##### Revised 3/8/06

##### *2005-2006 No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program*

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: (Check all that apply)
\_[X]{.underline}\_ Elementary \_\_ Middle \_\_ High \_\_ K-12
\_\_Charter

Name of Principal [Ms. Susan French]{.underline}

(Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other) (As it should appear in the
official records)

Official School Name [Emmet Field Elementary]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

SchoolMailingAddress\_[120 Sacred Heart
Lane]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(If address is P.O. Box, also include street address)

\_\_[Louisville]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[KY]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[40206-2763]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Jefferson]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_State
SchoolCodeNumber\*\_\_\_\_[275]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Telephone [( 502) 485-8252]{.underline} Fax [(502) 485-8576]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.jefferson.k12.ky.us]{.underline} E-mail
[sfrench2@jefferson.k12.ky.us]{.underline}

I have reviewed the information in this application, including the
eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my
knowledge all information is accurate.

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Dr. Stephen W. Daeschner, Ph.D.]{.underline}

(Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other)

District Name [Jefferson County]{.underline} Tel. [(502)
485-3252]{.underline}

I have reviewed the information in this application, including the
eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my
knowledge it is accurate.

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson[\_\_Mr. Joseph L.
Hardesty\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

(Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other)

I have reviewed the information in this package, including the
eligibility requirements on page 2, and certify that to the best of my
knowledge it is accurate.

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(School Board President's/Chairperson's Signature)

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

**\[Include this page in the school's application as page 2.\]**

The signatures on the first page of this application certify that each
of the statements below concerning the school\'s eligibility and
compliance with U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights
(OCR) requirements is true and correct.

1.  The school has some configuration that includes grades K-12.
    (Schools with one principal, even K-12 schools, must apply as an
    entire school.)

2.  The school has not been in school improvement status or been
    identified by the state as \"persistently dangerous\" within the
    last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the
    state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2005-2006 school
    year.

3.  If the school includes grades 7 or higher, it has foreign language
    as a part of its core curriculum.

4.  The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from
    at least September 2000 and has not received the 2003, 2004, or 2005
    *No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools Award.*

5.  The nominated school or district is not refusing the OCR access to
    information necessary to investigate a civil rights complaint or to
    conduct a district‑wide compliance review.

6.  The OCR has not issued a violation letter of findings to the school
    district concluding that the nominated school or the district as a
    whole has violated one or more of the civil rights statutes. A
    violation letter of findings will not be considered outstanding if
    the OCR has accepted a corrective action plan from the district to
    remedy the violation.

7.  The U.S. Department of Justice does not have a pending suit alleging
    that the nominated school, or the school district as a whole, has
    violated one or more of the civil rights statutes or the
    Constitution\'s equal protection clause.

8.  There are no findings of violations of the Individuals with
    Disabilities Education Act in a U.S. Department of Education
    monitoring report that apply to the school or school district in
    question; or if there are such findings, the state or district has
    corrected, or agreed to correct, the findings.

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

**All data are the most recent year available.**

**DISTRICT** (Questions 1‑2 not applicable to private schools)

1\. Number of schools in the district: [\_87\_]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[\_22\_]{.underline} Middle schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Junior high schools

[\_19\_]{.underline} High schools

[\_22\_]{.underline} Other

[\_150\_]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District per Pupil Expenditure: \_[\$10,111]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_

Average State per Pupil Expenditure: \_[\$
8,663]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_

**SCHOOL** (To be completed by all schools)

3\. Category that best describes the area where the school is located:

> \[ \] Urban or large central city
>
> \[ x \] Suburban school with characteristics typical of an urban area
>
> \[ \] Suburban
>
> \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area
>
> \[ \] Rural

4\. [2]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

[10]{.underline} If fewer than three years, how long was the previous
principal at this school?

5\. Number of students as of October 1 enrolled at each grade level or
its equivalent in applying school only:

  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------
  **Grade**   **\# of   **\# of                **Grade      **Grade**   **\# of   **\# of     **Grade
              Males**   Females**              Total**                  Males**   Females**   Total**

  **PreK**    9         11                     **20**       **7**                             

  **K**       33        33                     **66**       **8**                             

  **1**       28        34                     **62**       **9**                             

  **2**       34        23                     **57**       **10**                            

  **3**       33        31                     **64**       **11**                            

  **4**       30        35                     **65**       **12**                            

  **5**       27        25                     **52**       **Other**   14        2           16

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   402
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

*\[Throughout the document, round numbers to avoid decimals.\]*

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [58]{.underline} % White (3% other)

the students in the school: [33]{.underline} % Black or African American

[1]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

[7]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander

[1]{.underline} % American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

Use only the five standard categories in reporting the racial/ethnic
composition of the school.

