##### *2006-2007 - No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program*

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: (Check all that apply) \[ \] Elementary
\[ \] Middle \[**x**\] High \[ \] K-12 \[ \] Charter

Name of Principal [Mr. Gary Davis]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Denver City High School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [601 Mustang Drive]{.underline}

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

[Denver City, TX 79323-2753]{.underline}

County [Yoakum]{.underline} State School Code Number\*
[251-901]{.underline}

Telephone [(806) 592-5950]{.underline} Fax [(806) 592-5959]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.dcisd.org]{.underline} E-mail
[gary.davis@dcisd.org]{.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 [02-01-07]{.underline}

[(Principal's Signature)]{.underline}

[Name of Superintendent\*]{.underline} [Mr. Dagobert Azam]{.underline}

[(Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other)]{.underline}

District Name: [Denver City Independent School District]{.underline}
Telephone [(806) 592-5900]{.underline}

Date [02-01-07]{.underline}

[(Superintendent's Signature)]{.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.

[Name of School Board President]{.underline} [Mrs. Davela
Parker]{.underline}

[(Specify: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other)]{.underline}

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 [02-01-07]{.underline}

[(School Board President's/Chairperson's Signature)]{.underline}

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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 on the same campus with one principal, even K-12 schools,
    must apply as an entire school.)

2.  The school has made adequate yearly progress each year for the past
    two years and has not 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 2006-2007 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 2001 and has not received the *No Child Left
    Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools Award* in the past five years.

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**

**DISTRICT**

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

Middle schools

[1]{.underline} Junior high schools

[1]{.underline} High schools

Other

[3]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,408]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$9,269]{.underline}

**SCHOOL**

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

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

4\. [3]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

If fewer than three years, how long was the previous principal at this
school?

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

  **PreK**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**                                                     **8**                             

  **1**                                                     **9**       45        56          101

  **2**                                                     **10**      52        51          103

  **3**                                                     **11**      43        47          90

  **4**                                                     **12**      44        46          90

  **5**                                                     **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   384
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [35%]{.underline} White

the students in the school: [02%]{.underline} Black or African American

[63%]{.underline} Hispanic or Latino

Asian/Pacific Islander

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 [6 %]{.underline}

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      16
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

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

  **(3)**                   Total of all transferred    20
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 384
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .06
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

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

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [5%]{.underline}

[6]{.underline} Total Number LEP

Number of languages represented: [5]{.underline}

Specify languages: English, Spanish, German, Japanese, Chinese

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [38%]{.underline}

Total number students who qualify: [151]{.underline}

The entire district has 56% of its students that qualify for the free
and reduced lunch program. The elementary and junior high campuses are
both "closed campuses" where each student is required to remain on
campus for the lunch period. The high school, though, allows students to
leave the campus during lunch. Some of our high school students do not
complete the free and reduced meal application because they choose not
to eat in our facilities. Some students can be accounted for because
they have qualifying siblings on other campuses. However, we are taking
into account the fact that we have approximately 7-10 students without
younger siblings, who have not completed the application process.
Therefore, we estimate our percentage is actually a bit higher than the
reported 38%. This would put us at or slightly above 40% and would put
the high school campus more closely aligned with the percentages of the
other two campuses in our district.

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

[36]{.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.

\_\_\_\_Autism [1]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness [2]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [30]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

[1]{.underline} Emotional Disturbance [3]{.underline} Speech or Language
Impairment

[2]{.underline} Hearing Impairment \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

> [3]{.underline} Mental Retardation [1]{.underline} Visual Impairment
> Including Blindness
>
> \_\_\_\_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) [03]{.underline}

Classroom teachers [35]{.underline} [01]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists [04]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [04]{.underline}

> Support staff [06]{.underline}
>
> Total number **[52]{.underline}** **[01]{.underline}**

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers, e.g.,
22:1 [11:1]{.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. Also
explain a high teacher turnover rate.

