# U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NOVEMBER 2002

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

## Cover Sheet

Name of Principal [Dr. Gerald C. Traynor
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Official School Name [Las Lomitas Elementary
School\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

School Mailing Address [299 Alameda de las
Pulgas\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

##### Atherton CA 94027-6469\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

City State Zip Code=4 (9 digits total)

##### Tel. (650) 854-5900 FAX (650) 854-4493\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Website /URL [www.llesd.k12.ca.us](http://www.llesd.k12.ca.us/) [E
mail]{.underline}
<Jtraynor@llesd.k12.ca.us>[\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ (Principal's
Signature

*[Private Schools: If the information requested is not applicable, write
N/A in the space.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}*

Name of Superintendent [Ms. Mary Ann
Somerville\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

District Name [Las Lomitas Elementary School District Tel.(650)
854-2880\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.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\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President /Chairperson [Dr. Lee
Anderson\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

## [PART II -- DEMOGRAPHIC DATA]{.underline}

DISTRICT (Questions 1-2 not applicable to private schools)

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

> [1]{.underline} Middle schools
>
> \_\_\_ Junior high schools
>
> \_\_\_ High schools
>
> [2]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure:
[\_\_\_\$9,950]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure:
[\_\_\$6,133\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

**SCHOOL** (To be completed by all schools)

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

\[ \] Urban or large central city

\[ \] Suburban school with characteristics typical of an urban area

\[x\] Suburban

\[ \] Small city or town in a rural area

\[ \] Rural

4\. [2 1/2]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in
her/his position at this school.

[18 months]{.underline} 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:

2002-2003 School Year

+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| Grade | \# of | \# of  | Grade   |   | Grade  | \#   | \# of | Total |
|       |       |        |         |   |        | of   |       |       |
|       | Males | F      | Total   |   |        |      | Fe    |       |
|       |       | emales |         |   |        | M    | males |       |
|       |       |        |         |   |        | ales |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| K     | 59    | 64     | 123     |   | 7      |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| 1     | 50    | 47     | 97      |   | 8      |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| 2     | 60    | 58     | 118     |   | 9      |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| 3     | 61    | 64     | 125     |   | 10     |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| 4     |       |        |         |   | 11     |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| 5     |       |        |         |   | 12     |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
| 6     |       |        |         |   | Other  |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+
|       | #  TO |        |         |   |        |      |       | 463   |
|       | TAL S |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
|       | TUDEN |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
|       | TS IN |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
|       |  THE  |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
|       | APPLY |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
|       | ING S |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
|       | CHOOL |        |         |   |        |      |       |       |
+-------+-------+--------+---------+---+--------+------+-------+-------+

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of \_\_[70]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [1]{.underline} % Black or African American

> [\_\_\_8\_]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino
>
> [17]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander
>
> [\_\_\_0\_]{.underline} % American Indian/Alaskan Native

[­\_\_\_4\_]{.underline} % Multiple ethnicity

**100 % Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year: [\_\_7.98
%]{.underline}

(This rate includes the total number of students who transferred to or
from different schools between

October 1 and the end of the school year, divided by the total number of
students in the school as of

October 1, multiplied by 100.)

+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+
| \(1\)      | Number of students who             | 16                 |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | transferred to the school          |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | after October 1 until the          |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | end of the year.                   |                    |
+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+
| \(2\)      | Number of students who             | 18                 |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | transferred from the               |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | school after October 1             |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | until the end of the year.         |                    |
+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+
| \(3\)      | Subtotal of all                    | 34                 |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | transferred students \[sum         |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | of rows (1) and (2)\]              |                    |
+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+
| \(4\)      | Total number of students           | 426                |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | in the school as of                |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | October 1                          |                    |
+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+
| \(5\)      | Subtotal in row (3)                | .0798              |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | divided by total in row            |                    |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | \(4\)                              |                    |
+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+
| \(6\)      | Amount in row (5)                  | 7.98%              |
|            |                                    |                    |
|            | multiplied by 100                  |                    |
+------------+------------------------------------+--------------------+

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school:
[\_\_12.74%]{.underline}

> [\_\_\_\_ 59]{.underline} Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: [\_\_\_\_12\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Specify languages: Spanish, Japanese, Tongan, Russian, Korean, Tagalog,
French, Finnish, Farsi, German, Hindi, and Norwegian

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals:
[\_\_\_2.38%\_]{.underline}

> [\_\_\_\_11\_\_\_\_]{.underline}Total Number Students Who Qualify

If this method is not a reasonably accurate estimate of the percentage
of students from low-income

families or the school does not participate in the federally supported
lunch program, specify a more

accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it
arrived at this estimate.

