Oregon Alliance for
Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance
- OAHPERD Fall Conference 2008
- Assessment and Secondary Physical Education
E-Journal Summer 2008
Come Join Us!
OAHPERD Fall Conference 2008
October 10, 2008
West Salem High School, Salem OR
Please join us at the conference:
“You Can Do It Too!”
John P. Bennett,
John Bennett is a professor with the Department of Health and Applied Human Sciences at the University of North Carolina Wilmington where he primarily teaches K-12 HPE teacher education courses and dance. Bennett started his teaching career in 1969 and has been actively involved in state, district, and national HPERD organizations since 1967. He taught and/or administered K-12 HPE for 15 years in public schools and was the NC State Director of Healthful Living for eight years. He has written over 100 publications and presented over 400 presentations nationally and internationally.
- Ann Griffin: Teacher of the Year from Iowa (Adapted PE)
- Marigay Schopp: NW District Elementary Teacher of the Year
- Lynn Barry: NW District Middle School Teacher of the Year
- Dr. Mary E. Kreis: California University of Pennsylvania
- Paul Rosengard: SPARK
- Dr. Glenna DeJong: EPEC, Lansing Michigan
- Greg Bert: STARS
PLEASE JOIN US
Is there a Relationship between Scholastic Sports Participation and Academic Performance? Research Brief
Department of Nutrition and Exercise Sciences
Oregon State University
The Study in Brief
The study was conducted by examining student records over a three-year period (1993-1996). Data on 285,805 students from the North Carolina High School Athletic Association (NCHSAA) were evaluated using paired t-tests to determine if there were differences in the grade point averages (GPAs) and attendance records of athletes and non-athletes. Participants were tested within their racial and gender groups. Percentages of discipline referrals, dropout rates, and graduation rates for athletes and non-athletes were also examined.
The Results in Brief
Students who participated in interscholastic athletics significantly outperformed their non-athlete peers. Over the three-year study period, student athletes, on average, had 22.66% higher GPAs, better attendance by 6.06 days over the entire school year, and 9.8% fewer discipline referrals. Additionally, the mean dropout rate for athletes was 0.7% vs. 8.98% for non-athletes. Furthermore, the graduation rate for athletes was 4.9% higher than that of non-athletes.
This study supports the idea that interscholastic sports participation is associated with improved academic performance and student success. Considering that sports are often believed to be a hindrance to education and that many athletes are labeled as “dumb jocks,” this is an interesting and important finding. If people persistently believe that sports have a negative impact on the educational performance of students, then interscholastic sports programs become educationally marginalized and could perhaps even risk being eliminated. Some parents may intentionally restrict their child’s participation in interscholastic sports programs due to erroneous beliefs. This study supports the educational value of interscholastic sports participation.
Whitley, R. (1999). Those “dumb jocks” are at it again: A comparison of the educational
performances of athletes and nonathletes in North Carolina schools from 1993 through 1996. High School Journal, 82(4), 223-233.
LEARN MORE – about high school athletes’ performance at http://www.nchsaa.org
Authors: Dani Blackwell – West Albany High School; Albany, OR
Jeff McNamee – Linfield College; McMinnville, OR
Gay Timken – Western Oregon University; Monmouth, OR
Some physical education leaders argue without substantive change in secondary school physical education, or at least evidence that what we have is working (of which we have yet to produce); secondary school physical education may cease to exist in its current form. The purpose of this article is to highlight the status of assessment practices within secondary school physical education and to outline a few exemplar assessment strategies.
Calls have been made to “reorient” secondary school physical education programs and “chucking it” all together. (Locke, 1992) In 1987, Griffey stated that we have failed: “…to explain [through authentic assessment] to our students, their parents, administrators, fellow teachers, and the community what is distinct about what physical education has to offer”. (p. 21) Siedentop (1987) echoed this statement by describing “…high school physical education as an endangered species, a subject matter that might become extinct in secondary curricula in America”. (p. 24) Locke (1992) concluded, “…replacing the dominant program is the only course of action that can save a place for physical education in secondary schools”. (p. 361) Locke (1992) was referring to the dominant physical education program as one that grade primarily on dressing out and participation. In a recent viewpoint paper entitled “Is the extinction of high school physical education inevitable?” Doolittle (2007) argued that Griffey’s, Siedentop’s and Locke’s statements could still be utilized today to describe most secondary physical education programs:
“Too many physical education programs hold students accountable only for attendance and good behavior. Students, parents, school personnel, and the public know and collude with the fact that showing up and taking part is all that is required to pass high school physical education” (p. 7).
Are Doolittle’s (2007) statements true for secondary physical education programs in Oregon? The authors have witnessed amazing teachers and physical education programs throughout the state... Unfortunately, it is our view these programs are unique, far from ordinary. We are concerned Oregon secondary physical education programs are not keeping pace with National initiatives. Case in point: Oregon’s recent House Bill 3141. As readers review this bill (www.leg.state.or.us/07reg/measpdf/hb3100.dir/hb3141.en.pdf) you will notice no mention of physical education beyond the 8th grade level.
To illustrate the attention physical education is receiving at the national level, we share the following story of a colleague who provided testimony during a Congressional hearing for the purpose of deciding on the future of the Physical Education Progress (PEP) Grant program: After our colleague completed her testimony reviewing the various physical and emotional benefits of physical education, one Representative rose and asked her to provide classroom level evidence? The Representative then explained that her child was graded on dressing and coming class, which has little to do with student learning. The room fell silent. Unfortunately, little consistent classroom level evidence exists illustrating the positive impact physical education programs have on high school aged students.
We do not want to watch secondary physical education, or physical education at any level, go the way of the dinosaur. We, as a profession, want and need to be like the amoeba. The change needed is multifaceted, from reorienting programs’ focus to developing solid evidence-based curriculum; from offering student choice to demonstrating real student learning outcomes; from paying lip service to what it is we do, to actually providing solid evidence something real is going on in our gyms. It is our belief this evidence comes in the form of on-going formal assessment.
By now we have all heard the about standards-based instruction and No Child Left Behind. As a result of educational standards, or statements illustrating what students should be able to know and do as a result of our programs, we now have rich assessment literature, albeit sometimes difficult to navigate. Essentially, both standards-based education and NCLB refer to curriculum that enables students to meet instructional standards, such as Oregon’s physical education content standards (http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/results/?id=21). But what is assessment? And how do physical educators go about using it to document student learning?
Assessment can be defined as a process of gauging student progress and may or may not be used to formulate a grade. Think of assessment as a way to reflect back or mirror student learning, something a ‘grade’ often fails to convey. Assessments can be formative, the continuous assessment during the unit of instruction, or summative, the assessment at the end of the unit. A grade, on the other hand, is when we assign a value to students’ work, a value that too often does not reflect actual student progress relative to our physical education standards, but instead reflects how well a student can dress for physical education.
Here is an example to highlight the difference: A teacher wants to know how well her students are progressing during day three of a ten-day volleyball unit. She develops and uses a rubric, or scoring guide (see figure 1 & 3), to assess her students’ tactical play during a 3 v. 3 volleyball game. While formally assessing (i.e., actual recording of student learning) off the ball play early in the unit, the teacher notices students are not providing appropriate court coverage. The teacher uses this information to make instructional changes for the next two class periods focusing students on getting into the ready position. In this case, assessment was integrated into a daily lesson and is subsequently used to drive future instructional episodes. These assessment data should also be shared with students to illustrate where they are, where they need to be, and inform them of progress along the way. This type of assessment is sometimes referred to as integrated formative assessment, or on-going assessment. It is used continuously throughout a unit of instruction and provides students, teachers, parents and administrators evidence of student learning. This evidence serves to validate a teacher’s physical education program and substantiates a place for physical education in schools. The information may also be used as part of the students’ psychomotor grade (see grade breakdown below).
According to Ainsworth and Viegut (2006) teachers who implement integrated formative assessment are better able to:
- determine what standards students already know and to what degree;
- decide what minor modifications or major changes in instruction they need to make so that all students can succeed;
- create appropriate lessons and activities for groups of learners or individual students; and
- Inform students about their current progress in order to help those set goals for improvement (p. 23).
Researchers have demonstrated integrated formal assessment has the potential to motivate students and involve them in the learning/assessment process (Black & Williams, 1998a, 1998b). There is also evidence teachers dislike the nature of typical summative (i.e., end-of-unit skills tests) assessment practices, as these do not facilitate teachers’ nor students’ understanding of student growth (Pryor & Akwesi, 1998).
An integrated approach to assessment has the potential to link teaching, learning, and assessment (Shepard, 2001; Wood, 2003). Greenwood and Maheady (1997) noted the “inability to document meaningful changes in student performance have…impeded our ability as teachers…to identify those instructional arrangements and practices that may be responsible for subsequent changes in learner performance”. (p. 266) Some teachers suggest an integrated assessment approach is challenging, due to the simultaneous nature of performing regular instructional duties along with assessing student performance. We would argue physical education teachers already do a good deal of assessment informally, but fail to gather data (e.g., record it) on student learning during the learning process. The missing link is the documentation itself.
In the next section we hope to help you meet this challenge by providing real world, high school tested assessment examples. Dani Blackwell, the 2007 Oregon High School Teacher of the Year, provides real assessment examples that she has refined over the past few years.
A High School Physical Educator’s Assessment Evolution
It was not until this year I really understood what I needed to do for assessment and how I needed to grade in my high school physical education classes. During the 2006-2007 academic year, I took part in a study designed to help physical education teachers integrate formal assessment. This study required me to re-evaluate how I was assessing in my classes. I have always set learning objectives to meet the Oregon Physical Education Standards, but still gave daily points for participation, dressing down, promptness, and attitude. Everyday I gave five points if students showed up on time, dressed down, participated, had a good attitude and used appropriate language. My final grades consisted of daily points, written assignments, quizzes, tests, projects, skill checklists, and journal responses. The daily points ended up being 20% of the students’ grades.
During the 2007-2008 academic year it ‘clicked’ in my brain, “How can I expect the world to take physical education seriously if I am still grading on whether a student dresses down and does not “agitate” me during the class period?” Can you imagine if any other subject matter did this?
Recently, I have shifted to Daily Lesson Objectives (Figure 1) instead of daily points. For example, after introducing the forearm pass during a volleyball unit, I would provide drills designed to help students practice the forearm pass. During game play, I require the student who is rotating out to complete a peer checklist on a team member (see Figure 2).
Figure 1. Daily Lesson Objective Rubric
Daily Lesson Objective Rubric
Carefully evaluates and discussed results with partner
Evaluates partners and quickly discusses results with partner
Completes peer checklist and gives to partner
Peer checklist is incomplete and does not discuss results with partner
Does not complete peer checklist
Figure 2. Peer Check List - Forearm Passing in Volleyball
Directions: If you see the skill occur, put a check mark in the “yes” column. If you do not see the skill occur put a check mark in the “no” column. Discuss results with your partner.
|Ready Position (medium posture, knees bent, arms out)|
|Moves feet to ball before passing|
|Belly button to target|
After game play, at the end of a lesson, I have students discuss results from the peer checklist and I go around evaluating students’ discussions (see Figure 1). The points earned from my evaluation of their discussions, not the peer evaluation, go into the student grades. I collect the peer checklists as an assessment piece and make necessary instructional modification for future lessons.
However, not every assessment has to be graded [With this particular assessment example, I have attached a grading format to it]. I assess daily, but not all scores/data are used for grading purposes. I use several assessments for the sole purpose of helping students perform better and make instructional changes (see Figure 3).
Adapted from Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars (2006). Complete guide to sport education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
During a typical unit, I assess students daily and give them verbal feedback based on a rubric. Figure 3 is from my volleyball unit, and it serves as an example of the typical structure I use in my rubrics. Students are assessed several times (4-5) throughout the unit (formative) and not just at the end ( summative). There are situations when I will use these types of rubrics to assign a grade.
Physical educators typically want to assign a grade for attendance and dressing out. I assess areas such as arriving to class on time, dressing down, using appropriate language, and having a good attitude. However, instead of assigning a letter grade to these areas, I have developed a citizenship grade for my classes (Figure 4). Students are expected to come to class on time, dress down, demonstrate good sportsmanship, and use appropriate language & behavior.
