##### U.S. Department of Education November 2002

**2002-2003 *No Child Left Behind---Blue Ribbon Schools Program***

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Mrs. Sheryll R. Klein]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Mint Canyon Community School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [16400 Sierra Highway]{.underline}

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

[Canyon Country]{.underline} [California 91351]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [(661) 252-2570]{.underline} Fax [(661) 298-3383]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.sssd.k12.ca.us]{.underline} Email
[sherry_klein@mc.sssd.k12.ca.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)

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

Name of Superintendent [Dr. Robert Nolet]{.underline}

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

District Name [Sulphur Springs School District]{.underline} Tel. [(661)
252-5131]{.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. Marilyn Sparks]{.underline}

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

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

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

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

**[PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA]{.underline}**

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [\_\_\_8\_]{.underline}
Elementary schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Middle schools

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

\_\_\_\_\_ High schools

[\_\_\_8\_]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: \$6734.

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: not available

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

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

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

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

  **K**       12        25                     **37**       **7**                             

  **1**       24        25                     **49**       **8**                             

  **2**       36        29                     **65**       **9**                             

  **3**       25        22                     **47**       **10**                            

  **4**       36        29                     **65**       **11**                            

  **5**       21        38                     **59**       **12**                            

  **6**       30        25                     55           Other                             

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of 48 % White

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

[44]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year: 31%

> (This rate includes the total number of students who transferred to or
> from different schools between October 1 and the end of the school
> year, divided by the total number of students in the school as of
> October 1, multiplied by 100.)

  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------
  **(1)**     Number of students who transferred 67
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 55
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        122
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    395
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .309
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    30.89
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: 23%

86Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: 5

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: 57%

225 Total Number Students Who Qualify

> If this method is not a reasonably 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: 17%

63 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 Autism 0 Orthopedic Impairment

0 Deafness 0 Other Health Impaired

0 Deaf-Blindness 24 Specific Learning Disability

0 Hearing Impairment 15 Speech or Language Impairment

0 Mental Retardation 0 Traumatic Brain Injury

23 Multiple Disabilities 0 Visual Impairment Including Blindness

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

Classroom teachers 19

Special resource teachers/specialists 3 1

Paraprofessionals 17

> Support staff 3 2
>
> Total number 26 20

12\. Student-"classroom teacher" ratio: K -- 3rd Grade = 20:1, 4^th^ --
6^th^ Grade = 28:1

13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students. 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 and drop-off rates.

  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                           2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999   1997-1998

  Daily student attendance 94.45%      93.90%      94.21%      94.52%      

  Daily teacher attendance 95%         95%         94%         95%         

  Teacher turnover rate    0%          4%          8%          14%         

  Student dropout rate                                                     

  Student drop-off rate                                                    
  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

14\. **(*High Schools Only*)** Show what the students who graduated in
Spring 2002 are doing as of September 2002.

+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Graduating class size                               | > \_\_\_\_\_   |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Enrolled in a 4-year college or university          | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Enrolled in a community college                     | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Enrolled in vocational training                     | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Found employment                                    | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Military service                                    | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Other (travel, staying home, etc.)                  | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Unknown                                             | > \_\_\_\_\_%  |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| **Total**                                           | > 100 %        |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+

**[PART III ‑ SUMMARY]{.underline}**

Provide a brief, coherent narrative snapshot of the school in one page
(approximately 475 words). Include at least a summary of the school's
mission or vision in the statement and begin the first sentence with the
school's name, city, and state.

Nestled against the semi arid foothills of California's Santa Clarita
Valley, Mint Canyon Community School is the smallest and most rural
school in the valley. We first welcomed 125 students in 1963 with one
permanent building containing six classrooms surrounding a multipurpose
room which also served as a cafeteria. Since then, Mint Canyon's
population has grown to approximately 400 students with additional
portable structures accommodating the increase in student population,
the cafeteria, and the office. With major student growth predicted over
the next few years, extensive plans for remodeling and new construction
exist, pending state approval for funding.