  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                            2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Daily student attendance  97%         96%         97%         96%         96%

  Daily teacher attendance  97%         97%         96%         96%         97%

  Teacher turnover rate     9%          11%         29%         6%          5%

  Student dropout rate      3%          4%          0%          2%          2%

  Student drop-off rate     8%          10%         5%          1%          -2%
  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

> The 29% teacher turn-over rate can be attributed to a retirement
> package that was offered. Many took advantage of this, which meant
> hiring 15 teachers during that summer. Our drop-out rate remains low
> because of our alternative campus which offers
> credit-recovery/graduation to at-risk students. Our drop-off rate
> tends to be a little higher because of the migrant farm families and
> oil-field families who leave us to follow jobs and/or to find
> additional work. Census numbers reflect a definite population shift
> away from our area because of declining oil production, company
> transfers and irrigation problems that negatively affect farming.

13\. Show what the students who graduated in Spring 2006 are doing as of
September 2007.

+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Graduating class size                                   | > [78]{.   |
|                                                         | underline} |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Enrolled in a 4-year college or university              | > [52]{.u  |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Enrolled in a community college                         | > [20]{.u  |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Enrolled in vocational training                         | > [02]{.u  |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Found employment                                        | > [24]{.u  |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Military service                                        | > \%       |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Other (travel, staying home, etc.)                      | > [02]{.u  |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Unknown                                                 | > \%       |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| **Total**                                               | **100%**   |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
|                                                         |            |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+

[Part III --
Summary\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Denver City High School in Denver City, Texas, is a small, rural high
school located 14 miles from the Texas- New Mexico border in Yoakum
County. Nestled among pump jacks and agricultural fields approximately
eighty miles southwest of Lubbock and eighty-five miles northwest of
Midland-Odessa, the district is one of two in the county. A district
with 154 square miles, a total of 385 students walk through Denver City
High School's doors each day into a learning environment that houses
grades nine through twelve.

Founded in 1940, Denver City Independent School District consists of
three campuses, including Denver City High School, William G. Gravitt
Junior High, and Kelley-Dodson Elementary School. Denver City High
School students and parents richly benefit through collaborative efforts
shared with the Excalibur Alternative Education Program and Yoakum
County Family Literacy Program, which holds the distinguished honor of
receiving the First Lady's Family Literacy Initiative for Texas in 2003.

Denver City schools remain the hub of the community with many of the
activities centered on student involvement from academics to athletics.
Classified as a Chapter 41 school, the schools once had ample funds for
students; however, due to the wealth equalization law known as "Robin
Hood," they now find themselves operating with much less. Oilfield
workforce reduction resulted in a major economic downturn as well as a
decline in city and school populations. In addition, the only other
major economic resource, agriculture, suffered disaster as well. The
U.S. Census reports an estimated local decrease in population of 22.4%
between 1990 and 2005 with a proportionate school enrollment decline.

In difficult times, though, the staff has risen to the challenge,
realizing that despite economic conditions, their responsibility is to
adequately educate tomorrow's future today. Denver City High School is
blessed with a solid arsenal of "highly qualified" educators with an
average of twelve years experience. The district offered a retirement
incentive program in 2003 and experienced a turnover rate of 29%. Other
than that year, a relatively small turnover rate contributes to the
academic success of students. The faculty constantly models high
standards of instructional practices while mentoring the few beginning
educators in an effort to chart the mission, "To improve the performance
of each student." The campus takes its vision, "Build the future...one
student at a time," to heart as educators do everything within their
power to create a student-focused school climate. Providing
individualized needs, the campus offers many services required to ensure
no child is left behind. Individualized services include counseling,
special education, ESL inclusion for students with language-barrier
difficulties, and Excalibur Alternative Education Program for At-Risk
students. In addition, the school provides remedial reading tutorials,
Core-curriculum small-group instruction, advanced-placement and
pre-advanced placement classes, dual-credit classes, distance learning
education, and three computer labs with research-based learning
programs. The high school has also instituted courses in teen
leadership, which is part of the Flippin Organization's Capturing Kids'
Hearts curriculum.

**[Part IV -- Indicators of Academic
Success\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}**

**1. Meaning of School Assessment Results**

Disaggregating test data is a driving force behind all student-centered
decisions for Denver City High School students. Teachers and staff
derive data from multiple sources, including the Texas Assessment of
Academic Skills (TAKS), benchmark testing, individualized testing,
progress reports, and observation, which they use to make individualized
decisions for students as well as all curricular decisions.

We have been pleased with the continual improvement of TAKS scores over
the past five years, and especially over the past three years, gaining
the campus a rating of Recognized from the Texas Education Agency. This
was an improvement over the Acceptable ratings from previous years.

