School Accountability Report Card Reported for School Year 2008-09 Published During 2009-10

Executive Summary School Accountability Report Card, 2008-09

Tree of Life Charter School

Address:	241 Ford Rd. (PO Box 966), Ukiah CA 95482-3440	Phone:	707-462-0913
Principal:	Celeste Beck	Grade Span:	K - 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

Tree of Life Charter School is a Montessori public school serving children ages 5 through 15. It was founded by a group of parents and teachers in 1999, and has been educating children since the 2000-2001 school year. The school currently has four classrooms, each with a Montessori Guide and an assistant: Primary for ages 5-7, Junior Elementary for ages 7-9, Senior Elementary for ages 9-12, and Secondary for ages 12-15. It is an intentionally small school in order to foster a sense of community within the school, where each student is known individually and personally.

Student Enrollment

Group	Percent
African American	2.67 %
American Indian or Alaska Native	9.33 %
Asian	1.33 %
Filipino	%
Hispanic or Latino	8.00 %
Pacific Islander	%
White (not Hispanic)	78.67 %
Multiple or No Response	%
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged	37.00 %
English Learners	%
Students with Disabilities	15.00 %
Total Number of Students	75

Teachers

Indicator	Teachers
Teachers with full credential	5
Teachers without full credential	0
Teachers Teaching Outside Subject Area of Competence	0
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	55%
Mathematics	53%
Science	67%
History-Social Science	*

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.

Academic Progress

Indicator	Result
2009 Growth API Score (from 2009 Growth API Report)	755
Statewide Rank (from 2008 Base API Report)	5 *
2009-10 Program Improvement Status (PI Year)	N/A

School Facilities

Summary of Most Recent Site Inspection

Tree of Life Charter School owns one modular classroom, leases one modular classroom, and leases buildings from the Redwood Empire Fairgrounds, where it is located. Maintenance is provided by a combination of family volunteers, independent contractors, and Fairgrounds Grounds Maintenance Department. The school is inspected by staff monthly and by its insurance risk manager every other year.

Repairs Needed

None at this time

Corrective Actions Taken or Planned

N/A

Curriculum and Instructional Materials

Core Curriculum Areas	Pupils Who Lack Textbooks and Instructional Materials
Reading/Language Arts	0%
Mathematics	0%
Science	0%
History-Social Science	0%
Foreign Language	0%
Health	0%
Visual and Performing Arts	0%
Science Laboratory Equipment (grades 9-12)	N/A

School Finances

Level	Expenditures Per Pupil (Unrestricted Sources Only)
School Site	$ 6,716
District	$ LEA Provided
State	$5,512

School Completion

Indicator	Result
Graduation Rate	N/A

Postsecondary Preparation

Measures	Percent
Pupils Who Completed a Career Technical Education Program and Earned a High School Diploma	N/A
Graduates Who Completed All Courses Required for University of California or California State University Admission	N/A

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	Tree of Life Charter	District Name	Ukiah Unified
Street	241 Ford Rd. (PO Box 966)	Phone Number	707-463-5211
City, State, Zip	Ukiah , CA 95482-3440	Web Site	www.uusd.net
Phone Number	707-462-0913	Superintendent	Lois Nash
Principal	Celeste Beck	E-mail Address	lnash@uusd.net
E-mail Address	treeoflifeschool@sbcglobal.net	CDS Code	23- 65615- 6117386

School Description and Mission Statement (School Year 2008-09)

Our Mission

Like parents everywhere, we care about our children, want what’s best for them, and know that their experience in school can have a great impact on the quality of their life. We want them to have an education that is worthy of their beauty and potential. We want them in a place where they are known, not as part of a pack or faces in a crowd, but individually and personally. We want them in a school where they receive direct, high-quality attention, where their actual needs are met, where their potential is being realized. We want them in a classroom where they are engaged, interested, and happy – a place where they have a say about what they learn and how they learn it, where their education means something to them and to us, and where they have a vote and voice in class decisions. We want them in an environment where they are respected and where they are expected to respect each other, and held accountable for it. We believe these simple but far-reaching desires can be the basis of an education that helps them grow into creative, truthful, compassionate adults who contribute meaningfully to the society that made their education possible.

