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

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

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal[: \_\_\_\_\_ Bonnie Martin
Bogue\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

Official School Name: \_\_\_\_[Hudson PEP Elementary
School\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address[: 1609 Lilly
Street\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

City [Longview\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}
State\_\_\_\_\_[TX]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Zip Code
[75602-1609\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Tel. [( 903 ) 753-7472]{.underline} Fax [( 903 )
753-825\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.lisd.org/hudson/index/html]{.underline} Email
<bbogue@lisd.org________________>

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.

[\_]{.underline}
Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Principal's Signature)

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

Name of Superintendent \_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Dr. Dana Marable]{.underline}

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

District Name [Longview Independent School
District\_\_\_\_]{.underline}Tel. [( 903)753-0206\_\_\_\_\_]{.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 Mr. John Harrison

President/Chairperson:

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

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

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

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

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district:
\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_Elementary schools

\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_ Middle schools

\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_ Primary schools

\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_ High schools

\_\_[15]{.underline}\_\_\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_[\$
4,267]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Campus Per Pupil Expenditure [\_\_\$
3,616\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure:
\_\_[\$4,929]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

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

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

4\. [8.75]{.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:

> Grades 1-5

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

  **K**                                        **0**        **7**                             0

  **1**       33        52                     **85**       **8**                             0

  **2**       47        39                     **86**       **9**                             0

  **3**       47        40                     **87**       **10**                            0

  **4**       30        46                     **76**       **11**                            0

  **5**       40        41                     **81**       **12**                            0

  **6**                                        0            Other                             0

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [\_\_71]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [\_\_20.2]{.underline} % Black or African
American

[\_6.7\_]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

\% American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
\_\_\_\_[5]{.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 transferred 9
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 12
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        21
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    415
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .05
              total in row (4)                   

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

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school:
\_\_\_[1.0\_\_]{.underline} %

[\_\_4\_\_\_\_]{.underline}Total Number Limited English Proficient

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

Specify languages: Spanish

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals:
\_\_\_[20\_]{.underline}%

\_\_\_[84\_\_\_]{.underline}Total Number Students Who Qualify

10\. Students receiving special education services:
\_\_\_\_\_[1.4\_\_\_]{.underline}%

\_\_\_\_\_[6\_\_\_]{.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 \_\_\_\_Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_\_\_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_\_\_\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_[X\_]{.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}\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[5]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

> (Art, Librarian, GT, Music, PE, Counselor, Nurse) (Band, Strings, GT,
> Speech, Dyslexia)

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

(Secretary, Office Aid, Computer Lab Manager, and Instructional
Assistant)

> Support staff \_\_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

(Custodians and Cafeteria Staff)

> Total number \_\_\_\_\_[37]{.underline}\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

12\. Student-"classroom teacher" ratio: \_\_[22:1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

1.  Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students.

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

  Daily student attendance 98.3%               98.1%               98.2%               97.9%               97.9%

  Daily teacher attendance 97.8%               97.7%               95.7%               96.6%               96.4%

  Teacher turnover rate    21.7%               21.7%               0                   10.8%               26%

  Student dropout rate     [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}

  Student drop-off rate    [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}   [N/A]{.underline}
  ------------------------ ------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ------------------- -------------------

**[PART III -- SUMMARY]{.underline}**

Hudson PEP (Planned Enrichment Program) Elementary is a unique learning
atmosphere for students of average and above average academic abilities
located in Longview, Texas. Elementary students from any school zone in
Longview ISD are eligible to make application to attend this special
school that was established in 1976. The selection process is committed
to maintaining a rich diversity of students. The school's parental and
community involvements result in a shared belief of "high expectations
for all students" and support the motto of "Soaring to New Heights of
Excellence." The school's mission statement captures the uniqueness of
the learning atmosphere.

> "Our mission is to provide a qualitatively different learning
> environment that
>
> nurtures a passion for intellectual curiosity, encourages risk-taking
> and
>
> innovation, and cultivates self-discipline and respect for others. We
> are
>
> committed to a tradition of academic excellence and social
> responsibility
>
> as we assist students to become lifelong learners in a global
> society."

It is apparent to anyone who arrives on campus that the Hudson faculty
and staff are committed to fulfilling the school district and the
school's mission. All students are provided a challenging curriculum and
exemplary instruction within a safe, orderly environment that is warm
and inviting. The custodial and cafeteria staff, teachers, professional
support staff, administrators, paraprofessionals, and office personnel
help to provide a caring, friendly climate where students are valued and
loved. The collaborative efforts of everyone contribute to the school's
tradition of excellence.

A planned enrichment program (PEP) is part of the school's name and
tradition. Hudson students enjoy an enriched, challenging program of
study. They have opportunities to participate in a variety of special
interest classes, which include band, orchestra, or show choir for fifth
graders and weekly art, music, computer, and science lab classes for
grades 1-5. The ACE (A Curriculum for Excellence) program serves
identified gifted and talented students in a pullout program that meets
2.5 hours a week. Children delight in the 135 minutes of physical
education activities that are scheduled weekly and love using the latest
technology in the classroom and computer lab.

At Hudson, parents and other community members recognize the important
role they play and share in the success of students. Parent volunteers
and service groups contribute as partners-in-education. In the last
three-years, school volunteers logged an average of 2389 hours annually.

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) rated Hudson PEP Elementary as an
"Exemplary" school for the last seven consecutive years. To receive an
Exemplary rating, at least 90 percent of all students and students in
each sub-population must pass all sections of the TAAS, (Texas
Assessment of Academic Skills), which is a state-criterion referenced
test. Outstanding educators, who are part of the faculty, have won
numerous awards. In the last eight years, four members of the Hudson
faculty were each selected as Longview ISD Teacher of the Year. Three
advanced to win the highly competitive Region VII Teacher-of-the Year
contest.

Although Hudson has received many honors for academic excellence, the
faculty and staff work as a team and focus on the whole child, not just
awards and test scores. All one needs to do is walk through the
classrooms and halls to see the effectiveness of the faculty, staff,
parent, community, and students working together. Students are actively
engaged in learning with an unquenchable desire to know more. They are
thinking creatively and critically while demonstrating good citizenship
and working independently or in collaborative groups. Seeing the smiles
on the students' faces and sharing the joy they feel as they
successfully meet challenges are the reasons the faculty and staff of
Hudson PEP Elementary School pursue excellence for all students.

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

1.  **The schools assessment results in reading and mathematics are
    displayed in tables at the end of this application. Tables 1A-1F
    disaggregate data by school scores, African American, white, and
    economically disadvantaged groups. These tables also show the scores
    for the state.**

Meeting minimum expectations is considered basic. Mastering all
objectives is considered proficient and scoring 95% or greater is
considered advanced. All scores were given in percentages.

The faculty and staff are aware that there is a difference between the
sub groups on the proficient and advanced scores. White students are
scoring higher than the other groups. The campus is working toward
higher test scores for all students. The scores for spring 2002 indicate
the gap is being reduced in these areas. This faculty and staff will
continue to work toward reducing these gaps and having all students
achieve at high levels.

**Table 2** is the cohort analysis for 1997-2002. It shows the TLI
scores distributed by grade level in each subject. By tracking a group
of students from one year to the next one can determine if there have
been positive or negative gains.

The TLI is not a percentage of items correct. It is a standard score
whose primary functions are to describe how far above or below the
passing standard the student is and to indicate whether the student is
making progress over time.

**Table 2** data shows that all students are making progress from one
year to the next. The difference in the TLI is in the positive for each
group.

**Table 3** gives a clear picture of how the opportunity gap between the
sub groups has closed. In 1974, African American students passed the
math portion of the TAAS test at the rate of only 71.4% and economically
disadvantaged students at the rate of 74%. The next year both groups
passed at a 90% or better rate. Each year the students' passing rate
increased and the gap between the groups lessened. One hundred percent
of Hudson students passed math in 1999. In 2000 all students passed all
portions of the TAAS test. In subsequent years only one or two students
failed a portion of the TAAS test.

**Table 3** also shows the scores for Hudson students are clearly
outstanding when compared to the state's scores in all areas.

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

Hudson's teachers and administrator utilize assessment data in a variety
of ways to determine if the academic needs of all students are being
met. Teachers in grades one and two use the Texas Primary Reading
Inventory and portfolio data to diagnose student weaknesses and
strengths. The district's software program, ADM, allows teachers in
grades one through five to use diagnostic benchmark data to plan
effective instruction and remediation. It also helps the principal and
the campus improvement team to identify staff development needs for the
faculty and staff.

Before-school tutorials are offered to certain students based on a
variety of data the teacher collects. Grades, portfolios, district
benchmark tests, and campus assessments are the types of data reviewed
to determine if remediation is needed. Assessment data is also used to
determine if a student needs a more challenging curriculum. Students who
meet the district's criteria are placed with a specialist for gifted and
talented instruction for 2.5 hours of instruction each week.

The campus improvement plan is structured around assessment results.
TAAS assessment data is used to evaluate the effectiveness of the
instructional programs. Teachers in grades three through five receive
disaggregated data showing individual, classroom, and campus scores and
sub-groups within his/her class compared to other teachers within the
school, the district, and the state. They use this data and item
analysis data to determine ways to improve instruction for the next
school year. The budgetary decisions for the campus are linked to the
plan for improvement.

In 1998, the campus began to focus on student achievement at a higher
level than merely passing the state TAAS test. Various forms of data
showing the number and percent of students "mastering all objectives"
were analyzed resulting in the realignment of goals, objectives, and
strategies. Students' proficient and advanced scores on the TAAS tests
increased in the succeeding years.

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

Informing parents regularly of school and student achievement is a
priority at Hudson. Teachers in all grades send folders with students'
work and behavior reports home weekly for the parent to review. In
addition, all students, not just those making unsatisfactory progress,
are issued three-week progress reports. Report cards are sent each six
weeks. Numerical grades are given in all subjects except fine arts,
behavior, and physical education. Students in all grades use daily
planners to record assignments and activities.

In January, the administrator issues a School Report Card, which
includes the school's accountability report, to each parent. Included in
this report are the school's TAAS scores in reading, writing, and math
with comparisons to the state and district. Parents are shown how
all-ethnic and low socio-economic groups scored. A public meeting to
discuss these results is held each year. The TAAS results are also
reported in the PEP Talk, a PTA newsletter, the Hudson website, and the
local newspaper. Brochures and newspaper ads about the school showcase
the "exemplary" ratings and consistently high test scores.

Parents and/or guardians are sent individual student test results
showing how their child scored on the Texas Academic and Assessment
Skills (TAAS) test. An explanation sheet is provided with the test
scores. Those wanting more information or a personal explanation are
encouraged to contact the school's principal, counselor, or their
child's teacher.

Results of student's performance on the Texas Primary Reading Inventory
(TPRI) at the beginning and end of school are mailed to parents. In
addition, students who did not perform satisfactory are placed in small
groups for targeted intensive reading instruction. Parents are notified
of their progress at the end of 60 sessions. Parent conferences are held
within the first nine weeks of school for all students and again in the
spring to show student progress. Hudson parents are very involved in
their children's education so attendance at conferences is high.

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

The Texas Educational Agency (TEA) recently formed the Texas Pathfinder
Collaborative and selected Hudson PEP School to participate. The purpose
of this collaborative is to hold regional conferences with staff
development sessions conducted by Pathfinder Schools. The conferences
provide a platform for Texas schools to work together in an effort to
increase student achievement by reaching, informing, connecting, and
supporting educators. TEA designated Hudson to be part of this elite
group after a site visit in the fall of 2002.

The Texas Pathfinder Collaborative highlights successful school
practices in a catalog and distributes it to all Texas school districts.
As a member of the collaborative, the campus agrees to provide
information about the school's instructional practices and organization,
invite other schools to visits, and provide staff development.

The school became part of the Texas Mentor School Network in January
2000, but the network was dissolved in 2003 due to the lack of funding.
Although Hudson is no longer receiving funds, the principal and teachers
will continue to provide staff development for Longview ISD, surrounding
school districts, and at various regional and state conferences. The
Pathfinder Collaborative network will be an excellent avenue for Hudson
to share its successes with other schools.

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

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

Teachers at Hudson follow an aligned, rigorous curriculum implemented by
the district to meet the needs of all learners. Teachers from the Hudson
campus participated in writing the district curriculum guides with clear
written expectations for all learners based on the Texas Essential
Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) and standards. In Texas, the framework for
the written curriculum is the TEKS, and the statewide student assessment
is the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), formerly the
TAAS. The curriculum is based on a core set of non-negotiable student
objectives that guide decisions about teaching and learning.

Although it is the teacher's responsibility to decide how the curriculum
is taught, as a campus, Hudson faculty and staff began following the
principles and guidelines of ITI (Integrated Thematic Instruction) by
Susan Kovalik. Naturally, some teachers are at different stages of
implementation than others; some just beginning and others well
established.

The eight brain-compatible elements of ITI that teachers strive to
provide are: 1) a trustworthy environment\--absence of threat, 2)
meaningful content, 3) choices, 4) adequate time, 5) enriched
environment, 6) collaboration, 7) immediate feedback, and 8) mastery
(application). These components are woven throughout all lessons and
activities.

Campus instructional strategies are varied and provide the most
effective methods for the particular content at hand with choices
regularly provided through inquiries and other means. Adequate time is
allowed to let students complete their work. Collaboration is
effectively used to enhance learning academically and socially. Hudson
students use technology as a natural extension of their senses to
explore and learn. They have access to databases and communication
systems throughout the country. Also, peers and cross-age tutors
substantially increase teaching and practice time for students in areas
of individual need.

The character education program implemented two years ago at Hudson is
based solely on the ITI principles. Students learn tools for citizenship
and life by using life long guidelines and life skills. A weekly Friday
morning assembly that starts twenty minutes before the regular school
day recognizes the "Student-of-the-Week" from each classroom who has
demonstrated the life- skill or guideline of the week. These assemblies
are used as a means to build a community of learners and to demonstrate
respect and pride for the accomplishments of others.

The program for the assemblies varies from week to week. Cup stacking
competitions, Jump Rope for Heart demonstrations, show choir
performances, and community speakers are a few examples. What doesn't
change is the recognition of students for good citizenship, meeting
goals in the Accelerated Reader program, and perfect attendance.
Students are encouraged to develop a love for reading and are given
daily class time for silent reading. They earn special, engraved dog
tags for reading a set number of books.

The Accelerated Reader program is an essential part of Hudson's immense
success record. Each year Hudson students read more and more books. As
an example, first graders read 5,338 books in 1997. This number
increased to 12,597 books in the 2002 school year. Since students at
this school are such successful readers, less time is spent in
remediation and more time is devoted to application, synthesis, and
evaluation activities.

The curriculum at Hudson is brain-compatible and enhances the learner's
pattern seeking and program building capabilities. The real reason for
the school's curriculum is for students to make meaning, to use what
he/she understands in real world situations, and retain what he/she
learns. The exemplary faculty and staff at Hudson PEP Elementary strive
daily to provide challenging curriculum and exemplary instruction so
that all students will reach the highest level of academic achievement
possible.

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

Hudson's reading curriculum is based on a "balanced literacy" approach
with small reading groups. Teachers use the components of read aloud or
modeled reading, shared reading, interactive reading, guided reading,
independent reading, write aloud or modeled writing, shared writing,
interactive writing, guided writing, and independent writing. In
addition, students participate in 15-30 minutes of silent sustained
reading each day and are strongly encouraged to read daily at home.

Emergent readers at Hudson become very proficient with phonological
awareness, the alphabetic principle, word study, spelling fluency,
comprehension, and written expression. The school's transitional
readers, who readily use decoding skills to decipher text, receive
explicit instruction using strategies, methods, and overall literacy to
understand and learn from complex text.

Teachers continually assess reading progress examining student data from
both formal and informal assessments to determine students' knowledge
and skills. Then they design instruction using student data to plan
effective learning activities for students. Scaffolding instruction
(i.e. adjusting and extending instruction) is done constantly so that
students are able to develop the new skills necessary to meet
challenges.

This "balanced literacy" approach with strategies from the Texas Reading
Academy is used because it is research based and is effective for Hudson
students. The faculty and staff believe that reading, writing,
listening, and speaking provide the foundation for success in school and
life. The integration of all language arts areas into a coordinated
program that allows for the authentic application of language arts
skills can be found at Hudson. Within the school's reading curriculum
framework are the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) objectives
and student expectations.

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

At Hudson science education is valued as an important key to producing a
citizenry capable of handling the immense decisions that are facing the
world as a result of today's scientific break-throughs. It is a vital
part of knowledge in the elementary years. The faculty and staff believe
that early science education should emphasize the concept that
scientific knowledge is always changing; therefore, students need tools
to answer questions about the world they live in, rather than isolated
facts to memorize.

Students begin in first grade being taught the scientific process
through experiments in the fully equipped science lab that was built
four years ago. Two years ago a full-time lab teacher joined the staff
working with the classroom teachers to offer inquiry based hands-on
activities for each class.

Many times the lab experience provides a springboard into a new concept.
Once an idea has been explored in the lab, printed material in the
textbooks and other resource materials become more meaningful to the
students. Children of all learning abilities feel successful in the
hands-on lab investigations. This active participation is essential for
a thorough understanding of the basic scientific principles. Cooperation
and creative thinking emerge from these real world applications.

In addition to the science lab, students study about ecosystems in the
new outdoor learning center that consists of a lovely landscaped area
with fishpond and waterfall. This year the campus held a science fair
for all students in grades 1-5. Ninety-nine percent of the students
participated and showcased their science fair displays at an open house
for parents and community members.

In an effort to provide experiences that extend the classroom into the
field, Hudson's fifth graders spend four days and three nights each fall
at Camp Tyler Outdoor Education facility in Whitehouse, Texas. There
they explore, observe, and investigate things in the natural world that
cannot be brought into the classroom learning environment. Connections
are made while applying science skills and concepts to solve real-world
problems.

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

Hudson PEP Elementary appreciates the uniqueness of each student and
encourages a partnership between students and teachers so that each
child develops his/her potential socially, physically, emotionally, and
academically. Our child-centered philosophy is reflected in the school's
organizational structure. Each class is comprised of heterogeneous
learners and is self-contained. This enhances the development of strong
teacher/student relationships while maximizing instruction time.

Hudson faculty and staff believe that a variety of instructional
strategies such as teacher guided small-group instruction,
differentiated curriculum, peer tutoring and re-teaching are needed for
a diverse group of learners to be successfully challenged in the regular
classroom. Class activities and assignments are adapted to students'
learning styles and levels of understanding.

Direct instruction is done on a limited basis. Mini-skills lessons are
taught prior to cooperative-group activities, when introducing new
concepts, and during one-on-one tutoring. Informal instructional methods
are used frequently. Inquiry-based learning activities are used as the
primary type of instruction for science. All teachers structure lessons
around the use of Bloom's Taxonomy and incorporate questioning
techniques that require students to analyze, evaluate, synthesize, and
apply knowledge. Students are actively engaged in meta-cognition,
writing processes, research, and student demonstrations. They work
cooperatively in groups or pairs.

Math instruction is done with students using hands-on manipulatives to
develop number sense, computation, problem solving, and reasonableness.
Activities are geared to help students bridge the concrete to the
abstract.

Technology is integrated in the learning processes at Hudson PEP. Fourth
and Fifth grades students present their research findings using
PowerPoint. Students in second and third grade use Kid Pix and Apple
Works for multimedia presentations.

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

The high level of success enjoyed by Hudson students is a result of the
dedicated campus professionals and the instructional methods and
strategies they use. Faculty and staff constantly seek ways to improve
student achievement. Their quest for learning and high expectations for
themselves and all students are met in a variety of ways:

-   Campus professional development is planned to meet the needs of
    students with the goal of ensuring student success when
    participating in challenging activities. Professional development
    activities are of high priority and receive a significant portion of
    the campus budget each year.

-   The principal and teachers participate in many of the state and
    regional conferences yearly, such as the Texas Association for
    Gifted and Talented, the Conference for the advancement of Math
    Teachers, and the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors
    Association.

-   Common planning times for grade level teachers, vertical teams for
    district and campus professionals, and book studies provide
    additional venues for faculty and staff to gain professional
    development.

As a result of the dedication and hours put in by the staff, three
Hudson teachers were selected through a very competitive process to
serve as "instructors" in the state's reading academies for second,
third, and fourth grade teachers. In addition, for the second summer, a
fifth grade teacher was invited to be an instructor for the Region VII
Math Reading Academies. The school's principal was selected as a Texas
Reading Leader in 2000 to present reading workshops.

**Test: Texas Academic Assessment of Academic Skills Grade: 3**

**Publisher: Texas Education Agency Subject: READING**

## TABLE 1A

  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                                     **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  **Testing month**                  **APRIL**       **APRIL**       **APRIL**

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                  

  **TOTAL ENROLLED**                 **84**          **87**          **87**

  **At or Above Basic**              **99%**         **98%**         **100%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **85%**         **86%**         **93%**

  **At Advanced**                    **57.1%**       **51%**         **75.3%**

  **Average TLI**                    **90.4**        **89.9**        **91.8**

  **Number of students tested**      **84**          **85**          **87**

  **Percent of total students        **100%**        **97.7%**       **100%**
  tested**                                                           

  **Number of students excluded**    **0**           **0**           **0**

  **Percent of students excluded**   **0**           **0**           **0**

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                

  **1. AFRICAN AMERICAN**            **15**          **21**          **22**

  **At or Above Basic**              **93%**         **95%**         **100%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **60%**         **71%**         **86%**

  **At Advanced**                    **27%**         **33.4%**       **50%**

  **Average TLI**                    **85.3**        **88.3**        **90.9%**

  **2. WHITE**                       **60**          **60**          **61**

  **At or Above Basic**              **100%**        **98%**         **100%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **92%**         **90%**         **95%**

  **At Advanced**                    **65%**         **58%**         **77%**

  **Average TLI**                    **91.8**        **90.6**        **92/1**

  **3. ECONOMICALLY DIS.**           **13**          **17**          **15**

  **At or Above Basic**              **91%**         **94%**         **100%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **45%**         **64%**         **91%**

  **At Advanced**                    **23%**         **29.4%**       **53%**

  **Average TLI**                    **82.3**        **87.4**        **89.4**

  **STATE SCORES**                                                   

  **TOTAL TESTED**                   **261,437**     **262,170**     **258472**

  **At or above Basic**              **87%**         **86%**         **87%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **55%**         **54%**         **56%**

  **At Advanced**                    **3.45%**       **3.26%**       **27%**

  **Average TLI**                    **83.1**        **82.6**        **82.7**
  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**Basic = Met Minimum Requirements for Passing**

**Proficient = Mastered All Objectives**

### Advanced = Score of 95% or greater

# Test: Texas Academic Assessment of Academic Skills Grade: 3

**Publisher: Texas Education Agency Subject: MATH**

## TABLE 1B

  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                                     **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  **Testing month**                  **APRIL**       **APRIL**       **APRIL**

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                  

  **TOTAL ENROLLED**                 **84**          **87**          **87**

  **At or Above Basic**              **99%**         **100%**        **100%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **85%**         **31%**         **74%**

  **At Advanced**                    **30.9%**       **14.9%**       **56.3%**

  **Average TLI**                    **3-90.4**      **3-87.0**      **3-88.0**

  **Number of students tested**      **84**          **87**          **87**

  **Percent of total students        **100**         **100**         **100%**
  tested**                                                           

  **Number of students excluded**    **0**           **0**           **0**

  **Percent of students excluded**   **0**           **0**           **0**

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                

  **1. AFRICAN AMERICAN**            **15**          **21**          **22**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **7%**          **24%**         **59%**

  **At Advanced**                    **6.7%**        **4.8%**        **41%**

  **Average TLI**                    **86.1**        **84.5**        **86.0**

  **2. WHITE**                       **60**          **62**          **61**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **52%**         **34%**         **79%**

  **At Advanced**                    **38.3%**       **19.4%**       **62.3%**

  **Average TLI**                    **89.7**        **87.9**        **88.7**

  **3. ECONOMICALLY DIS.**           **13**          **17**          **15**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **0%**          **36%**         **73%**

  **At Advanced**                    **7.6%**        **11.8%**       **33.4%**

  **Average TLI**                    **85.6**        **84.6**        **85.6**

  **STATE SCORES**                                                   

  **TOTAL TESTED**                   **264,809**     **266,030**     **263,481**

  **At or above Basic**              **87%**         **82%**         **80%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **22%**         **16%**         **35%**

  **At Advanced**                    **10%**         **8%**          **21%**

  **Average TLI**                    **81.4**        **79.8**        **78.3**
  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**Basic = Met Minimum Requirements for Passing**

**Proficient = Mastered All Objectives**

**Advanced = Score of 95% or greater**

**Test: Texas Academic Assessment of Academic Skills Grade:4**

# Publisher: Texas Education Agency Subject: READING

## TABLE 1C

  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                                     **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  **Testing month**                  **APRIL**       **APRIL**       **APRIL**

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                  

  **TOTAL ENROLLED**                 **83**          **84**          **82**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **82%**         **93%**         **93%**

  **At Advanced**                    **81.7%**       **80.9%**       **82.9%**

  **Average TLI**                    **95.1**        **95.1**        **95.6**

  **Number of students tested**      **83**          **84**          **82**

  **Percent of total students        **100%**        **100%**        **100%**
  tested**                                                           

  **Number of students excluded**    **0**           **0**           **0**

  **Percent of students excluded**   **0**           **0**           **0**

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                

  **1. AFRICAN AMERICAN**            **19**          **21**          **19**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **58%**         **90%**         **84%60**

  **At Advanced**                    **57.9%**       **81%**         **61%**

  **Average TLI**                    **91.8**        **93.3**        **94.3**

  **2. WHITE**                       **60**          **59**          **62**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **92%**         **93%**         **95%**

  **At Advanced**                    **89.8%**       **83%**         **90.3%**

  **Average TLI**                    **96.2**        **95.8**        **95.9**

  **3. ECONOMICALLY DIS.**           **13**          **12**          **16**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **56%**         **91%**         **93%**

  **At Advanced**                    **69.2%**       **83.4%**       **81.2%**

  **Average TLI**                    **93.7**        **93.0**        **96.0**

  **STATE SCORES**                                                   

  **TOTAL TESTED**                   **252,778**     **264,683**     **260,109**

  **At or above Basic**              **92%**         **90%**         **89%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **49%**         **48%**         **52%**

  **At Advanced**                    **5.52%**       **5.05%**       **37%**

  **Average TLI**                    **87.3**        **86.4**        **86.1**
  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**Basic = Met Minimum Requirements for Passing**

**Proficient = Mastered All Objectives**

**Advanced = Score of 95% or greater**

###  

### Test: Texas Academic Assessment of Academic Skills Grade: 4

**Publisher: Texas Education Agency Subject: MATH**

**TABLE 1D**

  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                                     **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  **Testing month**                  **APRIL**       **APRIL**       **APRIL**

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                  

  **TOTAL ENROLLED**                 **83**          **84**          **82**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **39%**         **33%**         **86%**

  **At Advanced**                    **28%**         **30.9%**       **75.3%**

  **Average TLI**                    **88.0**        **87.7**        **88.7**

  **Number of students tested**      **83**          **84**          **82**

  **Percent of total students        **100%**        **100%**        **100%**
  tested**                                                           

  **Number of students excluded**    **0**           **0**           **0**

  **Percent of students excluded**   **0**           **0**           **0**

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                

  **1. AFRICAN AMERICAN**            **19**          **21**          **19**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **21%**         **19%**         **89%**

  **At Advanced**                    **10.5%**       **20%**         **61%**

  **Average TLI**                    **86.9**        **86.7**        **88.2**

  **2. WHITE**                       **60**          **59**          **62**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **47%**         **39%**         **85%**

  **At Advanced**                    **35.6%**       **33.9%**       **79%**

  **Average TLI**                    **88.5**        **88.1**        **88.8**

  **3. ECONOMICALLY DIS.**           **13**          **12**          **16**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **22%**         **0%**          **87.5%**

  **At Advanced**                    **7.6%**        **16.7%**       **81.3%**

  **Average TLI**                    **87.1**        **86.7**        **88.1**

  **STATE SCORES**                                                   

  **TOTAL TESTED**                   **269,901**     **262,263**     **264,865**

  **At or above Basic**              **94%**         **91%**         **87%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **18%**         **13%**         **43%**

  **At Advanced**                    **1.5%**        **1%**          **32%**

  **Average TLI**                    **83.4**        **82.0**        **83.9**
  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**Basic = Met Minimum Requirements for Passing**

**Proficient = Mastered All Objectives**

**Advanced = Score of 95% or greater**

# Test: Texas Academic Assessment of Academic Skills Grade: 5

**Publisher: Texas Education Agency Subject: READING**

**TABLE 1E**

  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                                     **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  **Testing month**                  **APRIL**       **APRIL**       **APRIL**

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                  

  **TOTAL ENROLLED**                 **79**          **74**          **79**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **92%**         **84%**         **91%**

  **At Advanced**                    **81%**         **79.7%**       **83.5%**

  **Average TLI**                    **97.3**        **96.7**        **97.8**

  **Number of students tested**      **79**          **74**          **79**

  **Percent of total students        **100%**        **100%**        **100%**
  tested**                                                           

  **Number of students excluded**    **0**           **0**           **0**

  **Percent of students excluded**   **0**           **0**           **0**

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                

  **1. AFRICAN AMERICAN**            **19**          **18**          **19**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **84%**         **56%**         **89%**

  **At Advanced**                    **73.7%**       **50%**         **63%**

  **Average TLI**                    **96.4**        **94.2**        **97.8**

  **2. WHITE**                       **57**          **55**          **55**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **95%**         **93%**         **91%**

  **At Advanced**                    **84.2%**       **89.1%**       **90%**

  **Average TLI**                    **97.5**        **97.4**        **98.2**

  **3. ECONOMICALLY DIS.**           **10**          **15**          **7**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **71%**         **70%**         **60%**

  **At Advanced**                    **60%**         **73.4%**       **57%**

  **Average TLI**                    **94.0**        **96.0**        **92.6**

  **STATE SCORES**                                                   

  **TOTAL TESTED**                   **271,356**     **267,953**     **259,374**

  **At or above Basic**              **92%**         **90%**         **87%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **53%**         **46%**         **45%**

  **At Advanced**                    **5.12%**       **4.3%**        **30%**

  **Average TLI**                    **88.8**        **86.9**        **85.9**
  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**Basic = Met Minimum Requirements for Passing**

**Proficient = Mastered All Objectives**

**Advanced = Score of 95% or greater**

# Test: Texas Academic Assessment of Academic Skills Grade: 5

**Publisher: Texas Education Agency Subject: MATH**

**TABLE 1F**

  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                                     **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  **Testing month**                  **APRIL**       **APRIL**       **APRIL**

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                  

  **TOTAL ENROLLED**                 **79**          **74**          **79**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **68%**         **59%**         **90%**

  **At Advanced**                    **50.6%**       **43.3%**       **76.9%**

  **Average TLI**                    **90.3**        **90.4**        **91.0**

  **Number of students tested**      **79**          **74**          **79**

  **Percent of total students        **100%**        **100%**        **100%**
  tested**                                                           

  **Number of students excluded**    **0**           **0**           **0**

  **Percent of students excluded**   **0**           **0**           **0**

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                

  **1. AFRICAN AMERICAN**            **19**          **18**          **19**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **47%**         **39%**         **79%**

  **At Advanced**                    **36.8%**       **16.7%**       **52.6%**

  **Average TLI**                    **89.2**        **89.4**        **89.8**

  **2. WHITE**                       **57**          **55**          **55**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **74%**         **65%**         **93%**

  **At Advanced**                    **54.4%**       **51%**         **85.2%**

  **Average TLI**                    **90.6**        **90.7**        **91.4**

  **3. ECONOMICALLY DIS.**           **10**          **15**          **7**

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

  **At or Above Proficient**         **29%**         **55%**         **80%**

  **At Advanced**                    **30%**         **26.7%**       **57.2%**

  **Average TLI**                    **88.3**        **90.0**        **89.4**

  **STATE SCORES**                                                   

  **TOTAL TESTED**                   **274,182**     **271,128**     **263,231**

  **At or above Basic**              **96%**         **94%**         **92%**

  **At or Above Proficient**         **34%**         **26%**         **43%**

  **At Advanced**                    **2.78%**       **2.01%**       **30%**

  **Average TLI**                    **85.8**        **84.6**        **83.9**
  ---------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**Basic = Met Minimum Requirements for Passing**

**Proficient = Mastered All Objectives**

**Advanced = Score of 95% or greater**

## TABLE 2

### Hudson PEP Elementary Cohort Analysis 1998-2002

**READING -- AVERAGE TLI\***

  ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Grade**    **1997-1998**   **1998-1999**   **1999-2000**   **2000-2001**   **2001-2002**

  ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
  **3**       **90.3**    **91.1**    **91.8**    **89.9**    **90.4**

  **4**       **93.5**    **94.2**    **95.6**    **95.1**    **95.1**

  **5**       **95.1**    **95.7**    **97.8**    **96.7**    **97.3**
  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

### MATH -- AVERAGE TLI\*

  ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Grade**    **1997-1998**   **1998-1999**   **1999-2000**   **2000-2001**   **2001-2002**

  ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
  **3**       **84.2**    **86.5**    **88.0**    **87.0**    **89.0**

  **4**       **87.7**    **88.3**    **88.7**    **87.7**    **88.0**

  **5**       **89.2**    **90.3**    **91.0**    **90.4**    **90.3**
  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**\* The TLI is not a percentage of items correct. It is a standard
score whose primary functions are to describe how far above or below the
passing standard the student is and to indicate whether the student is
making learning progress over time.**