##### REVISED DATE: March 29, 2005

##### *2004-2005 No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program*

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: \_\_ Elementary \_\_ Middle
[X\_]{.underline} High \_\_ K-12

Name of Principal [Mr. Wayne
Olson]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

Official School Name [Turtle Lake High
School\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [205 Oak Street
North\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

[Turtle Lake WI 54889-8929\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County [Barron]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ School
Code Number\*[502310\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Telephone [(715) 986-4470]{.underline} Fax
[(715)\_\_986-2444\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Website/URL
[www.turtlelake.K12.wi.us\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_](http://www.turtlelake.K12.wi.us__________/)
E-mail [cdunlop@turtlelake.K12.wi.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\*
[Mr.Chuck_Dunlop\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

District Name School [District of Turtle
Lake]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Tel.
[(715)\_986-2597\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.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 Molls

(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)

*\*Private Schools: If the information requested is not applicable,
write N/A in the space.*

**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 of 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 2004-2005 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 1999 and has not received the 2003 or 2004 *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: [\_\_1\_\_]{.underline}
Elementary schools

[**\_\_**1**\_\_**]{.underline} Middle schools

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

[1]{.underline} High schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Other

[3]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$10,091]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$10,023]{.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
>
> \[ \] Suburban school with characteristics typical of an urban area
>
> \[ \] Suburban
>
> \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area
>
> \[ X\] Rural

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

[4]{.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**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**                                                     **8**                             

  **1**                                                     **9**       14        20          34

  **2**                                                     **10**      20        24          44

  **3**                                                     **11**      31        17          48

  **4**                                                     **12**      27        28          55

  **5**                                                     **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   181
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [96]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: % Black or African American

\% Hispanic or Latino

\% Asian/Pacific Islander

[\_\_\_\_4]{.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:
\_\_\_[7]{.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      9
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 13
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 181
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided .07
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           7
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

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

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: \_\_[0\_\_]{.underline}

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals:
\_[\_44\_\_]{.underline}%

Total number students who qualify: \_\_[58\_\_]{.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:
\_\_\_[8\_\_\_\_]{.underline}%

\_\_\_[15\_\_\_]{.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.

\_[\_1\_]{.underline}Autism \_\_\_\_Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_[1\_]{.underline}Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [\_10\_]{.underline}Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_\_\_Speech or Language Impairment

\_\_[3\_]{.underline}Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

\_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment Including
Blindness

\_\_[2]{.underline} Emotionally Disturbed

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) \_\_[1\_\_\_\_]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_[19\_\_\_]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_[1\_\_\_\_]{.underline}
> \_\_[2\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}
>
> Total number [\_\_22\_\_\_]{.underline} [\_\_2\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
[9.53]{.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.)

  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                            2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000

  Daily student attendance  96 %        97 %        94 %        96 %        94 %

  Daily teacher attendance  92 %        94 %        92 %        94 %        94 %

  Teacher turnover rate     10 %        10 %        10 %        0 %         0 %

  Student dropout rate      0 %         0 %         0 %         0 %         0 %
  (middle/high)                                                             

  Student drop-off rate     0 %         0 %         0 %         0 %         0 %
  (high school)                                                             
  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

14\. **(*High Schools Only*)** Show what the students who graduated in
Spring 2004 are doing as of September 2004.

+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Graduating class size                                   | >          |
|                                                         | [47\_\_]{. |
|                                                         | underline} |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Enrolled in a 4-year college or university              | >          |
|                                                         | [30\_\_]{. |
|                                                         | underline} |
|                                                         | > %        |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Enrolled in a community college                         | > [        |
|                                                         | 13\_\_]{.u |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Enrolled in vocational training                         | > [        |
|                                                         | 28\_\_]{.u |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Found employment                                        | > [        |
|                                                         | 21\_\_]{.u |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Military service                                        | > [\_\_    |
|                                                         | \_\_\_]{.u |
|                                                         | nderline}% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Other (travel, staying home, etc.)                      | > \        |
|                                                         | _\_\_\_\_% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| Unknown                                                 | > \        |
|                                                         | _\_\_\_\_% |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+
| **Total**                                               | > 100 %    |
+---------------------------------------------------------+------------+

##  III - Summary

It is Turtle Lake High School's goal to educate and prepare our students
for life, not only with "book smarts" but with good moral character and
the ability to take on whatever challenge their life brings them.

