U. S. Department of Education September 2003

**2003-2004 *No Child Left Behind*---*Blue Ribbon Schools Program***

## Cover Sheet

Name of Principal [Mrs. Nancy
Manley\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [\_\_\_\_T. H. Rogers Elementary School
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_5840 San Felipe
Rd.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

[Houston, \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Texas
77057-3059\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel.[(713) 917-3565\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Fax
[(713)
917-3622\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Website/URL[\_\_\_\_\_ms.houstonisd.org/THRogers/\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}
E-mail [nmanley@houstonisd.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. Kaye
Stripling\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

District Name \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Houston Independent School
District\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}Tel.[(713)
892-6300\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.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. Karla
Cisneros\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

(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**

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

1.  The school has some configuration that includes grades K-12.
    (Schools with one principal,

> Even K-12 schools, must apply as an entire school.)

2.  The school has not been in school improvement status or been
    identified by the state as

> "persistently dangerous" within the last two years. To meet final
> eligibility, the school must meet the state's adequate yearly progress
> requirement in the 2003-2004 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 1998.

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 statues 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: [186]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[37]{.underline} Middle schools

> [0]{.underline} Junior high schools
>
> [23]{.underline} High schools

[52]{.underline} Other (Briefly explain\*)

298. TOTAL

\*Schools that offer programs that are not typical of most school
programs. Examples of these types of schools are early childhood
centers, specialty schools for health professions and law enforcement,
behavioral programs, drop back in schools, schools for pregnant teens,
etc.

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure [\$ 5, 323.00]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure [\$ 5,030.00]{.underline}

**[SCHOOL]{.underline}** (To be completed by all schools)

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

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

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

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

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

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 2%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 12%" />
<col style="width: 12%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Grade</strong></td>
<td><p><strong># of</strong></p>
<p><strong>Males</strong></p></td>
<td colspan="2"><p><strong># of</strong></p>
<p><strong>Females</strong></p></td>
<td><p><strong>Grade</strong></p>
<p><strong>Total</strong></p></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>Grade</strong></td>
<td><p><strong># of</strong></p>
<p><strong>Males</strong></p></td>
<td><p><strong># of</strong></p>
<p><strong>Females</strong></p></td>
<td><p><strong>Grade</strong></p>
<p><strong>Total</strong></p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>K</strong></td>
<td>11</td>
<td colspan="2">11</td>
<td>22</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>7</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>1</strong></td>
<td>27</td>
<td colspan="2">19</td>
<td>46</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>8</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2</strong></td>
<td>17</td>
<td colspan="2">15</td>
<td>32</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>9</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td>19</td>
<td colspan="2">15</td>
<td>34</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>4</strong></td>
<td>38</td>
<td colspan="2">29</td>
<td>67</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>11</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>5</strong></td>
<td>34</td>
<td colspan="2">32</td>
<td>66</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>12</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>Other</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="6"><strong>TOTAL STUDENTS IN THE APPLYING
SCHOOL</strong></td>
<td>267</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [24.8]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [15.8]{.underline} % Black or African
American

[30.5]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

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

> (The 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 | 10                   |
|         | to the school after October 1      |                      |
|         | until the                          |                      |
|         |                                    |                      |
|         | end of the year.                   |                      |
+---------+------------------------------------+----------------------+
| **(2)** | Number of students who transferred | 7                    |
|         | from the school after October 1    |                      |
|         |                                    |                      |
|         | until the end of the year.         |                      |
+---------+------------------------------------+----------------------+
| **(3)** | Subtotal of all transferred        | 17                   |
|         | students \[sum                     |                      |
|         |                                    |                      |
|         | of rows (1) and (2)\]              |                      |
+---------+------------------------------------+----------------------+
| **(4)** | Total number of students in the    | 304                  |
|         | school as of October 1             |                      |
+---------+------------------------------------+----------------------+
| **(5)** | Subtotal in row (3)divided by      | 5.6%                 |
|         | total in row(4)                    |                      |
+---------+------------------------------------+----------------------+
| **(6)** | Amount in row (5)multiplied by 100 | 560                  |
+---------+------------------------------------+----------------------+

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [0.3]{.underline}
%

1.  [1]{.underline} Total Number Limited English

> Proficient

Number of languages represented: [1 \_]{.underline}

Specify languages: [Spanish]{.underline}

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [42.3]{.underline}
%

113. Total Number Students Who Qualify

> If this method does not produce 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: [47.6]{.underline} %

150. Total Number of Students served

> (The high percentage of students in our special education program is
> due to the severity of the students\' disabilities. The students in
> the multiply impaired program must have specialized nursing care,
> instruction, and OT/PT services. Due to the severe shortage of
> certified teachers of the deaf, the school district made a decision to
> educate all deaf students at T. H. Rogers.)

Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to
conditions designated in the

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

[1]{.underline} Autism [15]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment

[78]{.underline} Deafness [4]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

Deaf-Blindness Specific Learning Disability

Hearing Impairment [24]{.underline} Speech or Language Impairment

[31]{.underline} Mental Retardation Traumatic Brain Injury

[150]{.underline} Multiple Disabilities [17]{.underline} 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}**

Administrators [3]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers [34]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists [21]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals [22]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Support staff [4]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Total number [84]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Average school student-\"classroom teacher\" ratio: [8.2]{.underline}

12. 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.)