While there are some expensive homes within our attendance boundary
area, more than half of our students come from family units well below
the poverty level. Approximately 31% of our students speak a language
other than English and of those, 84% are limited English proficient.
2002 California STAR API data revealed that 4% of our parents have
received a college degree, while 80% of our parents have either not
completed high school or have received the equivalent of a high school
education. The same data also revealed a second through sixth grade 27%
mobility rate, while the schoolwide mobility rate was closer to 31%.

Given our demographics and unique setting, the PTA, the School Site
Council, the Student Council, and the site Leadership Team cooperated to
compose the following vision statement. "The Mint Canyon School
community feels a personal pride and connection to our school family and
provides a safe, nurturing, and positive learning environment for all
students. Our vision establishes an academic atmosphere which respects
each other's unique qualities and provides all students with an equal
opportunity to achieve their full potential through a balanced and
quality education. The entire school community takes pride in
successfully preparing our students to function as responsible members
in our ever changing and culturally diverse society." This vision
statement is posted predominantly throughout the school as well as in
each classroom.

Mint Canyon's greatest strength continues to be its people. Support from
the Sulphur Springs School District, a dedicated PTA, and good old
fashioned hard work by the entire school community have all contributed
to our improvement in academic achievement. Mint Canyon School
represents a commitment and dedication to high expectations, positive
morale, and educational excellence.

**[PART IV - INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS]{.underline}**

1.  **Describe the meaning of the test results.**

Academic progress of Mint Canyon students is measured by the California
Academic Performance Index (API), the California State Test (criterion
referenced test), and the Stanford 9 test (norm referenced test). Data
for the following tables was derived from the California Department of
Education Internet STAR testing website as well as DataWorks Educational
Research company.

The California Department of Education has determined that an API score
of 800 or above signifies the school's students are achieving at or
above state standards. The number is reflective of each school's overall
achievement in both the Stanford 9 (SAT 9) norm referenced test and the
California Standards Test (CST), as well as the achievement of
significant subgroups, mobility factor, and parent educational level.
Schools scoring below the 800 API are provided with a mathematically
computed target growth number each year. The included API table
indicates that Mint Canyon School has far exceeded our target growth
number each year, not only schoolwide, but for each significant subgroup
as well.

The English/Language Arts CST has been in existence for the past two
years. Therefore, the included tables reflect comparison information for
performance standards for the past two years only. The Math CST was
administered last year for the first time, so therefore data from only
last year has been reported in the included tables. According to their
scaled score and grade level, students are rated as: Far Below Basic,
Below Basic, Basic, Proficient, or Advanced. California's standards
indicate that students should be scoring in the Proficient or Advanced
ranges. The following indicate 2002 scaled score ranges for performance
standards.

Even though long term comparative data is not available, Mint Canyon
School strives to move students from the Far Below Basic range to the
Below Basic range, from the Below Basic range to the Basic range, from
the Basic range to the Proficient range, and from the Proficient range
into the Advanced range.

The long term grade level data from the SAT 9 norm referenced test is
reported in terms of the percentage of students scoring above the 50
percentile, while subgroups are reported in terms of national percentage
and only available for the past three years. Data indicates that Mint
Canyon students have made significant growth in all grade levels and
subgroups.

2.  **Show in one-half page (approximately 200 words) how the school
    uses assessment data to understand and improve student and school
    performance.**

The Mint Canyon staff utilizes a wide variety of assessment data in
order to refine their instruction of state and district standards. First
grade teachers review students' end of the year kindergarten assessment
results. Second through sixth grade teachers meet in grade level teams
to review students' Stanford 9 and California Standards Test (CST)
scores from the previous year in reading, math, language, and spelling.
Teachers then analyze data content clusters to determine strengths and
weaknesses for each student. A grade level target growth is determined,
and specific instructional plans for remediation and extension
activities are developed. Formal remedial interventions include the
following: targeted first grade students receive assistance from a
kindergarten teacher with the *VoWac* program; and specific second and
third grade students receive scaffolding support through the
supplemental *Reading Explorers* program which is designed to build
fluency and comprehension. This past year, upper grade teachers
determined a need for additional writing opportunities for their
students. Therefore, a kindergarten teacher provides weekly writing
opportunities and instruction for all upper grade students. All students
are provided with remedial or extended independent practice in math
through the *Accelerated Math* computer program. The *Accelerated
Reader* computer program, which allows students to progress at their own
rate, is also an integral part of the language arts program.

