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

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: (Check all that apply) [X]{.underline}
Elementary \_\_ Middle \_\_ High \_\_ K-12 \_\_Charter

Name of Principal [Dr. Ellen E. Mauer]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Romona Elementary School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [600 Romona Road]{.underline}

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

\_\_\_\_[Wilmette]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Illinois]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_[60091-2125]{.underline} City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County [Cook]{.underline} State School Code
Number\*\_\_\_[14-016-0390-02]{.underline}

Telephone [( 847 ) 256-0211]{.underline} Fax [( 847 )
251-4153]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.wilmette39.org/romona/]{.underline} E-mail
[mauere@wilmette39.org]{.underline}

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

Date [2-7-06]{.underline}

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Dr. Glenn McGee]{.underline}

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

District Name [Wilmette District 39]{.underline} Tel. [( 847 )
256-2450]{.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 [2-7-06]{.underline} (Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson [Mr. Alan Dolinko]{.underline}

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

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

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[2-7-06]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

**\[Include this page in the school's application as page 2.\]**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [4]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[1]{.underline} Middle schools

[1]{.underline} Junior high schools

[0]{.underline} High schools

[0]{.underline} Other

[6]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$15,107]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$14,002]{.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\. [4]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

[NA]{.underline} If fewer than three years, how long was the previous
principal at this school?

5\. Number of students as of October 1 enrolled at each grade level or
its equivalent in applying school only:

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

  **PreK**    48        19                     **67**       **7**                             

  **K**       43        45                     **88**       **8**                             

  **1**       30        38                     **68**       **9**                             

  **2**       45        48                     **93**       **10**                            

  **3**       50        60                     **110**      **11**                            

  **4**       45        52                     **97**       **12**                            

  **5**                                                     **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   523
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [74]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [5]{.underline} % Black or African American

[3]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100 % Total**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [6]{.underline} %

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

Number of languages represented: [12]{.underline}

Specify languages: Bulgarian, Japanese, Chinese, Hindi, Urdu, Russian,
Polish, Korean, Thai, Spanish, Romanian, and Gujarti.

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [1]{.underline} %

Total number students who qualify: [9]{.underline}

> If this method does not produce an accurate estimate of the percentage
> of students from low‑income families or the school does not
> participate in the federally‑supported lunch program, specify a more
> accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it
> arrived at this estimate.

10\. Students receiving special education services: [8]{.underline} %

[44]{.underline} Total Number of Students Served

> Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to
> conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education
> Act. Do not add additional categories.

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

[0]{.underline} Deafness [1]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

[0]{.underline} Deaf-Blindness [14]{.underline} Specific Learning
Disability

[0]{.underline} Emotional Disturbance [23]{.underline} Speech or
Language Impairment

[0]{.underline} Hearing Impairment [0]{.underline} Traumatic Brain
Injury

> [3]{.underline} Mental Retardation [0]{.underline} Visual Impairment
> Including Blindness
>
> [0]{.underline} Multiple Disabilities

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) [2]{.underline} [0]{.underline}

Classroom teachers [22]{.underline} [2]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists [19]{.underline} [7]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [21]{.underline} [3]{.underline}

> Support staff [10]{.underline} [0]{.underline}
>
> Total number [74]{.underline} [12]{.underline}

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers:
[23:1]{.underline}

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

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

  Daily student attendance  96%         96%         95%         95%         96%

  Daily teacher attendance  97%         98%         97%         98%         98%

  Teacher turnover rate     10%         11%         14%         6%          24%

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

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

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Situated in a vibrant community on Chicago's North Shore, Romona School
is home to 523 students from preschool through fourth grade. Our student
population is 73% White; 18% Asian, 5% multi-racial; 3% Hispanic and 1%
African American. Approximately 6% of our students have limited English
proficiency. Romona is a very stable environment with only a 6% mobility
rate. Class sizes range from 21 to 24. Romona is fortunate to have a
staff with a broad range of experience from newly-graduated teachers to
veterans with more than thirty years of experience. Fully 60% of our
teachers have a Master's Degree or post-graduate degree of some kind and
90% are actively pursuing professional development activities.

