Poverty, Race, Resources,
Results
in the
Pittsburgh Public Schools
THE ACORN STUDY
A report from the
NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES
FORDHAM UNIVERSITY
Copyright April 30, 2003
Introduction
At the request of the Pennsylvania Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the National Center for
Schools and Communities conducted an analysis of the relationships
among inputs, resources, demographics, and outcomes in the Pittsburgh
Public Schools). This report summarizes the results of that
investigation.
We find moderate evidence of positive relationships between
teaching resources and academic outcomes. We find strong evidence
relating attendance and outcomes. We also find evidence of income
and race based patterns in the distribution of educational resources
for children attending Pittsburgh's public schools.
Methodology
This analysis is based on a data set of nearly 200 variables
compiled from a number of sources. The bulk of the data is drawn
from the 2000-2001 Pennsylvania System of School Assessment
- School and District Profiles (Pennsylvania Department of Education.
The African American enrollment by school as of October 2, 2000
is based on the Pittsburgh Public Schools Membership Report
for 2001-2002 (PPS Office of Technology). Per school teacher
data not available in the state reports were provided by PPS
to Pittsburgh ACORN and include average years of service, average
sick days, number of teachers with Bachelor's degrees, number
of teachers with Master's degrees, number of teachers with Doctorates,
and total number of teachers. These data are for the 2002-2003
school year. Their use in this analysis represents a compromise
of availability over the ideal. Our assumption is that the staffing
pattern in schools generally does not shift precipitously; we
are, however, willing to check our findings against 2000-2001
data when they become available to the community. We note that
the school profile data currently available on the PPS website
is for 1998-1999.
For academic outcomes, we have used variables related to the
Pennsylvania System of School Assessment tests in math and reading
which are given in the fifth, eighth, and eleventh grades. To
allow for comparisons among the dominant organizational formats
in the system (elementary, middle, high), we have excluded eighth
grade data from schools other than middle schools.
The PPS teacher data refers to schools which are not listed
in the 2000-2001 state data; this disparity leads to occasional
instances of missing data, which are factored out of the analysis
as necessary. In the comparison of best and most poorly performing
schools, zero indicates such missing data. A small number of
schools appeared to be special-purpose and, therefore, have
been excluded from the analysis. Generally, our calculations
are based on a maximum of 59 elementary schools, 20 middle schools,
and 11 high schools.
All findings are at the 95 to 99 percent significance level,
which means there is only a one to five percent chance that
they could be random. Occasionally, we refer to correlations
with lower significance levels but only by way of suggesting
the overall direction of a group of correlations that do meet
the significance standard.
We have attempted to maintain a narrative tone that is accessible
to the non-technical reader. We usually refer to correlations
as relationships. In a positive relationship, as x increases,
y increases and vice versa. For example, in some cases, schools
with higher average teacher experience tend to have higher percentages
of students testing at the top level. A negative (or inverse)
relationship suggests that as x increases, y decreases and vice
versa. For example, as the percentage of low-income children
in a school goes up, the average experience of their teachers
tends to go down.
For the statistically inclined, we present tables of association
in the appendices.
Academic Outcomes As A Function Of Educational Inputs
Attendance:
In this and other analyses, we have found that attendance is
a gatekeeper variable that can be viewed as both an input and
an outcome. Of the variables we examined for this report, attendance
is among the clearest predictors of both average test scores
and the percentage of students in the two top scoring categories
for the fifth, eighth, and eleventh grade math and reading tests.
Specifically, there is a positive relationship between overall
elementary school attendance and:
- the percentage of students scoring in level four (top) of
the fifth grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four (top) of
the fifth grade reading test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
fifth grade reading test
The positive relationships at the middle school level are even
stronger. Attendance relates to:
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eighth grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eighth grade reading test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
eight grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
eighth grade reading test
In high school, the positive relationship of attendance to
higher scoring groups is similar:
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eleventh grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eleventh grade reading test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
eleventh grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
eleventh grade reading test
In other words, in all these instances, the higher the average
school attendance, the higher the percentage of students scoring
in the top two levels tends to be.
