##### Revised -- 4/2/06

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

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: (Check all that apply) \_X\_ Elementary
\_\_ Middle \_\_ High \_\_ K-12 \_\_Charter

Name of Principal: [Mr. Robert M. Buck .]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [: Windsor Elementary School .]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [: 935 Windsor Road .]{.underline}

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

\_\_\_[Loves Park , Illinois 61111- 4228 .]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County: [Winnebago]{.underline} State School Code [Number\*
04-101-1220-22 .]{.underline}

Telephone: [(815) 654-4507]{.underline} Fax: [(815) 654- 4585
.]{.underline}

Website/URL: [WWW. Harlem122.org]{.underline} . E-mail:
<rbuck@harlem122.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\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Dr. Pascal DeLuca .]{.underline}

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

District Name [Harlem Cons. School Distict \# 122]{.underline} Tel.
[(815) 654-4500]{.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 [Mrs. Sandy Johnson .]{.underline}

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

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

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

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

*\*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 for Civil Rights
(OCR) requirements is true and correct.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [9]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[0]{.underline} Middle schools

[1]{.underline} Junior high schools

[1]{.underline} High schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Other

[11]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [7855 .]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [8786]{.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
>
> \[ x \] Suburban
>
> \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area
>
> \[ \] Rural

4\. [1]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

[11]{.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**       37        33                     **73**       **9**                             

  **2**       30        32                     **74**       **10**                            

  **3**       26        41                     **60**       **11**                            

  **4**       38        26                     **53**       **12**                            

  **5**       40        31                     **77**       **Other**                         

  **6**       33        32                     78                                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   415
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [90]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [4]{.underline} % Black or African American

[3]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

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

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

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      27
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      22
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Total of all transferred    49
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 409
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .1198
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           12
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [2]{.underline} %

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

Number of languages represented: [2 .]{.underline}

Specify languages: Hispanic, Bosnian, Ethiopian

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [44]{.underline} %

Total number students who qualify: [176 .]{.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: [23]{.underline} %

[88]{.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.

[5]{.underline} Autism [2]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment

Deafness [7]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_ Deaf-Blindness [43]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

[1]{.underline} Emotional Disturbance [27]{.underline} Speech or
Language Impairment

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

> [1]{.underline} Mental Retardation [1]{.underline} Visual Impairment
> Including Blindness
>
> [32]{.underline} Multiple Disabilities

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) [1]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers [26]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists [4]{.underline} [3]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [4]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff [4]{.underline} [8]{.underline}
>
> Total number [32]{.underline} [11]{.underline}

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers:
[22:1]{.underline}

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

  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                            2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001

  Daily student attendance  94 %        95 %        95 %        95 %        \%

  Daily teacher attendance  96 %        96 %        96 %        96 %        \%

  Teacher turnover rate     2 %         2 %         2 %         2 %         \%

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

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

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Nestled in the middle of the Harlem School District, Windsor Elementary
is an All-American school. Representing part of the Loves Park
community, we are just a tablespoon of the vast melting pot, which
typifies the entire school district. We are not large, we are not small,
but we are just right.

The diverse Windsor student population includes Black, White, Hispanic,
Asian, and Native American. We have students representing various income
levels, and parents with varied educational expectation levels. Even
though over the past few years our income base is dropping, we are
seeing increasing parental involvement, and increasing community
interest. As we begin to show off the wonderful opportunities we offer
here at Windsor, we remember change cannot happen without support, both
from the outside community we represent, but from the community of
educators within the walls of the building.

The variety in our community is reflected in the variety of our staff.
We are a population that spans the generational gap from thirty plus
years of educational experience to only a couple. We are male and
female, married and single, new parents and grandparents, but we are all
educators with one common goal, and that goal is to make Windsor a
remarkable place to work and learn. We do this by looking ahead with
goals that have been established by looking at where we have been.
Continual data collection and analysis, has shown us where some of our
strengths and weaknesses are. Knowing those weaknesses, we planned and
continue to plan our strategies for future growth and development.

The mission of the Harlem School District is to be a community of
learners acquiring knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary to reach
our potential as contributing members of society. At Windsor, we try to
fulfill this mission by stressing excellence in reading, math and
writing, as well as supplementing the core curriculum with character
building programs, supplemental reading programs, and tutoring
opportunities for our students. We are also fortunate enough to be able
to continue offering varied special opportunities such as Art, Music,
Learning Center, and PE as part of our core curriculum, as well as all
of the needed Special Education programs to meet the individual needs of
some of our children. Balancing our programs within an atmosphere that
stresses taking ones education seriously yet being open to fun and
creativity, allows for an enjoyment of education that continues into the
future.