10\. Students receiving special education services: [8.68]{.underline} %

> [54]{.underline} Total Number of Students Served

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

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

> \_\_\_\_Autism [2]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment
>
> \_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_\_\_Other Health Impaired
>
> \_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [8]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability
>
> \_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment [44]{.underline} Speech or Language
> Impairment
>
> \_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury
>
> \_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment Including
> Blindness

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

# Number of Staff

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

Administrator(s) [\_\_\_\_1\_\_\_]{.underline}
[\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Classroom teachers [\_\_\_25\_\_\_]{.underline}
[\_\_\_\_2\_\_\_]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists [\_\_\_\_1\_\_\_]{.underline}
[\_\_\_ 5 \_\_\_]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [\_\_\_\_3\_\_\_]{.underline} [\_\_ 11 \_]{.underline}

Support staff [\_\_\_\_4\_\_\_]{.underline}
[\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Total number [\_\_\_34\_\_\_]{.underline} [\_\_\_18\_\_\_]{.underline}

12\. Student-"classroom teacher" ratio: [\_\_20:1\_\_\_]{.underline}

13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students. The student
drop-off rate is the difference

between the number of entering students and the number of exiting
students from the same cohort.

(From the same cohort, subtract the number of exiting students from the
number of entering students;

divide that number by the number of entering students; multiply by 100
to get the percentage drop-off

rate.) Briefly explain in 100 words or fewer any major discrepancy
between the dropout rate and

the drop-off rate. Only middle and high schools need to supply dropout
and drop-off rates.

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

  Daily student        414.59      411.33      467.82      458.32      485.28
  attendance                                                           

  Daily teacher        96.5        97.4        96.1        98.2        97.3
  attendance                                                           

  Teacher turnover     0           0           1           0           0
  rate                                                                 

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

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

# PART III -- SUMMARY

Las Lomitas Elementary School, located in the town of Atherton,
California, on the peninsula south of San Francisco, is a public primary
school serving students in kindergarten through third grade.

The mission of Las Lomitas School is to educate all students to achieve
their maximum potential in order to become independent life long
learners and positive contributing members of a global society. This
mission is the driving force behind our vision to be an exemplary, model
K-3 elementary school.

Our kindergarten, first and second grade students are on a staggered
schedule with one half of the class attending school as "early birds"
and the other half as "late birds." This allows a maximum student to
teacher ratio of 10:1 for a 75 minute teaching block that is devoted
specifically to language arts and reading instruction. Third graders do
not have a staggered schedule, however the length of the instructional
day is longer.

Las Lomitas families reside in the communities of Menlo Park, Atherton,
Portola Valley, Woodside and East Palo Alto. This is a high
socioeconomic area overall, but serves students from a range of high,
middle and low-income students. In the current school year the
racial/ethnic composition of the student body is 70% Caucasian, 8%
Hispanic, 13.4% Asian, 1% African American, 2.3% Pacific Islander and
1.5% Filipino. Slightly over 7 1/2% of our students speak a primary
language other than English. Twelve different languages are represented
including a high percentage of Spanish, Japanese and Tongan speaking
students. These students are assigned to regular classes, but have an
extended school day (during early or late bird time) in kindergarten,
first and second grades devoted specifically to English language
development. Some kindergarten and all third grade English Language
Learners are given special English language instruction during the
school day. We celebrate the diversity brought by all families, and are
proud of our students' consistently high achievement on state-mandated
tests.

Parents have a strong interest in and enthusiastically support the
school through volunteer activities, bond elections and teacher support.
An active Parent Teacher Association (PTA) and School Site Council
provide input and the required approval for our school's programs and
fiscal management. Las Lomitas has a long-standing reputation for high
standards and academic excellence.

Las Lomitas School provides a positive learning environment through a
school-wide plan that emphasizes positive recognition for behavior and
the use of elementary "conflict resolution" strategies. Character
education is an integral program that focuses on a different value/life
skill each month.

The school houses a technology lab which can accommodate 20 students, a
library well stocked with current, age appropriate materials, a large
multi-purpose room, rooms for the speech therapist, school counselor,
school psychologist, English Language Development (ELD) teacher,
resource specialist, reading specialists, math specialist and literacy
coaches. In addition, physical education, music and art specialists
complete the educational support providing opportunities for our
students to become well-rounded individuals. A Special Day Class
operated by the San Mateo County Office of Education is housed on site,
and many of the students are included in regular classroom activities.
It is classified as a cross categorical class, serving students with
various disabilities and multiple levels of autism. These children take
alternative assessments and their scores are not part of Las Lomitas
School's data. A privately operated pre-school/day care facility is part
of the campus, and the majority of its students attend our school.

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

1\. The goal of Las Lomitas School is to be "a child-centered
organization where we set high academic expectations for our children
and hold ourselves accountable for student achievement."