With the exception of eighth and eleventh grade math level
two (.363 and .565, no significance), there is an inverse (negative)
relationship between attendance and the percentage of students
scoring in the bottom two categories for math and reading tests
(significant for seven of ten coefficients). That is, in all
significant instances, lower attendance is related to higher
percentages of students in the lowest scoring levels.
Attendance is directly related to schools' average test (scale)
scores for the standardized tests at all three levels:
- fifth grade math
- fifth grade reading
- eighth grade math
- eighth grade reading
- eleventh grade math
- eleventh grade reading
Clearly, schools with better attendance, on average, perform
better on the state tests. The comparison of top and bottom
ranked schools in the final section further illustrates this
conclusion.
Teachers:
Various studies suggest that teachers' experience is related
to the academic success of their students. We found a number
of relationships between average teacher experience per school
and student performance. Average years of service is positively
related to:
- average school scale scores on fifth grade math test
- average school scale scores on fifth grade reading test
- average school scale scores (scale) on the eleventh grade
math test
- average school scale scores on the eleventh grade reading
test
In other words, higher scores on these tests are associated
with schools that have more experienced teachers.
Generally, the relationship between average years of experience
and the percentage of students in the two lower scoring levels
is negative; that is, as the percentage of experienced teachers
decreases, the percentage of students with weaker scores increases.
There are negative relationships with lower score levels for
the following tests and levels:
- fifth grade math level one
- fifth grade reading level one
- eighth grade reading level two
- eleventh grade math level one
- eleventh grade reading level one
The one exception to this trend is the relationship of average
teacher experience to eleventh grade math level two, which is
positive.
Average years of teaching experience per school is also positively
related to higher percentages of students scoring in the upper
two levels of standardized tests in the following instances:
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
fifth grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
fifth grade reading test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eighth grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eighth grade reading test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
eleventh grade math test
- the percentage of students scoring in level four of the
eleventh grade reading test
- the percentage of students scoring in level three of the
eleventh grade reading test
Master's degrees:
Some research, particularly that cited by No Child Left Behind
program staff, emphasizes the level and quality of teacher education.
The data used for this study suggest a modest positive relationship
between the percentage of teachers with master's degrees and
average scale scores on both the elementary math and reading
tests:
- fifth grade scale score math
- fifth grade scale score reading
There is also a negative relationship between the percentage
of students testing at the lowest levels in math and reading
and master's degrees; that is, the fewer the teachers with master's
degrees, the more students testing at the bottom level:
- fifth grade math level one
- fifth grade reading level one
Educational program components:
The State of Pennsylvania collects data on a standardized set
of programmatic resources. These resources are organized by
level and categorized as academic or supportive. Academic options
range from "art instruction with a certified art instructor"
to tutorial programs to career exploration to honors courses.
Supportive activities range from before school clubs to intramural
sports to band to parent involvement. For elementary schools,
the state tracks 15 academic programs and 12 supportive programs.
For middle schools there are 26 academic and 11 supportive categories.
High schools have up to 28 and 13, respectively. (See the appendix
for a full list of activities.)
We constructed six rudimentary variables by totaling the number
of state standardized academic and support activities at the
elementary, middle, and high school level. The number of academic
program activities an elementary school has a positive relationship
to:
- percentage of students at level four on the fifth grade
math test
- percentage of students at level three on fifth grade math
test
- fifth grade scale scores for math
- fifth grade scale scores for reading
Of the various academic options, the presence of the elementary
enrichment programming relates positively with the percentage
of master's degrees. In other words, a school with a higher
percentage of teachers with master's degrees is more likely
to have this activity.
At the middle school level, the number of support activities
relates positively to attendance, and, as we know, attendance
relates positively to test outcomes.
Resources As A Function Of Demographics
Across all levels, there is a moderate negative relationship
between the percentage of master's degrees at a school and the
low-income enrollment: more poor students, proportionately fewer
master's degrees.
Across all levels, there is a smaller but still definite negative
relationship between master's degrees and the percentage of
African American enrollment.