The school we have created to meet our goals is based in part on proven principles that have borne fruit in situations as different as the slums of Rome and the suburbs of Silicon Valley. It is also based on an element we think is relatively new – a desire to co-develop with our children, to become better, more effective, more fully human people by learning with and from them, both inside and outside their formal school setting. Our mission is to work and learn with our children, with our school staff, with each other, and with the community to develop confident, creative, fruitful citizens of a world made better by their having the opportunity for full development.

Instructional Design and Strategies

Over ninety years ago, Dr. Maria Montessori began to demonstrate that the natural curiosity of very young children could be the center of an education that effectively explores, reveals, and develops their true capacities. The wonderfully flexible educational method she developed was based not on theories or dogmatic beliefs, but on actual observation of children’s real nature and activities. She filled their educational environment with materials they could discover and work with to learn. And she supplied both the guidance needed to get a child started at the right time with the right activity and the direct personal supervision needed to help the child succeed. The careful, loving observation that is the key to her method has always focused on the individual child – not on age, or on peer group, or on preconceived standards of readiness, but on seeing and respecting each and every child. It is her discoveries, updated appropriately as she anticipated, that guide our program.

Our methods center on a self-pacing, sequentially organized curriculum, supplemented by experiential learning of many kinds. Instead of segregating children by age and grade, we employ multi-age groupings that resemble the groupings that occurred naturally outside of schools before our society became so fragmented and busy. These groupings correspond with demonstrated planes of human development, and give children a secure, inclusive setting for learning, as well as a sense of what’s ahead for them and a chance to learn from and teach each other as they would in the larger world. The curriculum offers an overview of the development of the universe through present civilizations, to provide students a sense of how they got here and who they are. It includes a great deal of independent research and a variety of experiential projects and exposures. Community service, democratic group government, setting and evaluating one’s own goals, and exchanges with children and adults in other communities and ways of life are important aspects of learning.

Three main observations of human development form the basis of our programs: (1) that human development does not occur in a steady linear ascent but in a series of formative planes; (2) that the complete development of human beings is made possible by their tendencies to certain universal actions in relation to their environment; and (3) that this interaction with the environment is most productive for an individual child’s development when it is self-chosen and founded upon individual interest. Such human behavioral tendencies as exploration, orientation, order, imagination, manipulation, repetition, precision, perfection, and communication – are present throughout life, but they don’t operate uniformly in different developmental stages. This observation underlies Montessori’s establishment of new divisions in education based upon the child’s developmental stages, each of which requires different educational environments.

These educational environments contain three essential elements: a prepared physical environment, a prepared adult Guide, and freedom with responsibility. By changing the focus of each of these elements in the different planes of development, the educational environment allows for and supports the changing needs and interests of the child as s/he develops. The educational environment includes the family and the home environment as well as the school. What is especially striking is that as children grasp concepts and master skills in this prepared environment, they become not only more adept and confident, but more loving and peaceful as their inner lives unfold as well.

The ongoing scientific research initiated by Montessori, and the educational method based upon it, have provided the foundation for thousands of highly successful Montessori programs around the world, including more than 300 Montessori public schools across the United States.

Our charter school is the expression of a growing alliance of families intent on working together to help their children realize their potential and become creatively fruitful members of society. The families involved recognize that the present world is full of both opportunities and dangers to children, and we feel that coming together to pool interests, abilities, and perspectives on our children’s behalf can be an enjoyable and satisfying way to co-develop with them. We plan to reach out both to others with children of the same ages and to expectant and new parents who are ready to think from early in their children’s lives about consciously sharing responsibility with others for their children’s well being and development.

The classroom-based learning environment is filled with didactic materials for the children’s use in an experiential way. Trips for going out to explore the larger world provide varied settings for exploration and instruction. Small group and individual lessons are the primary method of introducing students to a topic or skill, which each child practices and reinforces until mastery. Secondary Level instruction includes seminars, discussions, and demonstrations with follow-up activities, assignments, and projects. Encouraging children to learn at their own pace allows time for those who need extra time and help for mastery, and allows those who master skills quickly to proceed to the next challenge. Large group lessons and class meetings provide social learning, opportunities for participatory democracy, and community building.