  --------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                        2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999

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

  Daily teacher         95%         94%         94%         98%         96%
  attendance                                                            

  Teacher turnover rate 9.5%        6%          7%          14%         10%

  Student dropout rate  N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  Student drop-off rate N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A
  --------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

##### PART III -- SUMMARY

T. H. Rogers Elementary School, one of the Houston Independent School
District's many Magnet programs, is devoted entirely to providing the
best education not only for special education but also gifted and
talented children from across the entire area. The staff addresses the
vast learning requirements of a wide range and age of students divided
into three large populations. Rogers Elementary serves kindergarten
through fifth grade gifted and talented children in its Vanguard
program, pre-school through fifth grade deaf students in the Regional
Day School Program for the Deaf (R.D.S.P.D.), and birth through fifth
grade Multiply Impaired (MI) students. A special staff numbering 84
paraprofessionals, speech therapists, social workers, nurses,
audiologists, occupational and physical therapists, teachers, counselors
and administrators work as a team to serve the special needs of our
students. The ethnic make up of the elementary school is 15.8% African
American, 28.9% Asian, 30.5% Hispanic, 0% Native American and 24.8%
White/Other. The student population is 47.6% special education and 42.3%
free/reduced lunch. We have a 94% attendance rate.

The Vanguard program uses a curriculum that focuses on higher level
thinking skills, the MI students work on a functionally based
curriculum, and the Deaf students use a total communication language
program. Each of these groups has many opportunities to work with the
others both in classroom settings and in socially oriented,
extra-curricular, age appropriate activities. One emphasis in Vanguard
is a volunteer program in which gifted students begin assisting the MI
students in the primary grades, and continue throughout middle school.
Deaf and Vanguard students share ancillary classes, physical education
classes, assemblies, lunch, field trips, clubs and organizations, and
extra-curricular activities. The Vanguard students participate in
Sign-Language and Spanish classes as a foreign language.

The mission of T. H. Rogers School is to provide all students with the
educational opportunity to develop to their fullest potential. The
school ensures that a supportive learning environment integrates the
special populations, provides enhanced learning opportunities, and
reflects a continuing commitment to excellence.

Two years ago, through the assistance of the Bush Foundation Grant,
Rogers installed an in-house TV studio dedicated to instructional
emphasis on Media Literacy. Elementary students are given the
opportunity to participate in the studio announcements, newscasts, and
special presentations. During the summer of 2003, a teleprompter and
advanced computer programs were purchased to enhance the production of
the daily broadcasts, which are delivered via cable network to our
elementary students each day.

Each student population excels in its specific arena. The Vanguard
students remain at the top in academic testing scores within the Houston
Independent School District and elementary students continue to excel in
area academic competitions among students in the city and state. Some of
our higher functioning Multiply Impaired Special Education students are
successfully working in jobs in the local community. The Deaf students
are learning communication skills that will allow them to integrate into
society, which helps them to become independent, productive citizens
that contribute to the economy. Rogers Elementary has also been very
successful in involving Houston's corporate and civic institutions to
provide individual students with equipment and special projects for the
school. Two non-profit organizations, Be An Angel Fund and Just Like Us,
work very closely with the school staff to provide special equipment and
supplies to our economically deprived students. The staff, district, and
community continually strive to provide a quality, integrated program,
which meets the needs of all elementary students.

Part IV -- INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS

# **1. State Tests and Exclusionary Criteria**

The Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) was first
administered in the Houston Independent School District (HISD) and in
Texas in March 2003. It replaced the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills
(TAAS) as a major part of the State Accountability Rating System. The
school ratings, as designated by the TEA, range from "Low Performing" to
"Exemplary." T. H. Rogers has proudly been rated TAAS Exemplary every
year but one since 1994. This past year was a pilot-test TAKS year and
we were rated Exemplary once again. Passing the third grade reading and
fourth grade writing tests is required for promotion to the next grade.

Every 3^rd^ through 5^th^ grade student is administered the TAKS;
however, there is a procedure in place to exclude students from TAKS if
they are labeled for Special Education and the Admissions Review and
Dismissal Committee (ARD) makes that decision. All Vanguard students are
administered the TAKS in English, including all Special Education
students and English Language Learners (ELL).

The TAAS and TAKS test results are reported in the following language:
"Commended" represents the highest score of mastery (Meeting All
Objectives); "Meets Minimum Expectations" (Met Standard) is an indicator
of a passing score; and "Does Not Meet Minimum Expectations" (Below
Standard) is an indicator of a failing score. The passing score is an
indicator that the student has achieved mastery of at least 70% of the
objectives on any subtest, such as reading, writing, or mathematics.

Stanford 9 is a national, norm-referenced test, which HISD has used
since the 1999 school year. The only students excluded from taking the
Stanford 9 are those students in our MI and deaf programs. Our MI and
Deaf special education students take the SDAA (State-Developed
Alternative Assessment) or the LDAA (Locally-Developed Alternative
Assessment). Stanford 9 data from 2001 through 2003 are included,
disaggregated data is not available from the test vendor.

**2. Monitoring and Use of Assessment Data**

The teachers, administrators, and support personnel utilize a myriad of
available assessment tools to plan and formulate the academic direction.

The Vanguard population uses the District supported PASS test results
based on the Houston Independent School District's (HISD) Project CLEAR
curriculum, the state TAKS test results, Stanford test results, and a
number of teacher-developed assessment methods.

The Deaf utilizes State Developed Alternative Assessment (SDAA), Locally
Developed Alternative Assessment (LDAA), and a criterion-based, teacher
developed assessment. The MI staff develops database forms
individualized for each student, and works with our evaluation
specialists to develop an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) for each
child to develop the specific needs of that student. Numerous
checkpoints are built in to measure success, and it is always an option
to re-evaluate and adjust the student's IEP as needed. In any event,
IEP's are re-evaluated at least once every year. This IEP process also
applies to our Deaf student population. Additionally, the MI staff
utilizes the (Functional Skills Screening Inventory) FSSI and Skills
Activities Matrixing System (SAMS) assessment tools for their students.

Finally, T.H. Rogers is in constant motion to update, improve and evolve
to meet our students' needs through committees consisting of
campus-related staff, parents, and students. Those committees are the
Admission/Review/Dismissal Committee, Language Proficient Assessment
Committee, Parent Advisory Committee, Grade Placement Committee, Site
Decision Making Committee, Faculty Advisory Committee, Campus
Referral/Intervention Assistance Committee, Security/Safety Committee,
Student Advisory Committee, Student Attendance Committee, Discipline
Committee, Entrance/Exit for Advanced Academics Committee, and the 504
committee.

3\. Communicating Student Performance

Our greatest pride here at TH Rogers is communicating our exemplary
student performance to the parents, students, and community at large.
Through many forms of communication and media, the staff, students,
parents, and district ensure that student achievement and assessment
data is readily accessible and efficiently disseminated to all.

We highlight such data in the Ram News, a monthly newsletter, distribute
letters from the principal, publish the School Improvement Plan, issue
progress reports every 3-4 weeks and report cards on a nine week
schedule. Because Rogers Elementary is an Exemplary school, results of
our assessment data are also published at least annually in the *Houston
Chronicle*. During daily television broadcasts student academic and
extra-curricular achievements are communicated on closed-circuit Channel
16 KRAM News. On the world-wide web, news of student performance is only
a click away at
[**http://ms.houstonisd.org/THRogers**](http://ms.houstonisd.org/THRogers).
The "Awards," "Announcements," and "Curriculum" links on the site
provide up-to-the-minute details of student success and progress as well
as homework reminders.

The T. H. Rogers community and its' visitors need only to walk our halls
and sidewalks to get a feel for what our students are doing. Plaques,
student's works on bulletin boards, exhibit tables, and trophy cases
serve as visual reminders of student success. Messages on our lawn-side
marquee let passers-by know that there is learning going on inside our
walls. Communicating student performance keeps our students and staff
motivated to keep building on our success.

**4. Sharing Success With Other Schools**

T.H. Rogers Elementary continues it long-standing tradition as a mentor
school, both regionally and worldwide. We welcome numerous educators and
groups who observe our various programs, our staff is often requested to
lead both district and regional in-services, and our administrative and
professional support staff is often utilized to assist in the evaluation
of non-Rogers' students and academic programs. Because Rogers has a
large number of students that are gifted and talented, deaf, and
multiply impaired, which is typically a low-incidence population at most
other schools, we have developed specialized programs and techniques
that maximize learning.

When we find materials or procedures that work with our students, we
share this information with teachers of individual classes located in
the neighborhood schools. We hold workshops for teachers of the gifted
and talented as well as for teachers of the multiply impaired and deaf
to explain not only the background and theories behind some of our
specialized programs, but also how to implement these ideas in their own
classrooms. A number of university programs, including University of
Houston, Rice University, Houston Baptist University, St. Thomas
University, Texas A & M, and Lamar University often come to observe our
programs. Although we are not a "neighborhood" school *per se*, we often
invite area schools to participate in numerous events of interest to
fellow students and teachers.

Because of the diverse population we serve and our successful teaching
methods, we are constantly sharing our methods of success with the
broader education community. Several times a year, our school is visited
by fellow educators from abroad who have heard of our gifted and
talented academic and special education programs via our school website
or word-of-mouth. Visitors from as far away as Korea, China, England,
and Brazil have come to learn about our programs, which in their
countries are either non-existent or in the beginning stages of
development, especially among their disabled populations. One of our
most heart-warming successes has been with students from other schools
who come into Rogers to volunteer with our multiply impaired students.
They not only learn the techniques and reasoning behind how the students
are educated, but become passionate ambassadors for students with
special needs, and are able to explain the program to staff and peers in
their own schools.

**PART V \-- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

**1. The Comprehensive Curriculum of T. H. Rogers School**

The MI curriculum focuses on the development of functional skills within
the classroom, school, and community at large. Routines are established
which emphasize maximum student participation in a variety of areas, and
priority is given to skills which are used with greatest frequency and
which allow students the best access to people and materials in their
environments. Communication is a major emphasis to allow non-verbal
students a method to communicate their needs, wants, and desires to
others in their world.

The Deaf program has at its core language development as the key to
success in each subject area. Students are immersed in language-rich
experiences from the age of three. The structured programs we use
include Language for Learning, Direct Instruction for Reading, and Saxon
Math, supplemented by creative interdisciplinary units developed by the
teachers. All academic areas are enriched by classes in Art, Science,
Performing Arts, Social Studies, and Science, and monthly field trips
highlight learning both as a pre-teaching and culminating experience.
Deaf students at Rogers also have the opportunity to compete on the
school level in Spelling Bee and Science Fair. The Deaf integrate with
Vanguard and MI through activities such as Kite Day (highlighting
aerospace and wind machines), a traditional Field Day, Rogersburg
(simulating a colonial town), Gardening and Native Plant areas, and
other school-wide programs. All Vanguard students are instructed in Sign
Language to facilitate integration, and of course we use Deaf Awareness
Month in September to share and inform the staff, parents, and students
about Deafness.

The Vanguard curriculum is designed to meet the needs of our gifted and
talented students in grades K-5 by providing an educational environment
where they may successfully and cooperatively work with their cognitive
peers. Vertically aligned and differentiated in depth, complexity and
pacing, the program develops intellectual ability, critical thinking
skills, and leadership ability. Our multi-faceted Reading/Language Arts
curriculum includes not only basic skills, but also provides ample
opportunities to practice and expand skills in writing, reading and
spelling. Our students participate in a program called WITS (Writers in
the Public Schools) where local authors teach writing techniques, then
participate in the statewide Rising Star contest for poetry, short
stories and art. In the Digital Book Fair original stories are written,
illustrated and artistically bound for competition. Rogers' students
have received the highest recognition and honors from these contests,
thus confirming our need for a challenging curriculum for gifted and
talented students. In addition, higher level reading is stimulated
through the Accelerated Reader Renaissance Program in which students are
provided ample choices on challenging reading levels where they can
self-monitor their progress. In mathematics, students are exposed to
daily hands-on activities, and teachers employ both algebraic and
geometric initiatives to provide a strong foundation in mathematical
thinking, and we participate in Math Olympiads and Number Sense
contests. Chess is also taught as enrichment instruction to promote
predictive, logical thinking skills. In addition, our integration of the
core subjects of Reading, Social Studies and Science into our Math
curriculum has proven beneficial. Since our elementary school is so
widely diverse, the Social Studies curriculum explores holidays around
the world with emphasis on customs and traditions, in addition to the
general curriculum. We also confirm mastery of basic skills by promoting
participation in the annual Geography Bee, and have been fortunate to
send many entrants past the district competition level. Parents are
eagerly invited as community resource volunteers to impart their
personal knowledge of the heritage and culture of various countries
through direct classroom presentations. Finally, the curriculum's
emphasis on critical thinking is notable in the Science curriculum,
which is also hands-on and lab-based. With a Science specialist as a
full-time employee and a separate elementary Science Lab, our students
are well versed in the scientific method. Our teachers have also been
trained in HU-LINC, a grant-funded program for training and supplying
educators with scientific equipment and activities. The result of this
broad-based Science curriculum is reflected in our students' success, on
all levels, in Science Fair and Odyssey of the Mind competitions.

**2. Reading Curriculum**

T. H. Rogers' Vanguard reading curriculum is dictated by the objectives
put forth in the Texas state-mandated curriculum, the Texas Essential
Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). In order to focus upon the specific needs
of our students, we follow HISD's "A Balanced Approach to Reading" which
contains the broad-based components of alphabetic, phonemic,
orthographic, and print awareness in grades K-3. In the intermediate
grades our focus is on developing improved word recognition, increasing
fluency and automaticity at appropriate reading difficulty levels,
predicting and summarizing, and complex analyzation of diverse genres.
To ensure student success, our program provides abundant opportunities
for our learners to build upon successful experiences in reading through
a variety of techniques and exposures to literature. We utilize
whole-group instruction, flexible small-group instructional
configurations, instructional work-stations, paired groupings,
independent projects, and Accelerated Reading Intervention programs to
best address our students' needs and optimize student achievement. Our
gifted and talented program not only promotes achievement of basic
skills, but also stimulates higher-order thinking and critical thinking
skills as portrayed in Bloom's Taxonomy, Sandra Kaplan's Scholars and
Knowledge Program, and Kagan's Multiple Intelligences. These approaches
provide our students with a differentiated curriculum by modifying the
depth, complexity, and pacing of the general school program in all
academic areas, thus meeting the needs of all children. It is through
this multi-faceted combination of research-based techniques that our
students have consistently shown growth and success by scoring in the
top 10% on state assessments for the past 16 years.

The Deaf reading curriculum is on the cutting edge. Classically Deaf
children fall behind in reading scores due to the fact that the majority
of people learn to read by "sounding out" words. We are presently
involved in a pilot program using Visual Phonics to teach Deaf children
to read. Visual Phonics allows the deaf child to see the sounds and
gives them a boost in breaking the code of reading. Visual Phonics is
used for the scripted program by SRA called Corrective Reading. We are
in the second year of a three-year trial under the guidance of our
reading deaf education consultant, Beverly Trezek, from the University
of Wisconsin. The reading instruction is supplemented with various
techniques known to succeed with deaf children, such as creating small
plays about stories, teacher made hands-on activities related to real
and imaginary stories, and reward reading programs, such as Book It! In
this program, students are rewarded after reading a set number of books
prescribed by the teacher.

**3. Science Curriculum**

The Science curriculum of T. H. Rogers Elementary School is driven by
the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) and Houston Independent
School District's CLEAR (Clarifying Learning to Enhance Achievement
Results) Curriculum. Various research-based learning theories are the
premise of both of these directives. CLEAR aligns the districts and
state objectives while emphasizing scientific process, skill
connections. The Science curriculum faculty creatively adheres to the
TEKS and CLEAR curriculum by employing Constructivist learning theory
and Inquiry Based learning strategies. This approach relies on student
involvement and collaboration to yield conceptual understanding and
discovery. Students work as disciplinarians employing the scientific
method and science process skills in "hands-on" activities enjoyed in
the self-contained classroom, science lab, school gardens and science
related field trips. Teachers work as facilitators who encourage and
nurture inquiry habits and reasoning.

Instructors use the Collaborative Learning Theory, which allows students
to work in groups to develop and construct their learning by discussing
observations, and obtaining and analyzing data to conceptualize ideas.
The Problem Based learning approach promotes effective use of critical
thinking skills through discovery. These discovery opportunities focus
on critical thinking skills and the more challenging aspects of the
Blooms Taxonomy, and student assignments and activities are designed and
patterned by the Dimensions of Depth and Complexity as created by Sandra
Kaplan. These learning theories and strategies are implemented to
encourage students who can apply their learning as they choose and
design their own mandatory science fair projects. T. H. Rogers
instructors implement skills and strategies acquired through
professional training at the district's Science Lead Teacher workshops,
Gifted and Talented workshops, Rice University's HULINC program, and
other Professional Development opportunities. The thorough preparation
of the students and faculty provides for successful compliance with the
school's mission, " . . . to provide all students with the educational
opportunity to develop to their fullest potential." This faculty strives
to develop students who construct knowledge that is accessible,
transferable and applicable.

**4. Instructional Methods**

The teacher to promote optimum student learning uses a wide variety of
instructional methods at T. H. Rogers, each chosen. In the Multiply
Impaired Unit, skills within daily functional routines are analyzed and
broken down to provide maximum participation by each student, especially
those who are at a low level of functioning. Community based instruction
allows the student to practice the skills he or she has learned in
settings other than the classroom. In order to promote communication
with these students, a calendar system is often used which cues the
student to routines in their day by use of representational objects or
pictures. Students may also be provided with voice-output devices with
single or multiple messages which they access by using different parts
of their bodies in order to communicate.

The Deaf program has used direct Instruction (DI) the past few years
with evident improvement in language, reading and writing skills. By
delivering a quick paced lesson, acknowledging positive student
behavior, following DI lesson procedures and using data to guide
instructional decisions, student success is assured.

The Vanguard teachers use methods to inform and challenge their students
as well as to encourage them to accept responsibility for their
learning. Methods such as Think-Pair-Share, inquiry, role playing,
co-operative learning, and concept maps are among those used.

Every teacher in our school, before choosing a particular method,
considers the age and developmental level of each student, what the
child already knows, what she or he needs to know next to reach each
objective, and the student's learning style. Every teacher in our school
is committed to the children in her or his care and believes he or she
can find a way to teach each child.

**5. Professional Development**

T. H. Rogers School is committed to supporting continual professional
development of the staff as a cornerstone of educational improvement.
Utilizing data from research on effective methodology for adult
learners, the school has designed a multi-faceted approach. The
foundation is a six-day staff development program that centers on five
strands of best teacher practices, interpersonal skills, technology,
current trends, and new employee training. To meet the unique needs of
the staff due to diversified teaching fields and experience, the staff
development program offers a choice of training whenever possible. A
professional library of training tapes and professional journals
provides for individualized learning. Topic centered study groups
provide in-depth learning. Each teacher is allocated one substitute day
to use to attend outside workshops, and the PTO has committed to paying
up to \$50 of the tuition for any workshop. The faculty was surveyed for
specific topics of interest in January. Members of the Instructional
Council and the team leaders met with the specific teams to identify
topics to support the School Improvement Plan goals for the coming year.
The school will continue the specific training identified under the
Comprehensive Analysis Program for Special Education developed several
years ago. The goals of professional development for 2003-2004 are
conflict resolution and a school wide discipline-management program,
CLEAR/TEKS, staff technology and paraprofessional training. Our campus
has engaged in extensive curriculum support training in the area of
CLEAR/TEKS and will continue to do so. Training is inclusive of the
Internet, digitizing our campus networking system, graphic calculators
and any necessary instruction indicated by staff survey and requests.
Time will be spent applying the knowledge in the lab or classroom
setting. RDSPD teachers will continue training in the TEKS, CLEAR, and
the Direct Instruction program.

NATIONAL NORM REFERENCE TEST DATA

Grade: [1]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # READING -- Grade 1              | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| First Grade Vanguard              | 89        | 92      | 86        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 18        | 19      | 22        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 46%       | 49%     | 71%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 21        | 20      | 9         |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 54%       | 51%     | 29%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [1]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # MATH -- Grade 1                 | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| First Grade Vanguard              | 87        | 92      | 86        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 18        | 19      | 22        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 46%       | 49%     | 71%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 21        | 20      | 9         |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 54%       | 51%     | 29%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [2]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # READING -- Grade 2              | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Second Grade Vanguard             | 74        | 76      | 79        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 19        | 19      | 22        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 59%       | 61%     | 56%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 13        | 12      | 17        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 41%       | 39%     | 44%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [2]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # MATH -- Grade 2                 | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Second Grade Vanguard             | 81        | 77      | 81        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 19        | 19      | 22        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 59%       | 61%     | 56%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 13        | 12      | 17        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 41%       | 39%     | 44%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # READING -- Grade 3              | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Third Grade Vanguard              | 86        | 77      | 83        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 20        | 18      | 22        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 51%       | 46%     | 59%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 19        | 21      | 15        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 49%       | 54%     | 41%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [3]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # MATH -- Grade 3                 | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Third Grade Vanguard              | 78        | 74      | 85        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 20        | 18      | 59        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 51%       | 46%     | 59%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 19        | 21      | 15        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 49%       | 54%     | 41%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [4]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # READING -- Grade 4              | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Fourth Grade Vanguard             | 81        | 85      | 89        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 38        | 39      | 42        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 64%       | 68%     | 61%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 21        | 18      | 27        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 36%       | 32%     | 39%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [4]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # MATH -- Grade 4                 | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Fourth Grade Vanguard             | 87        | 88      | 90        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 38        | 39      | 42        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 64%       | 68%     | 61%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 21        | 18      | 27        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 36%       | 32%     | 39%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [5]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # READING -- Grade 5              | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Fifth Grade Vanguard              | 83        | 84      | 81        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 44        | 40      | 46        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 56%       | 51%     | 66%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 35        | 39      | 24        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 44%       | 49%     | 34%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

Grade: [5]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [Ninth/See Table]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Company]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf students]{.underline}

[and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the Stanford Nine
due to their disabilities.]{.underline}

[The deaf students are assessed with an approved State Developed
Alternative Test (SDAA) and]{.underline}

[The multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally Developed
Alternative Test (LDAA),]{.underline}

[Skills Activities Matrixing System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills
Screening Inventory (FSSI).]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs [X]{.underline} Scaled
scores \_\_\_ Percentiles \_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| # MATH -- Grade 5                 | 2002-2003 | 20      | 2000-2001 |
|                                   |           | 01-2002 |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Testing Month                     | March     | F       | February  |
|                                   |           | ebruary |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Publication Year                  | 2001      | 2001    | 1996      |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Fifth Grade Vanguard              | 88        | 87      | 91        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students tested         | 44        | 40      | 66        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students tested        | 56%       | 51%     | 66%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Number of students excluded       | 35        | 39      | 24        |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| Percent of students excluded      | 44%       | 49%     | 34%       |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES\*                 |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 1\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 2\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 3\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
| 4\.                               |           |         |           |
+-----------------------------------+-----------+---------+-----------+

\*Stanford Nine Scores are not disaggregated for socioeconomic or
ethnic/racial groups.

N/A = Not Available.

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                       | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # NATIONAL MEAN SCORE |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| **NATIONAL STANDARD   |        |        |        |        |        |
| DEVIATION**           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

**STATE CRITERION REFERENCED TESTS**

Grade [3 - 5]{.underline}

Tests: 1998-2002 - [Texas Assessment of Academic Skills
(TAAS)]{.underline}

2003 [Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [1998-2003]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered [See
Table on Individual Grade]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test [See Table on Individual
Grade]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[The deaf and the multiply impaired students were excluded from the
Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) or Texas Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) due to their disabilities. The deaf students
are assessed with an approved State Developed Alternative Assessment
(SDAA) and the multiply impaired students are assessed using Locally
Developed Alternative Assessment (LDAA), Skills Activities Matrixing
System (SAMS), and the Functional Skills Screening Inventory
(FSSI).]{.underline}

Number excluded [See Individual Grade Level Tables]{.underline}

Percent excluded [See Individual Grade Level Tables]{.underline}

Explain the standards for basic, proficient, and advanced (or the
relevant state categories), and make clear what the test results mean in
a way that someone unfamiliar with the test can interpret the results.

### RELEVANT STATE CATEGORIES

**MET STANDARD** = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

**COMMENDED PERFORMANCE** = Meeting 100% of all objectives tested. This
category is not available by subgroups

**BELOW STANDARD** = Failure to meet 70% of all objectives tested.

Data Display Table for Reading and Mathematics (Language Arts or
English).