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
[\_\_1]{.underline}%

> \[This rate should be calculated using the grid below. The answer to
> (6) is the mobility rate.\]

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      4
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      1
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Total of all transferred    5
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 382
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .01
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           1
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [0]{.underline}%

[0]{.underline} Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [59 %]{.underline}

Total number students who qualify: [\_226]{.underline}

> If this method does not produce an accurate estimate of the percentage
> of students from low‑income families or the school does not
> participate in the federally‑supported lunch program, specify a more
> accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it
> arrived at this estimate.

10\. Students receiving special education services: [18]{.underline}%

[71]{.underline} Total Number of Students Served

> Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to
> conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education
> Act. Do not add additional categories.

[14]{.underline} Autism [1 \_]{.underline}Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness [\_\_7\_\_]{.underline}Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [\_\_3\_]{.underline} Specific Learning
Disability

[2]{.underline} Emotional Disturbance [\_27\_]{.underline} Speech or
Language Impairment

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment [\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Traumatic Brain Injury

> [\_ 5\_]{.underline} Mental Retardation [1\_\_\_]{.underline} Visual
> Impairment Including Blindness
>
> [\_\_1\_]{.underline}Multiple Disabilities

11. Indicate number of full‑time and part‑time staff members in each of
    the categories below:

    **Number of Staff**

**[Full-time]{.underline}** **[Part-Time]{.underline}**

Administrator(s) [\_\_\_ 2\_\_]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers [\_\_\_17\_\_\_]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists [\_\_\_ 7\_\_\_]{.underline} [\_\_
1\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [\_\_\_\_2\_\_\_]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff [\_\_\_\_21\_\_]{.underline}
> [\_\_\_1\_\_\_\_]{.underline}
>
> Total number [\_\_\_\_49\_\_]{.underline} [\_\_\_2\_]{.underline}

12. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio, that is, the
    number of

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers:
[\_17:1\_\_]{.underline}

13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students as a
percentage. The student dropout rate is defined by the state. The
student drop-off rate is the difference between the number of entering
students and the number of exiting students from the same cohort. (From
the same cohort, subtract the number of exiting students from the number
of entering students; divide that number by the number of entering
students; multiply by 100 to get the percentage drop-off rate.) Briefly
explain in 100 words or fewer any major discrepancy between the dropout
rate and the drop-off rate. Only middle and high schools need to supply
dropout rates and only high schools need to supply drop-off rates.

  ---------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------
                                     2004-2005    2003-2004    2002-2003

  Daily student attendance           96%          95%          95%

  Daily teacher attendance           98%          96%          96%

  Teacher turnover rate              6 %          8%           5%

  Student dropout rate (middle/high) N/A %        NA%          NA%

  Student drop-off rate (high        N/A %        NA%          NA%
  school)                                                      
  ---------------------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Emmet Field Elementary School, a landmark in Louisville\'s Crescent Hill
neighborhood since 1915, is a three-time Kentucky Reward School. The
governor of Kentucky and the Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence
recognized Field Elementary for "Exemplary Progress in Student
Achievement.\" The results of the 2005 Commonwealth Accountability
Testing System show that Field Elementary achieved a gain of 15 points,
larger than any other Jefferson County Public School. Of greater
significance, is the thirty-point reduction of the achievement gap
between African-American students and white students.

Field has one of the most diverse populations of students in the state.
Our 395 students include children representing 21 countries and many of
the 50 states. 65% of its student population is on free/reduced lunch
and 20% of the students qualify for Exceptional Child Education
services.

The Field staff believes that all children can excel in academics. To
make that belief a reality, the staff closely follows the JCPS
performance standards and curriculum guides. Field is proud of its
strong academic program, which challenges each student to strive to
achieve his/her own personal best. Instruction is focused on the higher
levels of Bloom's taxonomy. Consequently, learning is accelerated,
rather than remediated. Field serves students in grade 4 and 5 through
the Advanced Program and is proud of its Advanced Program enrichment.
These students receive differentiated instruction designed to enhance
the educational experience and ensure that their rapid pace of
achievement is continuous. Tuition-based JCPS preschool for three and
four -year olds, full-time Spanish, and up-to-date computers in all
classrooms support the learning program.

