November 9, 2022 – Minutes

Hillcrest High School–School Community Council Meeting Notes

Wednesday, November 9, 2022, 5:00 pm

ACR Conference Room (A129)

Attending

Ari Tavo

Atiya Nash

Brant Thomsen

Debora Johnson

Elena Foley

Greg Leavitt

Jenny Olson

Jessica Dalton

Rebecca Martin

Stacey Kratz

Stacey Timmerman

Not attending

Jeremy Wright

John Olsen

Karina Park

R.J. Graham

Steve Brown

Discussion and vote on approval of minutes for the October 12, 2022 meeting was deferred to the next meeting due to a delay in the minutes being delivered and sent out.

Most of the remainder of the meeting was spent discussing our school grade, breaking down the data points behind it, comparing our grade to schools with similar demographics, and looking at how the challenges identified fit into our TSSP and land trust plans.

School grade

The majority of the school grade, TSSP, and School Climate presentation is by Hillcrest Principal Greg Leavitt:

Every few years, the Utah State Board of Education puts out the Utah School Report Card, which gives us a school grade. This helps us determine if we’re moving in the right direction and how to spend our trust lands money. This measure lets us compare ourselves to other schools across the state, but most importantly, helps us to see how our trust lands and TSSP efforts are aligning with our goals and with the needs of our school. 

This year, our overall performance grade was a B, which is “commendable.”  The grades are not given based on traditional percentages; the breakdown has large percentages at each end and narrower bands in the middle, as follows: 

• A (Exemplary): 64-100%
• B (Commendable): 57-63%
• C (Typical): 46-56%
• D (Developing): 38-45%
• F (Critical Needs): 0-37%)

This score is based on a 100-percentage-point rubric, broken down as follows:

• Proficiency, as indicated by student performance on statewide assessments, is 25% of the score; 56 points are possible; Hillcrest earned 22 points
• Overall school growth, measured by student improvement over the course of the year, is 25% of the score; 56 points are possible; Hillcrest earned 33 points
• Progress of our English language learners is 6% of the score; 13 points are possible; Hillcrest earned 5 points
• Growth by our lowest-performing 25% of students is 11% of the score; 25 points are possible; Hillcrest earned 14 points
• The percentage of students prepared to go on to postsecondary education is 33% of the score; 75 points are possible; Hillcrest earned 56 points
• Graduation rate is 11% of the score; Hillcrest’s four-year graduation rate of 84.4% puts us below the district average of 89% and the state average of 88%
• Percentage of students scoring 18 or higher on the ACT test is 11% of the score; Hillcrest’s percentage of 60% puts us below the district average of 70% and the state average of 62%
• Percentage of students taking advanced coursework (advanced placement, concurrent enrollment, career and technical education) is 11% of the score; Hillcrest’s average of 80% puts us just below the district and state averages, which are both 81%.

In interpreting these results, it is important for us to take into account both our school demographics (we are in the middle to upper middle of the pack among comparable schools, and as a matter of information, higher-scoring Canyons schools like Brighton and Corner Canyon are not demographically comparable to Hillcrest, which affects the comparison between our score and overall district scores), and the effects of the pandemic on our performance. For example, our school goal for graduation rate is 88%, and just before the pandemic began to affect learning in 2020, we hit an 87% graduation rate, the highest graduation rate we have ever achieved at Hillcrest. That rate, as well as other indicators of student progress, went down for the pandemic years, but we are seeing some upward movement now that the acute phase of the pandemic is over.

Interpreting the progress of our English language learners also requires some context. Unlike many other schools in our district, Hillcrest has between 300 and 325 students who are English language learners at any given time. Other schools in our district, and many of our comparable schools, have far fewer students who are English language learners; some have as few as perhaps a dozen of these students in their whole school. We are committed to increasing our scores in this area, but it is important to note that even with that large population of ELL students that must be served, Hillcrest meets or exceeds district and state averages for their progress:

• 41% of our English language learners are making adequate progress, compared with a district average of 32% and a state average of 36%.
• 4% of our English learners are reaching proficiency in the language, compared with a district average of 4% and a state average of 3%.