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (1999 -- 2002)**

## Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003)

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # READING -- Grade 3  | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Testing Month         | March  | April  | April  | April  | April  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SCHOOL SCORES         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 82%    | 90%    | 91%    | 95%    | 94%    |
| Performance           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 22     | 21     | 22     | 22     | 18     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 58%    | 54%    | 59%    | 49%    | 51%    |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 16     | 18     | 15     | 23     | 16     |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 42%    | 46%    | 41%    | 51%    | 46%    |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent Absent        | \-     | \-     | \-     | \-     | 3%     |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 1\. AFRICAN AMERICAN  |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 4      | 3      | 2      | 4      | 3      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 2\. HISPANIC          |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 3      | 3      | 3      | 2      | 2      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 3\. WHITE             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 75%    | 50%    | 45%    | 67%    | 86%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 8      | 8      | 11     | 12     | 7      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 4\. ASIAN             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 100%   | 43%    | 33%    | N/A    | 83%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 7      | 7      | 6      | 3      | 6      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## STATE SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| TOTAL                 |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 90%    | 88%    | 87%    | 88%    | 88%    |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| State Mean            |        |        |        |        |        |
| Score\*\*\*\*         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

\*Met Standard = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

\*\*Commended Performance = Meeting 100% of all objectives. Subgroups
not available on state

scores and campus scores when less than five students are tested.

\*\*\*Below Standard = Vendor does not report these numbers.

\*\*\*\*State Mean Score -- State Mean Scores not reported by test
vendor.

N/A = Not Available

Data Display Table for Reading and Mathematics (Language Arts or
English).

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (1999 -- 2002)**

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003)

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # MATH -- Grade 3     | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Testing Month         | March  | April  | April  | April  | April  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SCHOOL SCORES         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 91%    | 52%    | 41%    | 55%    | 78%    |
| Performance           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 22     | 21     | 22     | 22     | 18     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 58%    | 54%    | 59%    | 49%    | 51%    |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 16     | 18     | 15     | 23     | 16     |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 42%    | 46%    | 41%    | 51%    | 46%    |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent Absent        | \-     | \-     | \-     | \-     | 3%     |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 1\. AFRICAN AMERICAN  |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 4      | 3      | 2      | 4      | 3      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 2\. HISPANIC          |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 3      | 3      | 3      | 3      | 2      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 3\. WHITE             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 100%   | 50%    | 45%    | 67%    | \%     |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 8      | 8      | 11     | 12     | 7      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 4\. ASIAN             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 100%   | 57%    | 33%    | N/A    | \%     |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 7      | 7      | 6      | 3      | 6      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## STATE SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| TOTAL                 |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 91%    | 87%    | 83%    | 81%    | 83%    |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| State Mean            |        |        |        |        |        |
| Score\*\*\*\*         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

\*Met Standard = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

\*\*Commended Performance = Meeting 100% of all objectives. Subgroups
not available on state

scores and campus scores when less than five students are tested.

\*\*\*Below Standard = Vendor does not report these numbers.

\*\*\*\*State Mean Score -- State Mean Scores not reported by test
vendor.

N/A = Not Available

Data Display Table for Reading and Mathematics (Language Arts or
English).

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (1999 -- 2002)**

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003)

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # READING -- Grade 4  | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Testing Month         | March  | April  | April  | April  | April  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SCHOOL SCORES         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 53%    | 86%    | 95%    | 78%    | 95%    |
| Performance           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 40     | 43     | 42     | 41     | 41     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 70%    | 75%    | 61%    | 69%    | 65%    |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 17     | 14     | 27     | 17     | 22     |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 30%    | 25%    | 39%    | 29%    | 35%    |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent Absent        | \-     | \-     | \-     | 2%     | \-     |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 1\. AFRICAN AMERICAN  |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | 100%   | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 4      | 5      | 7      | 4      | 3      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 2\. HISPANIC          |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | 60%    | N/A    | 100%   | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 4      | 5      | 4      | 5      | 3      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 3\. WHITE             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 42%    | 85%    | 95%    | 76%    | 100%   |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 12     | 16     | 20     | 17     | 22     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 4\. ASIAN             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 50%    | 100%   | 91%    | 87%    | 91%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 20     | 17     | 11     | 15     | 11     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## STATE SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| TOTAL                 |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 86%    | 93%    | 91%    | 90%    | 89%    |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| State Mean            |        |        |        |        |        |
| Score\*\*\*\*         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

\*Met Standard = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

\*\*Commended Performance = Meeting 100% of all objectives. Subgroups
not available on state

scores and campus scores when less than five students are tested.

\*\*\*Below Standard = Vendor does not report these numbers.

\*\*\*\*State Mean Score -- State Mean Scores not reported by test
vendor.

N/A = Not Available

Data Display Table for Reading and Mathematics (Language Arts or
English).

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (1999 -- 2002)**

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003)

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # MATH -- Grade 4     | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Testing Month         | March  | April  | April  | April  | April  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SCHOOL SCORES         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 73%    | 56%    | 45%    | 81%    | 95%    |
| Performance           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 40     | 43     | 42     | 42     | 41     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 70%    | 75%    | 61%    | 71%    | 65%    |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 17     | 14     | 27     | 17     | 22     |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 30%    | 25%    | 39%    | 29%    | 35%    |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent Absent        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 1\. AFRICAN AMERICAN  |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | 40%    | 64%    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 4      | 5      | 7      | 4      | 3      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 2\. HISPANIC          |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | 60%    | N/A    | 100%   | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 4      | 5      | 4      | 5      | 3      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 3\. WHITE             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 83%    | 56%    | 45%    | 89%    | 100%   |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 12     | 16     | 20     | 18     | 22     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 4\. ASIAN             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 65%    | 59%    | 64%    | 80%    | 91%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 20     | 17     | 11     | 15     | 11     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## STATE SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| TOTAL                 |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 88%    | 94%    | 91%    | 87%    | 88%    |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| State Mean            |        |        |        |        |        |
| Score\*\*\*\*         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

\*Met Standard = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

\*\*Commended Performance = Meeting 100% of all objectives. Subgroups
not available on state

scores and campus scores when less than five students are tested.