Because TAKS includes reading, writing, mathematics, social studies, and
science, students who fail any of those core-subject areas are placed in
additional reading, writing, and/or mathematics classes. Our goal has
been to help the students reach mastery on the state-mandated
assessments. This provides failing students with an additional 100
minutes each week in their weak core-subject areas. Students are grouped
based upon their specific deficient objectives. Special education
students receive instruction in mainstream classes, resource classes,
tutoring sessions, additional classes, and the ARD committee determines
the appropriate assessment level based upon the instructional level and
the modifications used in the IEP.

Campus personnel understand the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills
(TAKS) is definitely a point of pride considering how the students and
staff have risen to the challenge of increased standards and state
accountability. Reading scores in the 9^th^ grade improved 5.6% locally
over a five-year period and were 8% above the state average. 10^th^
grade reading scores increased 20% locally in the same time period and
were 10% above the state average. 11^th^ grade reading scores saw the
most improvement at a 30% local increase and were 12% above the state
average. Math scores in the 9^th^ grade experienced improvement as well
with a 13.2% local increase since 2004-2005, while scoring 6% above the
state averages. 10^th^ grade math remained equal to the state averages,
while 11^th^ graders made a 31% local increase in the category of "met
standard" and climbed to 15% above the state average. The percentage of
students who were "commended" increased in every subject and grade level
over the past five years.

The staff, both professional and paraprofessional, takes great pride in
the tireless efforts of students to exceed expectations on the
assessment instruments. The school population, comprised of 63.4%
Hispanic, 1.7% African American, .3% Asian/Pacific Islander, .3% Native
American and 34.3% Anglo, proved that the desire to excel is a
contributing factor in student success. In addition, the school has a
Economically Disadvantage rate of 42.1% and a mobility rate of 13.8%.
Five languages are spoken in the school, including English, Spanish,
German, Japanese and Chinese.

Staff uses various methods of sharing results with all stakeholders,
including individual conferences, group presentations using charts and
graphs, newspaper announcements, reports included with progress reports,
and public service announcements on the school's television station,
Channel 16. Denver City High School takes great pride in acknowledging
the students, parents, educators, support staff, and the entire
community for the time-intensive and dedicated work that has brought
about the increase in all students' scores on state assessment
instruments

**2. Using Assessment to Improve Student and School Performance**

The use of assessment data determines all curricular and staff
development decisions as well as the cornerstone in identifying
individual student needs. Data is derived from various instruments to
identify student needs. Determination of instructional direction,
remediation areas, staff development, and budgeting are all directly
correlated to the various assessment instrument results.

Staff believes that reading skills are a critical teaching area for all
students and have made a direct effort to identify needs by using such
assessment instruments as the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills
(TAKS), the prior Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS), released
TAKS assessments, and campus-developed benchmark tests.

Each year, staff spends time disaggregating assessment results by
breaking the results down by individual subject area, test objectives,
student, and even individual questions. Because the Texas Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills assessment is directly correlated to the Texas
Essential Knowledge and Skills, staff can ensure that the mandated
curriculum is taught to mastery. Throughout the year, staff has ample
opportunities to engage with colleagues and administrators through
core-curricular common planning periods to determine a course of action
for all students. At the beginning of the school year, teachers and
administrators develop an instructional curricular approach based upon
prior assessment results. The process continues throughout the school
year as teachers and administrators meet periodically to assess students
using benchmark exams to ensure adequate progress and to modify both
individual and classroom instruction as needed. All core-subject area
teachers are provided with a common planning period, at which time they
are encouraged to meet, share ideas and assess student progress.

**3. Communication of Student Performance**

Establishing a good home-school connection is the focus of the "Open
House" evening hosted within the first three weeks of the year. Teachers
utilize the evening to positively interact with parents and to introduce
classroom expectations and the various assessments students will be
taking during the year. The availability of telephones in each classroom
allows teachers to continually communicate with parents throughout the
year regarding their student's strengths as well as any concerns.

Parents, students, and stakeholders receive written reports regarding
assessment results through various means. The state's campus report card
and individual student results are mailed to all parents. Stakeholders
may view campus report cards via the DCISD website, Denver City Press
(local newspaper), school cable Channel 16, and through Board of
Education reports. District and Campus Site-Based Decision Making
Committee meetings afford stakeholders the opportunity to review
assessment data.

**4. Sharing Successes**

Denver City High School administrators, teachers, parents, and students
take advantage of every opportunity to share successes. Networking with
administrators and teachers across the state allows personnel the
opportunity to share the successes of the school. Regional and state
conferences offer personnel an opportunity to establish a network of
professionals across the state with whom they are able to share
strategies and techniques that have brought positive results in
assessments and curricular issues. The network is kept active through
the use of an e-mail delivery system, allowing professionals to connect
to other professionals seeking assistance in increasing their own
student success rates.

Denver City High School staff welcomes visitors to view its "learning in
progress" through on-site visits from various school districts. Visitors
are encouraged to walk-through classrooms, to interact with teachers and
paraprofessionals, to talk with students about their learning, and to
view the curriculum in progress. Professionals offer visitors successful
strategies to implement in their classrooms. Professionals are also
encouraged to present at regional and state conferences as a means to
promote the school and to continue to improve their own curriculum.

Group discussions, site-based committees, and faculty meetings give
staff the opportunity to share their findings and to make decisions
concerning needed changes to improve student performance. Teachers and
administrators take part in both scheduled and unscheduled opportunities
to collaborate, observe lessons, discuss curriculum, and share
innovative ideas. The programs at Denver City High School will continue
to focus on parent/community involvement and networking to share
successes. E-mail, local newspaper, regional newspapers, Cable Channel
16, and the district web page will continue as modes of outreach to
promote success.

**[Part V - Curriculum and
Instruction\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}**

**1. The School's Curriculum**

At the core of Denver City High School's curriculum is the Texas
Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), the curriculum framework that is
provided by the Texas Education Agency. All skills outlined in the TEKS
are addressed in each curriculum area, and those skills are taught to
mastery.

The foundation curriculum and core of each curriculum area for all grade
levels and for all disciplines is based upon the TEKS. Students receive
instruction in all curricular areas including reading, language arts,
math, science, social studies, health and physical education. In
addition, students are offered courses in technology, journalism, choir,
band, theatre, art, agriculture, horticulture, automotive technology,
industrial technology, and foreign language. The foreign language
program encompasses three different levels of instruction from basic
Spanish through Pre-Advanced Placement Spanish. Along those lines, the
Fine Arts program uses the TEKS objectives to provide quality,
award-winning education to students in the fields of band, instrumental
ensemble, voice, choral production, theatre production, and four levels
of Art ranging from drawing to painting to pottery and sculpture. The
TEKS offers a comprehensive curriculum that ensures students have the
necessary knowledge to be successful at subsequent grade levels and on
the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).

A dual-language ESL program addresses the needs of students whose
dominant language is one other than English. Regardless of whether
students require bilingual services or special education services or
mainstream education, all students receive a TEKS-based curriculum.
Students also have the opportunity to connect to their global community
through an Internet connection in classrooms and in computer labs.

Additionally, educators use a multidisciplinary approach to learning
that allows students to make connections across all curricular areas.
The hands-on approaches allow students opportunities for discovery and
subsequent application of knowledge through units of study. Teachers
also understand the importance of quality literature as the springboard
for learning.

Special efforts were made to begin the process of curriculum alignment,
with educators actively taking part in the process. Core area teachers
used a collaborative method to align the curriculum horizontally, and
then they aligned the curriculum vertically by using a "teaming"
approach. The schedule allows each department to have a common planning
time where they can meet together as teams of teachers in a directed
manner of identifying and filling any gaps in the curriculum. This
allows teachers to be better prepared with an understanding of prior
student knowledge and knowledge needed to be successful at the next
level. Educators understand that curriculum is ever-evolving and
ever-changing, and they focus upon delivering a curriculum that meets
individual student needs rather than forcing students to fit a
curriculum.