Figure 4. Citizenship Grade
Excellent (E) 0-3 infractions (see list above)
Satisfactory (S) 4-7 infractions
Needs Improvement (N) 8-11 infractions
Unsatisfactory (U) 12 or more infractions
If you really want to grade on participation, you might consider a protocol that is more objective in nature. I use either momentary time sampling (MTS) or pedometer step counts. MTS allows you to take a snapshot of student behavior, typically every 2 minutes. MTS can be used to compute percent of time-spent on-task, engagement in subject matter activities, skill drills, and moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) by students (Figure 5).
One of the physical education related goals of Healthy People 2010 (USDHHS, 2000) is to create opportunities for student MVPA. Specifically it challenges physical educators to have their students spend at least 50% of the class time in MVPA. MTS, coupled with a focus on MVPA, allows me to assess my own lesson planning and assess the physical activity levels of my students (e.g. participation level). If a student is at a walking pace or higher, I record “yes”, if not, then “no”. Student(s) are observed every 2 minutes during class time and I use a stop watch or a prompting device (http://www.motiv-aider.com/) to remind me to observe these student behaviors. I can calculate the percentage of class time the student participated at a level of moderate activity or higher (see Figure 6). I have also found a personal digital assistant (e.g., hand-held computer) to be helpful when collecting MTS data for assessment and grading purposes. For a full review of using MTS and assessing MVPA see Weigis & van der Mars, 2006.
Figure 5. Student MVPA Assessment
MVPA Scoring Guide: Student Performance Related to Healthy People 2010 Objective 22-10
Student MVPA % Level
Scoring Guide Level
|Below Average (BA)|
|Moving Towards (MT)|
Figure 6. Sample MVPA Score Card
(Yes: Walking or any activity that would require more energy than walking;
No: anything less than walking.)
|Interval||Circle Yes (Y) MVPA||Circle No (N) MVPA|
Based on various assessments students’ final grades are based on percentages. The breakdown is as follows:
Cognitive (quizzes, tests, & written assignments) 30%
Psychomotor (skills) 30%
Affective (journal responses, self-reflections) 10%
Daily Lesson Objectives 5%
Personal Fitness Plan 25%
Remember, assessment is not just for a grade. I use assessment daily to help my students improve their skill level with the hope that they will be active for a lifetime. I also use assessment to analyze my lesson planning and instruction. When first collecting students’ MVPA data during a weight training class, I found that my students were not very active. Assessing MVPA helped me to restructure how I plan not only weight room activities, but also most of my other units of instruction. Now, I tend to use more circuit training in the weight room to ensure my students’ MVPA level is at least 50%. In addition, yes, I use assessment to determine grades. Imagine if all high school physical educators used assessment daily that had value….would we have to worry about becoming extinct?
If you would like to start using formal assessment on a daily basis, I suggest you start with assessing your students’ MVPA levels. This information will provide you and your student’s information about how class time is spent. You can simply start by assessing one to three students every two minutes (your watch timer can be used as a prompting device). Remember, just take a mental snap shot of a student’s position and determine if the students is at a walking pace or higher (see Figure 6). MVPA data you collect could then provide evidence for any grade you wish to give for participation - hard data - instead of something more subjective in nature. From there you can start to use rubrics for different activities, skill and tactic development and more. I would suggest reviewing texts from our suggested reading list (see Figure 7) for assessment information and ready made scoring guides. Also, remember to begin slowly. Try assessing one class or one student, just start assessing!
Figure 7. Suggested Reading List
Lea Lund, J., & Fortman Kirk, M. (2002). Performance-based assessment for middle and high school physical education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Mitchell, S., Oslin, J., & Griffin, L. (2006). Teaching sport concepts and skills:
A tactical games approach (2nd. Ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars (2006). Complete guide to sport education.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Ainsworth, L., & Viegut, D. (2006). Common formative assessments. Thousand Oaks,
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7–74.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139–144.
Doolittle, S. (2007). Is the extinction of high school physical education inevitable?
Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 78, 7-9.
Greenwood, C.R., & Maheady, L. (1997). Measurable change in student performance:
Forgotten standard in teacher preparation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 20 (3), 265-275.