In addition, a home-based independent study program served some students and families for whom a Montessori curriculum was important. The students and families met with their credentialed Montessori teacher at a minimum of once a month, sometimes more often. The teacher, using the Montessori scope and sequence as well as the California standards, designed an individualized program with each family and planned monthly assignments that would meet or exceed the minimum number of days and minutes required by the state. The students and their parents received books, Montessori didactic materials, art materials, science materials, and curriculum guides to use in the home. A Montessori-trained tutor met weekly with the students and attended the monthly meeting with the teacher. The tutor did additional activities to support each student’s individual learning program and consulted with the parents. Some of the students participated in field trips with students in our classroom-based program. All of the students took educational field trips with their families and friends on a regular basis, participated in classes with other children in the community, and belonged to sports teams and/or youth clubs as ways of having social interaction with other children. The home environments provided excellent opportunities for practical life activities that also incorporated academics.

Opportunities for Parental Involvement (School Year 2008-09)

We intend to create a school culture that will encourage and sustain meaningful and enjoyable parental involvement. While we recognize that parental participation cannot be forced, we promote it strongly. Upon first expressing interest in the school, parents and students participate in an in-depth orientation session with a staff member, during which school goals, philosophy, policies, and governance are discussed, and parent participation is stressed. Open meetings of parents, children, and staff are held several times a year. The purposes of these meetings include, but are not limited to: discussions aimed at supporting parents' and children's efforts to extend the Montessori classroom into the home, and opportunities for parents and staff to get to know each other better and to support each other. Every effort is made to make these meetings enjoyable, engaging, and stimulating. Parental attendance and participation in these meetings is strongly encouraged.

All parents and guardians belong to the school’s Parent Council, which plans fundraisers, discusses parents’ concerns, holds school events, organizes family volunteer service, and sponsors parent/guardian education. The Parent Council met seven times during the school year for meetings that were not family events. Additional meetings were held to plan and hold family events and fundraisers. This body, whose members attend the Parent Council meetings, advises the Charter Board Cabinet and staff. The Parent Council is an informal body that does not have bylaws. It determines its own rules and agenda, including the biannual date in September on which it will elect its representative to the Charter Board Cabinet. Its Charter Board Cabinet representative plans and chairs its meetings. It can vote to place items on the agenda of the next Charter Board Cabinet meeting.

Level of Parent Involvement

100% of the parents at Tree of Life Charter School participated in family service to the school. 63% of the families contributed the thirty hours per year of service to the school expected. Family service committees include facilities maintenance, fundraising, classroom and field trip helpers, and social event planners. An average of 44% attended Parents Council meetings throughout the year. An average of 59% of families attended each of the school’s social events, including school picnics and potlucks, Back to School Evening, Winter Party, Fundraiser Dinner, Science Fair, and End of Year Party and Bridging.

Summary Data from Parent Satisfaction Surveys (56% of families responding):

Parenting Education

Regularly attended Parent Council meetings: 44%

Regularly read parent education hand-outs: 94%

Regularly read all articles in monthly newsletter: 94%

Checked out and read books from parent library: 9%

Parent Involvement

Facilities maintenance: 42%

Fundraising: 52%

Field trip driver: 70%

Classroom project helper: 33%

Social event planner: 3%

After school activities: 9%

Garden/yardwork: 30%

Participation in Parent/Guardian Activities that Support Students

Phoning staff: 30%

Talking to staff in person: 85%

Checking and signing goal booklet: 85%

Listening to child read at home daily: 70%

Limiting or eliminating TV viewing: 90%

Helping child with school project/report: 75%

Taking child to the library: 40%

Arranging for after school activities: 40%

Including child in meaningful activity: 80%

Parents and guardians commented that their children are excited about coming to school and are learning about responsibility. They appreciate the parenting education meetings and articles, however many often cannot fit the meetings into their busy schedules. There was high praise for the staff and for the Montessori philosophy and curriculum.

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
Kindergarten	10
Grade 1	9
Grade 2	11
Grade 3	11
Grade 4	6
Grade 5	6
Grade 6	6
Grade 7	8
Grade 8	6
Ungraded Elementary	0
Grade 9	1
Grade 10	0
Grade 11	0
Grade 12	1
Ungraded Secondary	0
Total Enrollment	75

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	2.67 %
American Indian or Alaska Native	9.33 %
Asian	1.33 %
Filipino	%
Hispanic or Latino	8.00 %
Pacific Islander	%
White (not Hispanic)	78.67 %
Multiple or No Response	%
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged	37.00 %
English Learners	%
Students with Disabilities	15.00 %

Average Class Size and Class Size Distribution (Elementary)

This table displays by grade level the average class size and the number of classrooms that fall into each size category (a range of total students per classroom).

