and decoding (LANGUAGE!)

-   comprehension (Degrees of Reading Power (D.R.P.))

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Interim Testing (John's Test)

    -   fluency

    -   accuracy

    -   comprehension

\[Slide 75\]

Elk Grove, California LANGUAGE! (trademark)

Comprehension National Percentile Rank (N.P.R.) Gain or Loss Gray Oral
Read Test Third Edition (GORT -- 3)

Figure 5. Grouped vertical bar graph comparing the national percentile
rank (N.P.R.) gain or loss on the Gray Oral Read Test Third Edition
(GORT-3) (Y axis: zero to forty five in increments of five, 0 -- 45 in
increments of 5, figures do not accompany any of the bars) year 1999
pre-test (light green bars) and year 2000 post-test (dark blue bars) (X
axis, within groups, left to right, same order top to bottom on the
legend) for (X axis, groups, left to right), first, a combined group of
seventh (7^th^) and eighth (8^th^) graders and, second, a separate group
of ninth (9^th^ graders) in Elk Grove, California who experienced the
LANGUAGE! curriculum.

It seems that the seventh and eighth (7^th^ and 8^th^) graders gained
appreciably on the GORT-3 post-test, compared to the earlier GORT-3
pre-test, after completing the LANGUAGE! Curriculum: their GORT-3 scores
went up from fifteen (15) to slightly over forty (slightly over 40), a
gain of over twenty-five (over 25) GORT-3 points. The ninth (9^th^)
graders gained at least as much from the LANGUAGE! curriculum: their
post-test GORT-3 scores, compared to their pre-test GORT-3 scores, went
up from about ten (about 10) to thirty (30), a gain of about twenty (20)
GORT-3 points.

End of Figure 5.

\[Slide 76\]

# Developing An Intervention

## 

## Step Four: Holding On

## articulation \-- Downward!

-   Taking it to the middle school

-   All seventh (7^th^) grade students are tested

## now piloting in the fourth (4^th^) and fifth (5^th^) Grades: 

## Continued Work at the High School Level

-   continuing work with students from the feeder schools

-   forming classes for new students without previous intervention

## \[Slide 77\]

# Developing An Intervention

## Step Five: Exiting Students

##  

## maintaining a Mastery Program

## integrating grade level literature and skills

## re-assigning students to college preparatory courses

\[Slide 78\]

# Other Contributors

## 

## English Language Program

## Insights Program

## Small Learning Communities

## AVID (Advancement via Individual Determination) Program

## Site Buy-In and Support

## Corrective Reading: Special Education

## Healthy Start

## Counseling Program (Student Support Teams (S.S.T.) Process)

## Late Wednesday Start (Tutoring and Clubs)

## Open Enrollment Honors Courses

## Continuous Progress Monitoring Model

# 

\[Slide 79\]

## Questions And Answers