The staff works together as a team to develop a school culture of high
expectations for all, appreciation of cultural differences, and genuine
care and concern for the children who make up the Field family. Ongoing
analysis of student work enables the staff to meet the diverse learning
styles of all students and provide immediate interventions as needed. An
Extended School Services program is also available to help students who
are experiencing difficulty, as are small reading and mathematics
intervention groups. Field offers an off-site Saturday school program
located directly in the neighborhood of its most needy students. The
Potter House, a community partner, works closely with the school to
offer an academically rigorous Saturday program that uses sports and
video games as incentives for attending. Parents may earn household
items such as cleaning supplies and toiletry items for regularly sending
their children to the program. As the data shows, our Saturday school,
in combination with other interventions, has been extremely effective in
reducing the achievement gaps between minority and non-minority groups.
Field participates in Project Care, a federally-funded initiative that
focuses on building learning communities by developing positive
relationships with children. By working collaboratively with families,
community and business partners, Field better ensures the success of all
students. Parent and community members volunteer weekly to tutor and
mentor Field\'s students through the Every1Reads program.

Field offers an extensive list of extracurricular and co-curricular
programs including dance and step teams, golf, basketball, baseball,
modern dance, choir, drama club, science club, art club, Spanish club,
competitive academic teams, and scouting. These programs provide
additional opportunities for children to discover their talents while
engaging them in meaningful after-school activities. A YMCA Childcare
Enrichment Program, offering before and after-school childcare, is also
available to help meet the needs of working parents.

Field strives to maintain a safe learning community for its students.
Mutual respect and courtesy among staff and students is expected and
demonstrated. All families receive a copy of the JCPS Code of Acceptable
Behavior and Discipline and the Student Bill of Rights upon enrollment.
Student instruction takes place in an environment of high expectations
for conduct that helps students become responsible and where students
feel safe reporting information to school staff.

Field Elementary School is a learning community where children know they
are loved and that their accomplishments will be celebrated. The school
staff believes that all children can learn at high levels and is
relentless in its efforts to ensure their success