Grade Level	2006-07				2007-08				2008-09
	Avg. Class Size	Number of Classrooms			Avg. Class Size	Number of Classrooms			Avg. Class Size	Number of Classrooms
	Avg. Class Size	1-20	21-32	33+	Avg. Class Size	1-20	21-32	33+	Avg. Class Size	1-20	21-32	33+
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
K-3	17.0	2			21.0		1		20.0	2
3-4
4-8	22.0		1		21.0		1		20.0	1
Other	11.0	2			17.0	1			15.0	1

III. School Climate

School Safety Plan (School Year 2008-09)

This section provides information about the school's comprehensive safety plan.

Tree of Life Charter School adopted and implemented a comprehensive set of health, safety, and risk management policies. These policies were developed in consultation with the school’s insurance carriers and address the following topics:

· A requirement that all enrolling students and staff provide records documenting immunizations to the extent required for enrollment in non-charter public schools.

· Policies and procedures for response to natural disasters and emergencies, including fires and earthquakes. Fire and/or earthquake drills are held monthly.

· Policies relating to preventing contact with blood-borne pathogens. Plastic or latex gloves are available in first aid kits for use in treating children or adults with injuries.

· A policy requiring that instructional and administrative staff receive training in emergency response, including appropriate “first responder” training or its equivalent. All staff are required to hold current Community First Aid and Safety as well as Community CPR cards or certificates to document training. Continuing staff receive First Aid and CPR training as part of an in-service program each year. Policies relating to the administration of prescription drugs and other medicines. The school gives a copy of the medication policy to each family upon enrollment. Medications are stored in locked boxes and dispensed by staff according to written directions provided by the physician and family.

· A policy that the school will be housed in facilities that have received Fire Marshal approval and that have been evaluated by a qualified structural engineer who has determined that the facilities present no substantial seismic safety hazard. Our facilities were inspected and approved by a representative from the Fire Marshal’s office. A fire alarm system is maintained by Deep Valley Security.

· A policy establishing that the school functions as a working and learning environment free of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. This policy is included as part of our discipline policy as well as our employment policy.

· A requirement that each employee of the school submit to a criminal background check, which includes fingerprinting, and furnish a criminal record summary as required by Education Code Section 44237. All employees and contractors working with children received the fingerprinting and criminal background check and were cleared by the FBI and DOJ.

These policies are incorporated as appropriate into the school’s student and staff handbooks, and are reviewed on an ongoing basis in the school’s staff development efforts and governing board policies.

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
Rate	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09
Suspensions	3.7	0.0	2.7	14.6	21.5	39.1
Expulsions	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.4	0.5	0.7

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.

Other than occasional caulking of modular classroom roof and replacing ceiling tiles, no additional repairs were needed.

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
Item Inspected	Exemplary	Good	Fair	Poor	Repair Needed and Action Taken or Planned
Systems: Gas Leaks, Mechanical/HVAC, Sewer		x
Interior: Interior Surfaces		x
Cleanliness: Overall Cleanliness, Pest/ Vermin Infestation		x
Electrical: Electrical		x
Restrooms/Fountains: Restrooms, Sinks/ Fountains		x
Safety: Fire Safety, Hazardous Materials		x
Structural: Structural Damage, Roofs		x			Occasional recaulking of roofs, replacing of ceiling tiles
External: Playground/School Grounds, Windows/ Doors/Gates/Fences		x
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
Teachers	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2008-09
With Full Credential	3	4	5	328
Without Full Credential	1	1	0	9
Teaching Outside Subject Area of Competence	0	0	0	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	N/A	N/A	N/A
Total Teacher Misassignments	0	0	0
Vacant Teacher Positions	0	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
Location of Classes	Taught by NCLB Compliant Teachers	Taught by Non-NCLB Compliant Teachers
This School	100.0	0.0
All Schools in District	98.6	1.4
High-Poverty Schools in District	96.0	4.0
Low-Poverty Schools in District

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		N/A
Library Media Teacher (Librarian)		N/A
Library Media Services Staff (paraprofessional)		N/A
Psychologist		N/A
Social Worker		N/A
Nurse		N/A
Speech/Language/Hearing Specialist	4	N/A
Resource Specialist (non-teaching)	2	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.