Romona School proudly houses the early childhood program for the entire
district. We have 68 pre-school students who range in age from three to
five. Half of each pre-school class is made up of students who show
developmental delays and the other half of each pre-school class is made
up of typically-developing students. Children in this program receive
regular services such as occupational/physical therapy and
speech/language therapy as part of their daily program. Special needs
students are welcomed, as Romona provides full inclusion services. In
fact, Romona is known throughout New Trier Township as the most diverse
school on the North Shore and a leader in inclusion, flexible service
delivery and differentiation for students with special needs.

Romona enjoys enormous parental involvement and support. We boast of
having 100% of our parents involved in a host of activities. Our PTA
funds all field trips and assemblies and takes the lead in organizing
our book fair, publishing center, lunchtime clubs, both Disability and
Environmental Awareness weeks, Picture Day, School Store, yearbook, and
many other unique activities for mothers and sons and dads and
daughters. The staff works closely with our parents to ensure a strong
school-family partnership. This partnership plays a large part in
fostering academic success as well as important values such as
integrity, responsibility and tolerance.

Under the umbrella of District 39's vision of "Teaching Tomorrow's
Leaders," Romona's mission is to provide a safe, nurturing environment
in which students will be motivated in becoming independent life-long
learners, while developing a positive self-image and accepting and
appreciating the differences of others. We strive to help children live
this statement each and every day with high expectations and leading by
example. Our yearly school improvement plan (SIP) is congruent with our
mission. SIP goals include: 1) To assure all students are appropriately
challenged in reading, writing, and math; 2) To drive district-wide
implementation of the cultural awareness component of the strategic long
range plan; and 3) To maintain and strengthen community perception of
Romona School as one of the best schools for students to learn, teachers
to teach, and families to flourish.

As we reviewed our mission this year, parents were encouraged to
communicate with us what really made the school special. Among the
things parents mentioned were:

-   Teachers who obviously care so much about the students, and not just
    in the academic arena, but as people

-   Administration and staff who are so very appreciative and responsive

-   Mutual respect, support, and cooperation among administration,
    staff, parents, teachers, and students

-   Pleasant, friendly, welcoming atmosphere

-   Culture and diversity emphasized throughout the curriculum

To visit Romona is to become a believer in the potential of all
children. Prospective parents and community members who tour our school
always remark about our students' abilities, presence and respect for
one another. Teamwork, partnership around a shared vision and commitment
to every individual child are the keys to our success.

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

1.  **Assessment Results:**

Romona students have historically achieved at high levels on state and
national tests, yet they continue to improve. All students take the Iowa
Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS) in grades three and four in reading and
math. In grade three, over four years' time, the national percentile of
our average scale score in reading increased from 77 to 78 and in math
from 78 to 82. In grade four, the average national percentile in reading
improved from 77 to 78, and in math, from 70 to 76. ITBS reports
indicate that the average scale score of our students places us in the
98^th^ or 99^th^ percentile of all school districts across the country.
Overall, students have improved even at the high levels at which they
are achieving, thus demonstrating our successful commitment to
continuous improvement.

In Illinois, all students are required to take a reading and math test
in grade three. These rigorous tests, the Illinois Standards Achievement
Test (ISAT), measure the extent to which students meet the Illinois
Student Learning Standards. ISAT performance is divided into four
different categories:

-   "Exceeds Standards"-Student work demonstrates advanced knowledge and
    skills in the subject. Students creatively apply knowledge and
    skills to solve problems and evaluate the results.

-   "Meets Standards"-Student work demonstrates proficient knowledge and
    skills in the subject. Students effectively apply knowledge and
    skills to solve problems.

-   "Below Standards"-Student work demonstrates basic knowledge and
    skills in a subject. However, because of gaps in learning, students
    apply knowledge and skills in limited ways.

-   "Academic Warning"-Student work demonstrates limited knowledge and
    skills in the subject. Because of major gaps in learning, students
    apply knowledge and skills ineffectively.

Additional information on the Illinois assessment system is found at
[www.isbe.net](http://www.isbe.net/).

