|
Back to: Yale, MI, Michigan, All US cities.
Discuss this school with others on our active Michigan forum.
315 PARK AVENUE
Yale, MI 48097
County: St. Clair
Grade span: 6 - 12
Phone: (810) 387-3231 (make sure to verify first before calling)
Enrollment in Phoenix Alternative School
Female Enrollment : 11
Male Enrollment : 15
6th Grade Enrollment : 1
8th Grade Enrollment : 1
9th Grade Enrollment : 1
10th Grade Enrollment : 5
11th Grade Enrollment : 6
12th Grade Enrollment : 12
9th Grade Female Enrollment : 1
10th Grade Female Enrollment : 2
11th Grade Female Enrollment : 4
12th Grade Female Enrollment : 4
6th Grade Male Enrollment : 1
8th Grade Male Enrollment : 1
10th Grade Male Enrollment : 3
11th Grade Male Enrollment : 2
12th Grade Male Enrollment : 8
White Enrollment (%): 92.3% | Here: | 92.3% | | State average from 3483 schools: | 70.4% |
Hispanic Enrollment (%): 3.9% | This school: | 3.9% | | State average from 3483 schools: | 4.9% |
Hawaiian Enrollment (%): 3.85% | Here: | 3.85% | | State average from 3483 schools: | 0.12% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School Grades in Phoenix Alternative School Races in Phoenix Alternative School
2006 Student Enrollment: 28
Female Enrollment : 12
Male Enrollment : 16
8th Grade Enrollment : 4
9th Grade Enrollment : 2
10th Grade Enrollment : 4
11th Grade Enrollment : 11
12th Grade Enrollment : 7
8th Grade Female Enrollment : 1
9th Grade Female Enrollment : 1
10th Grade Female Enrollment : 3
11th Grade Female Enrollment : 5
12th Grade Female Enrollment : 2
8th Grade Male Enrollment : 3
9th Grade Male Enrollment : 1
10th Grade Male Enrollment : 1
11th Grade Male Enrollment : 6
12th Grade Male Enrollment : 5
White Enrollment (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 3572 schools: | 70.3% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School Grades in Phoenix Alternative School
2005 Student Enrollment: 21
Female Enrollment : 8
Male Enrollment : 13
Special Education Enrollment : 21
Special Education Female Enrollment : 8
Special Education Male Enrollment : 13
White Enrollment (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 3644 schools: | 70.9% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School
2004 Student Enrollment: 16
Female Enrollment : 5
Male Enrollment : 11
Special Education Enrollment : 16
Special Education Female Enrollment : 5
Special Education Male Enrollment : 11
White Enrollment (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 3582 schools: | 72.3% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School
2003 Student Enrollment: 17
Female Enrollment : 4
Male Enrollment : 13
Special Education Enrollment : 17
Special Education Female Enrollment : 4
Special Education Male Enrollment : 13
White Enrollment (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 3497 schools: | 73.5% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School
2002 Student Enrollment: 14
Female Enrollment : 4
Male Enrollment : 10
Special Education Enrollment : 14
Special Education Female Enrollment : 4
Special Education Male Enrollment : 10
White Enrollment (%): 92.9% | Here: | 92.9% | | State average from 3348 schools: | 74.2% |
Asian Enrollment (%): 7.1% | Here: | 7.1% | | State average from 3348 schools: | 1.7% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School Races in Phoenix Alternative School
2001 Student Enrollment: 19
Female Enrollment : 5
Male Enrollment : 14
7th Grade Female Enrollment : 1
8th Grade Female Enrollment : 1
12th Grade Female Enrollment : 3
7th Grade Male Enrollment : 2
8th Grade Male Enrollment : 3
9th Grade Male Enrollment : 1
10th Grade Male Enrollment : 2
12th Grade Male Enrollment : 1
White Enrollment (%): 94.7% | This school: | 94.7% | | State average from 3201 schools: | 76.6% |
Hispanic Enrollment (%): 5.3% | Here: | 5.3% | | State average from 3201 schools: | 3.6% |
Genders in Phoenix Alternative School Races in Phoenix Alternative School
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Statistics:
Met Overall AYP : Yes
School Safety Practices:
Warning codes used to alert faculty of a critical incident : Yes
Tactical evacuation route for students or entry routes for emergency support teams : Yes
Off-site staging area for assembly and communication at the onset of critical incident : Yes
Emergency communication tree or plan : Yes
Facility blueprints and site plan on file with emergency support team : Yes
Control access to site during school hours (doors locked or monitored) : Yes
Control access to grounds during school hours (gates locked or monitored) : No
Students required to pass through metal detectors each day : No
Visitors required to pass through metal detectors : No
Campus closed for most students during lunch : Yes
Integrated home-land security in school practices into school safety plans : Yes
Random sweeps for weapons : Yes
Require clear book bags or ban book bags : Yes
Require students to wear badges or picture IDs : No
Require staff to wear badges or picture IDs : Yes
Provide staff training in risk assessment : Yes
Security cameras used to monitor the school : No
Telephones provided in most classrooms : Yes
Emergency button provided in lavatories : No
In compliance with the state law that requires that a student who brings a firearm to school be expelled for one year : Yes
In compliance with Elem. and Sec. Edu. Act (ESEA), that requires referral to juvenile delinquency system of any student who brings a firearm to school : Yes
School wide training in positive behavioral support and interventions : Yes
School Safety Plans:
Safety plan exists - Shootings : Yes
Safety plan exists - Riots : Yes
Safety plan exists - Bomb scares or comparable threats (excluding fire) : Yes
Safety plan exists - Disaster planning (tornadoes, floods, chemical spill, etc.) : Yes
Safety plan exists - Hostages : Yes
Safety plan exists - Lock down : Yes
School Prevention Programs:
Implemented a violence prevention curriculum : No