Moving on to our academic proficiency divided by subject:

• English language arts: Hillcrest showed 46%, which is below the district average of 54% but above the state average of 44%. Our ELA proficiency is down 4% from last year.
• Mathematics: Hillcrest showed 39% proficiency which was below the district average of 46% but above the state average of 32%. Our mathematics proficiency is up 7% from last year. 
• Science: Hillcrest showed 36% proficiency in science, a 6% decrease from last year that is below the district average of 45% but above the state average of 34%.

Two years ago, we were named a School of Excellence for our academic progress, and we are committed to continuing that. We see ourselves below the district average due to demographically non-comparable schools like Corner Canyon, which got an overall A score, and Brighton, which got a higher B than Hillcrest. 

So, where will we focus for growth? Our strongest area this year was growth, where we received an exemplary rating (this category consists of the scores for the academic subjects and the growth of our lowest-achieving 25% of students). Like many schools, we are still in the “developing” area in terms of the progress of our English language learners. We feel good about the supports we have in place and the ways we’re developing that area. We are “typical” in both achievement (which, again, takes into account our scores in academic areas) and post-secondary readiness, which considers the percentage of students who score 18 or higher on the ACT test, our graduation rate, and the percentage of students receiving a C or higher in postsecondary readiness coursework (honors, AP, IB, and CTE classes).

We see some of our biggest potential for progress in this last area, and particularly in the graduation rate and readiness coursework categories. It’s important to note that the ACT, although it is still considered for our school grade, is in decline as a measure of achievement and college readiness by most universities, including the very selective ones. Some schools have dropped testing as a measure of achievement altogether. We typically have about 80% of our eligible juniors take the test, and we will continue to do so, but we want to concentrate on getting that graduation rate back up and increasing student access to college and career readiness courses. Principal Leavitt believes raising these percentages are not only achievable, but that we already have systems in place to help us do that. In the area of access to college and career readiness courses, we will concentrate primarily on access to AP, IB, and CTE courses. 

Looking at these scores with reference to our 2023-24 TSSP (Teacher and Student Success Plan):

Our 2023-24 TSSP so far (it is still developing):

• Increase our school graduation rate to 88%.
  • Measured by progress of student GPAs and attendance so that we know who is on track and can intervene where there are issues
• Achieving higher than state average on Aspire testing
• Achieving higher than state average in school postsecondary readiness
  • Measured by increase of percent of students on track to achieve this; target will be to see an increase of 5% of on-track students in each category by the end of 2023-24

We believe the problem is that, through the pandemic, students have unfinished learning that is currently hard to address due to lack of attendance and a general lack of academic skills. This is perpetuated by a need for strengthening collective efficacy school-wide. We believe that focusing on the core early warning (EW) signs, which are overall grades (GPA), attendance, and interventions for students with D’s And F’s, will help Hillcrest teachers and students focus on core knowledge and skills for each content area that will keep them on track and prepared to graduate.

Academic Performance Goals

• Tier 1 goal: prepare all students to score 80% or higher on classroom assessments.
  • Every grade level will increase the number of students scoring at or above 80% on tier 1 CFAs (common formative assessments).
  • For Tier 2 intervention, teachers will use APP to engage in relearning to prepare students for retakes to meet 80% proficiency.
• Academic learning goals: teachers will enhance learning for all students, including multilingual students and SPED (special education) students, through: 
  • Continuing effective PLC data-driven teams
    • Teacher clarity: learning intentions and success criteria
    • Backward design: summative assessments create daily learning intentions/CFAs
    • Teachers limit standards of focus to priority standards when creating assessments and related learning intentions.
    • Teachers will use the 2023-24 TSSP assessment criteria.
  • Variety of engagement strategies
  • Using data to identify and implement re-teaching groups
  • Comprehensive close reading of informational/literacy test
  • Interactive note taking: focusing on relevant instructional standards with a clearly student-written stated objective, capturing, questioning, summarizing, reviewing, applying
  • Hillcrest will use Tier 1 instruction to academically prepare students for AP/IB/CTE courses.