Turtle Lake High School serves a rural community with agricultural and
seasonal tourism the predominant industries. The student population of
181 have raised requirements due to the No Child Left Behind Act. Our
high school now operates on an 8 period day. Over the past three years
our school completed a comprehensive school reform effort. First, we
have made efforts to set high expectations for student achievement and
required greater expectations for reading and writing. Teachers within
Turtle Lake High School have a goal of students completing writings at
least once a week in every class. The results of these changes are
starting to show as we have won the "New Wisconsin Promise Award" in the
high school two years in a row. We are looking forward to receiving our
scores again this spring to find out how we did!

Seniors at Turtle Lake High School must also complete a project that
requires research, a product and a multi media presentation before they
graduate. Our school has also "clamped down" on attendance. A stringent
attendance policy has been implemented where truancy charges are filed
after three unexcused absences and students must make up excessive
absences in summer school. Students have noted that increased
expectations for behavior have resulted in a great school climate.

Here at Turtle Lake students are very comfortable approaching their
teachers for extra help to accommodate their needs. Over the past few
years our 21^st^ Century grant has even been able to provide extended
media center hours, a supervisor/tutor and an activity bus for students
who need to stay after school to get extra help. Our students are also
required to participate in silent sustained reading at least two times
per week.

Turtle Lake High School continually reviews, revises, and expands the
curriculum to meet our students needs. Recent actions with curriculum
mapping, updated course outlines, and class articulation agreements with
some of our upper level English and Business Education course and our
nearby technical college make it an incentive for students to earn an A-
or better to receive dual credit while in high school and not even have
to travel away from our school building. Science teachers have recently
revised the 7^th^-9^th^ grade curriculum to align with state standards
and mathematics teachers have implemented a reformed state curricula.
School leadership has also expanded our curriculum through offering
Distance Learning opportunities as well. This year we have students
enrolled in Mythology, Criminal Justice and Sign Language.

Our administration continues to provide a vision for our school in
multiple forms. The principal holds weekly staff meetings with coffee
and doughnuts to provide opportunities for staff interaction and plans
to continue to attend data retreats to desegragate student progress on
the state assessments, grades, involvement in activities affect student
learning within the Turtle Lake School District

**IV -- Indicators of Academic Success**

**Part 1**

The state of Wisconsin, in meeting the demands of the federal
legislation of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), has developed an assessment
design known as the Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Exam (WKCE). This
assessment framework is designed for students in 4, 8 and 10th grade.
The assessment evaluates the application of Wisconsin standards in all
four content areas, although, we will only be discussing Reading and
Mathematics.

Turtle Lake High School has participated in a District Wide Data Retreat
in order to more meaningfully meet the needs of all students. This
retreat has helped the high school to identify trend data

within standards. The proficiency data provided,
<http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/graphshell.asp?GraphFile=GEDISAPRIORYEARS&Comp>
show the number of students at Proficient or Advanced using this data.
The following is a brief display of the data in reading and mathematics.

-   2001/2002/2003 Grade 10 Reading 60%/78%/93% Proficient & Advanced

-   2001/2002/2003 Grade10 Math 39%/83%/93% Proficient & Advanced

\*\*Adequate Yearly Progress levels have been identified by the
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI). This progress for the
years mentioned was set at the following:

Reading 64% Proficient & Advanced

Math 37% Proficient & Advanced

**(This AYP will increase each year until 2014 when 100% of our students
are at Proficient & Advanced, 80% or better.)**

Although the data collected for all students has indeed been
exceptional, the subgroup data is continually being addressed. Support
programming is continually being identified and modified. The following
programs are producing results and will continue to be monitored:

-   High School Reading Support, **SSR**

-   K-12 Comprehensive Writing Program, **6 Traits Writing Model**

-   Increased mathematics instruction for HS seniors, **3 credit
    structure**

# Part 2

The Turtle Lake High School has participated in an annual DATA Retreat
provided through the regional Cooperative Educational Service Agency
(CESA 11) for the last four years. The focus of this retreat is to
understand the quality of the educational programming provided and to
empower school and district leadership teams to use their own data to
inform their school improvement process. This has been a powerful
catalyst for improvement in several ways.

1.  **[Creation of professional leaning communities]{.underline}**

> The leadership team bonds and learns collaboratively. This cohesive
> group is energized to lead their peers toward positive change for the
> learning community.

2.  **[Management of district data]{.underline}**

> The retreat process guides high school personnel in gathering and
> organizing their data. These data teams learn about the human and
> technological data management efficiencies and inefficiencies that
> occur with their school and district.