As a Montessori school, Tree of Life Charter School does not use textbooks. Instead, it uses a variety of hands-on materials, Montessori curriculum instructional materials, and materials and books from a variety of resources. This fosters looking at different viewpoints and learning using a variety of modalities.

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	Montessori curriculum materials and a large assortment of literature	N/A
Mathematics	Montessori curriculum materials	N/A
Science	Montessori curriculum materials, microscopes, lab equipment, and other resource materials	N/A
History-Social Science	Montessori curriculum materials and other resources	N/A
Foreign Language	Montessori curriculum materials and other resources	N/A
Health	Montessori curriculum materials and other resources	N/A
Visual and Performing Arts	Musical instruments, music, Montessori curriculum materials, other resources	N/A
Science Laboratory Equipment (grades 9-12)	N/A	N/A

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	$7,262	$546	$6,716	$42,775
District	N/A	N/A	LEA Provided	$58,249
Percent Difference – School Site and District	N/A	N/A	LEA Provided	-27%
State	N/A	N/A	$5,512	$64,246
Percent Difference – School Site and State	N/A	N/A	+22%	-33%

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.

Tree of Life Charter School participates in Class Size Reduction in its Primary and Junior Elementary classes, with class size of 20 or fewer. With Garden and Nutrition Education grant funding, the school continued its organic gardening. Students also participated in pruning fruit trees and grape vines, then harvesting fruit, with trees and vines that had been previously planted. Cooking and food preparation activities were also part of nutrition education. The school has an active physical education program that was supplemented with extra equipment from the Arts, Music, and PE grant. The Visual and Performing Arts grant allowed the school to buy art materials and musical instruments for its arts activities, which are integrated with the academic curriculum.

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	$36,001	$40,917
Mid-Range Teacher Salary	$53,001	$64,688
Highest Teacher Salary	$71,186	$82,849
Average Principal Salary (Elementary)	$91,656	$102,130
Average Principal Salary (Middle)	$94,691	$108,050
Average Principal Salary (High)	$104,736	$117,805
Superintendent Salary	$145,000	$176,845
Percent of Budget for Teacher Salaries	40.40 %	40.30 %
Percent of Budget for Administrative Salaries	4.70 %	5.90 %

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
Subject	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09
English-Language Arts	59	50	55	37	39	43	43	46	50
Mathematics	27	38	53	30	33	35	40	43	46
Science	45	75	67	31	36	40	38	46	50
History-Social Science	*	*	*	32	34	42	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
Group	English-Language Arts	Mathematics	Science	History-Social Science
African American	*	*
American Indian or Alaska Native	*	*	*	*
Asian	*	*
Filipino
Hispanic or Latino	*	*
Pacific Islander	*	*
White (not Hispanic)	62	54	*	*
Male	35	71	*	*
Female	66	44	*	*
Economically Disadvantaged	64	45	*	*
English Learners
Students with Disabilities	*	*
Students Receiving Migrant Education Services

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
Grade Level	Four of Six Standards	Five of Six Standards	Six of Six Standards
5
7
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	5 *	5 *	4 *
Similar Schools	N/A	N/A	N/A

"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
Group	2006-07	2007-08	2008-09	2009
All Students at the School	18	-4	0	755 *
African American
American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian
Filipino
Hispanic or Latino
Pacific Islander
White (not Hispanic)
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged
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	Yes	No
Participation Rate - English-Language Arts	Yes	Yes
Participation Rate - Mathematics	Yes	Yes
Percent Proficient - English-Language Arts	Yes	No
Percent Proficient - Mathematics	Yes	No
API	Yes	Yes
Graduation Rate	Yes	Yes

"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	N/A	In PI
First Year of Program Improvement	N/A	2007-2008
Year in Program Improvement	N/A	Year 3
Number of Schools Currently in Program Improvement	N/A	11
Percent of Schools Currently in Program Improvement	N/A	68.8

XI. School Completion and Postsecondary Preparation

Admission Requirements for California Public Universities

University of California

Admission requirements for the University of California (UC) follow guidelines set forth in the Master Plan, which requires that the top one-eighth of the state's high school graduates, as well as those transfer students who have successfully completed specified college work, be eligible for admission to the UC. These requirements are designed to ensure that all eligible students are adequately prepared for University-level work. For general admissions requirements please visit the General Admissions Information Web page (Outside Source).