Romona students have done exceedingly well over the last four years on
this test. In math, our students---including those with special needs
who have IEPs and 504 plans\--went from 95% meeting or exceeding state
standards to 99%. Yes, this past year only one student failed to meet
standards. Of the students in the "exceeds state standards" category in
mathematics, Romona numbers soared from 61% to 73%. In the area of
reading, our students went from 89% to 94% meeting and exceeding. The
"exceeds" numbers went from 38% to 51% for an overall increase of 13%.
When three out of four students exceed state standards in mathematics
and more than half exceed in reading, we know our children are receiving
an exceptionally high quality of education. These numbers are inclusive
of all IEP and 504 Plan students.

Turning to subgroup performance, 100% of our Asian students are meeting
or exceeding state math standards. In reading, our Asian subgroup showed
strong improvement from 81% to 100% meeting or exceeding, an increase of
19%. Performance of our special education subgroup fluctuates in reading
from year to year, but their performance in math has improved from 63%
to 90% meeting or exceeding state standards. Romona is proud of the
great increases our test scores have shown over the years for the
subgroups and for the entire population. Our student performance shows
that schools can move from "good to great."

Our district annually completes a benchmark study comparing our schools
to other high achieving schools with similar demographics on the ISATs.
When compared to these schools, we consistently find we are ranked
either first or second in the category of highest test scores and lowest
per pupil expenditure. In sum, we give the greatest "bang for the buck"
value to our taxpayers.

2.  **Using Assessment Results:**

Romona begins each year by reviewing both student assessment data and
each student's learning style. During the summer, each teacher meets
with the principal to discuss students in her or his new class. The
principal presents detailed information on the ISAT, ITBS, and local
assessments for each child and together they review the transition notes
from the previous year's teacher. The teacher and principal develop
intensive learning plans for children who have not met standards or not
made a year's progress in a year's time. They then meet quarterly to
discuss and revise the plans for each of these students.

Romona administers the ITBS for all students each fall. When results
arrive in January, teachers receive inservice on how to interpret and
use the results in an appropriate, diagnostic manner. Results are
disaggregated and compared longitudinally to assess curriculum and
assure all subgroups are making at least a year's growth in each area.

In May, teachers give local assessments. Each grade level meets and
analyzes the data, puts it in a written format, and uses it to plan for
the following year as well as to identify certain children for help as
they go forward.

The School Improvement Plan (SIP) team sets goals for the upcoming year
based on the ITBS, ISAT, and local assessment data. Each goal has
specific measures and targets. Every fall at a public meeting, our SIP
team presents results from the previous year to the Board of Education
and also outlines the goals for the new year.

Such careful scrutiny of data has improved teaching and learning for
individuals as well as larger groups. For example, data showed that we
needed to pay more attention to gender differences and as a result, we
have modified the way we teach reading and writing to engage male
students.

3.  **Communicating Assessment Results:**

Romona uses a variety of methods and media to communicate student
performance regularly. Each fall, our SIP team presents the progress we
have made on each of our goals at a televised School Board meeting and
at a PTA meeting. We show the five-year longitudinal progress in both
scale scores and percentage of students meeting and exceeding state
standards. The SIP team also provides updates in January and again in
the summer when the ISAT scores arrive. We post the results and updates
on the district and school websites and place them in the district
quarterly bulletin and monthly school newsletter, the *Romona Reporter*.
The principal presents ISAT and ITBS results to the Romona staff in work
sessions so they can both understand and use the data. Annually, the
Superintendent shares ISAT and ITBS results as well as findings of the
benchmark study with the School Board, with all teachers at the Opening
Day meeting, and at several presentations to community service clubs. To
assure a wide reach, we even devote a special local cable television
broadcast to communicating annual test results and longitudinal trends.

Teachers provide parents with individual reports during conference times
and report card times. Teachers also review each report card with their
individual students. Teachers regularly use communication methods for
parents such as 24-hour access to voicemail and email as well as weekly
classroom newsletters. The principal apprises new families of the
assessment data during special tours she conducts.

To help parents understand and use ISAT and ITBS data, the district
publishes a booklet and also holds two presentations for Romona parents
each year. We also conduct similar workshops for teachers. The district
website has copies of the booklet and the parent Powerpoint presentation
at [www.wilmette39.org](http://www.wilmette39.org/).

4.  **Sharing Success:**

Romona School regularly shares its successes with neighboring schools as
well as with schools throughout the state and country. Within the
district, elementary principals meet monthly to share important ideas
and successful practices. Our teachers meet with the other district
grade level teachers quarterly, and during our district-wide staff
development days, many of our teachers conduct workshops or breakout
sessions for their colleagues in other schools. Staff have presented in
California, South Carolina, and across Illinois regarding
differentiation of instruction, use of data, and communication. Our
teachers have been nominated for and honored with recognition through
the Golden Apple, Illinois Teacher of the Year, and DisneyHands
programs. We host a myriad of student teachers and observers because so
many prospective educators are eager to be placed in our school.
Neighboring schools have also sent teachers to visit us and learn more
about our programs, especially elementary foreign language and
"Connecting Kids" preschool.

Additionally, the principals belong to the Midwest Principals Center and
meet three times each year to share our "greatest hits." The principal
belongs to a county-wide curriculum council that regularly hosts
workshops for other educators at which she discusses Romona's innovative
practices which have led to such remarkable improvement. The principal
also teaches graduate courses for teachers wishing to get their
administrative certificate and is sharing many of the good practices
Romona uses first hand. Romona is participating in a collaborative
benchmarking project of high performing schools across the country
including Ladue, Missouri; Highland Park, Texas; Scarsdale, New York;
and Palo Alto, California. The superintendent is an active member of the
District Management Council and has presented our "secrets to success"
at their annual conference as well as at other national conferences
including AASA, NASB, and SSS and several state and regional
conferences.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

1.  **Curriculum:**

District 39 provides a comprehensive curriculum based on research,
rigorous state standards and best practices. Believing "there is no
ceiling on any child's potential," Romona's teachers differentiate
instruction to challenge every child, stretching those who learn quickly
and providing extensive support for those who struggle. Our teachers
find a way to reach all boys and girls in the style each child learns
best. At Romona we do not let any student fail and instill a love of
learning in all.

Mathematics -- Daily instruction builds a strong foundation with direct
computation instruction and focus on problem solving. Real world
problems and manipulatives engage all students in learning number sense
and facts; patterns, relations, and algebraic thinking; geometry;
measurement; data analysis; mathematical reasoning; and making
connections to the sciences and arts.

Language Arts -- The daily curriculum encompasses reading, literature,
writing, speaking and listening. We use scientifically-based approaches
incorporating instruction in phonics, fluency, comprehension and
vocabulary along with immersion in quality literature. Through a variety
of genres, students learn American literary heritage and also read about
diverse cultures, eras, and ideas. They learn literary forms and
elements and to appreciate and evaluate literature. The writing
curriculum teaches, develops, and assesses students' skills at every
step of the writing process from planning through editing to producing a
final draft. We teach spelling, handwriting, and grammar conventions.
Within the speaking/listening areas, we teach all students to express
themselves clearly and comfortably and to listen actively.

Science -- Daily, we use in-depth units combining reading, hands-on
experiments and expert demonstrations to teach content and processes of
scientific inquiry and experimental design, interactions between
science, technology, and society, and unifying concepts of life,
physical and earth/space sciences.

Social Studies -- Daily, students learn to use reference materials, map
and globe skills. They study U.S. regions and world geography to
understand political and economic diversity; prepare for living in a
changing world; become global citizens who recognize the
interrelatedness and interdependence of all living things; and learn to
face and seek solutions to present and future problems.

Library, Reference and Technology -- Our curriculum covers organization
of materials and electronic and traditional research methods. We also
teach keyboarding skills and assure a high level of technological
literacy. Technology is infused in all areas.

Health -- Students study dental health, substance abuse prevention,
family life, human growth and development, nutrition, mental health,
hygiene, environmental health, disease prevention, consumer health, and
household safety.

Physical Education -- With daily PE, students have several opportunities
for physical fitness development and also learn body control, folk
dances, organized games, teamwork and small and gross motor skills.

Art -- In addition to acquiring basic skills to produce works of art
with a variety of processes and tools, students learn design principles,
become familiar with artworks representing historical periods and
styles, and recognize art forms important to diverse cultural
traditions.

Music -- Through vocal music, frequent use of Orff instruments and
special performances, students learn melody, music form, rhythm,
harmony, dynamics, tone color, tempo, and the history and culture of
music.

Foreign Language -- Spanish is taught in kindergarten through second
grade daily (third and fourth grade will be added in 2006-07/2007-08).
All classes are conducted completely in Spanish so students become
fluent and proficient in listening, speaking, reading, and writing in
Spanish. They also acquire an understanding and appreciation of other
cultures. We use regular classroom content to teach foreign language
skills.

Romona has high standards for each child and continually seeks to
improve the way instruction is delivered to ensure students are
achieving. The different areas of the curriculum are integrated
throughout all classes with the effect being a smooth, seamless
education for all.

2a. **(Elementary Schools)** **Reading:**

Romona uses a balanced literacy approach based on the Illinois State
Standards in reading. In the primary grades, we focus on phonemic
awareness and building fluency with instruction and practice in
comprehension. The intermediate grades focus on comprehension and
specific strategies to use with fiction and non-fiction materials. If a
child is still weak in fluency or phonemic awareness, teachers give
additional help in those areas. In all grades, teachers use read alouds,
independent reading, shared reading, guided reading, modeled/shared
writing, interactive writing, and independent writing. In guided
reading, teachers use flexible grouping practices and individual
instruction if necessary. Teachers regularly use reading inventories and
curriculum based measures (CBM) to monitor progress of the students in
both fluency and comprehension. The principal meets quarterly with
teachers regarding the individual progress of students not meeting
standards or CBM targets. A full-time reading specialist and
paraprofessional work with individual students who are having reading
problems and assist classroom teachers in helping students who have
occasional struggles.

Romona chose a balanced literacy approach because it is based on
research, best practice, and our fundamental belief that all children
can learn to read well and deserve the opportunity. When we hire primary
teachers, we insist on them having either a reading endorsement or a
Master's Degree in reading. We only hire the most highly-qualified
staff. Teachers at Romona are expected to differentiate the curriculum
for students whether they are reading many years above grade level or
below grade level. Teachers are trained to differentiate and regularly
do so for all of their students. Extensive classroom libraries and
direct vocabulary instruction support our approach to reading. Staff
development in this area is ongoing. The proof of our reading success is
in the continuous improvement of our students as outlined above.

3.  **Mathematics, Science, Art, etc.:**

The study of mathematics at Romona School has been broken down into 9
key areas:

-   number sense and computation

-   patterns, relations, and algebraic thinking

-   geometry

-   measurement

-   data and chance

-   problem solving

-   communication

-   reasoning

-   mathematical connections.

These key areas are taught in all grade levels. We currently use
[Trailblazers]{.underline} to assist us in teaching and supplement this
series with direct instruction and daily assessment in computation.
[Trailblazers]{.underline} has a base in problem solving and the main
focus is to have students understand and apply basic skills and specific
strategies to solving problems, to think mathematically, and to
demonstrate application of and rationale for specific problem-solving
strategies. When assessment data showed a weakness in the areas of time,
money, and computation we incorporated other materials and professional
development opportunities to improve teaching and learning in these
areas. Our curriculum is based upon recommendations from the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics Curriculum and Evaluation Standards
and closely aligns with the Illinois State Standards.

Mathematics instruction relates to the mission of our school in the way
that our teachers teach the students. By adjusting their teaching styles
to student learning styles, using whole and small group instruction and
supplementing [Trailblazers]{.underline} with computation instruction,
they help each child enjoy math and become a life-long learner who can
apply his or her skills to solving real-world problems. Students can
make connections and see meaning in mathematics. The skills the students
take with them from year to year gives them a positive self-image. They
are confident because they know they are highly capable and possess the
skills in math to become successful individuals. We know our methods are
successful because 72.5% of our students place in the "exceeds" category
of our state test.

4.  **Instructional Methods:**

Romona's teachers use a vast repertoire of skills to differentiate
instruction and improve student learning. We believe, "If kids don't
learn the way we teach, then we must teach the way they learn," so all
teachers are well-trained in methods of differentiated instruction.
Teachers use auditory, visual, and kinesthetic modalities in each lesson
because they understand that children learn differently and also benefit
from the opportunity to strengthen their weaker modalities. Teachers use
several diagnostic tools, from DIBELS and the ISEL in primary grades to
CBM and SCANTRON continuous progress assessment in the upper grades, to
identify where students are performing and then provide appropriate
challenge to help each individual learn and grow, regardless of level.
Even if a child is already achieving well above grade level, the teacher
modifies the curriculum and assignments to extend the individual's
learning. Moreover, in every class at every grade, Romona teachers
assess throughout the lesson to determine when re-teaching is needed.

Teachers use a range of groupings including whole class instruction,
flexible groupings, one-to-one instruction, centers, cross-grade
tutoring, and peer mentoring. Parent volunteers and instructional
specialists are used to further individualize instruction. Romona
employs a curriculum differentiation support teacher, learning behavior
specialists, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, a
social worker, and a psychologist who provide assistance and coaching
for teachers and direct assistance to students.

Teachers' instruction incorporates all levels of Bloom's taxonomy. They
infuse critical thinking skills in written work and discussion groups.
When using questioning techniques, they include analysis, synthesis, and
evaluation questions as regularly as knowledge, comprehension, and
application questions. Teachers excel at creating project-based
activities to foster higher level thought processes.

Differentiating instruction has been the key factor in our continuous
improvement and shown us again and again that children have no ceiling
on their potential.

**5. Professional Development:**

At Romona, "life-long learning" is a reality. Our teachers have
countless opportunities to pursue professional development. District
strands include differentiation, inclusion, and brain research. Teachers
sign up for inservice in the strand of their choice to learn about the
topic in depth. The principal also guides staff development based upon
individual needs in particular classrooms. The principal encourages
visitations from room to room by staff to do observations of what is
working well.

Grade levels hold monthly collaborations to discuss and plan units of
study based upon the curriculum and the Illinois State Standards. At
these sessions, the teams also share information about workshops they
have attended. The district provides after-school courses of study for
teachers in mathematics, reading, technology applications, and
differentiation of instruction.

The School Board has allocated significant funds for staff development
as it relates to SIP and District 39 goals. Teachers who pursue
professional development in these areas receive twice the amount of
reimbursements. Our superintendent runs a book club in which many of our
teachers take part and enjoy. This is but one way they keep up with
educational trends, ideas, and can have regular discussion with a broad
base of other educators.

Beginning teachers are provided with a mentor teacher. They have monthly
meetings and will observe each other teaching. The mentees attend
monthly meetings with the principal. Building and district
administrators use survey data to identify what they can do to further
assist and support our new teachers. All of the above have had a great
impact on student achievement and have reduced teacher turnover. We have
been able to address key areas over the last few years like reading,
math, and communication, and have seen some terrific gains on academic
measures and parent satisfaction surveys.

**PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**Public Schools**

Subject: Reading Grade: Third Test: Illinois State Achievement Test

Edition/Publication Year: 2000-2005 Publisher: Illinois State Board of
Education

Alternative Assessment: Per state guidelines, students with severe
disabilities whose IEPs indicate that group standardized testing would
not be appropriate, participate in the IAA (Illinois Alternate
Assessment) required by the state. Also, students in bilingual programs
less than 3 years take the IMAGE test. (Illinois Measure of Annual
Growth in English)

  ----------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  ISAT                          **2004-05**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2000-01**

  Testing Month                 March         April         April         April         April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Meets State    94%           93%           81%           91%           89%
  Standards                                                                             

  \% At Exceeds State Standards 51%           66%           54%           60%           38%

  Number of Students Tested     96            85            87            87            88

  Percent of Total Students     100%          100%          100%          100%          100%
  Tested                                                                                

  Number of Students            0             6             4             5             1
  Alternatively Assessed                                                                

  Percent of Students           0             0.07%         0.05%         0.05%         0.01%
  Alternatively Assessed                                                                

                                                                                        

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                       

  1\. Asian or Pacific Islander                                                         

  \% At or Above Meets State    100%          \*            94%           100%          81%
  Standards                                                                             

  \% At Exceeds State Standards 50%           \*            65%           69%           45%

  Number of Students Tested     27            \*            16            19            \*\*

  2\. IEP (Special Education                                                            
  Group)                                                                                

  \% At or Above Meets State    60%           50%           \*            \*            63%
  Standards                                                                             

  \% At Exceeds State Standards 30%           20%           \*            \*            18%

  Number of Students Tested     10            13            7             6             11%

  3\. White                                                                             

  \% At or Above Meets State    92%           95%           80%           88%           90%
  Standards                                                                             

  \% At Exceeds State Standards 53%           64%           54%           58%           39%

  Number of Students Tested     62            69            65            66            \*\*

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

\*Not enough students in that subgroup tested that year to form a valid
subgroup.

\*\*This subgroup information was not kept during this year.

Subject: Math Grade: Third Test: Illinois State Achievement Test

Edition/Publication Year: 2000-2005 Publisher: Illinois State Board of
Education

Alternative Assessment: Per state guidelines, students with severe
disabilities whose IEPs indicate that group standardized testing would
not be appropriate, participate in the IAA (Illinois Alternate
Assessment) required by the state. Also, students in bilingual programs
less than 3 years take the IMAGE test. (Illinois Measure of Annual
Growth in English)

  ------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  ISAT                            **2004-05**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2000-01**

  Testing Month                   March         April         April         April         April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                       

  \% At or Above Meets State      99%           99%           95%           98%           95%
  Standards                                                                               

  \% At Exceeds State Standards   73%           67%           62%           68%           61%

  Number of Students Tested       96            85            87            87            88

  Percent of Total Students       100%          93%           95%           95%           99%
  Tested                                                                                  

  Number of Students              0             6             4             5             1
  Alternatively Assessed                                                                  

  Percent of Students             0             7%            5%            5%            1%
  Alternatively Assessed                                                                  

                                                                                          

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                         

  1\. Asian or Pacific Islander                                                           

  \% At or Above Meets State      100%          \*            100%          100%          100%
  Standards                                                                               

  \% At Exceeds State Standards   86%           \*            71%           62%           82%

  Number of Students Tested       27            \*            16            19            \*\*

  2\. IEP (Special Education                                                              
  Group)                                                                                  

  \% At or Above Meets State      90%           90%           \*            \*            63%
  Standards                                                                               

  \% At Exceeds State Standards   50%           10%           38%           38%           36%

  Number of Students Tested       10            13            7             6             11

  3\. White                                                                               

  \% At or Above Meets State      98%           100%          95%           97%           93%
  Standards                                                                               

  \% At Exceeds State Standards   68%           66%           62%           70%           58%

  Number of Students Tested       62            69            65            66            \*\*
  ------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

\*Not enough students in that subgroup tested that year to form a valid
subgroup.

\*\*This subgroup information was not kept during this year.

Subject: Reading Grade: Third Test: Iowa Test of Basic Skills

Edition/Publication Year: Fall of 2000 Publisher: The Riverside
Publishing Co.

Scores are reported here as:

\_\_\_\_\_NCEs \_\_\_\_\_Scaled Scores
\_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_Percentiles

Alternative Assessments: Per state guidelines, students whose IEPs
indicated severe disabilities for whom group testing would not be
appropriate were not given the IOWA. Instead, they were given a
curriculum based assessment or a nationally normed individually given
achievement test such as KTEA or Woodcock Achievement Test.

  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  ITBS-Reading              **2004-05**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2000-01**

  Testing Month             November      November      November      November      November

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                 

  Total Score               77.8          81.3          75.7          77.1          \*

  Number of students tested 95            85            82            86            

  Percent of total students 100%          93%           95%           94%           
  tested                                                                            

  Number of students        0             6             4             5             
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  Percent of students       0             7%            5%            6%            
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                   

  1\. IEP (Special          65.0          \*            56.0          \*            
  education)                                                                        

  Number of students tested 10            5             10            5             

  2\. White                 80.2          84.2          77.6          78.5          

  Number of students tested 63            58            60            64            

  3\. Asian/Pacific         68.6          68.8          68.9          71.5          
  Islander                                                                          

  Number of students tested 25            13            19            20            
  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

\*Iowa test not given in that year.

Subject: Math Grade: Third Test: Iowa Test of Basic Skills

Edition/Publication Year: Fall of 2000 Publisher: The Riverside
Publishing Co.

