##### U.S. Department of Education September 2003

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

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Mr. Terry L.
Bowers\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [100 Eighth Street; P.O. Box
609\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

[Milledgeville Illinois 61051-0609\_\_]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [(815) 225-7141, ext. 225 Fax (815)
225-7847\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.dist399.net]{.underline} E-mail
[tbowers@dist399.net\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.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\_\_\_\_[2/8/04]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\*\_\_\_\_\_[Mr. Terry L.
Bowers]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

District Name [Chadwick-Milledgeville CUSD #399 Tel. (815) 225-7141,
ext. 225\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.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\_\_\_\_\_\_[2/8/04]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board Mrs. DiAnn Adolph

President/Chairperson

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

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

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_[2/8/04]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

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

-1-

**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 2003-2004 school
    year.

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

4.  The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from
    at least September 1998.

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

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

7.  The U.S. Department of Justice does not have a pending suit alleging
    that the nominated school, or the school district as a whole, has
    violated one or more of the civil rights 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.

-2-

**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: \_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_
Elementary schools

\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_ Middle schools

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_ Junior high schools

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

\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_ Other (Briefly explain)

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

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$4,457 instructional; \$7,492
operating]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$4,842 instructional; \$8,181
operating]{.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\. [18]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

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

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

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

  **K**       20        21                     **41**       **7**                             

  **1**       18        19                     **37**       **8**                             

  **2**       12        18                     **30**       **9**                             

  **3**       9         24                     **33**       **10**                            

  **4**                                                     **11**                            

  **5**                                                     **12**                            

  **6**                                                     Other                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   141
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

-3-

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [99.97]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [0]{.underline} % Black or African American

[.01]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
\_[12.41]{.underline}\_\_%

> (This rate includes the total number of students who transferred to or
> from different schools between October 1 and the end of the school
> year, divided by the total number of students in the school as of
> October 1, multiplied by 100.)

  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------
  **(1)**     Number of students who transferred 7
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 10
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        17
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    137
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .1241
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    12.41
              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:
\_\_[18.44]{.underline}\_%

\_\_\_[26]{.underline}\_\_\_Total Number Students Who Qualify

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

10\. Students receiving special education services:
\_\_[4.97]{.underline}\_\_%

-4-

\_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_Total Number of Students Served

> Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to
> conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education
> Act.

\_\_\_\_Autism \_\_\_\_Orthopedic Impairment

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

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_[1]{.underline}\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_\_\_Speech or Language Impairment

\_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

\_[6]{.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) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_[9]{.underline}\_\_\_ \_\_\_[9]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
\_[17.6/1]{.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.)

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

  Daily student attendance 97.1        96.3        97.3        97.1        96.7

  Daily teacher attendance 95.58       96.99       96.93       96.61       96.58

  Teacher turnover rate    0           10%         0           0           0

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

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

-5-

**[Part III - Summary]{.underline}**

Milledgeville Elementary School is a small rural school located in
northwest Illinois. The school is located in Milledgeville, Illinois and
is part of the Chadwick-Milledgeville Community Unit District #399. Our
school district is committed to assisting students to discover and build
from their individual strengths toward the realization of their full
personal potentials. Although we are a very small school we are able to
provide a comprehensive curriculum and the opportunities for students to
develop a solid foundation of intellectual, physical, social, and
emotional skills. Our competent staff provides a caring, nurturing
environment in which students are encouraged and challenged to become
responsible, life-long learners in our ever-changing world.

Our student population is predominately white with most children coming
from single-family homes. Nearly all of our students use English as
their first language. We are fortunate to have only 18.44% of our
student population coming from economically disadvantaged homes. Our
school has very low mobility and truancy rates compared to state
averages, and we have excellent student attendance.

One huge advantage of our small school is a pupil-teacher ratio of 17.6
to 1. Our small class sizes have enabled our staff to spend a great deal
of time on task and teaching to meet the needs of our students who come
to us with a variety of learning styles. Besides the regular classroom
teachers that our students see every day our children are fortunate
enough to have the services of full-time music, art, and physical
education teachers, full-time speech, Reading Recovery (for first
grade), and Title 1 specialists, plus a part-time gifted teacher, and
the full attention of their own media services specialist who assists
them daily in the elementary computer lab and library. When needed, our
school has the services of a part-time school psychologist and a social
worker. Our high school guidance counselor fills in as our counselor if
needed when the others cannot be at our school. Since our elementary
school is in the rather unusual situation of being housed in the same
building as our high school, our teachers have always had the luxury of
having high school students as teacher aides. In this arrangement, our
teachers are able to further aid our children with more one-on-one
assistance and our young students are also exposed to older students who
are academically strong, and who are usually excellent role models. The
high school Spanish students also provide our youngsters with foreign
language lessons once a week, which helps to broaden our children even
further in their learning.