\*\*\*Below Standard = Vendor does not report these numbers.

\*\*\*\*State Mean Score -- State Mean Scores not reported by test
vendor.

N/A = Not Available

Data Display Table for Reading and Mathematics (Language Arts or
English).

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (1999 -- 2002)**

## Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003)

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # READING -- Grade 5  | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Testing Month         | March  | April  | April  | April  | April  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SCHOOL SCORES         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 69%    | 96%    | 95%    | 93%    | 87%    |
| Performance           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 49     | 45     | 42     | 40     | 45     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 62%    | 57%    | 60%    | 70%    | 73%    |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 30     | 34     | 28     | 17     | 17     |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 48%    | 43%    | 40%    | 28%    | 27%    |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent Absent        | \-     | \-     | \-     | 2%     | \-     |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 1\. AFRICAN AMERICAN  |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 80%    | 83     | N/A    | N/A    | 90%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 5      | 6      | 4      | 2      | 10     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 2\. HISPANIC          |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 40%    | 100    | 100%   | 80%    | 60%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 5      | 5      | 6      | 5      | 5      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 3\. WHITE             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 65%    | 95     | 95%    | 95%    | 86%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 20     | 21     | 19     | 20     | 21     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 4\. ASIAN             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 79%    | 100    | 100%   | 91%    | 100%   |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 19     | 13     | 17     | 11     | 9      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| #                     |        |        |        |        |        |
| #  5. NATIVE AMERICAN |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## % Met Standard     |        |        |        | 100%   |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## % Comm             |        |        |        | NA     |        |
| ended Performance\*\* |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## %                  |        |        |        |        |        |
|  Below Standard\*\*\* |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## Numb               |        |        |        | 2      |        |
| er of students tested |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| ## STATE SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| TOTAL                 |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 80%    | 93%    | 90%    | 88%    | 86%    |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| State Mean            |        |        |        |        |        |
| Score\*\*\*\*         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

\*Met Standard = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

\*\*Commended Performance = Meeting 100% of all objectives. Subgroups
not available on state

scores and campus scores when less than five students are tested.

\*\*\*Below Standard = Vendor does not report these numbers.

\*\*\*\*State Mean Score -- State Mean Scores not reported by test
vendor.

N/A = Not Available

**(Grade 5 Math continued on next two pages.)**

Data Display Table for Reading and Mathematics (Language Arts or
English).

**Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (1999 -- 2002)**

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003)

+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| # MATH -- Grade 5     | 200    | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                       | 2-2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Testing Month         | March  | April  | April  | April  | April  |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SCHOOL SCORES         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 80%    | 62%    | 72%    | 83%    | 71%    |
| Performance           |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 49     | 45     | 46     | 42     | 45     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 62%    | 57%    | 66%    | 70%    | 73%    |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 30     | 34     | 24     | 17     | 17     |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent of students   | 38%    | 43%    | 34%    | 28%    | 27%    |
| excluded              |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Percent Absent        | \-     | \-     | \-     | 2%     | \-     |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 1\. AFRICAN AMERICAN  |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 80%    | 33%    | N/A    | N/A    | 40%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 5      | 6      | 4      | 3      | 10     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 2\. HISPANIC          |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 80%    | 40%    | 50%    | 80%    | 40%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 5      | 5      | 6      | 5      | 5      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 3\. WHITE             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 70%    | 67%    | 79%    | 81%    | 86%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 20     | 21     | 19     | 21     | 21     |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 4\. ASIAN             |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | 89%    | 77%    | 71%    | 100%   | 89%    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    | 19     | 13     | 17     | 11     | 9      |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| #                     |        |        |        |        |        |
| #  5. NATIVE AMERICAN |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       |        |        |        | 100%   |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          |        |        |        | N/A    |        |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*\*      |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Number of students    |        |        |        | 2      |        |
| tested                |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| #### STATE SCORES     |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| TOTAL                 |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Met Standard       | 86%    | 96%    | 95%    | 92%    | 90%    |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Commended          | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
| Performance\*\*       |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| \% Below              |        |        |        |        |        |
| Standard\*\*\*        |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| State Mean            |        |        |        |        |        |
| Score\*\*\*\*         |        |        |        |        |        |
+-----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

\*Met Standard = Meeting state minimum passage of 70% of objectives
answered correctly.

\*\*Commended Performance = Meeting 100% of all objectives. Subgroups
not available on state

scores and campus scores when less than five students are tested.

\*\*\*Below Standard = Vendor does not report these numbers.

\*\*\*\*State Mean Score -- State Mean Scores not reported by test
vendor.

N/A = Not Available