Practiced behavior modification/intervention with students : Yes
Provided group counseling (social work) or therapeutic activity for students : Yes
Provided peer mentoring or coaching program : No
Provided peer mediation (student court) in resolving conduct problems : No
Provided conflict resolution training to staff and students : Yes
Provided programs that promote a sense of social integration among students : Yes
Established a hot line for students to report problems : Yes
Provided training and assistance in classroom management to teachers : Yes
Revised or reviewed school wide discipline policy : Yes
Made architectural or environmental modifications to reduce crime or violence : Yes
Used a paid law enforcement or security service : Yes
Implemented a drug prevention service : No
Conducted community service projects on prevention : No
Implemented teacher/staff training on violence/drug prevention : No
Conducted public/parent awareness activities on violence/drug prevention : No
Offered after-school or before-school programs : No
Provided alternative education programs : Yes
Underwent curriculum acquisition or development : Yes
Provided services for out-of-school youth (school-age) : Yes
Administered special one-time events (not included in the above mentioned programs) : No
Involved organizations in administering drug and violence-prevention services via joint service delivery (including referrals) : Yes
Involved organizations in administering drug and violence prevention services via teacher/staff training : No
Involved organizations in administering drug and violence prevention services via public awareness activities : Yes
Involved organizations in administering drug and violence prevention services via fund raising : No
Allowed students to participate in the design, delivery or critiquing of a drug or violence prevention program : No
Balanced and restorative justice conferencing (aka transformative conferencing) : No
Attendance Statistics:
Attendance Rate (2006): 82.0% | This school: | 82.0% | | State average from 3668 schools: | 93.6% |
Attendance Rate (2005): 85.0% | This school: | 85.0% | | State average from 3919 schools: | 92.3% |
Attendance Rate (2004): 83.0% | This school: | 83.0% | | State average from 3863 schools: | 92.4% |
2006 Expulsion statistics:
Expulsions - Prohibited Substances : 1
2003 Expulsion statistics:
Expulsions - Prohibited Behaviors : 1
2002 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Math Statistics:
Students Tested : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient (%): 100.0% | Phoenix Alternative School: | 100.0% | | State average from 805 schools: | 25.7% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 100.0% | Phoenix Alternative School: | 100.0% | | State average from 805 schools: | 41.1% |
2002 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Reading Statistics:
Students Tested : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 804 schools: | 23.1% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 804 schools: | 35.6% |
2002 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Writing Statistics:
Students Tested : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient (%): 100.0% | Phoenix Alternative School: | 100.0% | | State average from 802 schools: | 17.6% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 802 schools: | 41.7% |
2002 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Science Statistics:
Students Tested : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 802 schools: | 26.8% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 100.0% | This school: | 100.0% | | State average from 802 schools: | 47.6% |
2002 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Social Studies Statistics:
Students Tested : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Below Proficient (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 801 schools: | 48.3% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 100.0% | Here: | 100.0% | | State average from 801 schools: | 80.6% |
2001 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Math Statistics:
Students Tested : 4
Students Scoring Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Proficient (%): 25.0% | This school: | 25.0% | | State average from 701 schools: | 41.4% |
Met Or Exceeded Standards : 1
Met Or Exceeded Standards (%): 25.0% | Here: | 25.0% | | State average from 701 schools: | 56.5% |
2001 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Reading Statistics:
Students Tested : 4
Students Scoring Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Proficient (%): 25.0% | Phoenix Alternative School: | 25.0% | | State average from 703 schools: | 46.2% |
Met Or Exceeded Standards : 1
Met Or Exceeded Standards (%): 25.0% | This school: | 25.0% | | State average from 703 schools: | 61.6% |
2001 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Writing Statistics:
Students Tested : 4
Students Scoring Partially Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Partially Proficient (%): 25.0% | Here: | 25.0% | | State average from 700 schools: | 19.2% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 25.0% | This school: | 25.0% | | State average from 700 schools: | 29.0% |
2001 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Science Statistics:
Students Tested : 4
Students Scoring Partially Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Partially Proficient (%): 25.0% | Here: | 25.0% | | State average from 700 schools: | 20.1% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 25.0% | Here: | 25.0% | | State average from 700 schools: | 37.5% |
2001 Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) Social Studies Statistics:
Students Tested : 4
Students Scoring Partially Proficient : 1
Students Scoring Partially Proficient (%): 25.0% | Here: | 25.0% | | State average from 698 schools: | 26.4% |
Did Not Meet Standard : 1
Did Not Meet Standard (%): 25.0% | Here: | 25.0% | | State average from 698 schools: | 63.7% |
|