Finally, in order for any educational program to grow and change, we
need the support of parents and those who are loved and respected by the
children. At Windsor we are beginning to see a shift, which is reflected
in our students improving attitudes. Through the efforts of our PTA,
more and more of our parents are participating in activities and
opportunities designed to bring the Windsor families together. Our
Muffins for Mom, Donuts for Dad's, and Grandparents Breakfast, are
supported and run by our PTA., as well as Turkey Bingo and our Family
Fun Fair. Each of these events has grown to be exciting time for not
only the group invited, but the students as well. Parent teacher
conferences, winter and spring music programs, Art in the Park, are not
the only opportunities for our parents to see us; they are now an
extension of a concerted effort of involvement. Our 100% parent contact
percentage belittles the fact that most of our parents participate in a
variety of programs here at Windsor.

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

1.  **Assessment Results:**

Windsor Elementary participates in the Illinois State Assessment Tests
each spring in the third, fourth and fifth grade classes. In the
2004-2005 school year, third grade was tested on Reading and
Mathematics, fourth grade was tested in Social Science, and fifth grade
was tested on Reading and Mathematics again. Using this Assessment
system, we can compare the fifth grade students test results to the
third grade scores they had two years earlier. This enables us to
examine "same student" growth.

The ISAT reading scores for 2004-2005 indicate the highest percentage of
students meeting and exceeding expectations ever at Windsor. Each year,
despite changes in our population, it is our goal for continued growth.
This includes an income level that is dropping. Usually, lower income
levels can indicate a plateau or even lowering of the impacted area's
standardized scores. We are very happy that this is not the case at
Windsor for 2005.

Mathematics has continued to rise to 82% in third grade and 85% in fifth
grade at meets and exceeds. These ISAT scores show a steady increase
over the past few years, with this year once again, being the most
successful.

Actual comparisons between the reading scores of last year's fifth grade
class and the scores they had in third grade show a 7% improvement in
our meets and exceeds percentages from 68% as third graders to 75% as
fifth graders. The same class showed an increase of 6% from 80% to 86%
in mathematics over the same two-year period. Tracking this information
has given us indications of which students may need assistance. If we
continually see a lack of progress in a particular area, or when we see
a group of students who were excelling early in their education, but
have a faulty year only to return back on track after that one year, it
stands to reason that we need to look deeper into the different
variables impacting those students. This could mean the materials being
used, the make-up of that particular class, the book series, the actual
layout of the rooms, or even the staff at that level. When the district
makes building comparison, the test scores offer much the same kind of
information only impacting at the building level, do we need a different
series

Subgroup comparisons are difficult for us. We do not have a group large
enough in our building to be considered a subgroup. We are all grouped
together as one. We accept those who are struggling due to learning
difficulties, language barriers, or economic disadvantaged as part of
our large group. This enables us have to include all children into our
plans for growth and success. This makes us even happier with our
success.

The ISAT allows us to see how we compare with other school in the state.
This comparison with schools statewide and schools in our district
provides us with information regarding our educational programs. We are
always glad to see how we compare to other schools throughout the state
and in our district. We would expect that the State of Illinois would
utilize the information when comparisons are done from state to state.
Having the report card available on the Illinois State Board of
Education web sight, allows any citizen the opportunity to see the test
results.

2.  **Using Assessment Results:**

We are currently gathering data at three intervals during the school
year, fall, winter and spring. With the data we collect, we are able to
track a student's progress through out the school year. This offers us
an early intervention opportunity, which would not happen if we only
relied upon the ISAT testing scores. The ISAT scores give us a
standardized yearly score to track building and student academic
performance

As a building, we continually use this data to direct our strategic
planning, and academic goal setting each spring. Once the test results
become available, we review those results and begin the introspection
process needed to evaluate our programs. We discuss ideas we have been
exposed to over the following year. We collaborate, and decide which
ideas we find valid enough to include them for our particular building
programs. We then lay plans to implement those ideas with a timeline and
action plans.

Re-evaluation is our ongoing final step of our planning process. Over
the next year, we periodically annualize all of our programs using
alternative assessments in order to make any adjustments we may need. By
constantly reviewing and up-dating our data, we keep our programs
continually growing and fresh.

**3. Communicating Assessment Results:**

The Harlem School District makes all of our ISAT scores available to
every family in the district in a variety of methods. Besides making
them available at the district offices, the district scores are placed
on the Harlem 122 web pages giving added access to all parents who have
access through the Internet. On the district web page, we also link to
the Illinois State Board of Education web pages so that parents can
easily make comparisons with other districts of our size and make-up. In
addition, every parent in the district is given access to the ISAT
information through the local news sources, radio, TV, and newspapers.

A Windsor parent will receive a copy of their individual child's ISAT
scores as part of our standard Parent/Teacher conferences. Any parent
who does not attend those conferences will have their child's scores
mailed to them. They are offered further opportunity to discuss the
results with teachers and administration per request. The Windsor staff
uses our ISAT information to generate the building School Improvement
Plan. This planning is driven by the positive and negative results of
our ISAT scores.