**2b. The School's Reading Curriculum**

Students are required to successfully complete four years of English.
They must earn a passing grade of 70 each semester in order to gain full
credit. Because English uses skills that require mastery before moving
on to the next concept, if a student's yearly average falls below a 70,
he or she must repeat the entire course. The TEKS are the standards that
drive the curriculum. Students must also read from additional literature
books to increase their performance level. There is an emphasis on
reading and writing skills with depth and complexity and research skills
for real world applications. Student assessment results are required,
and the results are reviewed with all students. Curriculum and teaching
methods are collaboratively adjusted to improve instruction and
learning. Students read and study American and British drama, fiction
and non-fiction. Teachers and students discuss their work to analyze
reading, improve vocabulary and reading comprehension. Some other
examples of the English curriculum are: main idea, foreshadowing, mood,
identifying text, improving cause, identifying the meaning of figurative
language, text proving effect, creating tension in the plot, using daily
oral language each day for sentence order, English grammar and
grammatical structure, effective sentence construction, and the use of
punctuation and mechanics. In addition, the English department teaches
summary, main idea, syntax, word choice, and proofreading. Students who
are below grade level in reading or who have difficulties that prevent
successful performance are given modified instruction, extra tutoring,
and access to programs such as "My Reading Coach" and "Reading for Blind
and Dyslexic (RFBD)". These students are often placed in an additional
reading class, and reading improvement is also available through special
education services through the ARD committee.

**3. Another Curriculum Area**

The Denver City High School staff also understands the importance of
mathematic skills for the overall academic success of students. The
staff has made a connection between the student's ability to read and
comprehend and the ability to perform mathematical computation. Thus,
they have investigated multiple approaches to teach math.

Again, the math curriculum is based upon the Texas Essential Knowledge
and Skills foundation. Because students must master the TEKS, teachers
spend a great amount of time studying various curricular approaches that
would fit the specific needs of the individual students. Course
offerings include Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Pre-AP Algebra II,
Pre-AP Geometry, and Pre-Calculus. In addition, students who struggle in
mathematics are placed in a Math Models class, which focuses on basic
math skills. Students who are in jeopardy of failing any math class or
any state-mandated standardized math test are placed in a morning math
tutorial.

Teachers within the math department constantly use benchmark testing to
monitor the progress of every student. Math classes also utilize
opportunities to become involved in project-based learning and
instruction. Curriculum instruction integrates multiple disciplines and
allows for in-depth learning of topics. Students focus upon presented
material as well as exposure to higher level, abstract learning.

**4. Varying Instructional Methodologies**

Students at Denver City High School are exposed to a wide variety of
instructional methods. Instruction is delivered to students in the form
of modified instruction, differentiated instruction, cooperative
learning, hands-on learning activities, lab activities, research,
technology for projects using the computer lab, student projects and
presentations, cross curriculum integration activities, team-teaching,
and other brain-based researched methods. The staff has also spent some
time with curriculum mapping basics, vertical and horizontal alignment
of the curriculum, deconstruction of assessment items, and the use of
data analysis to adjust timelines and instructional methods.

As a result of a site-based committee, decision, the staff participates
in a Zero-hour program that is conducted each morning. Struggling and/or
failing students are required to attend the 25 minute tutorial four days
per week. They are placed in core-curricular classrooms are instructed
by a teacher from that discipline as well as with a teacher outside the
discipline. This has encouraged all teachers to have a stake in
increasing student success. A reward system is in place for perfect
attendance, positive behavior, good grades, as well as a systematic
approach for tutoring, and individualized instruction in special
education. We also offer college dual credit through the Interactive TV
lab, as well as supporting a gifted and talented program, in the form of
AP and Pre-AP classes in the four core areas.

**5. Professional Development Program**

Professional development is linked to the improvement of instruction and
maintaining a safe and positive learning environment. Teachers are
provided with four professional development days each year, and they are
also required to attend 3 additional days within their subject area.

Teachers attend training updates in gifted and talented, ESL, special
education, technology, as well as any other required professional staff
development. In addition, teachers attend AP workshops, and teachers
have attended state conventions such as the Science Teachers Association
of Texas, and the Conference for the Advancement of Mathematics
Teaching.

Other staff development has included learning styles, cooperative
learning, Texas Behavior Support Initiative, State Review panel for
Mathematics, Texas Educational Theatre Association, South Plains Tech
Prep Initiative, Crisis Prevention Intervention, Developmental Youth
Conference, Youth in Crisis, School Safety, Drug Free Schools, Bullying,
TEKS Academies, Dyslexia, ADD, and ADHD. Additional staff development
and ongoing team meetings are held to bring all the staff together to
focus on common goals related to our mission of improving student
achievement. Finally, we use the Professional Development Appraisal
System to ensure implementation of curriculum strategies, assessments,
and to promote professional growth in targeted areas.