**PART IV -- INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS**

> **1. Assessment Results:**
>
> The Commonwealth of Kentucky uses the Commonwealth Accountability
> Testing System (CATS) as its state-mandated assessment.  CATS is
> administered in April of each school year.  Under CATS, elementary
> school students in 4th grade are tested in reading, science and
> writing. Students in 5th grade are tested in mathematics, social
> studies, arts and humanities and practical living/vocational
> studies. Each content-area test includes both multiple-choice and
> open-response questions. This test makes up the large portion of our
> accountability. This test also allows students to score above
> proficient into the distinguished level. There are two categories
> below proficient, novice being the bottom level and apprentice being
> the category between novice and proficient.
>
> The most valuable component of the Commonwealth Accountability Testing
> System (CATS) is the Kentucky Core Content Test (KCCT). The Kentucky
> Core Content Test assesses student mastery of the Kentucky Core
> Content for Assessment, as well as higher order thinking and
> communication skills. The objective of CATS is to have the same goal
> for all schools, proficiency by 2014. CATS is designed to measure
> progress toward the goal. Proficiency is defined as a score of 100 on
> a 140-point scale. Results of testing can be found at
> <http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Default.htm>.
>
> The KCCT for reading in 2004-2005 demonstrates that our school is
> currently scoring 99, with the goal of 100 by the year 2014. In
> reading, 80% of all students scored proficient or distinguished.
>
> The KCCT shows that we have 77% of our free and reduced lunch
> population scoring proficient or better with a score of 89. When
> comparing the 2003-2004 test scores to the 2004-2005 scores, the
> achievement gap between African American and white students decreased
> by six points. The group of students with disabilities at Field
> Elementary is too small to calculate a score (below 10 students).
> However, we currently have less than 4% of ALL students scoring at the
> novice level.
>
> In mathematics our school is currently scoring 84 with the goal of 100
> by the year 2014. We have 53% of all students scoring proficient or
> above while 42% of students receiving free or reduced lunch are
> scoring proficient or above. The free and reduced lunch population is
> scoring at or above proficiency with a score of 68. When comparing the
> 2003-2004 NCLB scores to the 2004-2005 scores, the percentage of
> African American students scoring in the proficient range more than
> doubled ( from 11% proficient to 26% proficient). Our student with
> disabilities populations was too small to calculate data.
>
> **2. Using Assessment Results:**
>
> Field's assessment results are the driving force for its instructional
> decisions and expectations for student performance. Field routinely
> analyzes assessment data by content area and through disaggregation of
> data looking for trends in the data and specific achievement gap
> information between and among subgroups of students. The staff reviews
> the Kentucky Performance Report in both horizontal and vertical teams.
> The teams analyze the information to determine the most appropriate
> teaching materials and instructional practices. The staff identifies
> priority needs based on student assessment data and creates learning
> goals for students based upon that specific data. Teachers discuss and
> share their areas of teaching strength with one another, determine
> needed professional development based on test data and identify
> classroom needs. Instructional practices are carefully monitored and
> modified to ensure that student goals are being met. Both formal and
> informal assessments are used on a continuous basis. Open-response
> questions and practice scrimmage tests occur throughout the year.
> Student work is routinely analyzed and the knowledge gained from the
> analysis enables the teachers to modify instruction, thus beginning
> the process anew. Additionally, the data is continuously disaggregated
> to ensure that the diverse learning needs of all of our students are
> being met and achievement gaps are closing.
>
> **3. Communicating Assessment Results:.**
>
> Field reports student grades and progress to parents each six weeks in
> the form of a district report card. In addition, in-depth explanation
> and goal setting occur twice a year at two designated parent-teacher
> conference days. Individual student assessment information is shared
> with students and parents on a weekly basis through weekly reporting
> notes. Field routinely shares school wide assessment information with
> students, parents and families, and our community-at-large. School
> wide data is reviewed in depth at monthly PTA meetings,
> School-Based-Decision-Making Council meetings, and Title I parent
> meetings. Our scores are posted in our local newspaper and shared at
> community- council neighborhood meetings.
>
> **4. Sharing Success:**
>
> Field Elementary has opened its doors to staff from other schools in
> and out of the district in addition to many parent/community groups.
> It has hosted visitors to observe our classrooms and talk with staff
> through "Focus Louisville," a partnership between JCPS and the
> Louisville business community, and school collaboration opportunities.
> In addition, Susan French, the principal, mentors new principals in
> the district, conducts professional development workshops for new
> principals, serves as a coach to another elementary school, and serves
> as the district representative on the state commissioner's principal
> advisory council. The instructional leadership team continues to work
> with teachers across the district. Examples of this include our
> leaders in literacy, math and writing. Field will continue its
> endeavors to share successful strategies with other schools and
> capitalize on the opportunities to continue improvement efforts for
> all children.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