Students in the bottom two quintiles are identified and provided with
extensive in class support designed to meet their instructional needs.
In addition, these students are given opportunities to meet standards
through participation in the after school intervention program. Mint
Canyon teachers provide after school intervention classes in English
Language Development and writing, reading, and math for first through
sixth grade students. Programs and materials utilized in after school
intervention classes differ from those used during the normal school
day, therefore, participating students are exposed to a wider range of
support designed to scaffold their learning.

3.  **Describe in one-half page how the school communicates student
    performance, including assessment data to parents, students, and the
    community.**

Mint Canyon parents and families are involved in ongoing two-way
communication concerning their child's education. Schoolwide results of
formal assessments are reported to parents and community in the annual
School Accountability Report Card. Staff analysis of all assessment data
is used as a catalyst for the development of student performance
standards which are identified in the Single Plan for Student
Achievement (SPSA). Once the SPSA has been adopted, the plan, including
an in-depth analysis of the assessment results, is presented in a public
forum for parents, staff, and community.

Parents are provided both formal and informal opportunities to meet
their child's teacher and discuss student performance. Back-to-School
Night, Open House, PTA, and Site Council meetings are among the
opportunities for formal teacher/parent contact. In addition, two formal
parent conferences are held each year. During these conferences, report
cards, Individual Learning Plans (ILPs) for students in special programs
such as Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) and English as a Second
Language, Individual Education Plans (IEPs) for students in Special
Education, and student work portfolios are reviewed by parent and
teacher. Student's performance on district and site standards based
assessments and district benchmark testing are also shared during the
formal parent conference. Translators are provided for parents as
needed. Informal opportunities for teachers to communicate with parents
include a "Friday Report" or "Friday Folder" highlighting behavior and
academic accomplishments for that week. Weekly/monthly classroom
newsletters also update parents on the activities in the classroom on an
informal basis.

School information is sent home in Spanish and English. These documents
include student handbooks, enrollment forms, ILPs, IEPs, school and
classroom letters, report cards, the School Accountability Report Card,
standardized test results, and other school related material. All
parents receive a monthly newsletter highlighting school activities,
upcoming school and community events and parenting topics. Parents of
GATE students are kept apprised of GATE activities through the GATE
coordinator and classroom teacher. Mint Canyon has a Bilingual Community
Liaison to facilitate communication between parents and the school. This
year, Mint Canyon has created a "HotLink" network for parents with
e-mail access to communicate and receive information from our school
homepage via the district website.

4.  **Describe in one-half page how the school will share its successes
    with other schools.**

Mint Canyon's successes are shared district wide, within our school
community, and county wide. 85% of our teaching staff has presented
in-services for other teachers during the district's staff professional
development program. In addition, at quarterly district grade level
meetings, the Mint Canyon staff shares specific curricular information
as well as successful strategies, ideas, and resources used in their
classroom with district colleagues. Mint Canyon has two representatives
to the district's Curriculum Council, another means to convey
achievements and share information to other school sites within our
district. Council members convene monthly to discuss and analyze
specific curricular areas. Through this reciprocal sharing of strategies
and methods, all students have access to the latest scientifically based
methods of learning.

California's Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) program
provides participants with a network for sharing and implementing the
California Teaching Standards. One of Mint Canyon's teachers is a BTSA
Trainer who provides in-services and workshops throughout Los Angeles
County. Mint Canyon's principal and a teacher are participants in the
BTSA Steering Committee. Yet another of Mint Canyon's teachers is an
English Language Learner Consultant who provides in-services throughout
the Southern California region. Mint Canyon's principal networks with
other local principals during AB 75 principal training.

**[PART V - CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION]{.underline}**

1.  **Describe in one page the school's curriculum, including foreign
    languages, and show how all students are engaged with significant
    content, based on high standards.**

Mint Canyon School's curriculum design begins with careful analysis of
the California State Frameworks and Standards. Teachers utilize these
frameworks and standards for long-range planning and then goals are
established to ensure that all major components and standards of each
content area are taught. Content areas include standards based
instruction in language arts, mathematics, science, health, history,
social studies, fine arts, and physical education.