Annually we administer the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR)
test, required by the State of California, to all our second and third
graders. (Please see attachments for yearly results.) Formerly known as
the Stanford Achievement Test, ninth edition (SAT 9), this multiple
choice test measures student competency in phonics, reading
comprehension, spelling, language mechanics, language usage, math
computation, mathematical concepts, time, money, and problem solving.
STAR includes a nationally norm referenced test as well as the
California Standards Test (CST) that specifically tests for proficiency
in our state reading/language arts and mathematics standards.

Within our school community we have developed a school-wide Literacy
Assessment Plan to improve literacy assessment data collection. The plan
delineates which assessments are given at each grade level, and to which
students at particular points during the year. Using the Developmental
Reading Assessment (DRA, known on our site as "Celebrations"), teachers
take a "running record" while a student reads a selection out loud to
determine reading proficiency levels and note a child's reading
strengths and weaknesses. This grade-leveled reading assessment is
administered one-on-one to all students. Using one consistent tool
throughout the school helps to calibrate grade-level expectations and
provides a common language for discussing students\' growth.

For the past four years we have trained to use Literacy Collaborative
(LC) assessments and teaching strategies from The Ohio State University.
The LC assessments identify skill abilities in phonics, spelling and
reading. It includes the Observation Survey that identifies reading
readiness and is administered to all kindergartners and any first
graders who begin the year below grade level in reading.

The California English Language Development Test (CELDT) is administered
to all students whose home language is not English. The CELDT determines
a student's proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing
English.

Our recently adopted mathematics textbook is aligned with state
standards and comes with a set of assessments, including chapter tests
that monitor computation, problem solving and higher-level thinking
skills. In addition, grade levels have identified other math assessment
tools to determine student understanding of the State of California's
key mathematics standards. For example, first grade uses specific
assessments to determine which students are proficient in such areas as
1:1 correspondence, number concepts, computation, estimation, and place
value.

We are in the process of developing and using a student data monitoring
system that will provide timely, useful information to guide
instruction. Using the data collected from the STAR, the CST, the
Academic Performance Index (API) issued from the state of California,
Literacy Collaborative assessments, the CELDT results, DRA and grade
level assessments, we are able to provide a comprehensive collection of
data that monitors student progress over a long period of time. In
addition, we will be able to compare growth in various segments of our
student populations by studying disaggregated data to see if all
segments of our student population are moving at a rate commensurate
with the state average.

By using several different assessment tools, and by collecting and
analyzing data, we are able to determine individual student performance
targets, examine group strengths or areas needed for improvement, and
alter our instruction accordingly.

2\. Teachers routinely use the assessment data described in item #1,
Part IV, to make instructional decisions in the classroom. Using the
school results from the STAR, we focus on academic areas needing
improvement and seek ways to alter our teaching to help students gain
confidence and skills in the areas needing to be strengthened. For
instance, we discovered that spelling is an area needing improvement and
sought and implemented a curriculum that would provide for a consistent,
developmentally appropriate method for teaching spelling.

Students in need of English instruction, based on the results of the
CELDT, are given additional opportunities to learn English through an
extended day for some kindergartners, first and second graders while
other kindergarten ELL and third grade ELL students receive special
instruction during the regular school day.

By using the results of the DRA, teachers are able to pinpoint group or
individual weaknesses and formulate instruction to strengthen skills.
For instance, if most children in a classroom seem to struggle with word
attack skills as a result of the one- on- one administered test, the
teacher knows which skills s/he needs to develop. If an individual child
is struggling with fluency, the teacher knows to work with that child in
that area. Some children are identified as needing special reading
instruction as a result of the assessments and are placed in
supplemental reading programs with reading specialists.

Students needing specific support in math, as determined by the math
assessments, can be placed in a small group math program for second and
third graders. As with literacy instruction, teachers are made aware of
and adjust their teaching as group or individual needs are discovered
through assessments.

3\. Student growth and performance is frequently communicated and
showcased not only to parents, but also with the students. A student's
individual, ongoing goals may be established through a personal
conference, by providing a rubric against which the student may compare
his/her work, by using editing checklists as a benchmark for writing.
Charts with strategies for good readers are visible for students to use
as needed. Mathematical problem solving strategies are visible
throughout classrooms. Student work is displayed throughout the school,
not only in individual classrooms, but also in the corridors. Our newly
revised report card format shows student performance on a continuum,
with performance at, above and below grade level standards clearly
indicated. This allows students and parents to monitor growth throughout
the year.

Communication to parents regarding expectations, grade-level standards
and individual performance results is critical to our students' success.
All families receive a packet on the first day of school containing
copies of our standards and expectations. At Parent Information Night,
early in the school year, teachers explain their programs and share
school curriculum as well as state standards to parents. Informal
conferences occur as needed, and formal conferences are held twice
annually for all students. Conferences allow teachers and parents to
review student progress, measuring the student's achievement against the
grade-level standards.

Group performance results are shared with parents and the community
through several means. We share results at School Site Council meetings,
in the annual School Accountability Report Card, in teacher's regular
classroom newsletters, in [The Lion's Roar]{.underline} (a PTA weekly
newsletter sent to parents), in the district superintendent's quarterly
reports to the community, in local newspapers, and on our website at
www.llesd.k12.ca.us.

4\. Our vision is to be an exemplary, model K-3 elementary school. With
that in mind, we are available and willing to share our successes with
other schools. Our English Language Development extended day program is
a model program for other schools in our county. We are a part of the
Mid Peninsula Teachers Institute (MTI) through which teachers
collaborate and train with others in the same teaching assignments. We
have explored the possibility of embracing a mathematics model (Math
Cadre) for our school, a program with an on site-coaching component
similar to the Literacy Collaborative. (See Part V, number 3.)

As a result of our participation in the Literacy Collaborative, the MTI,
and the Math Cadre our teachers interact with other educators locally,
statewide and nationally. Our Literacy coaches are networked with
educators nationally. They often e-mail, call, or write others to
support literacy efforts throughout the nation. The director of the MTI
is a Las Lomitas teacher on special assignment, who has also taught
[Math Their Way]{.underline} classes, technology workshops and has
presented at several curriculum conferences locally and statewide. Our
principal is often called upon to offer suggestions or assistance to
colleagues, and is always willing to confer with those seeking ways to
enhance or improve their school's performance. In addition, he speaks at
various community organizations to share the successes of our school.

Each staff member is encouraged to visit other classrooms, and often
these visits result in a mutual sharing of ideas, materials and
philosophies. Teachers collaborate and cross train with one another both
on campus and within the local districts. In the words of our principal,
we all strive to "get our story out."

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

1\. Las Lomitas School provides a comprehensive curriculum to its
students. Because we align our district standards and teaching to the
California State standards, our standards are high and measurable.
Instruction is guided by these standards and driven by student
performance. All students receive at least 75 minutes of language arts
instruction daily. Literacy forms the core of our curriculum. To support
that core, our teachers utilize the model and curriculum described in
description 2 of Part V. A well-stocked, organized book room contains
fiction and non-fiction material written for all students' reading
levels. The library supplements materials provided for students in order
to support all areas of the curriculum. The librarian selects books to
support classroom units such as poetry, author studies, cultural
explorations, or historical studies.

Our character education program focuses on a different value/life skill
each month. Responsibility, cooperation, patience, good sportsmanship,
initiative, gratitude, and friendship are some of the skills emphasized.
Students frequently check a bulletin board in the main corridor to see
who has received recognition for demonstrating the month's skill.

Children struggling with reading are provided additional support through
Reading Recovery, an intense 1:1 tutorial program for 30 minutes daily,
available to the lowest 20% of first grade readers. The students exit
the program when they achieve classroom average standing. For second and
third graders, Miller-Unruh funded (small group) reading is provided by
a reading specialist. In addition, remedial math lab, Outreach
(volunteer) tutoring, speech therapy, English Language Development
program, a Resource Specialist and a daily Homework Club support
struggling students. An on-site counselor offers small group sessions
for children facing emotional difficulties or needing extra care in
building self-esteem.

Physical education, art and music instruction are a regular part of the
student's schedule. Each child receives 200 minutes of physical
education each 10 school days exclusive of recesses and the lunch
period. The physical education specialist also integrates health
education into the program. The children delight in learning about
muscles, tendons, ligaments and bones through a weekly "trivia" bulletin
board displayed in the main corridor. Our art specialist teaches
techniques and artistic elements through the works of the masters, and
introduces children to famous artistic pieces. Music instruction is
provided for thirty minutes per week. Singing, a study of basic theory,
rhythms, and movement are the basics of the program. Each grade level is
taught to play an instrument. Kindergartners play rhythm instruments,
first graders play melodies and chords with melody bells, second graders
play xylophones and third graders perform on recorders.

Science instruction is primarily hands on using materials and concepts
in the [Full Operation Science System (FOSS)]{.underline} curriculum
developed the by the Lawrence Hall of Science. Students are fully
engaged in the scientific method of predicting an outcome, observation
over time, recording data, and formulating conclusions.

2\. For the past two years, we have been using the Literacy
Collaborative (LC) model, a nationally known research-based approach to
literacy from The Ohio State University. This model includes an on-site
coaching component. It incorporates [four kinds of reading]{.underline}:
[reading aloud]{.underline} which provides a model for fluency,
expression, and language development; [shared reading]{.underline} where
the students read with the teacher; [guided reading]{.underline} which
allows the teacher to teach a particular skill to a small group; and
[independent reading]{.underline} where students read alone. In
addition, there is a strong emphasis on comprehension. The state adopted
series [Open Court]{.underline} by SRA McGraw Hill, supplemented with
leveled guided reading books and library books form the basis of our
reading curriculum materials. Students needing additional reading
support receive one-on-one Reading Recovery assistance or small group
reading instruction taught by reading specialists.

The LC model also includes four kinds of writing: [shared
writing,]{.underline} where the teacher and students create written
material together; [interactive writing]{.underline}, where students
work collaboratively; [guided writing,]{.underline} where teachers
provide support or teach a specific skill to students in the process of
writing; and [independent writing,]{.underline} where students author
material independently. In addition, there is a strong emphasis on
phonics and spelling patterns. Spelling curriculum for kindergartners
and first graders is a phonics-based approach by McCracken. Second and
third graders use [Everyday Spelling]{.underline} materials.

This multi-pronged approach to literacy was chosen after several years
of research on best practices and through a school-wide desire to find a
means to challenge the brightest students while assisting those who are
struggling.

3\. Beginning in the school year 2001-02, we began focusing on the key
California math standards, establishing grade level benchmarks and
creating meaningful assessments. We researched the Silicon Valley Math
Initiative Project, hoping to find a math parallel to the LC, but this
model was not suited to a primary school. Instead, we are creating our
own model, known as the Math Cadre. This year, we are administering
consistent grade level assessments and are analyzing data that allows us
to collaborate to refine our instruction. In grades 1,2,3 we are using
the Harcourt Brace series. Kindergartners use Houghton Mifflin and [Math
Their Way]{.underline} curriculum materials. Hands-on learning is key to
teaching math. Beginning with concrete objects, students move to a level
connecting the concrete object to a concept level. Finally, the
symbolic, mathematical level is achieved. Without an understanding of
the concept, students struggle with math symbols. Throughout the process
of learning, students are always asked how they solved a problem, what
was their thought process, why did they eliminate a particular answer?
Brain-teasers, story problems, timed tests, and frequent assessments are
some of the components we use to provide a comprehensive program to
teach number sense, measurement and geometry, algebra and functions,
mathematical reasoning, statistics and probability. In order to
challenge students with higher ability levels, we have developed grade
level appropriate math enrichment boxes, which students may use
independently or collaboratively.

Students in the computer lab are adept at working with math software
that reinforces skills taught in the classroom. Students struggling with
math are supported in a small group program. The middle school math test
scores and large number of 8^th^ graders enrolled in algebra classes
reflect a firm foundation taught at Las Lomitas School. Without a strong
understanding of math and how to use it in daily life, our students
would not be prepared to "achieve their maximum potential in order to
become independent life long learners and positive contributing members
of a global society."

4\. Recognizing that each child is unique in his/her learning style, Las
Lomitas School teachers excel at providing a wide variety of challenging
learning experiences. We use a range of methods to meet the
instructional needs of all students, including large group, small group
and one-on-one instruction. Oral presentations and discussions, computer
research, writing opportunities, reading instruction, literature
studies, genre studies, math and science manipulatives, and partner
learning are a few of the many ways teachers instruct students. Classes
collaborate to present plays and musical programs for each other and for
parents. PTA sponsored assemblies bring to the children a variety of
artistic experiences including dramatic, scientific, and musical
presentations. Each year a children's author is invited to speak to the
students and parents. The author's books are studied in preparation for
this event. Music, art and physical education specialists offer a
variety of opportunities for students to become well-rounded
individuals. Field trips compliment classroom instruction and offer
children real world experiences. Teachers meet weekly by grade level to
plan creative ways to explore student-centered themes in the curriculum.
For example, social studies units include lessons integrating food,
music, art, clothing, and geography while students learn about people of
other cultures. Third graders and kindergartners "buddy up" for the year
providing an opportunity for the older student to teach the younger
child while the younger child experiences a role model. In addition,
some third graders are trained as conflict managers to assist on the
playground helping resolve problems, which arise during recess. Our
early / late staggered day allows for a 1:10 teacher to student ratio
for K-2 language arts instruction, giving each child a greater
opportunity for teacher guidance and support. Our Student Study Team
process is an opportunity for teachers, parents, and specialists to
collaborate on strategies to assist a struggling student. Instruction
centered around the children and their needs is the basis for our
teaching.

5\. As described earlier, the staff, including the principal, has been
training in the Literacy Collaborative model. This four-year plan began
with a committee that explored the program to determine its relevance
for our school. In the second year, two teachers were trained to become
on-site coaches. In the third year, the coaches began teaching the
methods to the staff, and teachers began integrating the methods into
classroom instruction. In the fourth year, the staff continued training
every other month. These classes are after the regular teaching day and
require extra hours developing a project for classroom use such as
designing learning centers, learning to teach the six traits of writing,
or creating genre studies. In addition, the coaches demonstrate
techniques in individual classrooms or observe a teacher utilizing the
strategies and suggest ways to improve the teacher's presentation.
Developing a similar model for our mathematics instruction is in
progress. Wednesday afternoons are set aside for regularly scheduled
grade level meetings, cross grade level articulations, staff or district
in-services, faculty meetings, district-wide curriculum planning
meetings, and School Site Council meetings. At the weekly grade level
meetings, teachers discuss strategies, develop or analyze assessments
and share in ways to support students. Annually, in collaboration with
the principal, teachers establish individual professional goals and are
provided time and funding to pursue training outside of the district in
order to meet these goals. We are a part of a newly developed
Mid-Peninsula Teacher Institute, a professional development
collaborative that offers in-service courses to four local small school
districts with similar demographics and student needs. All Las Lomitas
teachers are Cross-cultural Language and Academic Development (CLAD)
certified, Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE)
trained, or are in the process of learning these methods to meet the
needs of English learners. Our school board values teacher training and
builds into our calendar two in-service days. As each teacher personally
continues to be a life long learner, we demonstrate to our students the
value of the quest for knowledge and utilize new ideas, research and
methods in our classrooms to help the students become life long
learners.

####### STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS

California Standards Tests

The Data Display Tables are on the following pages.

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics. Complete a separate form for reading
(language arts or English) and mathematics at each grade level.

Grade: 2 Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication year: 1999 Publisher: Educational Testing Service
(The California Department of Education owns the copyright)

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

No specific groups were excluded from testing. If parents requested in
writing that their child be excluded from testing, individuals were not
given the standardized tests. These students were evaluated using our
regular school assessment tools.

Number excluded: It varies by year. Percent excluded: It varies by year.

.

The California Standards Test (CST) determines how well students are
learning the skills and knowledge required by the California Content
Standards for each grade. The California Content Standards explain what
students should know and be able to do at each grade level and in
specific subjects. The California Standards Test scaled scores range
from approximately 200 to 500. The scaled scores are specific to each
grade and content areas. They are designed to serve the needs of
California's accountability system, allowing for accurate comparisons of
scores in the same content area and grade level from year-to-year. The
mean scaled score is the group average scaled score for each grade and
content area. Mean Scaled Scores between 300 and 349 are at the Basic
Performance Standard (Academic Achievement Standard) and scores of 350
or higher are at or above the Proficient Performance Standard. The
California Standards Tests are more rigorous than the SAT 9, and student
scores are likely to be lower on the CST than the SAT 9. The state
target is for every student to score at the Proficient or Advanced
Performance Standard.^1^ The data table shows that the percentage of Las
Lomitas students at or above the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced
categories are well above the state average percentages.

######## STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS

###  California Standards Test 

Data Display Table for [Reading (language arts or English)]{.underline}
[Grade 2]{.underline}

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

  Testing month                                          May         April       May         April       April

  SCHOOL SCORES                                                                                          

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      98%         93%         \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 80%         75%         \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            37%         44%         \*          \*          \*

  Number of students tested                              126         99          126         113         \*

  Percent of total students tested                       98%         95%         100%        91%         \*

  Number of students excluded                            2           5           0           11          \*

  Percent of students excluded                           2%          5%          0           9%          \*

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                        

  1\. English Language Learners                                                                          

  At or Above Basic                                      95%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 71%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            12%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  2\. Students receiving Special Ed. Services                                                            

  At or Above Basic                                      96%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 73%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            25%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_(specify                                                   
  subgroup)                                                                                              

  At or Above Basic                                                                                      

  At or Above Proficient                                                                                 

  At Advanced                                                                                            

  STATE SCORES                                                                                           

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      63%         61%         \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       324.1       \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 32%         32%         \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                                   \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            9%          10%         \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                                   \*          \*          \*          \*
  ------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* This test is relatively new in the state of California. No data is
available for these years.

Our subgroups are too small for the data to be reported.