> **1. Curriculum:**
>
> Field Elementary implements a rigorous curriculum that is taught to
> all students. The adopted curriculum is aligned with the Kentucky Core
> Content for Assessment and national standards. In order to ensure
> mastery by all students, performance is monitored closely and
> instructional techniques are modified to address the identified needs.
> The curriculum is articulated from Preschool through Grade Five in
> order to ensure consistency across the grade levels. Continuous
> assessments ensure that the curriculum is aligned and that required
> content is mastered. Field's rigorous curriculum ensures the
> performance of all students at high levels in reading, writing,
> mathematics, science, social studies, arts and humanities and
> practical living.
>
> The Reading program at Field Elementary enables students to
> effectively comprehend the genres of reading (literary, informational,
> persuasive, and practical/workplace), to read for a variety of
> purposes at a level of difficulty and quantity appropriate for the
> grade level.
>
> Students at Field Elementary learn to use the writing process and
> criteria for effective writing to develop story structures and
> language patterns through drawing, symbols, letters and words.
> Students compile a collection of writings for many different purposes
> and audiences in a variety of forms. All students, K-5, are required
> to develop a writing folder over the course of the year. These folders
> contain a selection of "best" writing pieces. These pieces are
> analyzed according to the Kentucky Holistic Scoring Guide and the
> primary writing continuum. The purpose of this analysis is to
> benchmark student progress and identify instructional next steps.
>
> In math, students are given multiple opportunities to develop grade
> appropriate mathematical concepts and skills. Understanding that
> children have a variety of learning styles, math concepts are taught
> using instructional strategies that address these differences.
> Students have many opportunities to use manipulatives and engage in
> hands-on activities during math instruction. Furthermore, our goal is
> to not only make sure that students learn important math concepts, but
> also that they understand how those concepts apply and relate to real
> world situations.
>
> Students at Field are engaged in Arts and Humanities instruction that
> focuses on creating, performing, and responding to the art forms of
> visual art, dance, drama and music. Students learn to understand the
> purposes of the arts in different cultures. They then use these
> elements as a basis to respond in writing to works of art. Students
> are assessed through performance based assessments and a variety of
> written assessments including the Kentucky Core Content Test.
>
> **2. Reading:**
>
> Field utilizes a multi-faceted approach to teaching reading including
> a wide-variety of researched-based practices. Field implements the
> district literacy system by using the JCPS "5-Block Reading" method
> that intentionally and explicitly develops proficient readers through
> word work, guided reading, self-selected reading, writing, and
> community reading and conversation. Additionally, students are placed
> in small focus groups according to their needs using Direct
> Instruction for struggling readers and literacy circles for more
> advanced readers. Students are continuously monitored as they track
> toward proficiency. Assessments drive instructional practices as teams
> of teachers analyze test data, group children according to needs, and
> modify teaching methods.
>
> **3. Math:**
>
> Mathematics at Field Elementary includes an introduction to concepts
> and skills in number, computation, geometry, measurement, algebra,
> probability and statistics. A hands-on approach is used with students
> to develop strategies to solve problems. Students receive
> differentiated math instruction combining Math Investigations in
> correlation with other developmentally appropriate math materials that
> address the needs of a diverse student population. Small, flexible
> student focus groups allow for individualized attention and
> cooperative learning experiences. Differentiated math instruction
> ensures that students receive instruction in strategies that support
> their needs and learning styles. This approach is necessary for all
> students to be successful. There are no exceptions and no excuses are
> accepted.
>
> **4. Instructional Methods:**
>
> Skills and concepts are arranged from the simplest to the most complex
> within content areas. The faculty and staff at Field engage students
> in active learning by using effective, varied and research --based
> instructional practices. The focus is on what is learned, rather than
> what was taught. Field implements selected Robert Marzano strategies
> along with techniques developed by Ruby Payne, author of
> [Understanding Poverty,]{.underline} to insure that the needs of our
> most struggling learners are met. Strategies for improving vocabulary,
> comprehension, and student writing are modeled and taught. Students
> understand how to use rubrics to assess their work and to become
> active participants in the assessment process.
>
> School-based teams implement intervention focus groups in order to
> differentiate instruction. Instructional approaches are designed to
> address achievement gaps among diverse student groups and focus on the
> different learning styles of children. This is done in a number of
> ways including flexible and cooperative learning groups, use of
> centers, independents studies and projects, and the use of technology.
>
> Teachers have been trained in and utilize strategies based upon Robert
> Marana's research. The strategies include compare/contrast,
> metaphors/analogies, use of graphic organizers, and summarizing.
> Teachers reinforce effort, provide specific feedback, and recognize
> and celebrate successes.
>
> Teachers meet in both vertical and horizontal teams to ensure that
> curricular goals are articulated between and among grades. Teachers
> plan together to provide students with intentional, rigorous classroom
> instruction.
>
> **5. Professional Development:**
>
> Field's professional development plan is long-term, focused,
> researched-based, job-embedded and data-driven. Job-embedded PD takes
> the form of lessons modeled by the principal, instructional coaches
> and expert teachers within the grade groups. Peer observations are
> encouraged and the frequency depends upon the needs of the grade
> group. Modifications to instruction are determined through team
> analysis of student work and lesson design. One of the most effective
> job-embedded PD opportunities at Field occurs as the principal gives
> written and verbal instructional feedback to teachers based upon
> regular instructional walk-through observation data. These
> observations form the basis for revisions, modification or
> continuation to the annual teacher professional growth plan.
>
> Our staff is engaged in a variety of professional development
> activities including book studies of Ruby Payne's and Robert
> Marzano\'s work, attending professional conferences on learning
> styles, applying Larry Bell's strategies to close achievement gaps,
> team teaching and/or coaching, team analysis of work products,
> neighborhood walks in the specific neighborhoods from which the
> children come, in-depth study of resources and strategies to utilize
> these resources for the most needy families, monthly analysis of
> achievement data to determine student needs, modify practice, and
> ensure success for all children. Teachers have effectively implemented
> these strategies as evidenced by the thirty-point reduction in the
> achievement gap in both reading and math for minority and non-minority
> students.
>
> The guiding force behind all professional development opportunities is
> to improve instruction resulting in higher student achievement. The
> entire staff embraces any opportunity to improve the quality of the
> instructional program.
>
> **PART VII -- ASSESSMENT RESULTS**
>
> According to the 2005 Kentucky Core Content Test (KCCT), Field is
> currently scoring 89. The goal for schools is to reach a score of 100
> by the year 2014. On the 2005 KCCT assessment for reading, 80% of
> Field's students scored proficient or above. Test data indicates 77%
> of students receiving free/reduced lunch scored proficient or above.
> [This data provides evidence that no significant achievement gap
> between economic groups exists in the most current reading assessment
> data.]{.underline} Field successfully reduced the economic achievement
> gap from 21 points in 2004 to 3 points in 2005.
>
> Additional data analysis of 2004 and 2005 test scores indicates Field
> is closing the achievement gap between African-American students and
> white students. In 2004, the gap was 43 points and in 2005 it was
> reduced to 36 points. The "students with disabilities" group is too
> small to calculate a score. The reading achievement score for 2005
> (99.5) reflected an increase of 17 points (the largest gain in the
> Jefferson County Public School System).
>
> In the area of mathematics, the 2005 KCCT data indicates that Field is
> currently scoring 84 with the goal being 100 by 2014. Seventy-two
> (72%) of all students scored proficient or above. From 2004 to 2005,
> Field made a 16-point gain in mathematics. There was a reduction in
> the economic achievement gap from 88 points in 2004 to 44 points in
> 2005. In addition, Field is closing the achievement gap between
> African American students and white students. In 2004, the gap was 88
> points and in 2005 it was cut in half to 44 points! The data is
> evidence that the vision of teaching all students at high levels is a
> reality.
>
> **Kentucky Core Content Tests (KCCT) 5th Grade**