From all staff development, Denver City High School teachers have
acquired a more in-depth knowledge for varying their instruction. With
the administrator's support and encouragement, they have received
flexibility, motivating them to make necessary and on-going evaluations
and adjustments in their instructional methods, curriculum, and
scheduling. Choice of staff development has encouraged educators to be
proactive in their decisions and has led to the success of all students
on the campus.

***[Part VII -- Assessment
Results\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}***

**Texas Ninth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

[Subject:]{.underline} **Reading** [Grade:]{.underline} **9**
[Test:]{.underline} **Texas Assessment of Knowledge & Skills**

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills '02**

[Edition/publication year]{.underline}: **2005**
[Publisher:]{.underline} **Texas Education Agency -- Austin, Texas**

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > \* - Data masked by TEA           | **T   | **T   | **T   | **T   |
| >                                   | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** |
| > NA - not available or not         |       |       |       |       |
| > applicable                        | **05  | **04  | **03  | **02  |
|                                     | -06** | -05** | -04** | -03** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                       | April | April | April | April |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 33%   | 27%   | 12%   | NA    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 95%   | 87%   | 90%   | 89%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 80    | 86    | 94    | 87    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested    | 93%   | 95%   | 85%   | 94%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively    | 5     | 0     | 14    | 5     |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively   | 6%    | 0     | 15%   | 5%    |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                 | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Economically Disadvantaged**   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 28%   | 22%   | 14%   | NA    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 92%   | 78%   | 86%   | 71%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 36    | 37    | 44    |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Hispanic**                     | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 28%   | 21%   | 11%   | 2%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 92%   | 86%   | 88%   | 84%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 50    | 56    | 56    | 45    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

**Texas Ninth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

[Subject:]{.underline} MATH [Grade:]{.underline} **9**
[Test:]{.underline} **Texas Assessment of Knowledge & Skills**

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills '02**

[Edition/publication year]{.underline}: **2005**
[Publisher:]{.underline} **Texas Education Agency -- Austin, Texas**

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > \* - Data masked by TEA           | **T   | **T   | **T   | **T   |
| >                                   | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** |
| > NA - Not Available or Not         |       |       |       |       |
| > Applicable                        | **05  | **04  | **03  | **02  |
|                                     | -06** | -05** | -04** | -03** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                       | April | April | April | April |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 16%   | 5%    | 15%   | 13%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 62%   | 49%   | 67%   | 76%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 81    | 90    | 96    | 86    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested    | 94%   | 98%   | 85%   | 93%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively    | 5     | 2     | 14    | 6     |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively   | 6%    | 2%    | 15%   | 6%    |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                 | **\   | **\   | **\   | **\   |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \--** | \--** | \--** | \--** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Economically Disadvantaged**   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 17%   | 5%    | 15%   | 8%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 58%   | 56%   | 62%   | 65%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 36    | 39    | 28    | 24    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Hispanic**                     | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 12%   | 3%    | 9%    | 7%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 57%   | 49%   | 63%   | 83%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 51    | 61    | 57    | 46    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

**Texas Tenth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

[Subject:]{.underline} **Reading** [Grade:]{.underline} **10**
[Test:]{.underline} **Texas Assessment of Knowledge & Skills**

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills '02**

[Edition/publication year]{.underline}: **2005**
[Publisher:]{.underline} **Texas Education Agency -- Austin, Texas**

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > \* - Data masked by TEA           | **T   | **T   | **T   | **T   |
| >                                   | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** |
| > NA - is Not Available or Not      |       |       |       |       |
| > Applicable                        | **05  | **04  | **03  | **02  |
|                                     | -06** | -05** | -04** | -03** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                       | April | April | April | April |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 8%    | 1%    | 5%    | 3%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 95%   | 82%   | 88%   | 75%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 107   | 121   | 93    | 96    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested    | 99%   | 99%   | 93%   | 94%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively    | 0     | 1     | 6     | 5     |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively   | 0%    | 1%    | 7%    | 5%    |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                 | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Economically Disadvantaged**   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 6%    | 0%    | 3%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 96%   | 71%   | 72%   | 63%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 49    | 48    | 29    | 38    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Hispanic**                     | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 61%   | 0%    | 4%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 94%   | 77%   | 82%   | 67%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 50    | 60    | 45    | 58    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