Due to our small size and all of the other advantages listed in the
above paragraph, our students have consistently scored very well on
nationally standardized tests and we have consistently exceeded the
state averages in all areas on the ISAT tests. In order to maintain
these high levels of achievement year after year our staff has
implemented the Accelerated Reading Program, teachers have been trained
well in the Four-Block writing method, and we have increasingly been
able to use our computer technology to strengthen our students' math
skills. To further hone our skills in the math area, several of our
teachers have been investigating the Accelerated Math program and we are
looking for ways to fund this program so our students can take advantage
of this wonderful learning tool as well.

In our current world, where often the term "Bigger is better" is what
the general public has come

-6-

to believe about so many things, we here at Milledgeville Elementary
School feel that another cliché fits our school quite well - "Small, but
mighty." The staff and administration at

Milledgeville Elementary School are fully committed to helping every
child reach his/her full potential. We are proud of our small school and
all that we have to offer our children from our small rural communities
of Chadwick and Milledgeville.

# [Part IV, #1 - Assessment Results]{.underline}

Milledgeville Elementary School administers the *[Illinois Standards
Achievement Test]{.underline}* (ISAT) which is published by NCS Pearson
/ Illinois State Board of Education. These tests were designed by the
State of Illinois to allow parents and educators to document the
educational progress of their children in relation to state standards.
The tests are given each spring to third grade students in our state.
The levels of achievement are reported in both Reading and Mathematics.
The Performance Level Descriptors for both reading and math are:
*Academic Warning --* Student work demonstrates limited knowledge and
skills in the subject and because of major gaps in learning, students
apply knowledge and skills ineffectively; *Below Standards* -- Student
work demonstrates basic knowledge and skills in the subject; however,
because of gaps in learning, students apply knowledge and skills in
limited ways; *Meets Standards* -- Student work demonstrates proficient
knowledge and skills in the subject, with students effectively applying
knowledge and skills to solve problems; *Exceeds Standards --* Student
work demonstrates advanced knowledge and skills in the subject, with
students creatively applying knowledge and skills to solve problems and
evaluate the results.

Milledgeville Elementary School has ISAT data from 1999-2003. Prior to
2001, some special needs (disabled) students with Individual Education
Plans (IEPs) were excluded from the ISAT as the result of the IEP team's
decision that standardized testing in reading and/or math was not
appropriate. The excluded students were assessed by locally developed
tests. There were 2 students excluded in 1999 and 3 in 2000. One hundred
percent of our students took the ISAT in 2001, 2002, and 2003, with
disabled students receiving test accommodations specified by their IEP
teams. Due to our low enrollment, we are unable to provide disaggregated
data for low income, racial/ethnic, or disabled student populations,
because the groups are not comprised of sufficient numbers to be a part
of the state's assessment reports. Our display tables for reading and
math instead include disaggregated data for non-disabled, not low
income, female, and male student populations.

Our faculty and administration continually work to align our curricula
with the Illinois Learning Standards. Our third graders have shown
marked progress in both reading and math as a result of these consistent
efforts. In 1999, 81% of our students scored in either the *Meets* or
*Exceeds* category in math, which was 13% higher than the state average.
The students demonstrating *Meets* or *Exceeds* achievement represented
95% in 2000, which was 26% higher than the state average; 87% in 2001,
which was 13 % higher than the state average; and 91% in 2002, which was
17 % higher than the state average. Last year, 2003, students
demonstrating *Meets* or

*Exceeds* achievement came in at an exciting 100%, which was 24.3%
higher than the state

average. The percentage of our 3^rd^ graders scoring in the *Exceeds
Standards* level in math has

-7-

increased steadily from 20% in 1999, to 33% in 2000, 50% in 2001, 61% in
2002, and 75% in 2003. Our Reading levels have also shown continued
growth. In 1999, 69% of our students scored in either the *Meets* or
*Exceeds* category in reading, which was 8% higher than the state
average. The students demonstrating *Meets* or *Exceeds* achievement
represented 75% in 2000, which was 13% higher than the state average;
87% in 2001, which was 25 % higher than the state average; 88% in 2002,
which was 25% higher than the state; and 91.7% in 2003, which was 29.7%
higher than the state. The percentage of our 3^rd^ graders scoring in
the *Exceeds Standards* level in reading has increased steadily from 5%
in 1999, to 18% in 2000, 24% in 2001, 27% in 2002, and 55.6 in 2003.

These test results have allowed our school to assess and identify our
strengths and our weaknesses. We consistently reevaluate the needs of
our students so that we may give each child an education that will
prepare him for each new level of learning.