California State University

Admission requirements for the California State University (CSU) use three factors to determine eligibility. They are specific high school courses; grades in specified courses and test scores; and graduation from high school. Some campuses have higher standards for particular majors or students who live outside the local campus area. Because of the number of students who apply, a few campuses have higher standards (supplementary admission criteria) for all applicants. Most CSU campuses utilize local admission guarantee policies for students who graduate or transfer from high schools and colleges that are historically served by a CSU campus in that region. For general admissions requirements please visit the Undergraduate Admission & Requirements Web page (Outside Source).

Dropout Rate and Graduation Rate

This table displays the school’s one-year dropout and graduation rates for the most recent three-year period for which data are available. For comparison purposes, data are also provided at the district and state levels. Detailed information about dropout rates and graduation rates can be found on the CDE DataQuest Web page.

Indicator	School			District			State
Indicator	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08
Dropout Rate (1-year)	N/A	N/A	N/A	0.8	3.8	3.8	3.3	4.2	3.9
Graduation Rate	N/A	N/A	N/A	93.9	89.1	89.1	83.4	80.6	80.2

Completion of High School Graduation Requirements

Students in California public schools must pass both the ELA and mathematics portions of the CAHSEE to receive a high school diploma. For students who began the 2008-09 school year in grade twelve this table displays by student group the percent who met all state and local graduation requirements for grade twelve completion.

Group	Graduating Class of 2009
Group	School	District	State
All Students	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
African American	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
American Indian or Alaska Native	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
Asian	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
Filipino	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
Hispanic or Latino	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
Pacific Islander	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
White (not Hispanic)	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
Socioeconomically Disadvantaged	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
English Learners	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A
Students with Disabilities	N/A	LEA Provided	N/A

Career Technical Education Programs (School Year 2008-09)

This section provides information about the degree to which pupils are prepared to enter the workforce, including a list of career technical education (CTE) programs offered at the school.

N/A

Career Technical Education Participation (School Year 2008-09)

This table displays information about participation in the school’s CTE programs.

Measure	CTE Program Participation
Number of the school’s pupils participating in CTE	N/A
Percent of the school's pupils completing a CTE program and earning a high school diploma	N/A
Percent of school's CTE courses sequenced or articulated between the school and institutions of postsecondary education	N/A

Courses for University of California and/or California State University Admission (School Year 2007-08)

This table displays, for the most recent year, two measures related to the school’s courses that are required for University of California (UC) and/or California State University (CSU) admission. Detailed information about student enrollment in, and completion, of courses required for UC/CSU admission can be found on the CDE DataQuest Web page.

UC/CSU Course Measure	Percent
Students Enrolled in Courses Required for UC/CSU Admission	N/A
Graduates Who Completed All Courses Required for UC/CSU Admission	N/A

XII. 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 staff at Tree of Life used the equivalent of 2 days for professional development before classes began in the Fall. They had the option of attending the AMS Montessori Conference or doing in-house professional development in October, and took one school day for staff development then. At the end of the school year, the staff used ½ day for professional development to reflect on the school year and make suggestions for the next year. In addition, the staff meets together for professional development 1 ¼ hours each week. Staff may also individually request two paid days of professional development any time during the year. This year some staff attended charter school association conferences as part of their professional development.

XIII. 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 – All Students

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		Percent at Achievement Level
Subject and Grade 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	72	30	5
Mathematics 2009, Grade 8	270	282	59	23	5

National Assessment of Educational Progress Reading and Mathematics Results for Students with Disabilities and/or English Language Learners by Grade Level – All Students

This table displays the state and national participation rates on the National Assessment of Educational Progress for reading (2007) and mathematics (2007) for students with disabilities and/or English language learners for grades four and eight.

Subject and Grade Level	State Participation Rate		National Participation Rate
Subject and Grade Level	Students With Disabilities	English Language Learners	Students With Disabilities	English Language Learners
Reading 2007, Grade 4	74.25	93.29	65.60	80.00
Reading 2007, Grade 8	77.66	92.10	65.60	77.30
Mathematics 2007, Grade 4	79.00	96.00	84.00	94.00
Mathematics 2007, Grade 8	85.00	96.00	78.00	92.00