On a broader scale, the Harlem Board of Education reviews and discusses
the district ISAT results as a group. These meetings are announced and
open for any parent or district member to attend.

**4. Sharing Success:**

Windsor has been very willing to share any success we have with any and
all. It is a district wide philosophy to share any successful strategies
with our colleagues. The Harlem Administrative team is made aware of
successful programs throughout the district and offers a variety of
in-service opportunities to share any new ideas and successes. Our
teachers are involved in various professional development classes where
they have opportunities to share as well as glean new ideas from others.
The Windsor staff has a nucleus of highly qualified team members who are
ready and willing to share at programs, which might assist another
schools.

As the Windsor staff, we would be presenting our success to the local
school board, and new media. However, as an unassuming group, we would
be open to any opportunity to show our successes, but we do not believe
we are anything special. We believe this success only demands continued
success.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

1\. **Curriculum:**

The core curriculum for the building evolves around the areas of
reading, math, writing, and science. By emphasizing these four areas, we
believe we are delivering a strong background to our children for future
educational success. As an elementary we believe Reading and Math are by
far the most needed abilities for any child. With this in mind it stands
to reason that we emphasize our reading and math programs here at
Windsor.

2a. **Reading:**

We have taken a multi-leveled approach to our reading program. As the
core of our reading, we use a text series, which offers many options for
our teachers, as well as multiple skill areas. The initial major areas
spotlighted are phonics, decoding, vocabulary development, and literacy.
Offering the students multi-ethnic subject matter and family
interactions enhances these areas. Spelling and writing skills are also
integrated into the program.

We supplement our series through the use of a reading workbook, which
stresses best practices in reading, as well as a separate phonics series
first grade through fourth. Beyond structured reading, we have
implemented the Accelerated Reader programs to increase self-motivation
in reading and to improve fluency. Our philosophy is " the more you read
the better you get ".

3\. **Mathematics:**

Our mathematics' program has developed over the course of years, with
trial and error having brought us to an approach, which seems to work.
We have some teachers who use manipulative elements while we have others
who use more memorization. We have some who have students in a
structured mathematics style classroom, while others are more relaxed
and freewheeling. What we do have is a concerted effort to improve math
scores using a textbook based approach with adaptations and workbooks
used to supplement the program. What we have found is that what works
for one teacher does not work for all teachers, and we needed to allow
for adjustments for that.

The staff approaches mathematics on an individual level. They use the
textbook as a base for introduction of material and direction to which
they add their own particular styles. By adding their own flair, it
makes the class more interesting for them, and therefore more
interesting for the students. Instructional Methods:

**4. Instructional Methods**

At Windsor Elementary, we have a variety of instructional approaches. We
wouldn't want it any other way. When a staff such as ours reflects
various generations, educational training, and experiential backgrounds;
to expect that their instructional styles would all blend into one
method would be contrary to human nature. One of our methods includes a
standard, structured, older style classroom with a teacher instructing
from the basal and adding enrichment throughout the course of the
lessons. We mix this with a newer centers based classroom where the
children are little less structured, and the teacher leads a more
student directed experience. We have some staff members who feel
comfortable lecturing from the front of the room, while others need to
wander and stroll through the rows of students checking material and
responses as they go.

Offering a variety of learning experience allows us to better meet the
individual needs of our children. Because children have varied learning
styles, we realize that some will need structure to succeed, while
others can flourish in a free flowing environment. By being aware of the
individual teacher styles, and diligence in selecting those students for
each class list, we can develop a classroom of students who grow under
each teacher's individualized methods.

**5. Professional Development:**

The Harlem School District eliminated a very strong professional
development program a couple of years ago, due to budget cuts and the
growing expenses of an expanding program. While it was running, the
staff had access to multiple classes offering instruction in methods,
technology, reading instruction, and most of the latest best practice
ideas being offered. Even though it is gone, this program is still
assisting our teaching staff as we continue to implement some of those
ideas into our classrooms. We are also fortunate to see new and young
teachers bringing into the building some of the latest and greatest
ideas being presented in the colleges today. At Windsor, we have had
several student teachers from various colleges in the building this past
year, each bringing their enthusiasm and thoughts to the building.

In an effort to continue a professional development program, the Windsor
administration has been very open when allowing the teachers access to
reasonable professional development. Our title funds have helped all of
our first grade teachers receive training in a new reading program we
just implemented this year, and special education funds have helped
support some staff development by sending some members to autism
conferences. As members of our staff, we expect them to present their
knowledge to the rest of us, by putting an emphasis on areas that
pertain to the entire staff. The school district is doing its part this
year, by currently training its entire staff in Curriculum Mapping. Our
lead teachers are currently trained, and they are training the next
group of "mappers". These staff members will then be asked to become the
trainers for their fellow teachers. By expecting everyone who receives
any professional development to share their knowledge, every one of our
teachers grows from the experience.