At different levels, there are negative relationships between
the percentage of low-income enrollment in a school and:
- the percentage of master's degrees in elementary schools
- the average years of teaching experience in elementary schools
- the percentage of master's degrees in middle schools
- the average years of teaching experience in the middle schools
- the average years of teaching experience in the high schools
In short, at every level, as the percentage of low-income children
goes up in a school, the qualifications of its faculty tend
to go down.
Moreover, there are also negative relationships between the
percentage of African American children in a school and:
- the percentage of master's degrees in elementary schools
- the average years of teaching experience in the elementary
schools
At the elementary level, there is a negative relationship between
the percentage of low-income students and the available academic
options; in other words, the poorer the school, the fewer state-defined
academic programs available.
Of the various academic options, the elementary enrichment
program relates negatively with the percentage of low-income
enrollment.
The likelihood that an elementary schools has a certified foreign
language program decreases as low-income enrollment goes up.
Schools Compared By Reading Rank
The following table compares the top and bottom ten percent
of Pittsburgh elementary schools in terms of reading scores
on the fifth grade test. In addition, we juxtapose the top and
bottom four middle schools and three high schools ranked for
their reading scores. This exercise provides a visual sense
of the tendencies described in the previous statistics. Although
any given school can vary from the trends, the spreadsheet provides
"eyeball analysis" verification of those trends and
adds the reality of putting the "face" of real Pittsburgh
schools on the abstractions of our earlier discussion.
Five of the six top elementary schools also rank in the top
twenty in terms of master's prepared faculty. Four out of five
of the bottom six rank in the last twenty for master's degrees.
(A zero indicates missing data.) Three of the high-end elementary
schools have faculties in the top ten for elementary schools;
on the other side of the comparison, three of five are among
the ten least experienced faculties. The low-income enrollments
of the top six are among the lowest in the city; at the other
end are schools from among the twenty poorest. While somewhat
subtler than these comparisons, the difference in the attendance
rates for the two groups is still noticeable.
Three of the four top ranking middle schools have faculties
in the top six for both experience and master's degrees. The
differences in attendance rates between high and low ranked
middle schools are more pronounced than those for elementary
schools.
The three top reading high schools have the three highest concentrations
of master's degrees and two of the three most experienced faculties.
The polarization of higher and lower low-income enrollment is
again obvious. Again, attendance patterns are distinct at the
two ends of the scale.
| School
ZIP |
School
Name |
Reading
rank
|
Experience
rank
|
Master's
rank
|
%AfrAm
|
AA
rank
|
%
Low Inc
|
L
Inc rank
|
Attendance
|
Math
rank
|
| 15201 |
Sunnyside Elem
School |
1
|
6
|
11
|
60%
|
27
|
54%
|
46
|
95%
|
33
|
| 15210 |
Roosevelt Elem
School |
2
|
21
|
6
|
4%
|
58
|
57%
|
43
|
92%
|
9
|
| 15211 |
Whittier Elem
School |
3
|
4
|
38
|
33%
|
46
|
61%
|
38
|
94%
|
19
|
| 15216 |
Beechwood Elem
School |
4
|
1
|
3
|
18%
|
50
|
47%
|
50
|
93%
|
10
|
| 15210 |
Bon Air Elem
School |
5
|
48
|
17
|
9%
|
56
|
29%
|
59
|
93%
|
1
|
| 15208 |
Linden Elem
School |
6
|
27
|
18
|
52%
|
34
|
40%
|
55
|
96%
|
4
|
| 15208 |
Belmar Elem
School |
54
|
45
|
42
|
99%
|
7
|
82%
|
17
|
93%
|
59
|
| 15219 |
McKelvy Elem
School |
55
|
0
|
0
|
100%
|
1
|
92%
|
1
|
91%
|
58
|
| 15212 |
Mann Elem School |
56
|
26
|
55
|
39%
|
41
|
79%
|
20
|
94%
|
54
|
| 15221 |
Crescent Elem
School |
57
|
50
|
40
|
100%
|
5
|
85%
|
13
|
90%
|
53
|
| 15201 |
McCleary Elem
School |
58
|
51
|
5
|
38%
|
42
|
87%
|
10
|
91%
|
48
|
| 15214 |
Northview Heights
Elem School |
59
|
52
|
50
|
95%
|
11
|
92%
|
3
|
91%
|
52
|
| 15208 |
Sterrett Classical
Academy |
1
|
1
|
1
|
51%
|
14
|
36%
|
20
|
93%
|
1
|
| 15226 |
West Liberty
Classical Academy |
2
|
4
|
2
|
54%
|
9
|
62%
|
13
|
93%
|
3
|
| 15206 |
Rogers Ctr Creat
& Per Arts |
3
|
8
|
11
|
52%
|
13
|
38%
|
19
|
94%
|
4
|
| 15213 |
Frick Intl Studies
Academy |
4
|
6
|
6
|
53%
|
10
|
47%
|
16
|
92%
|
2
|
| 15212 |
Columbus Middle
School |
18
|
18
|
18
|
90%
|
4
|
85%
|
5
|
80%
|
17
|
| 15201 |
Arsenal Middle
School |
17
|
16
|
16
|
83%
|
5
|
89%
|
2
|
87%
|
16
|
| 15219 |
Milliones Middle
School |
19
|
7
|
8
|
99%
|
1
|
89%
|
1
|
77%
|
19
|
| 15219 |
Letsche Ed Ctr |
20
|
3
|
10
|
79%
|
6
|
40%
|
18
|
68%
|
20
|
| 15208 |
Pittsburgh HS
Creat & Per Arts |
1
|
1
|
1
|
38%
|
8
|
32%
|
10
|
88%
|
3
|
| 15213 |
Schenley High
School |
2
|
3
|
3
|
64%
|
4
|
35%
|
9
|
83%
|
2
|
| 15217 |
Allderdice High
School |
3
|
5
|
2
|
28%
|
10
|
22%
|
11
|
88%
|
1
|
| 15212 |
Oliver High
School |
9
|
10
|
10
|
69%
|
3
|
56%
|
3
|
71%
|
8
|
| 15208 |
Westinghouse
High School |
10
|
8
|
4
|
100%
|
1
|
58%
|
2
|
71%
|
10
|
| 15203 |
South Vo-Tech
High School |
11
|
11
|
5
|
59%
|
5
|
63%
|
1
|
74%
|
11
|
Policy Questions
The description painted by the quantitative analysis of outcome,
demographic, and resource data for the Pittsburgh Public Schools
suggests a number of qualitative questions for exploration by
parents, community groups, educators, and policy makers.
Do the patterns of resource distribution suggested by this
analysis represent explicit policy on the part of the educational
and political leadership of Pittsburgh? If not, how willing
are that leadership and the community to alter those patterns?
What policy changes will be necessary to change the current
distribution essential educational inputs?
Specifically, how can school administrators persuade more experienced,
better educated teachers to work with students most in need
of their capabilities?
Given the demonstrable importance of attendance to academic
success, is the educational program of the Pittsburgh schools
one that encourages and supports attendance? What changes might
make the schools places where students want to be? What are
the barriers to improved attendance and how might they be removed?
For questions about this report or more information about
the National Center for Schools and Communities at Fordham University
contact us at
33 West 60th Street Second Floor, New York NY 10023,
212-636-6699 or visit our web site at www.NCSCatFordham.org
Appendices
Table 1. Significant relationships between attendance and
math and reading levels in Pittsburgh's public schools
| Attendance |
Elementary
Pearson's r(n)
|
Middle
Pearson's r (n)
|
High
Pearson's r (n)
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in top level (4) of 5th grade math test |
.398*
(59)
|
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in top level (4) of 5th grade reading test |
.476**
(59)
|
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 3 of 5th grade reading test |
.303*
(59)
|
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in top level (4) of 8th grade
math test |
|
.619**
(20)
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in level 3 of 8th grade math
test |
|
.728**
(20)
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in top level (4) of 8th grade
reading test |
|
.590**
(20)
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in level 3 of 8th grade reading
test |
|
.748**
(20)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in top level (4) of 11th grade math test |
|
|
.761**
(11)
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 3 of 11th grade math test |
|
|
.741**
(11)
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in top level (4) of 11th grade reading
test |
|
|
.730**
(11)
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 3 of 11th grade reading test |
|
|
.807**
(11)
|
*p< .05, **p< .01
Table 2. Significant relationships between attendance and
math and reading scale scores in Pittsburgh's public schools
| Attendance |
Elementary
Pearson's r(n)
|
Middle
Pearson's r (n)
|
High
Pearson's r (n)
|
| Fifth grade
math scale score |
.353**
(59)
|
|
|
| Fifth grade
reading scale score |
454**
(59)
|
|
|
| Eight grade
math scale score in middle schools |
|
.782**
(20)
|
|
| Eight grade
reading scale score in middle schools |
|
.786**
(20)
|
|
| Eleventh grade
math scale score |
|
|
.861**
(11)
|
| Eleventh grade
reading scale score |
|
|
.844**
(11)
|
*p< .05, **p< .01
Table 3. Significant relationships between teacher experience
and qualifications and academic performance indicators
| Academic
Performance Indicators |
Average
years of teaching experience Pearson's r
(n)
|
Percent
of teachers with a master's degree Pearson's r
(n)
|
| Average test
scores on fifth grade math test |
.319*
(56)
|
.363**
(56)
|
| Average test
scores on fifth grade reading test |
.470**
(56)
|
.384**
(56)
|
| Average test
scores on eleventh grade math test |
.743**
(11)
|
|
| Average test
scores on eleventh grade reading test |
.843**
(11)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 1 of 5th grade math test |
-.358**
(56)
|
-.309*
(56)
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 3 of 5th grade math test |
.406**
(56)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 1 of 5th grade reading test |
-.427**
(56)
|
-.365**
(56)
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 4 of 5th grade reading test |
.449**
(56)
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in level 4 of 8th grade math
test |
.470*
(18)
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in level 2 of 8th grade reading
test |
-.485*
(18)
|
|
| Percentage of
middle school students scoring in level 4 of 8th grade reading
test |
.511*
(18)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 1 of 11th grade math test |
-.777**
(11)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 2 of 11th grade math test |
.764*
(11)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 1 of 11th grade reading test |
-.856**
(11)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 3 of 11th grade reading test |
.831**
(11)
|
|
| Percentage of
students scoring in level 4 of 11th grade reading test |
.628**
(11)
|
|
*p< .05, **p< .01
Table 4. Significant relationships between programmatic resources,
school performance indicators and teacher qualifications
| School
Performance Indicators |
Total
number of academic programs
Pearson's r
(n)
|
Total number of supportive programs
Pearson's r
(n)
|
Elementary enrichment program
Pearson's r
(n)
|
| Average test scores on fifth grade math test |
419**
(59)
|
|
|
| Average test scores on fifth grade reading test |
.259*
(59)
|
|
|
| Percentage of students scoring in level 4 of 5th grade
math test |
.325*
(59)
|
|
|
| Percentage of students scoring in level 3 of 5th grade
math test |
.405**
(59)
|
|
|
| Percentage of teachers in elementary school with a master's
degrees |
|
|
.305*
(56)
|
| Middle school attendance |
|
.519*
(20)
|
|
*p< .05, **p< .01
Table 5. Significant relationships between student demographics
and school resources
| School
Resources |
Percent
of low income students
Pearson's r
(n)
|
Percent
African American
Pearson's r
(n)
|
| Percentage of
teachers with a master's degree in all schools |
-.359**
(87)
|
-.271*
(88)
|
| Percentage of
teachers with a master's degree in elementary schools |
-.309*
(56)
|
-.338*
(56)
|
| Average years
of teaching experience in elementary schools |
-.349**
(56)
|
-.389**
(56)
|
| Percentage of
teachers with a master's degree in middle schools |
-.530*
(18)
|
|
| Average years
of teaching experience in middle schools |
-.555*
(18)
|
|
| Average years
of teaching experience in high schools |
-.737**
(11)
|
|
| Total number
of academic programs in elementary schools |
-.412**
(59)
|
|
*p< .05, **p< .01
Table 6a. Significant association between enrichment program
and school characteristics
| School
Characteristic |
Elementary
Enrichment Program |
|
Schools
with program (n=41) |
School
without program (n=18) |
|
|
Mean |
sd |
Mean |
sd |
t |
| Percent of low-income
students in elementary school |
65.08% |
18.36 |
76.57% |
13.78 |
t =-2.373* |
Table 6b. Significant association between foreign language
program and school characteristics
| School
Characteristic |
Elementary
Certified Foreign Language Program |
|
Schools with program
(n=16) |
Schools without program
(n=43) |
|
|
Mean |
sd |
Mean |
sd |
t |
| Percent of low
income students in elementary schools |
54.73% |
16.34 |
73.73% |
15.54 |
t =-4.119** |
*p< .05, **p< .01
Elementary School Programs 2000-2001 (Grades K-6)
| Academic
Programs/Opportunities/Initiatives |
Supporting
Programs/Opportunities/Initiatives |
| Full-day kindergarten |
Before school
programs/clubs |
| Half-day kindergarten |
After school
programs/clubs |
| Art instruction
with certified art instructors |
Intramural sports |
| Music instruction
with certified music instructors |
Band/orchestra |
| Acceleration
programs |
Chorus |
| Enrichment programs |
Parent involvement
programs/organizations |
| Tutorial or
extra help programs |
Business partnerships |
| Magnet and/or
academy programs |
Even start |
| Environmental
education center |
Community service
programs/opportunities |
| Foreign language
instruction with certified foreign language instructor |
On-site lunch
service |
| Physical education
instruction with certified physical education instructor |
On-site breakfast
service |
| Independent
study courses |
Head Start |
| Educational
field trips |
|
| Distance learning |
|
| School to work
activities |
|
|
Totals
|
|
15
|
12
|
Middle/Junior High School Programs 2000-2001 (Grades 6-9)
| Academic
Programs/Opportunities/Initiatives |
Supporting
Programs/Opportunities/Initiatives |
| Required art
courses |
Before school
programs/clubs |
| Required music
courses |
After school
programs/clubs |
| Acceleration
programs |
Intramural sports |
| Enrichment programs |
Band/orchestra |
| Tutorial
or extra help programs |
Chorus |
| Magnet and/or
academy programs |
Theater/arts
activities or productions |
| Environmental
education center |
Parent involvement
programs/organizations |
| Foreign language
courses |
Business partnerships |
| Required physical
education courses |
Community service
programs/opportunities |
| Distance learning |
On-site lunch
service |
| Industrial arts/technology
education |
On-site breakfast
service |
| Ninth-grade
vocational education program(s) |
|
| Career exploration/career
resource center |
|
| School to work
activities |
|
| Consumer and
homemaking education |
|
| Tech prep |
|
| Work-based learning |
|
| Independent
study courses |
|
| Honors programs/courses:
Math, Science, English, Social Science, Arts, Other |
|
|
Totals
|
|
26
|
11
|
Senior High School Programs 2000-2001 (Grades 9-12)
| Academic
Programs/Opportunities/Initiatives |
Supporting
Programs/Opportunities/Initiatives |
| Art course cluster
or major |
Before school
programs/clubs |
| Music course
cluster or major |
After school
programs/clubs |
| Acceleration
programs |
Intramural sports |
| Enrichment programs |
Interscholastic
sports |
| Tutorial
or extra help programs |
Band/orchestra |
| Magnet and/or
academy programs |
Chorus |
| Environmental
education center |
Theater/arts
activities or productions |
| Foreign language
courses (Non-traditional) |
Community service
programs/opportunities |
| Foreign language
courses (Level 5 and above) |
Parent involvement
programs/organizations |
| Required physical
education courses |
Business partnerships |
| Distance learning |
Work study |
| Independent
study courses |
On-site lunch
service |
| School to work
activities |
On-site breakfast
service |
| Consumer and
homemaking education |
|
| Tech prep |
|
| Work-based learning |
|
| High-Schools-That-Work
initiative |
|
| Higher
education courses offerings |
|
| Career exploration/career
resource center |
|
| Industrial arts/technology
education |
|
| Driver education |
|
| Honors programs/courses:
Math, Science, English, Social Science, Arts, Other |
|
|
Totals
|
|
28
|
13
|
|