  ----------------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Math**                            **2004-2005**   **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**

  **Field Math Index**                84              68              62              64

  **District Math Index**             73              75              66              64

  **State Math Index**                74              77              68              66

                                                                                      

  **Field Data** Testing Month        April           April           April           April

  \% at of above the state standard   53              43              33              35
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       19              14              6               14

  Number of students tested           36              51              52              74

  Number of students alternatively    2               3               1               4
  assessed                                                                            

  Percent of students alternatively   4               6               2               8
  assessed                                                                            

                                                                                      

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                 

  1\. Free/reduced lunch              68              50              46              48

  Number of students tested           24              36              32              45

  \% at of above the state standard   42              23              16              20
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       4               6               0               9

                                                                                      

  2\. African-American                59              41              38              38

  Number of students tested           19              27              22              34

  \% at of above the state standard   36              11              9               12
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       5               4               0               3

                                                                                      

  3\. White Students                  112             96              72              84

  Number of students tested           15              23              24              35

  \% at of above the state standard   80              79              42              51
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       40              22              24              35
  ----------------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

> **\*** The Kentucky state standard is Proficiency (P). Students
> exceeding the standard are considered Distinguished (D).
>
> **Kentucky Core Content Tests (KCCT) 4th Grade**

  ----------------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Reading**                         **2004-2005**   **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**

  **Field Reading Index**             99              94              72              79

  **District Reading Index**          83              84              78              77

  **State Reading Index**             87              87              84              81

                                                                                      

  **Field Data** Testing Month        April           April           April           April

  Number of students tested           54              37              49              52

  \% at of above the state standard   80              70              49              54
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       24              14              8               12

  Number of students alternatively    2               2               3               3
  assessed                                                                            

  Percent of students alternatively   4               4               6               6
  assessed                                                                            

                                                                                      

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                 

  1\. Free/reduced lunch              89              89              65              63

  Number of students tested           33              27              37              27

  \% at of above the state standard   77              59              37              35
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       15              15              5               8

                                                                                      

  2\. African-American                84              84              57              56

  Number of students tested           21              18              27              18

  \% at of above the state standard   58              50              30              17
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       10              6               4               0

                                                                                      

  3\. White Students                  106             105             88              87

  Number of students tested           29              15              19              27

  \% at of above the state standard   94              93              69              68
  (P/D)                                                                               

  %above the state standard (D)       28              20              11              12
  ----------------------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**\*** The Kentucky state standard is Proficiency (P). Students
exceeding the standard are considered Distinguished (D).