Last but not least, at Windsor we are finding that a common goal and
direction is the key. We may have different approaches, the vehicles we
use may look different, but in the end, what is best for the children,
and their success is what we are all about.

**[PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS]{.underline}**

  --------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ---
  Subject: Reading      Grade:      3           Test:        Illinois                    
                                                             State                       
                                                             Assessment                  
                                                             Test                        

                                                                                         

  Edition/Publication                           Publisher:                                
  Year:                                                                                  

                                                                                         

                        2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003    2001-2002     2000-2001     

  Testing Month                                                                          

  **School Scores\***                                                                    

  \% At or Above State  68%         59%         67%          59%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   28%         23%         15%          13%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    145         142         145          151                         
  tested                                                                                 

  Percent of total      100%        99%         100%         100%                        
  students tested                                                                        

  \# of student         0           0           0            0             0             
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

  \% of Student         0%          0%          0%           0%            0%            
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Economic          4                                                               
  Disadvantaged**                                                                        

  \% At or Above State  64%         58%         64%                                      
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   19%         29%         12%                                      
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    74          52          51           50                          
  tested                                                                                 

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Multi Cultural** 0%                                                               

  \% At or Above State                                                                   
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State                                                                    
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students                                                                     
  tested                                                                                 

                                                                                         

                                                                                         

  Subject: Reading      Grade:      5           Test:        Illinois                    
                                                             State                       
                                                             Assessment                  
                                                             Test                        

                                                                                         

  Edition/Publication                           Publisher:                                
  Year:                                                                                  

                                                                                         

                        2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003    2001-2002     2000-2001     

  Testing Month                                                                          

  **School Scores\***                                                                    

  \% At or Above State  75%         73%         66%          64%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   10%         25%         17%          14%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    145         142         145          151                         
  tested                                                                                 

  Percent of total      100%        99%         100%         100%                        
  students tested                                                                        

  \# of student         0           0           0            0             0             
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

  \% of Student         0%          0%          0%           0%            0%            
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Economic                                                                          
  Disadvantaged**                                                                        

  \% At or Above State  73%         64%         45%                                      
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   8%          20%         8%                                       
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    74          52          51           50                          
  tested                                                                                 

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Multi Cultural** 0%                                                               

  \% At or Above State                                                                   
  Standards                                                                              
  --------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ---

***Public Schools***

  --------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ---
  Subject: Mathematics  Grade:      3           Test:        Illinois                    
                                                             State                       
                                                             Assessment                  
                                                             Test                        

                                                                                         

  Edition/Publication                           Publisher:                                
  Year:                                                                                  

                                                                                         

                        2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003    2001-2002     2000-2001     

  Testing Month                                                                          

  **School Scores\***                                                                    

  \% At or Above State  82%         76%         79%          88%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   37%         29%         38%          32%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    145         142         145          151                         
  tested                                                                                 

  Percent of total      100%        99%         100%         100%                        
  students tested                                                                        

  \# of student         0           0           0            0             0             
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

  \% of Student         0%          0%          0%           0%            0%            
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Economic                                                                          
  Disadvantaged**                                                                        

  \% At or Above State  81%         72%         78%                                      
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   39%         29%         39%                                      
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    74          52          51           50                          
  tested                                                                                 

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Multi Cultural** 0%                                                               

  \% At or Above State                                                                   
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State                                                                    
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students                                                                     
  tested                                                                                 

                                                                                         

                                                                                         

  Subject: Mathematics  Grade:      5           Test:        Illinois                    
                                                             State                       
                                                             Assessment                  
                                                             Test                        

                                                                                         

  Edition/Publication                           Publisher:                                
  Year:                                                                                  

                                                                                         

                        2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003    2001-2002     2000-2001     

  Testing Month         3                                                                

  **School Scores\***                                                                    

  \% At or Above State  86%         81%         67%          73%                         
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   9%          8%          3%            ?                          
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    145         142         145          151                         
  tested                                                                                 

  Percent of total      100%        99%         100%         100%                        
  students tested                                                                        

  \# of student         0           0           0            0             0             
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

  \% of Student         0%          0%          0%           0%            0%            
  Alternatively Asses.                                                                   

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Economic                                                                          
  Disadvantaged**                                                                        

  \% At or Above State  85%         77%         58%                                      
  Standards                                                                              

  \% At Exceeds State   8%          8%          8%                                       
  Standards                                                                              

  Number of students    74          52          51           50                          
  tested                                                                                 

                                                                                         

  **Subgroup Scores**                                                                    

  **1. Multi Cultural** 0%                                                               
  --------------------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ---