##### *REVISED 3-22-05*

##### *2004-2005 No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program*

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: [X]{.underline} Elementary \_\_ Middle
\_\_ High \_\_ K-12

Name of Principal: [Mrs. Cynthia R. Wobig]{.underline}

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

Official School Name: [Valentine Elementary]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address: [615 E. 5^th^ St.]{.underline}

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

[Valentine NE 69201-1642]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County: [Cherry]{.underline}
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_School Code
Number\*: [16-0001-001]{.underline}

Telephone [( 402 ) 376-3237]{.underline} Fax [( 402 )
376-1032]{.underline}

Website/URL: [www.valentinecityschools.org]{.underline} E-mail:
[cwobig@esu17.org]{.underline}

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

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

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Mrs. Jamie S. Isom]{.underline}

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

District Name: [Valentine City Schools]{.underline} Tel. [( 402 )
376-3367]{.underline}

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

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson: [Mrs. Susan Beel]{.underline} (Specify: Ms.,
Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other)

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

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

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

*\*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 of Civil Rights
(OCR) requirements is true and correct.

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

2.  The school has not been in school improvement status or been
    identified by the state as \"persistently dangerous\" within the
    last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the
    state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2004-2005 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 1999 and has not received the 2003 or 2004 *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: \_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_
Elementary schools

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

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

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

\_\_\_\_\_ Other

\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$7,622 (2002-03)]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$7,476 (2002-03)]{.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\. [7]{.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 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**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**       17        17                     **34**       **8**                             

  **1**       17        19                     **36**       **9**                             

  **2**       20        29                     **49**       **10**                            

  **3**       28        17                     **45**       **11**                            

  **4**       26        23                     **49**       **12**                            

  **5**       20        29                     **49**       **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   262
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of 76% White

the students in the school: 0% Black or African American

0% Hispanic or Latino

2% Asian/Pacific Islander

[22]{.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:
[16%]{.underline}

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      24
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      15
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 39
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 246
                            the school as of October 1  
                            (same as in #5 above)       

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided .16
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           16
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [0%]{.underline}

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

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

Specify languages: English

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [57]{.underline} %

Total number students who qualify: [149]{.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:
\_\_\_\_[12]{.underline}\_\_\_%

\_\_\_\_[32]{.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.

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_Autism \_\_[1]{.underline}\_Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_[1]{.underline}\_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_\_[5]{.underline}\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_[14]{.underline}\_Speech or Language
Impairment

\_\_[9]{.underline}\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_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) \_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_\_[16]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_[9]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[5]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_[38]{.underline}\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[9]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
[16:1]{.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.)

  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                            2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000

  Daily student attendance  96 %        96 %        96 %        96 %        97 %

  Daily teacher attendance  96 %        96 %        97 %        96 %        96 %

  Teacher turnover rate     4 %         8 %         8 %         4 %         4 %

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

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

14\. **(*High Schools Only*)** Show what the students who graduated in
Spring 2004 are doing as of September 2004.

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

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

**Narrative Snapshot**

Valentine Elementary serves the children of the small community of
Valentine in north central Nebraska. The community is the trade and
service center for an area of cattle ranching and tourism. The school
was built in 1963. A six-room addition was added in 1998, allowing the
school to reduce the teacher-student ratio. Visitors to the school
always comment on our clean, well-kept building and grounds. The
physical surroundings enhance the climate of our school, supporting
student learning and teacher satisfaction. The students, teachers,
parents, and community have high expectations for learning and character
development. We all believe it is essential that we prepare our children
for success in the world, whether their futures take them far away or
they stay and become the adults of the community. The mission of the
school says that we "... will provide a quality education for all
students preparing them to lead productive, responsible, and fulfilling
lives in an ever-changing world."

In order to realize our mission, we must focus on the needs of
individual learners in relation to our top priority, the learning goals.
The learning goals are outlined in our curricula and assessed through a
variety of formative and summative assessments. Student academic
learning is supported through nonacademic instruction and experiences.
The students receive daily instruction in music and physical education.
Students have access to computers in the classroom, a computer lab, and
a mobile computer lab. Keyboarding skills are taught in grades 3 through
5. The library provides a wide range of books and magazines for student
and teacher use. The local Arts Council provides an artist-in-residence
every year, as well as occasional professional performances. Our
school's character goals are promoted through daily teacher
reinforcement of four character traits and monthly guidance lessons by
our counselor. The community and school worked together to choose the
four character traits that we consider to be essential: honesty,
respect, compassion, and responsibility.