3.  **[Focus attention on student learning]{.underline}**

> The central focus for the retreat is to focus on the data relevant to
> student achievement. By studying primarily student data, through
> related lenses of programs and structure data, professional practice
> data, and parent and community data -- team members gain a rich view
> of the interrelationships between the these factors and student
> learning.

4.  **[Improvement planning]{.underline}**

> The team analyzes and interprets the data to develop observable and
> measurable goals for improvement for the following year. This plan
> builds upon these few targeted goals which center on students, by
> describing the action strategies and evaluation process that will lead
> to the goal. Their plan is not complete without the team's strategies
> and timelines toward sustainability.

# Part 3

A question that begs to have the assumptions challenged is: How well do
we know how our students are performing? This question grounds the
ongoing data team each year, and much communication is disseminated to
the larger learning community.

Three years ago Turtle Lake High School wrote and received a
**Comprehensive School Reform Grant**. Working with **High Schools that
Work (HSTW)** helped to clarify and focus the programming and
achievement goals for grades 9-12. An outcome for this grant was the
completion of a Curriculum Mapping process 9-12. Through this process
the high school continues to develop "concept maps" for both the core
and encore curricula. These documents will be housed on the district
technology server for both in-house staff as well as the larger
community. This mapping is best carried out electronically so that both
communication and revision can be immediate.

The success of this mapping program can be seen in two specific
outcomes: measurable improvement in student performance in the targeted
areas, and the institutionalization of mapping as a process for ongoing
curriculum and assessment review. Mapping has created a blueprint for
the communication of the concepts, skills, assessments and benchmarks
designed within specific units of study. All this grounded by essential
questions that measure student progress within identified curricula.

Parents, students and the larger community have the opportunity and the
access to connect to the state standards and benchmarked skills at each
grade/content level.

**HSTW** supported the use of evidence folders compiled by each teacher
to demonstrate the use of new and improved instructional techniques and
better assessment practices. This aligned with the curriculum maps have
created a dynamic framework for identified success for ALL students.

The implementation of the HSTW model has improved the level of parent
and community involvement opportunities in the Turtle Lake High School.
Examples of new opportunities for collaboration with parents and
community include:

-   The creation and implementation of a post-graduation survey in hopes
    of pinpointing areas of concern.

-   The new expectation of seniors to volunteer to work with or job
    shadow a community member for their senior project.

-   New format of student scheduling to include parents and students.

-   Parent surveys for input education issues and programming in the
    district

-   Revised and stronger alignment of work study programs for seniors

-   Parent and community membership on the advisory committee for school
    reform process.

# Part 4

The Turtle Lake High School is extremely pleased with the work
diligently aligned to sharing the successes of the trend data and school
improvement structures. This work is continually shared within the
region and state through a number of professional development
structures. Turtle Lake High School is a member of the CESA 11 regional
network. This network provides many opportunities to share and gather
information.

The following are just a few of the network opportunities provided for
within CESA 11 that Turtle Lake High School has become involved with.

-   CESA 11 STAR Academy

> Summer professional development venue that district teaching
> professionals engaged in 6 Trait Writing seminars

-   Instructional Methologies with Micky Hickman, HSTW Educational
    Consultant

-   Title I Consortium

-   Title IV Consortium

-   CESA 11 Barron County Tobacco Grant

Turtle Lake High School has also been active nationally. High School
teachers and administrators facilitated a seminar on the use of the
Senior Project designed for English and Social Studies collaborative
integration in Atlanta, 2003. These two departments combined efforts in
implementing this project which includes a 10-12 page research paper, a
project, community involvement/volunteer hours, an oral presentation,
and a final portfolio.

The Turtle Lake High School intends to continue with these partnerships
and opportunities to share successful instructional strategies and
methodologies using them as building blocks for continued progress
toward the school reform goals and student achievement.

**V -Curriculum and Instruction**

# Part 1

The standards movement of the 1990's has brought the content of the
school curriculum to the forefront of discussions about school reform
and renewal. The state of Wisconsin has developed a rigorous set of
standards that each school district within the state has adopted and
created meaningful benchmarks with assessment tools that compliment the
instructional practices guiding student learning. Turtle Lake has
structured the curriculum so that it allows students and teachers to
study in greater depth some of the most important topics and skills. In
other words, the district has identified very primary concepts and
skills within the model academic standards that each student will be
held accountable for and will be assessed using multiple measures making
sure that each child does in fact succeed. This delivery model assures
that each student will acquire both the essential skills and knowledge
of each subject. This structure also responds to students' individual
differences. The conceptual "mapping" model that the district is using
to harness the curriculum focuses achievement on the identified
grade/course level benchmarks and communicates the multiple measures
that teachers are using to assess their students. This tool has the
potential for rich data gathering and guides content level decision
making for strategic planning. Each content team has focused on a
variety of activities to continue working for continuous improvement.