Representatives from the Mint Canyon staff and parent community work
with other members of the district to adopt district standards and
research based textbooks that cover curriculum in a comprehensive
manner. Our most recent adoption is Houghton Mifflin language arts
series, which specifically addresses, and is aligned to, the California
State Standards in English/Language Arts. Supplemental resources are
also utilized to meet the needs of individual learners. These resources
include *Accelerated Reading* materials and assessments, along with
strategically targeted phonics programs, phonemic awareness activities,
and Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) to meet
the needs of our English Language Learners. Our math series, McGraw
Hill, is also standards based and addresses the math strands at all
grade levels. *Accelerated Math*, metacognitive activities and
technology-based approaches are all incorporated into the math program.
Our science, health, and history/social studies curriculum are developed
through the same processes and are integrated throughout the language
arts curriculum, yet are specific to grade level standards.

With long-term objectives in place, Mint Canyon grade level teams meet
to develop creative and comprehensive approaches to the curriculum. This
curriculum encompasses a variety of strategies and methods in order to
address the diverse learning styles and backgrounds of our students.
Lessons are developed which integrate subjects in ways that relate to
the everyday lives of our students and the world around them. Teachers
often combine their expertise to create team teaching situations in
order to assure that all students have access to all areas of the
curriculum as well as addressing students' different levels and styles
of learning. Qualifying students also receive support from the Resource,
Language/Speech, and adaptive P.E. Specialists.

Students' progress towards these established goals is measured through
diverse methods of assessments. The Sulphur Springs Union School
District has developed grade level block plans based on the state's
curriculum standards. These block plans guide teachers in lesson
planning and guarantee that the content being taught is significant and
based upon California's high standards. The block plans also address
pacing to ensure that the broadest spectrum of the curriculum is
addressed. Accountability for student learning is ensured through
biannual benchmark assessments in the areas of language arts, reading,
and math. These benchmark assessments assure that the content being
taught is standards based, and that students are mastering these skills
in the content areas. Students not meeting benchmark levels are targeted
for intervention programs incorporated within the school day as well as
after school. After school intervention classes are taught using
specific programs by our certificated teachers. A district wide Summer
Academy is also utilized to help students reach proficiency levels. A
site funded P.E. consultant coordinates with classroom teachers and
administers activities for specific grade levels as outlined by district
P.E. standards.

Mint Canyon teachers engage students in a total curriculum that
challenges them to achieve their full potential. District benchmark
assessment, national standardized test, and state criterion reference
test scores reflect the effectiveness of curriculum efforts made by the
Mint Canyon staff, students, and the entire school community.

2.  **Describe in one-half page the school's reading curriculum,
    including a description of why the school chose this particular
    approach to reading.**

The California English/Language Arts standards are the backbone of Mint
Canyon's balanced, comprehensive reading, writing, listening, and
speaking program. English/Language Arts is the key to all future
academic success and receives a strong emphasis for *all* students as a
stand-alone area of instruction as well as being integrated into all
content areas*.* Beginning with the Mint Canyon state supported
preschool and the language based kindergarten program, early literacy is
a major focus. This major focus on literacy continues through sixth
grade. Kindergarten through third grade teachers participated in the
California Reading and Literacy Project (CRLP), which focuses on the use
of appropriate language arts assessments (RESULTS) to guide instruction
while monitoring student progress. CRLP participants received extensive
professional development in analyzing assessment data, using the data to
differentiate teaching in order to accommodate student learning, and
implementing key components of an effective reading program. Because
Mint Canyon's goal is for all students to be fluent readers by the time
they exit third grade, CRLP teachers have found the RESULTS assessments
to be so successful that they are continuing to implement the program
even though the state's three-year grant expired last year.

Utilizing the district developed block plans referred to in the previous
question, the basal reader is the center of the English/Language Arts
program with additional materials and supplemental programs used in
order to best meet students' needs. The primary grade core program
focuses on the teaching of phonemic awareness, phonics, decoding,
vocabulary, comprehension strategies, spelling, writing skills, and
listening and speaking skills. In addition, primary teachers utilize
guided reading with supplemental texts, such as *Rigby* and *Wright
Group*. Daily phonics instruction is supplemented with *VoWac*. In the
upper grades the program focuses on vocabulary, comprehension
strategies, spelling, writing skills, listening, speaking skills, text
handling, and strategic reading skills. Core literature novels are also
used to apply comprehension and vocabulary skills through "real
literary" experiences. Students are positively engaged in the
*Accelerated Reader* computer program which assesses comprehension and
vocabulary skills following the reading of specially identified library
books. This program has proven to be highly motivating for all students.

3.  **Describe in one-half page one other curriculum area of the
    school's choice and show how it relates to essential skills and
    knowledge based on the school's mission.**

Mint Canyon's vision statement is to provide all students with equal
opportunities to achieve their full potential through a quality,
balanced education and to become life long learners. Site based
management provides an effective avenue for developing and revising our
standards based vision of student success and achievement especially as
it relates to English/Language Arts and math. The staff has created a
comprehensive and challenging math curriculum that stresses problem
solving, study skills, and critical thinking designed to assist students
in interpreting the world around them. This is especially visible in our
McGraw Hill math series, which emphasizes "real world" problem solving
and application.

Differentiated mathematics instruction is delivered through a variety of
scientifically based instructional strategies. Students are encouraged
to go beyond the core curriculum through opportunities for extension
activities. Second through sixth grade students not only have access to
the McGraw Hill standards based math program, but they are also
independently challenged through the use of their personally tailored
*Accelerated Math* computer program. This technology assesses each
student's acquired skills and then generates individualized practice
based upon those skills. All math strands are intricately woven
throughout our daily curriculum with the McGraw Hill math series, the
Problem of the Day, 5 Minute Review, teacher created "Miscellaneous
Math," *Mixed Math*, and *Mountain Math.* Specifically chosen fourth
through sixth grade level teams participate in the districtwide Math
Field Day in which they compete with students from other district
schools in geometry, algebra, number sense, statistics, data analysis,
and probability.

State standards and McGraw Hill math are used as catalysts to drive the
district created instructional block plans referred to in previous
questions. Ongoing assessment is utilized by all Mint Canyon teachers in
order to meet the diverse needs of our student population. The district
has implemented student math portfolios to reflect chapter pre- and
post- test results on student growth and performance. The information
derived from chapter pretests is used to drive instruction and meet
individual student's needs. Districtwide benchmark assessments, which
are aligned to the block plans, are administered twice a year to ensure
students' success in meeting state standards.

4.  **Describe in one-half page the different instructional methods the
    school uses to improve student learning.**

The Mint Canyon staff employs a wide variety of instructional methods,
pedagogy, and instructional strategies encompassing all learning
modalities and styles. Effective and differentiated instruction, based
on a rigorous review of assessment data, provides all students with
equal access to the total curriculum. Data from the Stanford 9, CST,
RESULTS, California Writing test (fourth grade only), district writing
prompts, biannual benchmark assessments, and teacher created tests are
analyzed to ensure that all teachers are able to make informed decisions
in their teaching and to choose strategies and materials designed to
meet the needs of all students.

Teachers utilize a wide variety of instructional strategies to meet
students' needs. Multiple grouping arrangements, cooperative learning,
whole group and small group instruction, individual instruction, team
teaching, hands on experiences and technology represent some of these
methods. Flexible grouping is employed and specific student clusters are
formed in response to identified student needs. In addition to grouping,
teachers use visual aids, real media, and other right hemispheric
assists to maximize student learning. Manipulatives, multimedia
presentations, experiments, and other tactile activities also address
the variety of student learning styles.

Scientifically based instructional methodologies are used daily in each
classroom. Students master skills and acquire knowledge as teachers tap
into prior knowledge, relate lessons to real life situations, utilize
effective questioning techniques, demonstrate with appropriate modeling,
check for understanding, and provide immediate and ongoing feedback.
Guided and independent practice include higher level thinking
activities. Extensive use of reciprocal teaching and writing programs
are incorporated into each teacher's repertoire of strategies and
methods.

5.  **Describe in one-half page the school's professional development
    program and its impact on improving student achievement.**

Staff development is a high priority at Mint Canyon School. Site based
professional development decisions are based upon analysis of student
assessment data. Staff members analyze results of on-going assessment
for all student subgroups. Using this data analysis, Mint Canyon's
Leadership Team, which includes primary and upper grade teachers and the
principal, collaborates to identify areas of relative weakness, creates
a yearly staff development plan designed to scaffold these areas, and
then implements appropriate inservices. Previous topics have addressed
reciprocal teaching strategies, integrating technology into classroom
learning, SDAIE, addressing diversity, and Four Square Writing.
Additionally, yearly professional growth objectives incorporating
targeted growth areas are written by each teacher.

Through a variety of opportunities, Mint Canyon's dedicated teachers
remain current on educational issues. New and returning staff members
receive district sponsored training in Effective Teaching, Cooperative
Learning, Second Language Acquisition, Early Intervention for School
Success, and specific grade level curricular needs as determined by site
and district goals. Previous district staff professional development
days have been dedicated to writing, standards alignment, and diversity
training. Participating Mint Canyon teachers have shared these
strategies with colleagues and implemented them into their regular
classroom teaching.

Site monthly grade level meetings allow Mint Canyon teachers with
opportunities to plan collaboratively and share instructional ideas.
Weekly staff meetings not only keep teachers apprised and current on
site specific concerns, but are also opportunities for staff
professional development and collaboration. These meetings have provided
useful inservice opportunities for test analysis, literacy research, use
of the writing rubric, updating student portfolios, and as an informal
vehicle for sharing effective new strategies with colleagues. Student
portfolios not only include assessment information, but also include
behavior observations, learning styles, and effective strategies for
each student. Grade level meetings are dedicated to analyzing student
portfolios which have proven to be an extremely beneficial communication
link. This information provides a smooth transition for each student to
achieve academic success throughout his/her Mint Canyon career.

Our shared vision and pride in Mint Canyon School is evident in all our
daily practices and improved achievement of our educational goals. Mint
Canyon School represents a commitment to educational excellence!

**Data Tables**

**English/Language Arts**

Grade Far Below Basic Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced

2 261 or less 262 - 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 401 402 or above

3 258 or less 259 - 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 401 402 or above

4 268 or less 269 - 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 392 393 or above

5 270 or less 271 - 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 394 395 or above

6 267 or less 268 - 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 393 394 or above

**Math**

2 235 or less 236 -- 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 413 414 or above

3 235 or less 236 -- 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 413 414 or above

4 244 or less 245 -- 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 400 401 or above

5 247 or less 248 -- 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 429 430 or above

6 252 or less 253 -- 299 300 -- 349 350 -- 414 415 or above

**California Academic Performance Index**

2002 2001 2000 1999

SCHOOLWIDE 728\*\* 715\* 705 653

Percent Tested 100% 98% 100% 100%

1-10 Statewide Rank 6 6 6 6

1-10 Similar Schools Rank 10 9 10 9

SUBGROUPS

Hispanic 680 677 644 594

SocioEconomic 697 689 682 612

\*\* The method for calculation was changed prior to March 2003

\* The method for calculation was changed April 2002

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**English/Language Arts**

Grade: Second Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

> 2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

SECOND GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 338.8

At or Above Basic 71% 80%

At or Above Proficient 30% 41%

At or Above Advanced 14% 7%

Number of Students Tested 44 68

Percent of Total Students Tested 98% 82%

Number of Students Excluded 0 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0 0

Percent Out of Level Test 2% 18%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 332.1

At or Above Basic 72% 62%

At or Above Proficient 24% 27%

At or Above Advanced 10% 8%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 63% 68%

At or Above Proficient 23% 21%

At or Above Advanced 16% 16%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 324.1

At or Above Basic 63% 61%

At or Above Proficient 32% 32%

At or Above Advanced 9% 10%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**Math**

Grade: Second Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

SECOND GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 334.2

At or Above Basic 69%

At or Above Proficient 42%

At or Above Advanced 13%

Number of Students Tested 45

Percent of Total Students Tested 100%

Number of Students Excluded 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0%

Percent Out of Grade Level 0%

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 330.8

At or Above Basic 69%

At or Above Proficient 37%

At or Above Advanced 14%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 63%

At or Above Proficient 32%

At or Above Advanced 5%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 342.7

At or Above Basic 68%

At or Above Proficient 43%

At or Above Advanced 16%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**English/Language Arts**

Grade: Third Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

THIRD GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 332.4

At or Above Basic 72% 88%

At or Above Proficient 37% 26%

At or Above Advanced 5% 9%

Number of Students Tested 60 48

Percent of Total Students Tested 90% 96%

Number of Students Excluded 0 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0% 0%

Percent of Out of Grade Level 10% 4%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 322.0

At or Above Basic 66% 63%

At or Above Proficient 25% 19%

At or Above Advanced 3% 11%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 62% 60%

At or Above Proficient 10% 5%

At or Above Advanced 0% 0%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 323.5

At or Above Basic 62% 59%

At or Above Proficient 34% 30%

At or Above Advanced 11% 9%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**Math**

Grade: Third Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

> 2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

THIRD GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 355.6

At or Above Basic 70%

At or Above Proficient 55%

At or Above Advanced 26%

Number of Students Tested 62

Percent of Total Students Tested 93%

Number of Students Excluded 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0%

Percent of Out of Grade Level 7%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 354.8

At or Above Basic 72%

At or Above Proficient 53%

At or Above Advanced 22%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 57%

At or Above Proficient 43%

At or Above Advanced 14%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 331.6

At or Above Basic 65%

At or Above Proficient 38%

At or Above Advanced 12%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**English/Language Arts**

Grade: Fourth Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

> 2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

FOURTH GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 342.9

At or Above Basic 89% 69%

At or Above Proficient 38% 39%

At or Above Advanced 18% 11%

Number of Students Tested 51 57

Percent of Total Students Tested 88% 81%

Number of Students Excluded 0 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0% 0%

Percent of Out of Grade Level 12% 19%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 336.9

At or Above Basic 87% 47%

At or Above Proficient 27% 20%

At or Above Advanced 17% 3%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 73% 50%

At or Above Proficient 23% 25%

At or Above Advanced 9% 6%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 332.9

At or Above Basic 71% 66%

At or Above Proficient 36% 33%

At or Above Advanced 14% 11%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**Math**

Grade: Fourth Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

> 2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

FOURTH GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 345.3

At or Above Basic 83%

At or Above Proficient 47%

At or Above Advanced 15%

Number of Students Tested 53

Percent of Total Students Tested 91%

Number of Students Excluded 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0%

Percent Out of Grade Level 9%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 340.5

At or Above Basic 85%

At or Above Proficient 44%

At or Above Advanced 16%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 82%

At or Above Proficient 46%

At or Above Advanced 18%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 332.4

At or Above Basic 67%

At or Above Proficient 37%

At or Above Advanced 13%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**English/Language Arts**

Grade: Fifth Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

FIFTH GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 338.6

At or Above Basic 87% 77%

At or Above Proficient 37% 24%

At or Above Advanced 7% 6%

Number of Students Tested 44 69

Percent of Total Students Tested 81% 74%

Number of Students Excluded 0 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0% 0%

Percent of Out of Grade Level 19% 26%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 331.7

At or Above Basic 79% 70%

At or Above Proficient 25% 14%

At or Above Advanced 4% 3%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 40% 61%

At or Above Proficient 13% 17%

At or Above Advanced 0% 0%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 327.7

At or Above Basic 71% 66%

At or Above Proficient 31% 28%

At or Above Advanced 9% 7%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**Math**

Grade: Fifth Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

> 2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

FIFTH GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 367.2

At or Above Basic 84%

At or Above Proficient 56%

At or Above Advanced 23%

Number of Students Tested 43

Percent of Total Students Tested 80%

Number of Students Excluded 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0%

Percent Out of Grade Level 20%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 358.9

At or Above Basic 70%

At or Above Proficient 61%

At or Above Advanced 9%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 54%

At or Above Proficient 31%

At or Above Advanced 15%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 322.5

At or Above Basic 59%

At or Above Proficient 27%

At or Above Advanced 7%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**English/Language Arts**