Academic Learning Goals

• Continuing effective PLC data-driven teams
  • Teacher Clarity: learning intentions and success criteria (ie. “I Can” statements)
  • Backward Design: summative assessments will create the daily learning intentions/CFAs
  • Teachers should limit the standards of focus to priority standards when creating assessments and related learning intentions.
  • Teachers will use the 2022-2023 TSSP Assessment Criteria
• Structured Classroom Discussions
• Using data to identify and implement re-teaching groups
  • Teachers and students will use APP as a Tier 2 strategy for reteaching content knowledge and skill building beyond Tier 1 instruction.
• Comprehensive Close Reading of Informational/ Literary Text
• Interactive Note-Taking: Focusing on relevant instructional standards with a clearly student written stated objective, capturing, questioning, summarizing, and reviewing and applying
• Hillcrest will use Tier 1 instruction to academically prepare students for AP/IB/CE courses.
• All monies are spent on personnel allowing for lower class sizes and instructional aides. ($329,124)

At Greg Leavitt’s invitation, Ari Tavo noted that we are implementing some new strategies to involve parents and the larger community in these efforts, including sending letters home not just when students have issues like tardies and grade problems, but also to celebrate academic excellence when students do well. These celebratory letters will also steer these high-achieving students into AP/IB/CE courses. We also may have teachers write personal notes to encourage kids to reach a little higher.

Greg Leavitt said the key time to get these letters into homes is the beginning of February, when they’re signing up for classes for the next year.

School Climate Goals

Greg Leavitt said that our school vision for climate is Every Husky, Every Day, and building relationships, relevance, and rigor for every student. 

The data shows that the students want to be successful, but they are stressed and overwhelmed with school. We believe the challenge is students’ social and emotional well-being as well as their understanding of how to be a successful student has been adversely affected by the disruption of school structure during the pandemic.

School Climate performance goals: 

• Achieve a 90% average quarterly attendance rate.
• Achieve a 70% APP attendance rate to promote Every Husky, Every Day
• Measured by the CTESS Teacher/ Student Surveys, we will increase our performance yearly on the following survey questions:
  • My teacher knows when I do not understand
  • My school is a place where I feel safe
• Keep students in school using a 0% student suspension philosophy. 

Teachers use tools like the following to meet these goals: 

• Academic Planning Period (APP)
• Reteaching Groups
• Electronic Hall Pass
• APP incentives (PBIS stamps, Husky Cards)
• Counselor-initiated Husky Huddles
• Husky Recognition
• Husky Grams
• Attendance Incentives
• School-wide Attendance Plan / Effective SST Team Coordination
• Effective CARE Team Coordination
• Hopeful Beginnings support for social-emotional needs
• Student Restoration Under Facilitation (RUF)
• Effective BLT Leadership
• Facilitating community and school relationships
• Use monies for possible extra hall monitor and ML support ($40,000) APP, reteaching groups, electronic hall pass, APP incentives, recognitions, Husky Grams, attendance incentives, school wide attendance plan, Free Market, SST (student support team) coordination (counselor, administrator and student support mentor; meet and discuss students of concern (academics, attendance, social/emotional issues) and interventions we can put in place, whether they’re progressing, etc.
• Free Market: Elena Foley noted that we have helped, and continue to help, a lot of students with the free market. We are giving out about 40 bags of produce each week, which is a very popular part of what we offer. The market also has canned goods, snacks, etc., as well as clothing and other supplies. About 50 students along with some of their families shop the pantry every week. We have so many newcomers this year who don’t come to us with any of the things they need, and the market is really helpful for that. In addition, we’re doing more community events like the second wellness fair event we’re hosting tomorrow (Nov. 10); everything is free and we invite the whole community to come to the school and use the services.