**Reading/Language Arts** has created a comprehensive program using the
interactive elements of comprehension, vocabulary/spelling, grammar, and
writing. These elements are supported by strategic teaching and the
cognitive development of the students. The basal series (Scott-Forsman)
and support materials that are used at the K-6 level, along with the 6
Traits writing model, have shown gains in student achievement over time
and continue to challenge students. The emphasis of teaching reading in
the content areas is helping learners to make connections between what
they already know and "new" information presented in the text. As
students make these connections, they create meaning; they comprehend
what they are reading.

Turtle Lake High School's **foreign language** program has supported the
reading in content initiative. Typically, children learn to read using
basal readers. They have multiple opportunities to interact with and
learn narrative text structure. Eventually, students are handed
informational text and foreign language resources and are expected to
make the leap from learning to read through stories written in familiar
chronological order to leaning to read to obtain information from
content and other languages that are organized in entirely different
ways. The content strategies being supported outside of the reading
classroom are instrumental in student achievement within foreign
language and content.

The **mathematics** curriculum has also been guided by using a set of
benchmarked standards at each grade/content level. These benchmarks have
raised the awareness level of teachers, students, and parents. The
Turtle Lake mathematics curriculum has moved from a "shopkeeper's
arithmetic" and routine problem solving model to a more sophisticated
mathematical reasoning and problems solving approach. This NCTM
supported approach to the content has helped the students to continue to
make yearly adequate progress (AYP) well above the state identified
gains. These gains have been significant at the high school level. Data
is being gathered to support the addition of a third year of mathematics
in the 9-12 curriculum. Likewise, data has shown great gains for
students in reading, therefore, Title I programming has been more
heavily moved to support mathematics in the K-6.

Continued work within this curriculum area is needed and the yearly data
collection procedures and evaluation have provided trend data for the
program team to continue to make informed decisions concerning district
needs and professional development.

The **Science** curriculum currently being utilized with the district is
based on collaborative inquiry within content. Students are active
learners and are encouraged to explore and investigate scientific ideas.
They are expected to read, write, and discuss science. The program asks
students to hypothesize, test, and build arguments while reasoning and
weighing the alternatives to their thinking and data gathering.

The curriculum "mapping" documents continue to support the evolution of
content and skill development within the district and have identified
the "gaps" and "overlaps" within the curriculum that need addressing to
align meaningfully with both the state and national standards within
science.

A **Social Studies** curriculum provides students with structured
opportunities to read and discuss information from a variety of primary
and secondary sources, essays, content resources, and geographical
representations. This curriculum guides students to develop the ability
to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens
of a culturally diverse, democratic society while understanding the
global world we live in.

The HSTW comprehensive reform model helped to frame a collaborative
project with the English and Social Studies programs to shape the Senior
Project. The depth and variety of these projects revealed elements of
student achievement that cannot be measured with current state testing:
oral language, technology applications and real world applications of
learning. The continuance of this project is a model for other local and
state district to build methods of assessment of student leaning based
on performance and authentic learning.

The encore curriculum can not be ignored. The career and technical
courses made available for students grades 7-12 have incorporated new
instructional strategies and technological support for students that
cross over into their content courses as well as community interactions.
HSTW helped to identify and train teachers to create pathways for
students to connect to content and their learning through the work that
Micky Hickman, HSTW Consultant, provided for the district teaching
staff.

Turtle Lake participated in a Technology Literacy Challenge Fund Grant.
Professional development opportunities through this grant meshed
strongly with the HSTW goals and provided resources for more staff to
attend high quality training on technology use. The district also
collaborated with CESA 11 to support the creation of a technology
long-range plan, and support improvement in technology access in the
classrooms. This work is very timely. The state of Wisconsin will be
assessing students in what might be termed, "A Technologically Literate
Student" within the next two years and this support for both specialists
and classroom teachers will be an added value for student success within
this assessment and their learning.

# Part 2. Secondary Schools

The secondary level English/language curriculum continues to make great
strides. Students are using a variety of resources depending upon the
course and suitability for students' needs.