Locke, L. (1992). Changing secondary school physical education. Quest, 44, 361-372.
Pryor, J., & Akwesi, C. (1998). Assessment in Ghana and England: Putting reform to the test of practice. Compare, 28, 263–275.
Shepard, L. A. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V.
Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th Ed)., pp. 1066–1101).Washington, DC: AERA.
Siedentop, D. (1987). High school physical education: Still an endangered species.
Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 63, 69-77.
Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars (2006). Complete guide to sport education.
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2000). Healthy people 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Gov. Printing Office.
Wegis, H., & van der Mars, H. (2005). Integrating Assessment and Instruction: Easing
the Process with PDA’s. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,
77, 27-34, 52.
Wood, T. (2003). Assessment in Physical Education: The future is now! In S. Silverman & C. Ennis (Eds.), Student learning in physical education: Applying research to enhance instruction (2nd ed., pp. 187-203). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
The American Association for Health Education (AAHE) seeks to recognize those who enrich the depth and scope of health-related activities. AAHE is proud to cosponsor the Health Education Professional of the Year (HEPY) Awards with Tampax Health Education Division, Procter and Gamble.
Awards are given in six categories:
- Public Schools (K-12)
- Clinical/Medical Care/Patient
- Health Education Administrator
Candidates for each of the awards are solicited from individual AAHE members and the six District Associations of the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance (AAHPERD). Recipients are selected by the AAHE Awards Committee. The awards are presented annually at the AAHE Luncheon held during the national convention.
Qualification of Candidates
- Previous recipients of awards may not be nominated to receive the same award; however, a person may be Nominated to receive any of the other category awards; one (1) full year must pass between the two formal nominations.
- Deceased persons are not eligible for nomination for the awards.
- Members of the AAHE Awards Committee and the AAHE Board of Directors and their families are not eligible for nomination while they are serving in said roles. Committee members are not allowed to resign from the Committee in order to be considered for an award.
- Candidates must have five (5) years of experience in the category where they are applying.
- A candidate does not have to be a member of AAHE or AAHPERD.
- Nominees must be practitioners.
- Each candidate must demonstrate specific contributions in the following criteria:
- Leadership in developing and implementing or directing/coordinating effective health education/ promotion programs.
- Volunteer service to local, state, district or national level organizations or at the school or community levels.
- Service to local, state or national professional organizations.
- Evidence of meritorious professional activity in at least three (3) of the following: innovative teaching, publications, presentations, funded research or programs, special projects, or other health related activities.
Guidelines for Nomination of Candidates
- Individual AAHE members may nominate a colleague using the form located on this website.
- State AHPERDs may make nominations through the AAHPERD District Associations in the following categories: School K-12, College/University and Health Education Administration. States wishing to make nominations to their respective Districts may use the form located on this website. The completed form is to be sent to Judy Young, Vice President for Programs, AAHPERD, 1900 Association Drive, Reston, VA 20191-1599, by October 15th. District AAHPERDs will send the District nominees to the AAHE national office by December 15th.
- National award winners will be selected by the AAHE Awards Committee prior to the AAHE/AAHPERD national convention. The awards are presented at the AAHE luncheon. No compensation is provided for the recipients to attend the AAHE/AAHPERD national convention.
- Attach only one (1) double–spaced sheet in evidence of each criteria. This write–up should follow the brief biographical section.
- Application Form with Biographical Information
- Contributions to Field Criteria (One double-spaced sheet for each)
- Letters of Recommendation (3)
- Brief Biographical Sketch
Of the profession in the years to come.
For questions concerning the national level process please contact AAHE, 1900 Association Drive, Reston, VA 20191-1599, 703-476-3437, aahe@aahperd.
Health Education Professional of the Year
LDC: (Leadership Development Conference)
June 18-21, 2008 in Washington D.C.
By Sherry Watkins
President Elect OAHPERD
I attended the LDC through AAHPERD this summer and met a bunch of people just like me who are President-Elects. It was great to connect with so many people who are the leaders of their state. It was neat to see and hear how they are dealing with the various issues of 1) conference, 2) leadership, and 3) advocacy.