The students of our school were asked to list things that are important
about our school. There were comments about the books, the building, and
the playground, but the most common answer was our teachers. Valentine
Elementary has a teaching staff that is committed to student growth,
whatever the needs of the students. A recent visitor commented that
throughout the building he saw students working in small groups or
one-to-one with a teacher or a Para educator. Teachers also work to
build a personal relationship with each student. We believe that in
order to learn, each student must know and believe that he/she matters
and that we care about him/her. Our average class size is 15. Grades
kindergarten through three are self-contained. Grades four and five are
departmentalized. Special needs are met through two resource teachers, a
speech pathologist/special education coordinator, a Title 1 teacher, an
upper level reading teacher, a guidance counselor, a part time media
person, and Para educators. Teachers in grades K-2 are provided with a
Para educator during part of the reading block to allow for individual
and small group instruction and assessment. The Title teacher's time is
prioritized for reading and math at first through third grades. The
reading teacher works with upper level readers in grades three through
five. Both the guidance counselor and the special education coordinator
are instrumental in analyzing the special needs of students and planning
appropriate interventions.

Valentine Elementary has seen a changing population. Increases in
poverty and diversity have created a wider range of learning needs.
Small class size and access to support personnel allow the use of
formative assessments that guide instruction and interventions that are
matched to the students' learning needs. The increased poverty and
diversity have resulted in a greater student need for vocabulary
instruction. The Reading Team is in the process of researching
vocabulary instruction. Our school has started to use collaborative
learning teams to study research and address problems. Past learning
team topics included reading, brain research, differentiation, and
instructional strategies. The learning teams have increased the
collective knowledge of the staff and have helped the school stay
abreast of educational research.

Valentine Elementary has great students, great teachers, great support
personnel, great parents, and a great community! We all work together to
increase student learning.

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

**The Meaning of the Assessment Results**

The State of Nebraska assesses the achievement of every 4^th^, 8^th^,
and 11^th^ grade student on all reading and math standards. Prior to
2003-04, the reading and math standards were assessed in alternate
years. The State of Nebraska also assesses the writing performance of
4^th^, 8^th^, and 11^th^ grade students. Prior to 2004-05, the grade
levels were assessed on a rotating schedule so each grade was not
assessed each year. Due to those assessment schedules, Nebraska schools
do not have writing data for each year, and there are years that the
reading and math data was not compiled at the state level. Schools were
required to assess their students each year, but they did not have to
report them to the State.

Schools in Nebraska developed their own assessments to measure student
performance of the state standards. Those assessments and the assessment
process are evaluated by the State each year to determine their quality.
Valentine Elementary received exemplary ratings for each of the past
three years for both assessment quality and student performance. There
are four student performance levels: beginning, progressing, proficient,
and advanced. Beginning and progressing are nonmastery levels, and
proficient and advanced are mastery levels. The charts at the end of
this document show the performance of Valentine Elementary 4^th^ graders
on norm-referenced tests in reading, language, and math; plus
performance on criterion-referenced tests in reading, math, and writing.
Our students consistently achieve at high levels. The Nebraska State
report card is available at
\<[www.nde.state.ne.us](http://www.nde.state.ne.us/)\>.

Data analysis at Valentine Elementary focuses on looking for patterns of
strengths and concerns and for evidence of the impact of interventions.
Whenever data is analyzed, it is important to maintain an open mind.
Perceptions of the meaning of the data may change. The small size of our
school population and extremely small size of our subgroups create
additional problems for finding the meaning of the data. The reliability
of the results and the meaning that can be derived from the data
diminish with a small number of scores.

Looking across Valentine Elementary data for three years, we identified
two strengths: our students achieved at high levels on both
norm-referenced and standards-based assessments, and math was our
strongest area for both norm-referenced and standards-based assessments.
Two concerns were identified: language and writing scores were lower for
the three-year period than math and reading. Writing was the area of
greatest concern, so writing was prioritized for the 2004-05 school
year, and interventions were selected and implemented.