Greg Leavitt said this entire meeting’s discussion, from school grade to our TSSP plan to our school climate plan, is a great preface to our discussion in the next few months about how to spend our trust lands and TSSP funds. We want our data to reflect our goals pretty clearly, and we feel it has in the plans we’ve implemented the last few years. We’ll continue to look at math and reading data into January before we make our final decisions. It’s safe to say that our plan has been pretty stable, subject to SCC input and approval, over the last few years, and that it has made a real difference in student experience and achievement. We have almost 10 teachers because of these monies that we wouldn’t have otherwise; if we didn’t have them, all the programs we’re trying to do would be devastated.

Stacey Kratz said that, if you want something that makes an across-the-board difference in a school, from the highest achievers to the kids who struggle the most, it’s investing in personnel targeted to the right areas.

Digital citizenship correction

Jenny Olson noted that, in her presentation on digital citizenship at the October meeting, she said erroneously that school-implemented filters do not continue at home. This is partly erroneous: while school Wi-Fi filters do not continue at home (because students are not using school Wi-Fi at home), filters included in school-issued Chromebook DO continue no matter where students are using those computers. Brant Thomsen said he will add that correction to the October minutes.

PTSA report

Rebecca Martin, PTSA president, reported the following:

• We have named our eight Husky Heroes for this month, and we’d love to see students, parents, and teachers nominate more!
• We have awarded three teacher grants of $150 each so far; teachers are welcome to apply for these grants; the only criteria are that they must be used to benefits students and the teacher must be a PTSA member.
• We will hold a Student Service Club activity on Nov. 15 after school. We will start a kindness campaign, writing out positive and affirming post-its and placing them around the school. 
• We will have a Spirit event on Monday, Nov. 14, at the Wendy’s on 900 East nearest to Hillcrest. This event lasts all day, from open to close, so make sure you stop by Wendy’s that day. 
• We received 16 Reflections entries and have sent the appropriate ones on to higher levels of competition
• Rebecca Martin is part of a Utah State Board of Education committee exploring curriculum changes and asked for input on the following issues:
  • Should there be a service component to graduating? 
    • The SCC was mixed on this issue, with many members agreeing service is an important thing to teach students, but objecting to the ways such a requirement might be administered and/or measured.
    • Atiya Nash noted that Texas, where she worked previously in schools, offers a Distinguished Service Graduate diploma.
    • Greg Leavitt said that, in his opinion, adding things to the graduation requirement is the wrong direction in our day and age; kids are way more independent; they want more diversity and opportunity out in the world to move towards graduation on their own terms as much as possible. Graduation is such a big deal to success in life that the last thing we should do is departmentalize kids to the point that they can’t reach some aspect of it. 
  • Rebecca Martin said the USBE was also considering offering differentiated diplomas: College Ready, Career Ready, and Military Ready; and want community input.
    • The SCC seemed wary of this idea, resisting the notion that students should be categorized or forced into “chutes” for their futures. Some members noted that programs already exist for students who want to prepare for college, take career and technical courses to prepare for a career, and/or take courses that will prepare them for military service. These members felt there was no need to codify that into a diploma.
    • Greg Leavitt agreed, saying that he does not believe we should categorize kids in this manner. To distinguish all of those things really isn’t hitting the mark; it might look cool on a diploma, but it’s not helping kids graduate. He noted that, If the state really wants to incentivize graduation and motivate kids to graduate, they will offer more competency-based opportunities for credit than they do now.

Due to time, the SCC agreed to defer other agenda items (Digital Citizenship and School Safety. Equity Steering Committee, the LAND Trust Plan) until our December meeting.

Greg Leavitt moved to adjourn the meeting, and Debora Johnson seconded.

The next meeting will take place at 5:00 p.m. on December 14, 2022.