Students are supported at all levels of achievement and many different
methodologies are used, they include:

-   Literature circles - which allow students to study novels and themes
    appropriate to their reading level

-   Think Alouds and Read Alouds are used to develop and support reading
    strategies

-   Individual Student Conferencing for critical thinking and feedback

-   Prentice-Hall "Timeless Voices, Timeless Themes" - Basal Literature
    Textbooks support "less proficient" readers using questioning
    strategies built on Bloom's Taxonomy and a themed approach to the
    literature

-   American Library Association's "high interest" choices support
    students for recreational and independent reading

-   Silent Sustained Reading (SSR) is used every day to model and
    support student independent reading

Supporting students in reading across the curriculum is a critical
element within the Turtle Lake High School. The impact of the above
mentioned strategies were apparent to classroom instruction. A random
survey of students indicated that students were not only aware of the
support for their reading achievement, but saw these support mechanisms
as being systemic, having impact in all of their classes.

# Part 3

An area of the curriculum that deserves focus because of it integrated
planning and support structure is that of comprehensive writing and
technology. The Turtle Lake School District has embarked on a
comprehensive writing model based on 6 Traits writing, K12, for the past
three years. This writing curriculum is supported by technology and all
students are selecting and using the technology to access, organize,
create, and communicate information for solving problems and
constructing the new knowledge and products they encounter in their
array of course work.

The district has participated in the variety of EdTech Grants provided
by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and supported
through CESA 11 for the past five years. These opportunities have shared
best practices and software developments to incorporate into their unit
planning when asking students to develop their writing abilities. The
following has happened K-12 in order to support student learning and
increase writing across the curriculum:

-   Teachers have embedded 6 Traits in their Comprehensive Literacy
    curriculum 1-6

-   English teachers 7-12 presented sample rubrics and strategies for
    using rubric assessment within classroom instruction

-   All teachers have incorporated at least one writing assignment, per
    week, in [all]{.underline} classrooms in [all]{.underline} content
    areas.

-   Wisconsin Information and Technology Literacy standards have been
    aligned and implemented into the Comprehensive Literacy curriculum

-   Teachers participated in Technology Literacy Challenge Fund Grant to
    support technology integration and use in the classroom

Efforts continue to be made in support of other areas of the curriculum
with technology such as, mathematics and science. Writing within these
curriculum areas continues to be evident on teacher unit plans, but data
has not been compiled to see increase in student achievement in
relationship to their writing and conceptual thinking in these content
areas.

# Part 4

Building a literate community requires that we create an environment
that builds a community of thinkers and learners, a community where kids
and teachers care and wonder about each other's interests and ideas and
take time to talk about them, think about them, and explore them. The
instructional methologies used to support classroom instruction are
varied and rich in best practice. These have been incorporated into the
classroom overtime and were supported by HSTW. Helping student to
construct knowledge and use their comprehension strategies when
approaching any new learning is happening in a variety of ways across
the curriculum. The Turtle Lake School District is using the following
strategies across the curricula:

-   Teacher modeling of thinking needed to address critical
    topics/content

-   Making connections between the new strategy and what the student
    already knows

-   Discussion of how the new strategy helps the student make meaning

-   Writing across the curriculum so students begin to connect the
    discrete content

-   Provide opportunities for guided practice in strategies within
    content

-   Feedback loop developed for critical evaluation and intrinsic
    motivation

-   Cooperative Learning experiences and Literature Circles developed to
    support ALL learners

-   Performance activities built into content to help students apply
    their learning

-   Authentic assessment opportunities designed to give students more
    ownership and real-life experiences

These are just a few of the instructional methods that the teachers at
Turtle Lake are using to support all students toward increased
achievement. Many of these methods were also modeled and supported by
HSTW with the help of Educational Consultant, Micky Hickman.

# Part 5

Any worthwhile professional development program is defined as one that
includes processes and activities designed to enhance the professional
knowledge, skills, and attitudes of the educators so that they might, in
turn, improve the learning of students. In Turtle Lake, this has also
included learning how to redesign educational structures and cultures
through the development and collaborative structure of the HSTW grant.
The following are activities that were developed by the professional
development team to meet the goals of the HSTW grant as well as
addressing student achievement gaps. Data is currently being collected
both formatively and summatively in order to measure the success of the
program. The following are activities that have been developed long-term
and are currently being evaluated:

-   Curriculum Mapping of all courses and identification of gaps in the
    standards addressed/not addressed.

-   Evidence folders compiled by each teacher to demonstrate use of new
    and improved instructional techniques

-   6 Traits of Writing program development across the curriculum

-   Multiple measures of assessment used to evaluate student learning
    within content

These opportunities for teachers to design more meaningful instructional
experiences for the Turtle Lake students are being monitored and
evaluated for strength and weakness in application to the classroom.

The program that has been built in Turtle Lake is an intentional process
designed out of data gathered from the annual data retreats and the work
done to collaborate with HSTW. This program is an ongoing and systemic
process requiring great care and purpose.

**PART VII -- ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**State of Wisconsin 2005 Blue Ribbon School Nominee Proficiency
Information**

School Name and District: Turtle Lake High School, Turtle Lake

Test Grade Level, Subjects, and Years of Data: Grade 10 Reading and
Mathematics, 2001-02 through 2003-04

School Percent Free and Reduced Price Lunches, 2003-04: 45%

Test Name and Publisher: Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examinations
(WKCE), CTB/McGraw-Hill

  ------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
                                  **Reading**                               **Math**                    

                                  **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**

  Month of Test Administration    February      November      November      February      November      November

  **School Information and                                                                              
  Scores:**                                                                                             

  \# FAY\* in school students     42            46            53            42            46            53
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate )                                                                                           

  \% of all FAY students tested   100%          100%          100%          100%          100%          100%

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 100%          100%          100%          100%          100%          100%
  above Minimal                                                                                         

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 98%           96%           92%           95%           93%           64%
  above Basic                                                                                           

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 93%           78%           60%           93%           83%           40%
  above Proficient                                                                                      

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 67%           67%           11%           57%           37%           11%
  above Advanced                                                                                        

  Number of students alternately  0             0             0             0             0             0
  assessed\*\*                                                                                          

  \% of all students alternately  0%            0%            0%            0%            0%            0%
  assessed                                                                                              

  **School Scores by Student                                                                            
  Subgroup:\*\*\***                                                                                     

  *American Indian/Alaskan                                                                              
  Native*                                                                                               

  \# FAY\* in school students     1             2             2             1             2             2
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate )                                                                                           

  *Hispanic*                                                                                            

  \# FAY\* in school students     0             0             1             0             0             1
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate )                                                                                           

  *White, non-Hispanic*                                                                                 

  \# FAY\* in school students     40            44            49            40            44            49
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate )                                                                                           

  *Economically Disadvantaged*                                                                          

  \# FAY\* in school students     15            12            8             15            12            8
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate )                                                                                           

  \% of all FAY students tested   100%          100%          100%          100%          100%          100%

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 100%          100%          100%          100%          100%          100%
  above Minimal                                                                                         

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 93%           83%           100%          93%           83%           63%
  above Basic                                                                                           

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 80%           58%           63%           93%           67%           13%
  above Proficient                                                                                      

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 33%           42%           13%           40%           33%           0%
  above Advanced                                                                                        

  Number of students alternately  0             0             0             0             0             0
  assessed\*\*                                                                                          

  \% of all students alternately  0%            0%            0%            0%            0%            0%
  assessed                                                                                              

  *Students with Disabilities*                                                                          

  \# FAY\* in school students     2             0             0             2             0             0
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate )                                                                                           

  **State Scores**                                                                                      

  \# FAY\* in district students   66,505        67,689        67,659        66,505        67,689        67,659
  tested (WKCE [or]{.underline}                                                                         
  alternate)                                                                                            

  \% of all FAY in district       99%           97%           96%           99%           97%           96%
  students tested                                                                                       

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 100%          100%          100%          100%          100%          100%
  above Minimal                                                                                         

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 86%           87%           85%           84%           83%           66%
  above Basic                                                                                           

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 71%           73%           62%           71%           71%           44%
  above Proficient                                                                                      

  \% tested on WKCE scoring at or 51%           53%           24%           26%           25%           16%
  above Advanced                                                                                        

  \% of all students alternately  1%            1%            1%            1%            1%            1%
  assessed\*\*                                                                                          
  ------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

\*FAY = Full Academic Year

\*\*Alternate assessments approved under the Wisconsin accountability
system are administered to qualified students with disabilities and
Limited English Proficient (LEP) students.

\*\*\*Per Wisconsin policy, test results for individual student
subgroups with fewer than six students are not released for public
consumption in order to protect student privacy. In addition, some test
results for other student subgroups are suppressed because their
performance of students can be inferred indirectly. Supressed data are
noted within the table with an asterisk (\*).