Scores are reported here as:

\_\_\_\_\_NCEs \_\_\_\_\_Scaled Scores
\_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_Percentiles

Alternative Assessments: Per state guidelines, students whose IEPs
indicated severe disabilities for whom group testing would not be
appropriate were not given the IOWA. Instead, they were given a
curriculum based assessment or a nationally normed individually given
achievement test such as KTEA or Woodcock Achievement Test.

  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  ITBS-Math                 **2004-05**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2000-01**

  Testing Month             November      November      November      November      November

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                 

  Total Score               82.2          83.0          80.0          78.5          \*

  Number of students tested 95            85            82            86            

  Percent of total students 100%          93%           95%           94%           
  tested                                                                            

  Number of students        0             6             4             5             
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  Percent of students       0             7%            5%            6%            
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                   

  1\. IEP (Special          78.0          \*\*          \*\*          \*\*          
  education)                                                                        

  Number of students tested 10            \*\*          \*\*          \*\*          

  2\. White                 81.0          82.6          81.4          78.8          

  Number of students tested 62            58            46            62            

  3\. Asian/Pacific         85.2          84.4          81.7          78.2          
  Islander                                                                          

  Number of students tested 25            13            16            19            
  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

\*Iowa test not given in that year.

\*\*Not enough students in that subgroup tested that year to form a
valid subgroup

Subject: Reading Grade: Fourth Test: Iowa Test of Basic Skills

Edition/Publication Year: Fall of 2000 Publisher: The Riverside
Publishing Co.

Scores are reported here as:

\_\_\_\_\_NCEs \_\_\_\_\_Scaled Scores
\_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_Percentiles

Alternative Assessments: Per state guidelines, students whose IEPs
indicated severe disabilities for whom group testing would not be
appropriate were not given the IOWA. Instead, they were given a
curriculum based assessment or a nationally normed individually given
achievement test such as KTEA or Woodcock Achievement Test.

  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  ITBS-Reading              **2004-05**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2000-01**

  Testing Month             November      November      November      November      November

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                 

  Total Score               78.1          76.6          82.0          77.2          \*

  Number of students tested 87            81            91            85            

  Percent of total students 100%          95%           93%           94%           
  tested                                                                            

  Number of students        0             4             6             5             
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  Percent of students       0%            5%            7%            6%            
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                   

  1\. IEP (Special          47.0          44.5          41.8          48.4          
  education)                                                                        

  Number of students tested 12            12            4             9             

  2\. White                 80.8          77.1          84.5          77.2          

  Number of students tested 68            55            64            70            

  3\. Asian/Pacific         68.6          77.3          72.6          76.9          
  Islander                                                                          

  Number of students tested 13            22            20            11            
  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

\*Iowa test not given in that year.

Subject: Math Grade: Fourth Test: Iowa Test of Basic Skills

Edition/Publication Year: Fall of 2000 Publisher: The Riverside
Publishing Company

Scores are reported here as:

\_\_\_\_\_NCEs \_\_\_\_\_Scaled Scores
\_\_[X]{.underline}\_\_Percentiles

Alternative Assessments: Per state guidelines, students whose IEPs
indicated severe disabilities for whom group testing would not be
appropriate were not given the IOWA. Instead, they were given a
curriculum based assessment or a nationally normed individually given
achievement test such as KTEA or Woodcock Achievement Test.

  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
  ITBS-Math                 **2004-05**   **2003-04**   **2002-03**   **2001-02**   **2000-01**

  Testing Month             November      November      November      November      November

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                 

  Total Score               76.1          76.9          81.4          70.3          \*

  Number of students tested 87            81            91            85            

  Percent of total students 100%          95%           93%           94%           
  tested                                                                            

  Number of students        0             4             6             5             
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  Percent of students       0%            5%            7%            6%            
  alternatively assessed                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                   

  1\. IEP (Special          49.5          51.5          66.5          59.7          
  education)                                                                        

  Number of students tested 12            12            4             9             

  2\. White                 76.5          75.2          81.5          71.7          

  Number of students tested 68            55            64            70            

  3\. Asian/Pacific         81.5          82.2          81.4          75.1          
  Islander                                                                          

  Number of students tested 13            22            20            11            
  ------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------

\*Iowa test not given in that year.