Disparities are evident for both Free and Reduced Students and Native
American Students. Those two groups did not perform as well as the total
population. It was found that the two groups performed significantly
better on the criterion-referenced state assessments than the
norm-referenced assessments. That may be an indication that the students
are learning what we teach. What we teach is more closely matched to the
criterion-referenced standards tests than the norm-referenced tests.
(The criterion-referenced standards tests compare a student's
performance to a standard, not to the performance of other test takers.
The items test the objectives of the standards, thus what the students
have been taught. The norm-referenced Terra Nova test compares a
student's performance to the performance of the students in the norming
group. Scores of the norming group have a bell curve distribution. The
items may or may not test what the students have been taught.) We plan
to keep track of the subgroup scores for each standard in order to
address the disparities and prioritize interventions to maximize student
learning.

**Use of Data**

Valentine Elementary uses data from many sources to understand and
improve student learning and performance. Using data begins with
teachers analyzing the interrelationship of the learning goals, the
assessments used to determine progress toward those goals, and the
strategies used to promote student learning. With that understanding in
place, teachers will know what the data says, and they will have ideas
about the implications of the data.

Our school participates in the Nebraska Statewide Writing Assessment.
Every fourth grade student writes a response to the state prompt. All
writing is sent to the state for scoring. Student writing scores fell in
2003-04. The scores were within the confidence interval, but indicated
possible problems with narrative writing. We analyzed possible
interventions in terms of time, people, and materials. As a result, the
language arts block was reorganized to focus more time on writing. The
need for writing in every curricular area was reinforced. Teachers met
with our district writing coordinator for a discussion and update on 6
Trait Writing. A student friendly narrative writing rubric was developed
to encourage student reflection and effort.

A computer-based system is used to assess the Nebraska Reading and Math
Standards. Scores are computed immediately, so the student is the first
to know if he/she has met the standard. We believe that student
ownership encourages effort. The teacher also knows immediately which
students performed at which levels, helping the teacher focus on the
needs of individuals and prioritize for individuals and the class. Data
is also analyzed on a building level at the end of the year. Hypotheses
are made about what the data might mean and what we might do about it in
terms of our resources of time, people, and materials. Each year brings
changes that we hope will improve student learning and performance.

The District Data Team looks at the annual results from the
norm-referenced achievement tests to see how the school and specific
grade levels are doing in comparison to the state and nation. Possible
problems and solutions are analyzed.

**Communication of Student Performance**

Students and teachers are the initial users of learning and performance
data. Students are required to fix all errors on daily math and reading
work in order to increase understanding. The corrected daily work, plus
quiz and test scores are sent home to families. Teachers communicate
informally with parents through notes and phone calls. Formal
communication consists of quarterly report cards and three conferences:
the September Student-Parent-Teacher Goal Setting, the October
Parent-Teacher Conference, and the February Goal Setting Follow-up and
Conference. Parents also receive individual student reports on the
Nebraska State Standards Assessments and the norm-referenced achievement
tests.

The Board of Education receives student learning and performance data
for the Nebraska Reading and Math Standards, including a rating on the
quality of the assessments, Adequate Yearly Progress data, the Nebraska
Statewide Writing Scores, norm-referenced achievement test data, and
NAEP data when applicable. Timely newspaper articles, radio spots, and
an annual district report card are distributed within the community. The
report card follows the format of the Nebraska State Report Card.

**Valentine Elementary Collaborates and Shares Successes with Other
Schools**

Three levels of collaboration exist for sharing successes with other
schools. First, day-to-day concerns and successes are shared with the
other two schools in our system, Valentine Middle School and Valentine
Rural High School. At the second level, Valentine Elementary is an
active participant in a consortium of all elementary schools in Cherry
County. Cherry County encompasses approximately 6000 square miles, but
is very sparsely populated. Our isolation makes it imperative that
schools work collegially and share ideas. We work together on many
aspects of curriculum and assessment, plus select most of the textbooks
used for elementary students. At the third level, Valentine Elementary
is a part of the Educational Service Unit that serves four counties in
north central Nebraska. All schools in the Educational Service Unit
receive up-to-date information from the State of Nebraska on educational
practices, including assessment and instruction. Teachers meet on a
regular basis, talking and thinking together about what students should
know and be able to do and the best ways to teach those things. This
system of collaboration enables small, rural districts to connect with
each other and with the most promising practices of the day.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

**1. Valentine Elementary Curriculum**

The Nebraska Standards and Assessment System (STARS) is a guiding
framework for Nebraska schools. Teachers are trained in writing
standards based curriculum, developing appropriate assessments to
measure the standards, and analyzing the assessment data. The sequence
of instruction is outlined so students have optimal instructional time
and opportunity to master the content. The State is currently
disseminating information on research-based instructional strategies.
The curricular areas follow.

Reading/Language Arts: The language arts are tools that help students
learn about their world and express themselves effectively. The Reading
Curriculum addresses the Nebraska Reading Standards and focuses on the
five areas identified by the National Reading Panel: Phonemic Awareness,
Phonics, Fluency, Comprehension, and Vocabulary. A basal series is the
primary delivery system. The basal is supported with several
supplemental programs and strategies. Student learning and performance
is measured through informal observations, basal assessments, DIBELS
assessments, (Dynamic Indicators of Basis Early Literacy Skills), and
Nebraska Standards Assessments. Information about DIBELS is available at
\<http://dibels.uoregon.edu/\>. The Nebraska Writing Standards are
taught and assessed with 6-Trait Writing and grammar. 6-Trait Writing
focuses on: Ideas, Organization, Conventions, Word Choice, Sentence
Fluency, and Voice. Information about 6-Trait Writing is available at
\<www.nwrel.org/\>. Spelling is taught with a locally developed program.
Handwriting is taught both as a separate subject and within context.

Speaking and Listening: The Nebraska Speaking and Listening Standards
are the focus for the curriculum. Students have opportunities to
communicate in different ways and different settings and to use
effective communication skills to acquire new knowledge and enhance
learning.

Math: Math instruction and assessment are organized about the areas in
the Nebraska Math Standards: Numeration/Number Sense,
Computation/Estimation, Measurement, Geometry/Spatial, Data
Analysis/Probability/Statistical Concepts, and Algebraic Concepts.
Instruction is based on a basal and supplemented with various programs
and strategies. Our goal is to help students develop strong basic math
skills and learn to think mathematically to solve everyday problems.

Social Studies: The core content areas of the Nebraska Social Studies
Standards are History, Geography, Civics, Economics, and Government. The
main purpose of the Social Studies Standards is to promote "civic
competence." The Standards help our school organize and prioritize
instruction from the basal. Students develop an appreciation of our
social heritage, a perspective for evaluating contemporary issues, and
an understanding of the democratic process.

Science: The science curriculum is based on the Nebraska Science
Standards. We adapt instruction from the science basal to match the
Science Standards. Students learn the basic concepts of science and
refine and use thinking skills. One of our goals is to stimulate
curiosity to keep children interested in the why, how, and what of our
world.

Physical Education, Music, Art, and Foreign Language: The goals of the
physical education curriculum are to enhance the intellectual,
emotional, and social development, as well as the physical well being of
the student. Students participate in activities organized on a
developmental continuum that will lead to the development of
coordination, strength, skill, endurance, and improved self-concept. The
music curriculum builds a foundation incorporating opportunities that
encourage knowledge of musical concepts, self-expression, appreciation,
and enjoyment. Art is taught in the regular classroom and often used to
enrich the core disciplines. Students are exposed to a variety of art
mediums to develop an appreciation for art and to learn about basic art
history. We do not currently have Foreign Language.

**2. Reading Curriculum**

The Reading Curriculum is built around the Nebraska Reading Standards
and the five areas identified in the National Reading Panel Report. We
believe it is important to begin with the assessment goal and determine
the appropriate steps and sequence for instruction. At the beginning of
the 2004-05 school year, we adopted the use of DIBELS as an additional
tool to monitor and assess students. The next step is a complete review
of the reading curriculum during the summer of 2005 in light of current
research and best practice.