Grade: Sixth Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

> 2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

SIXTH GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 333.5

At or Above Basic 84% 73%

At or Above Proficient 34% 38%

At or Above Advanced 10% 8%

Number of Students Tested 50 46

Percent of Total Students Tested 76% 87%

Number of Students Excluded 0 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0% 0%

Percent of Out of Grade Level 24% 13%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 326.6

At or Above Basic 82% 64%

At or Above Proficient 25% 23%

At or Above Advanced 7% 0%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 73% 69%

At or Above Proficient 14% 23%

At or Above Advanced 0% 0%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 323.0

At or Above Basic 66% 67%

At or Above Proficient 30% 31%

At or Above Advanced 9% 8%

**Criterion Referenced Test**

**Math**

Grade: Sixth Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication Year: 2001 and 2002

Publisher: California Department of Education

Number excluded: 0 Percent excluded: 0

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

2001 -- 2002 2000 -- 2001

SIXTH GRADE

Mean Scaled Score 341.7

At or Above Basic 70%

At or Above Proficient 41%

At or Above Advanced 16%

Number of Students Tested 51

Percent of Total Students Tested 77%

Number of Students Excluded 0

Percent of Students Excluded 0%

Percent Out of Grade Level 23%

(as per Special Education IEP)

SUBGROUPS

Economically Disadvantaged

Mean Scaled Score 331.4

At or Above Basic 68%

At or Above Proficient 34%

At or Above Advanced 10%

Hispanic

At or Above Basic 71%

At or Above Proficient 29%

At or Above Advanced 10%

STATE SCORES

Mean Scaled Score 328.3

At or Above Basic 62%

At or Above Proficient 32%

At or Above Advanced 10%

**Norm Referenced Test**

**Reading**

Grades: Second through Sixth Test: Stanford Achievement Test

Edition/Publication Year: Form T, 9^th^ Edition, published 1996

Publisher: Harcourt Educational Measurement

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

Percentage of Students Scoring Above the 50%ile

> 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998

MINT CANYON

SECOND GRADE 67 72 61 26 29

THIRD GRADE 55 46 41 23 26

FOURTH GRADE 59 44 40 49 39

FIFTH GRADE 66 37 53 44 35

SIXTH GRADE 47 49 49 42 42

CALIFORNIA

Second Grade 53 51 49

Third Grade 47 46 44

Fourth Grade 49 47 45

Fifth Grade 46 45 44

Sixth Grade 48 47 46

The following scores are given as National Percentiles

Mint Canyon SUBGROUPS

SocioEconomic

Second Grade 52 60 56

Third Grade 40 40 37

Fourth Grade 48 32 42

Fifth Grade 44 34 43

Sixth Grade 48 37 45

Hispanic

Second Grade 55 57 57

Third Grade 40 34 26

Fourth Grade 47 41 28

Fifth Grade 35 34 39

Sixth Grade 41 45 30

**Norm Referenced Test**

**Math**

Grades: Second through Sixth Test: Stanford Achievement Test

Edition/Publication Year: Form T, 9^th^ Edition, published 1996

Publisher: Harcourt Educational Measurement

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed:

There were no groups specifically excluded from testing. However, as per
their IEP, Special Education students were administered the California
Standards Test at their instructional level, not their educational
level. Therefore, their scores are not reflected in the following data.

Percentage of Students Scoring Above the 50%ile

> 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998

MINT CANYON

SECOND GRADE 54 70 60 48 40

THIRD GRADE 72 88 56 35 32

FOURTH GRADE 65 63 56 53 40

FIFTH GRADE 77 46 67 54 45

SIXTH GRADE 73 62 62 71 53

CALIFORNIA

Second Grade 62 58 57

Third Grade 62 59 56

Fourth Grade 58 54 51

Fifth Grade 57 54 50

Sixth Grade 60 57 55

The following scores are reported as National Percentile

Mint Canyon SUBGROUPS

SocioEconomic

Second Grade 58 61 60

Third Grade 68 72 64

Fourth Grade 58 44 47

Fifth Grade 59 47 61

Sixth Grade 69 60 69

Hispanic

Second Grade 52 54 54

Third Grade 64 71 49

Fourth Grade 59 39 45

Fifth Grade 51 52 60

Sixth Grade 68 54 53