**Texas Tenth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

[Subject:]{.underline} **Math** [Grade:]{.underline} **10**
[Test:]{.underline} **Texas Assessment of Knowledge & Skills**

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills '02**

[Edition/publication year]{.underline}: **2005**
[Publisher:]{.underline} **Texas Education Agency -- Austin, Texas**

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \* - Masked by TEA                  | **T   | **T   | **T   | **T   |
|                                     | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** |
| NA - not available or not           |       |       |       |       |
| applicable                          | **05  | **04  | **03  | **02  |
|                                     | -06** | -05** | -04** | -03** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                       | April | April | April | April |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 9%    | 9%    | 6%    | 1%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 60%   | 68%   | 76%   | 61%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 107   | 114   | 78    | 96    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested    | 99%   | 91%   | 92%   | 87%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively    | 1     | 10    | 6     | 4     |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively   | 1%    | 10%   | 8%    | NA    |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                 | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Economically Disadvantaged**   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 8%    | 2%    | 0%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 57%   | 60%   | 61%   | 51%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 37    | 48    | 28    | 40    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Hispanic**                     | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 6%    | 2%    | 2%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 54%   | 60%   | 74%   | 49%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 54    | 60    | 42    | 59    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

**Texas Eleventh-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

[Subject:]{.underline} **Reading** [Grade:]{.underline} **11**
[Test:]{.underline} **Texas Assessment of Knowledge & Skills**

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills '02**

[Edition/publication year]{.underline}: **2005**
[Publisher:]{.underline} **Texas Education Agency -- Austin, Texas**

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \* - Data masked by TEA             | **T   | **T   | **T   | **T   |
|                                     | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** |
| NA - is not available or not        |       |       |       |       |
| applicable                          | **05  | **04  | **03  | **02  |
|                                     | -06** | -05** | -04** | -03** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                       | April | April | April | April |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 32%   | 16%   | 4%    | 3%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 100%  | 93%   | 86%   | 70%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 71    | 69    | 93    | 73    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested    | 97%   | 90%   | 91%   | 94%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively    | 0     | 6     | 5     | 5     |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively   | 0%    | 9%    | 5%    | 7%    |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                 | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Economically Disadvantaged**   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 27%   | 7%    | 3%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 100%  | 86%   | 79%   | 64%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 22    | 28    | 39    | 28    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Hispanic**                     | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 34%   | 5%    | 2%    | 3%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 100%  | 87%   | 80%   | 61%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 41    | 38    | 60    | 38    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

**Texas Eleventh-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

[Subject:]{.underline} **Math** [Grade:]{.underline} **11**
[Test:]{.underline} **Texas Assessment of Knowledge & Skills**

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills '02**

[Edition/publication year]{.underline}: **2005**
[Publisher:]{.underline} **Texas Education Agency -- Austin, Texas**

+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \* - Data masked by TEA             | **T   | **T   | **T   | **T   |
|                                     | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** | AKS** |
| NA - not available or not           |       |       |       |       |
| applicable                          | **05  | **04  | **03  | **02  |
|                                     | -06** | -05** | -04** | -03** |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                       | April | April | April | April |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 26%   | 15%   | 6%    | 3%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 92%   | 82%   | 86%   | 61%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 72    | 71    | 87    | 71    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested    | 87%   | 91%   | 95%   | 87%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively    | 9     | 5     | 5     | 5     |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively   | 13%   | 7%    | 6%    | 7%    |
| assessed                            |       |       |       |       |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                 | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Economically Disadvantaged**   | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 32%   | 3%    | 6%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 92%   | 70%   | 83%   | 52%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 22    | 30    | 35    | 27    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Hispanic**                     | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  | \-\-  |
|                                     | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ | \-\-\ |
|                                     | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- | -\-\- |
|                                     | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- | \-\-- |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance      | 19%   | 5%    | 4%    | 0%    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard               | 88%   | 78%   | 81%   | 53%   |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested           | 42    | 40    | 53    | 38    |
+-------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+