Valentine Elementary uses a basal as the core delivery system. Basals
are effective and promote consistent instruction. We supplement the
basal series with several different components from the five areas of
reading in order to offer comprehensive reading instruction. Phonemic
awareness instruction and materials were weak in the basal. The National
Reading Panel determined that instruction in phonemic awareness is
essential for beginning readers. We started screening students for
phonemic awareness and taught strategies to the teachers. Now, our
teachers have high levels of knowledge about phonemic awareness, and
phonemic awareness instruction is occurring in classrooms instead of
only within intervention settings. Phonics has been a strength of our
school for many years. A supplemental text is available in addition to
the basal. Teachers are currently working to prioritize skills for
instruction. Comprehension instruction is the most difficult area to
address effectively. The basal offers many excellent strategies, and the
entire staff has been trained in the shared inquiry discussion method.
The Reading Team has analyzed comprehension research and is currently
choosing additional methods to share with their fellow teachers.
Vocabulary is taught through the basal and other content area texts.
Several graphic organizers are used to promote learning. The Reading
Team has selected a text and articles on vocabulary instruction for the
study group.

The Nebraska Standards and the five areas of reading guide decisions
about regular classroom instruction, assessments, and interventions.
This method helps us address student needs more effectively.

**3. Math Curriculum**

The Valentine Elementary Math Curriculum focuses on knowledge and skill
in the following areas: Numeration/Number Sense, Computation/Estimation,
Measurement, Geometry/Spatial, Data Analysis/Probability/Statistical
Concepts, and Algebraic Concepts. In order for students to realize the
mission of the school and become "productive, responsible, and fulfilled
(citizens) in their ever-changing world," it is critical that students
learn essential math concepts and become accomplished, real world
problem solvers. We believe that it is important for students to develop
automatic recall of math facts so they can be accurate in computation
and flexible in reasoning. Grades one through five use a math facts
practice program. The program consists of repeated drill at each
student's level of competency. The core math concepts are taught through
a basal. Teachers enhance instruction with a variety of hands on
strategies. Problem solving is an area of concern. Classroom assessment
records show a pattern of difficulty with problem solving. Teachers are
investigating possible interventions to promote more effective problem
solving strategies.

**4. Instructional Methods**

Valentine Elementary uses a variety of instructional methods to promote
learning and skill development. Building-wide, teachers individualize as
much as possible. That may include individual or small group work,
differentiation, or supplemental work. The entire staff has been trained
in 6-Trait Writing, Junior Great Books shared inquiry discussions,
student goal setting, and a locally developed decision making model that
students and staff use to address problems. The decision making model is
applicable to both social and practical problems. (Information about
Junior Great Books is available at
\<[www.greatbooks.org](http://www.greatbooks.org/)\>.)

Other strategies are used in particular subject areas, at particular
grade levels, and with different students. Teachers identify areas of
need, and then seek research-based strategies to address those needs.
Currently, the Reading Team is prioritizing comprehension strategies and
studying the research on vocabulary to select instructional strategies
to be used in reading instruction and content area reading. Math
teachers are reviewing problem solving strategies. School-wide, we try
to reinforce effort in order to promote student success.

**5. Professional Development**

Professional development at Valentine Elementary focuses on areas of
need that are identified through teacher concerns, achievement data, and
the school improvement plan. The areas of need are prioritized and
research-based strategies are selected to address the needs. Teachers
are trained, materials are acquired, and the implementation is planned.
The content, process, and context for the professional development vary
with the situation and the source of the need, including: individual
teacher(s), subject area(s), and/or grade level(s).

Recent examples of professional development include: school-wide
integration of 6 Trait Writing, phonemic awareness training for K-2
teachers, and school-wide implementation of student goal setting.
Currently, the Reading Team is sharing reading research with teachers,
and DIBELS assessment has been implemented school-wide.

Our district, Valentine City Schools, acknowledges that teachers cannot
be expected to implement more than a few new practices a year, therefore
changes are planned strategically. Professional development includes
more than bringing presenters into the school or going out to a meeting.
Professional development also includes collaboration. Inquiry and
sharing is encouraged among teachers. Valentine Elementary currently has
monthly staff meetings that include a professional development
component. The goal for the school is to operate as a collaborative
learning community.

**PART VI - PRIVATE SCHOOL ADDENDUM**

*The purpose of this addendum is to obtain additional information from
private schools as noted below. Attach the completed addendum to the end
of the application, before the assessment data tables.*

1.  Private school association(s):

> (Identify the religious or independent associations, if any, to which
> the school belongs. List the primary association first.)