**[STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

### California Standards Test

Data Display Table for [Mathematics]{.underline} [Grade 2]{.underline}

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

  Testing month                                          May         April       May         April       April

  SCHOOL SCORES                                                                                          

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      99%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 88%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            54%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  Number of students tested                              125         99          125         120         \*

  Percent of total students tested                       98%         95%         99%         97%         \*

  Number of students excluded                            3           5           1           4           \*

  Percent of students excluded                           2%          5%          1%          3%          \*

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                        

  1\. English Language Learners                                                                          

  At or Above Basic                                      100%        \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 76%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            47%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  2\. Students receiving Special Ed. services                                                            

  At or Above Basic                                      87%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 85%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            31%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_(specify                                                   
  subgroup)                                                                                              

  At or Above Basic                                                                                      

  At or Above Proficient                                                                                 

  At Advanced                                                                                            

  STATE SCORES                                                                                           

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      68%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       342.7       \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 43%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       \*          \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            16%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       \*          \*          \*          \*          \*
  ------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* This test is relatively new in the state of California. No data is
available for these years.

Our other subgroups are too small for the data to be reported.

######### ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics.

Grade 2 READING Test: Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (SAT 9)

(language arts or English)

Edition/publication year: 1996 Publisher: Harcourt Inc.

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

No specific groups were excluded from testing. If parents requested in
writing that their child be excluded from testing, individuals were not
given the standardized tests. All students were evaluated using our
regular school assessment tools.

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

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

  Testing month                                    May               April            May              April             April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                                                      

  Total Score                                      86%               84%              82%              79%               75%

  Number of students tested                        123               99               125              112               116

  Percent of total students tested                 98%               95%              99%              90%               97%

  Number of students excluded                      5                 5                1                12                4

  Percent of students excluded                     4%                5%               1%               10%               3%

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                                        

  1\. English Language Learners              80%               \*                \*               \*               31%   

  2\. Students receiving Special Ed.         88%               78%               \*               \*               \*    
  services                                                                                                               

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                               
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                     

  4.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                               
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                     

  5.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                               
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                     
  ------------------------------------------ ----- ----------- ----- ----------- ---- ----------- ---- ----------- ----- -----------

\* Data not available

Our other subgroups are not large enough for data to be reported.

######### ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics.

Grade 2 MATHEMATICS Test: Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (SAT
9)

Edition/publication year: 1996 Publisher: Harcourt Inc.

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

No specific groups were excluded from testing. If parents requested in
writing that their child be excluded from testing, individuals were not
given the standardized tests. All students were evaluated using our
regular school assessment tools.

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

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

  Testing month                                    May               April            May              April             April

                                                                                                                         

  Total Score                                      94%               95%              90%              80%               82%

  Number of students tested                        124               98               124              116               120

  Percent of total students tested                 97%               94%%             98%              94%               100%

  Number of students excluded                      4                 6                2                8                 0

  Percent of students excluded                     3%                4%               2%               6%                0

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                                        

  1\. English Language Learners              93%               \*                \*               \*               52%   

  2\. Students receiving Special Ed.         93%               89%               \*               \*               \*    
  services                                                                                                               

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                               
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                     

  4.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                               
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                     

  5.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                               
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                     
  ------------------------------------------ ----- ----------- ----- ----------- ---- ----------- ---- ----------- ----- -----------

\* Data not available

Our other subgroups are not large enough for data to be reported.

**[STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

#### California Standards Test

The Data Display Tables are on the following pages.

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics. Complete a separate form for reading
(language arts or English) and mathematics at each grade level.

Grade: 3 Test: California Standards Test

Edition/publication year: 1999 Publisher: [Educational Testing Service
(The California Department of Education owns the copyright)]{.underline}

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

No specific groups were excluded from testing. If parents requested in
writing that their child be excluded from testing, individuals were not
given the standardized tests. These students were evaluated using our
regular school assessment tools.

Number excluded: It varies by year. Percent excluded: It varies by year.

The California Standards Test (CST) determines how well students are
learning the skills and knowledge required by the California Content
Standards for each grade. The California Content Standards explain what
students should know and be able to do at each grade level and in
specific subjects. The California Standards Test scaled scores range
from approximately 200 to 500. The scaled scores are specific to each
grade and content areas. They are designed to serve the needs of
California's accountability system, allowing for accurate comparisons of
scores in the same content area and grade level from year-to-year. The
mean scaled score is the group average scaled score for each grade and
content area. Mean Scaled Scores between 300 and 349 are at the Basic
Performance Standard (Academic Achievement Standard) and scores of 350
or higher are at or above the Proficient Performance Standard. The
California Standards Tests are more rigorous than the SAT 9, and student
scores are likely to be lower on the CST than the SAT 9. The state
target is for every student to score at the Proficient or Advanced
Performance Standard.^1^ The data table shows that the percentage of Las
Lomitas students at or above the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced
categories are well above the state average percentages.

# STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS

###  California Standards Test 

Data Display Table for [Reading (language arts or English]{.underline})
[Grade 3]{.underline}

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

  Testing month                                          May         April       May         April       April

  SCHOOL SCORES                                                                                          

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      96%         89%         \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 75%         71%         \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            44%         35%         \*          \*          \*

  Number of students tested                              96          125         120         116         120

  Percent of total students tested                       99%         97%         98%         96%         98%

  Number of students excluded                            1           4           2           5           2

  Percent of students excluded                           1%          3%          2%          4%          2%

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                        

  1\. English Language Learners                                                                          

  At or Above Basic                                      92%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 35%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            14%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  2.Students receiving Special Ed. Services                                                              

  At or Above Basic                                      87%         86%         \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 58%         67%         \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            29%         37%         \*          \*          \*

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_(specify                                                   
  subgroup)                                                                                              

  At or Above Basic                                                                                      

  At or Above Proficient                                                                                 

  At Advanced                                                                                            

  STATE SCORES                                                                                           

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      62%         59%         \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       323.5       \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 34%         30%         \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       \*          \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            11%         9%          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       \*          \*          \*          \*          \*
  ------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* This test is relatively new in the state of California. No data is
available for these years.

Our other subgroups are too small for the data to be reported.

**[STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

**California Standards Test**

Data Display Table for [Mathematics]{.underline} [Grade 3]{.underline}

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

  Testing month                                          May         April       May         April       April

  SCHOOL SCORES                                                                                          

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      96%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 85%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            59%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  Number of students tested                              96          127         120         117         120

  Percent of total students tested                       99%         98%         98%         97%         98%

  Number of students excluded                            1           2           2           4           2

  Percent of students excluded                           1%          2%          2%          3%          2%

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                        

  1\. English Language Learners                                                                          

  At or Above Basic                                      87%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 58%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            29%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  2\. Students receiving Special Ed. services                                                            

  At or Above Basic                                      85%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 75%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            55%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_(specify                                                   
  subgroup)                                                                                              

  At or Above Basic                                                                                      

  At or Above Proficient                                                                                 

  At Advanced                                                                                            

  STATE SCORES                                                                                           

  Total                                                                                                  

  At or Above Basic                                      65%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       331.6       \*          \*          \*          \*

  At or Above Proficient                                 38%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       \*          \*          \*          \*          \*

  At Advanced                                            12%         \*          \*          \*          \*

  State Mean Score                                       \*          \*          \*          \*          \*
  ------------------------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* This test is relatively new in the state of California. No data is
available for these years.

Our other subgroups are too small for the data to be reported.

######### ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics.

Grade 3 READING Test : Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (SAT 9)

(language arts or English)

Edition/publication year: 1996 Publisher: Harcourt Inc.

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

No specific groups were excluded from testing. If parents requested in
writing that their child be excluded from testing, individuals were not
given the standardized tests. All students were evaluated using our
regular school assessment tools.

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

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

  Testing month                                    May               April            May              April            April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                                                     

  Total Score                                      88%               83%              82%              77%              81%

  Number of students tested                        87                121              118              116              120

  Percent of total students tested                 91%               98%              97%              96%              98%

  Number of students excluded                      9                 2                4                5                2

  Percent of students excluded                     9%                2%               3%               4%               2%

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                                       

  1.English Language Learners                62%               \*                \*               \*               \*   

  2.Students receiving Special Ed. Services  89%               81%               \*               \*               \*   

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                              
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                    

  4.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                              
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                    

  5.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                              
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                    
  ------------------------------------------ ----- ----------- ----- ----------- ---- ----------- ---- ----------- ---- -----------

\* Data not available

Our other subgroups are not large enough for data to be reported.

######### ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics.

Grade 3 MATHEMATICS Test: Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (SAT
9)

Edition/publication year: 1996 Publisher: Harcourt Inc.

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

No specific groups were excluded from testing. If parents requested in
writing that their child be excluded from testing, individuals were not
given the standardized tests. All students were evaluated using our
regular school assessment tools.

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

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

  Testing month                                    May                       April            May              April            April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                                                             

  Total Score                                      [94%]{.underline}         89%              88%              77%              83%

  Number of students tested                        86                        127              117              115              121

  Percent of total students tested                 90%                       98%              96%              95%              99%

  Number of students excluded                      10                        2                5                6                1

  Percent of students excluded                     10%                       2%               4%               5%               1%

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                                               

  1\. English Language Learners              84%                       \*                \*               \*               \*   

  2\. Students receiving Special Ed.         94%                       85%               \*               \*               \*   
  Services                                                                                                                      

  3.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                                      
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                            

  4.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                                      
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                            

  5.\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                                                                      
  (specify subgroup)                                                                                                            
  ------------------------------------------ ----- ------------------- ----- ----------- ---- ----------- ---- ----------- ---- -----------

\* Data not available

Our other subgroups are not large enough for data to be reported.