Many are excited for their conference (as I am!); however, a few were still struggling to make the necessary arrangements to host such an endeavor. Not to worry, we will be at West Salem H.S. in Salem, OR. Many are dealing with leadership issues in a professional manner (like me), but a few were still "learning the ropes and hoops" to climb and jump through with regards to experience with their state and national organizations (like me). Lastly, many were able to meet with their State Legislators and urge them to take a stand with the PEP Grant and FIT Kids Act. I met with a staff person for Gordon Smith, two staff persons for Ron Wyden, and Peter DeFazio -- in person. It was wonderful meeting with all four men and explaining how much we needed both programs to help our students. It was awesome to hear that each would support the different issues! Go Oregon! Others, like South Carolina, were not as lucky. Their state representatives did not see the NEED for Physical Education every day or the value of spending dollars to help facilitate PE Programs. All we can do is to keep educating these people to hopefully bring change. That's were you can help! Let your Principal (and Vice-Principal) at your school know how valuable Physical Education and Health Education are! Send positive letters to your School Board, Superintendent of Schools, State Legislators, and local newspapers regarding the issues.
Questions about the issues? Don't know exactly what they are? That's OK! That's where I can help! :-)
Have a great year and hope to see you at the Fall Conference!
Quality Physical Education
Physical activity is critical to the development and maintenance of good health. NASPE believes that every student in our nation’s schools, from kindergarten through grade 12, should have the opportunity to participate in quality physical education.
The goal of physical education is to develop physically educated individuals who have the knowledge, skills, and confidence to enjoy a lifetime of healthful physical activity.
Quality physical education consists of four critical elements:
- Opportunity to Learn
- Meaningful Content
- Appropriate Instruction
- Student and Program Assessment
Opportunity to Learn Standards for Elementary School Physical Education (NASPE, 2000)
Opportunity to Learn Standards for Elementary School Physical Education (NASPE, 2004)
Opportunity to Learn Standards for Elementary School Physical Education (NASPE, 2004)
These standards define the elements that need to be in place in order to provide a positive learning environment and quality program. Such elements include a certified physical education teacher, adequate time, and safe and ample facilities and equipment.
Moving into the Future: National Standards for Physical Education, Second Edition (NASPE, 2004)
These content standards clearly identify what students should know and be able to do as a result of a quality physical education program. The second edition reflects the most current research and theory about physical education.
Standard 1: Demonstrates competency in motor skills and movement patterns needed to perform a variety of physical activities.
Standard 2: Demonstrates understanding of movement concepts, principles, strategies, and tactics as they apply to the learning and performance of physical activities.
Standards 3: Participates regularly in physical activity.
Standard 4: Achieves and maintains a health-enhancing level of physical fitness.
Standard 5: Exhibits responsible personal and social behavior that respects self and others in physical activity settings.
Standard 6: Values physical activity for health, enjoyment, challenge, self-expression, and/or social interaction.
Appropriate Practices for Elementary School Physical Education (NASPE, 2000)
Appropriate Practices for Middle School Physical Education (NASPE, 2001)
Appropriate Practices for High School Physical Education (NASPE, 2004)
The national guidelines explain appropriate and inappropriate instructional practices. The guidelines address numerous areas including curriculum design, learning experiences, fitness activities, fitness testing, student assessment, maximizing participation, forming groups, competition, and many others.
Standards-Based Assessment of Student Learning (Lambert/NASPE, 1999)
This book addresses current thinking on assessment, defines assessment, and presents a framework for conducting standards-based assessment. It provides a conceptual context for the other books that comprise NASPE’s physical education assessment series (currently 15 books).
For more information on quality physical education, visit NASPE’s website at www.naspeinfo.org
click here to download the Conference Agenda (PDF format)
Red Lion Hotel: Salem, OR
3301 Market Street NE*Salem, OR 97301
(503) 370-7888* 800-Red-Lion
Directions: From I-5, Take Exit #256 (Market St.) and go west one block. The hotel is located on the north side of Market St.
****100% non-smoking hotel, restaurant, and lounge
****MUST declare attending OAHPERD conference to get special rate.
OCTOBER 10, 2008
Location: West Salem High School Salem, OR
(click the image below to open a high-resolution, printable copy)