2.  Does the school have nonprofit, tax exempt (501(c)(3)) status? Yes
    \_\_\_\_\_\_ No \_\_\_\_\_\_

3.  What are the 2004-2005 tuition rates, by grade? (Do not include
    room, board, or fees.)

\$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_
\$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_

K 1^st^ 2^nd^ 3^rd^ 4^th^ 5^th^

\$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_
\$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_

6^th^ 7^th^ 8^th^ 9^th^ 10^th^ 11^th^

\$\_\_\_\_\_\_ \$\_\_\_\_\_\_

12^th^ Other

4.  What is the educational cost per student? \$\_\_\_\_\_\_

(School budget divided by enrollment)

5.  What is the average financial aid per student? \$\_\_\_\_\_\_

6.  What percentage of the annual budget is devoted to \_\_\_\_\_\_%

scholarship assistance and/or tuition reduction?

7.  What percentage of the student body receives

scholarship assistance, including tuition reduction? \_\_\_\_\_\_%

**PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**[READING ASSESSMENTS]{.underline}**

**[REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS]{.underline}**

Subject\_[Reading]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Grade\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Test\_[CTBS Complete Battery Plus-Terra
Nova]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year\_[1997]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Publisher\_[CTB/McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

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

+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                          | 200    | 200    | 200    |
|                                          | 3-2004 | 2-2003 | 1-2002 |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Testing month                          | March  | March  | March  |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**                      |        |        |        |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Total Score (NP of the mean NCE)       | 72%    | 81%    | 70%    |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students                     | 43     | 32     | 52     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested              | 40     | 32     | 52     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Percent of total students tested       | 93%    | 100%   | 100%   |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students alternatively       | 3      | 0      | 0      |
| > assessed\*                             |        |        |        |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Percent of students alternatively      | 7%     | 0%     | 0%     |
| > assessed\*                             |        |        |        |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%)  | 3      | 2      | 4      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%)  | 6      | 2      | 10     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%)  | 12     | 10     | 12     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)    | 19     | 18     | 26     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                          |        |        |        |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > SUBGROUP SCORES                        |        |        |        |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch     | 24     | 10     | 23     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested              | 21     | 10     | 23     |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in bottom quartile (1-24%)      | 3      | 2      | 3      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%)  | 4      | 1      | 6      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%)  | 8      | 3      | 7      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)    | 6      | 4      | 7      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                          |        |        |        |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Native American                        | 6      | 3      | 3      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested              | 5      | 3      | 3      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%)  | 1      | 1      | 2      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%)  | 2      | 1      | 1      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%)  | 2      | 1      | 0      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)    | 0      | 0      | 0      |
+------------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+

\*These students were alternatively assessed. Due to the nature of their
disabilities, they are not working toward the same standards as their
same-age peers. They participate in a modified or altered curriculum
consisting of functional academics.

**[LANGUAGE ASSESSMENTS]{.underline}**

**[REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS]{.underline}**

Subject\_[Language]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
[Grade]{.underline}\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ Test\_[CTBS Complete
Battery Plus-Terra Nova]{.underline}

Edition/Publication
Year\_[1997]{.underline}\_\_\_Publisher\_[CTB/McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

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

+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                         | 200    | 200    | 200    |
|                                         | 3-2004 | 2-2003 | 1-2002 |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Testing month                         | March  | March  | March  |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**                     |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Total Score (NP of the mean NCE)      | 68%    | 83%    | 69%    |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students                    | 43     | 32     | 52     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested             | 40     | 32     | 52     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Percent of total students tested      | 93%    | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students alternatively      | 3      | 0      | 0      |
| > assessed\*                            |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Percent of students alternatively     | 7%     | 0%     | 0%     |
| > assessed\*                            |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%) | 3      | 2      | 6      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%) | 10     | 3      | 6      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%) | 11     | 6      | 15     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)   | 16     | 21     | 25     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                         |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > SUBGROUP SCORES                       |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch    | 24     | 10     | 23     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested             | 21     | 10     | 23     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%) | 3      | 1      | 4      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%) | 7      | 1      | 4      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%) | 6      | 2      | 6      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)   | 5      | 6      | 9      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                         |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Native American                       | 6      | 3      | 3      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested             | 5      | 3      | 3      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%) | 1      | 0      | 1      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%) | 2      | 1      | 2      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%) | 1      | 1      | 0      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)   | 1      | 1      | 0      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+

\*These students were alternatively assessed. Due to the nature of their
disabilities, they are not working toward the same standards as their
same-age peers. They participate in a modified or altered curriculum
consisting of functional academics.

**[MATH ASSESSMENTS]{.underline}**

**[REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS]{.underline}**

Subject\_\_[Math]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Grade\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ Test\_[CTBS Complete Battery Plus-Terra
Nova]{.underline}

Edition/Publication
Year\_\_[1997]{.underline}\_\_\_Publisher\_[CTB/McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

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

+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                         | 200    | 200    | 200    |
|                                         | 3-2004 | 2-2003 | 1-2002 |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Testing month                         | March  | March  | March  |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**                     |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Total Score (NP of the mean NCE)      | 79%    | 85%    | 73%    |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students                    | 43     | 32     | 52     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested             | 40     | 32     | 52     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Percent of total students tested      | 93%    | 100%   | 100%   |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students alternatively      | 3      | 0      | 0      |
| > assessed\*                            |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Percent of students alternatively     | 7%     | 0%     | 0%     |
| > assessed\*                            |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%) | 2      | 0      | 3      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%) | 5      | 2      | 7      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%) | 7      | 10     | 17     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)   | 26     | 20     | 25     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                         |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > SUBGROUP SCORES                       |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch    | 24     | 10     | 23     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested             | 21     | 10     | 23     |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%) | 2      | 0      | 3      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%) | 5      | 2      | 4      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%) | 4      | 4      | 8      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)   | 10     | 4      | 8      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
|                                         |        |        |        |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Native American                       | 6      | 3      | 3      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number of students tested             | 5      | 3      | 3      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the bottom quartile (1-24%) | 1      | 0      | 1      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 2^nd^ quartile (25-49%) | 2      | 1      | 1      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the 3^rd^ quartile (50-74%) | 0      | 2      | 1      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+
| > Number in the top quartile (75-99%)   | 2      | 0      | 0      |
+-----------------------------------------+--------+--------+--------+

\*These students were alternatively assessed. Due to the nature of their
disabilities, they are not working toward the same standards as their
same-age peers. They participate in a modified or altered curriculum
consisting of functional academics.

**NEBRASKA STATE WRITING ASSESSMENT**

Subject: Writing Grade: 4 Test: Statewide Writing Assessment

  --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                                2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                 February    Not Given   February

                                                                        

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                         N/A\*\*     

  Number of students                            44                      52

  Number of students tested                     41                      51

  Percent of students tested                    93%                     98%

  Number of students alternatively assessed\*   3                       0

  Percent of students alternatively assessed\*  7%                      0%

  Number At or Above Proficient                 22                      46

  Percent At or Above Proficient                54%                     90%

                                                                        

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                       

  Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch            24                      23

  Number of students tested with regular        21                      22
  assessment                                                            

  Number of students tested with alternate      3                       0
  assessment\*                                                          

  Number At or Above Proficient                 8                       20

  Percent At or Above Proficient                38%                     91%

                                                                        

  Native American                               8                       3

  Number of students tested on regular          7                       3
  assessment                                                            

  Number of students tested with alternate      1                       0
  assessment\*                                                          

  Number At or Above Proficient                 3                       3

  Percent At or Above Proficient                43%                     100%

                                                                        

  **STATE SCORES**                                          N/A\*\*     

  Percent of State's Students At or Above       79%                     73%
  Proficient                                                            

  Percent of School's Students At or Above      54%                     90%
  Proficient                                                            
  --------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*These students were alternatively assessed. Due to the nature of their
disabilities, they are not working toward the same standards as their
same-age peers. They participate in a modified or altered curriculum
consisting of functional academics.

\*\*Nebraska did not test 4^th^ graders with a statewide writing
assessment in 2002-03

#  NEBRASKA STATE READING ASSESSMENT

Subject: Reading Grade: 4 Test: Locally Developed State Reading
Assessments

  ------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                              2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  **Testing Month**                           Year-long   Year-long   Year-long

                                                                      

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                   

  Number of students                          43          32          52

  Number of students tested                   40          32          52

  Percent of students tested                  93%         100%        100%

  Number of students alternatively assessed   3           0           0

  Percent of students alternatively assessed  7%          0%          0%

  Student Averages (1):                                               

  \% At or Above Beginning                    100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Progressing                  100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   93%         100%        98%

  \% At Advanced                              33%         53%         71%

                                                                      

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                     

  Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch          23          10          23

  Number of students tested with regular      20          0           23
  assessment                                                          

  Number of students tested with alternate    3           0           0
  assessment                                                          

  Student Averages (1):                                               

  \% At or Above Beginning                    100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Progressing                  100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   85%         100%        96%

  \% At Advanced                              10%         30%         57%

                                                                      

  Native American                             7           3           3

  Number of students tested with regular      6           3           3
  assessment                                                          

  Number of students tested with alternate    1           0           0
  assessment                                                          

  Student Averages (1):                                               

  \% At or Above Beginning                    100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Progressing                  100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   83%         100%        67%

  \% At Advanced                              17%         0%          0%

                                                                      

  **STATE SCORES (2)**                        N/A\*\*                 N/A\*\*

  Nebraska students Meeting or Exceeding                  79%         
  Standards                                                           

  Valentine Elem. students Meeting or                     93%         
  Exceeding Standards                                                 
  ------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*These students were alternatively assessed. Due to the nature of their
disabilities, they are not working toward the same standards as their
same-age peers. They participate in a modified or altered curriculum
consisting of functional academics.

\*\*Nebraska did not compile state standard reading scores in 2001-02 or
2003-04.

\(1\) The "Student Average" was computed by averaging all the standards
together for each student. Each student's average was categorized into
the following levels: Beginning, \< 1.5.1; Progressing, ≥ 1.51;
Proficient, ≥ 2.51; Advanced, ≥ 3.51.

\(2\) The State Score was computed by finding the percent of proficient
and advanced students on each standard, then averaging that percentage
to arrive at an average of students meeting or exceeding the standards.

**NEBRASKA STATE MATH ASSESSMENT**

Subject: Math Grade: 4 Test: Locally Developed State Math Assessments

  ------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                              2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  **Testing Month**                           Year-long   Year-long   Year-long

                                                                      

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                   

  Number of students                          43          32          52

  Number of students tested                   40          32          52

  Percent of total students tested            93%         100%        100%

  Number of students alternatively assessed\* 3           0           0

  Percent of students alternatively           7%          0%          0%
  assessed\*                                                          

  Student Averages (1):                                               

  \% At or Above Beginning                    100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Progressing                  100%        100%        98%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   95%         100%        96%

  \% At Advanced                              58%         81%         60%

                                                                      

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                     

  Eligible for Free or Reduced Lunch          23          10          23

  Number of students tested with regular      20          10          23
  assessment                                                          

  Number of students tested with alternate    3           0           0
  assessment\*                                                        

  Student Averages (1):                                               

  \% At or Above Beginning                    100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Progressing                  100%        100%        96%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   90%         100%        91%

  \% At Advanced                              40%         60%         35%

                                                                      

  Native American                             7           3           3

  Number of students tested with regular      6           3           3
  assessment                                                          

  Number of students tested with alternate    1           0           0
  assessment\*                                                        

  Student Averages (1):                                               

  \% At or Above Beginning                    100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Progressing                  100%        100%        100%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   83%         100%        100%

  \% At Advanced                              33%         33%         33%

                                                                      

  **STATE SCORES (2)**                                    N/A\*\*     

  Nebraska students Meeting or Exceeding      85%                     78%
  Standards                                                           

  Valentine Elem. students Meeting or         92%                     90%
  Exceeding Standards                                                 
  ------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*These students were alternatively assessed. Due to the nature of their
disabilities, they are not working toward the same standards as their
same-age peers. They participate in a modified or altered curriculum
consisting of functional academics.

\*\*Nebraska did not compile state standard math scores in 2002-03.

\(1\) The "Student Average" was computed by averaging all the standards
together for each student. Each student's average was categorized into
the following levels: Beginning, \< 1.5.1; Progressing, ≥ 1.51;
Proficient, ≥ 2.51; Advanced, ≥ 3.51.

\(2\) The State Score was computed by finding the percent of proficient
and advanced students on each standard, then averaging that percentage
to arrive at an average of students meeting or exceeding the standards.