**[Part IV, #2 - Use of Assessment Data]{.underline}**

The commitment to use assessment data has driven our school improvement
process. Our district believes that in order to improve teaching and
student learning we must use different types of assessment tools to set
goals for improving student achievement. The disaggregation of data from
the Illinois Standards Achievement Test, the Stanford Achievement
Tests - 9^th^ Edition, and the Otis-Lennon School Ability Tests provide
a focus for professional development and for adjustments to be made in
our instructional program in order to address the diverse academic needs
of each group of children. Our district also uses a variety of formal
and informal strategies to make instructional decisions and to monitor
student progress. Any information that we are able to obtain through
assessment is passed on to students and their parents in order to
involve them in understanding the achievement successes or failures of
the students. Our staff uses full-day Teacher Institutes, half-day
School Improvement Planning Institutes, as well as 1¾ -hour Inservice
Programs to network and continually identify instructional targets to
improve student achievement. The on-going meetings throughout the school
year ensure that there is communication and planning between grade
levels as to the expectations for each student. The district uses
assessment data to understand and improve student and school performance
by:

-   Making instructional modifications in curriculum scope, sequence and
    delivery for individuals and small groups,

-   Involving specialized support staff including Reading Recovery,
    Title One reading and math, Helping Steps, special education
    resources, a speech and language specialist, and a summer school
    program to meet children's needs, and

-   Aligning the curriculum more closely to State standards.

-8-

**[PART IV, #3 - COMMUNICATING STUDENT PERFORMANCE]{.underline}**

The mission statement of the Chadwick-Milledgeville CUSD #399 commits
our district to assisting students to discover and build from their
individual strengths toward the realization of their full personal
potentials. As we do this, we are constantly and in many ways
communicating student performance and assessment to parents, students,
and the community. Student handbooks are distributed to families at
registration. An Open House is held early in the school year and
parent-teacher conferences are held each November. Parents are
encouraged to request a conference with teachers whenever they feel a
need and teachers contact parents throughout the year for additional
conference times. Report cards and progress reports are sent home a
minimum of 4 times a year, with many teachers sending weekly or
bi-weekly progress reports, as well as classroom calendars and
newsletters. Computer-generated reading reports are sent home weekly to
apprise parents of students' progress in the Accelerated Reading
program. Annual test results for the Illinois Standards Achievement
Tests, the Otis-Lennon School Ability Tests, and the Stanford
Achievement Tests are conveyed to parents via printed reports. Parents
of Title I/Reading Recovery students receive written reports
periodically through the year. News releases and pictures of school
events appear regularly in the local newspapers along with a monthly
newsletter insert. A great deal of information is posted on the
district's website ([www.dist399.net](http://www.dist399.net/)),
including the state-mandated School District Report Card, teachers'
voice mail numbers and e-mail addresses, and the electronic version of
the monthly district newsletter. A Fine Arts Festival is held in May to
showcase students' art work and music for the community.

**[Part IV, \# 4 - Sharing School Successes with other
Schools]{.underline}**

A Blue Ribbon School is made up of a group of people working together
toward the goal of helping our most precious assets, our children,
become the best that they can be. Perpetual and unthreatening
communication between the teachers, administrators, parents and students
within the school community is imperative. Education is, however, always
evolving and the ongoing commitment to improvement requires
communication with those outside of the local community as well.
Milledgeville Elementary School has improved because of interaction with
outside resources such as the Special Education Cooperative, the
Regional Office of Education and the State Board of Education. Our
district has sought and utilized outside resources such as categorical
grants, competitive school improvement grants and technology grants to
provide opportunities for growth of students and teachers alike.
Milledgeville Elementary School has also improved because staff members
attend university classes, workshops and professional meetings, and
utilize educational publications, news articles and Internet resources.
In pursuit of improvement, our staff members have networked with other
educators. As we experience improvement we recognize and celebrate the
students' academic performance, the teachers' dedication to improvement
and the parents' continuing assistance.

We firmly believe that Blue Ribbon Schools have the obligation to
contribute information to other districts to help them more successfully
meet the needs of their students. We will welcome visitors to our school
and will share how we developed our curriculum and utilized our assets
to

make a learning climate rich in possibilities for student achievement.
We will also share our

-9-

State School Report Card, our monthly district newsletter and our
successes via the school district website at
[www.dist399.net](http://www.dist399.net/). As we have reaped the
benefits of networking, we will put the word out that networking with a
Blue Ribbon School can be mutually beneficial as we exchange a variety
of ideas and a wealth of diverse information, making all interacting
schools stronger and more productive.

**[Part V, \# 1 -Curriculum and Instruction]{.underline}**

The curriculum at Milledgeville Elementary School is aligned to and
obligated by Illinois State Standards and the Chadwick-Milledgeville
CUSD #399 goals. The curriculum reflects the communities' high
expectations for our children's intellectual and personal growth. Using
the state standards, current research, and best practice, we have
developed programs and materials to support an environment encouraging
each child to achieve high expectations and find success in learning.
Our curriculum provides multiple opportunities to develop oral and
written language skills, as well as critical thinking skills.

-   The teaching of basic skills in all curricular areas is combined
    with life-skills and problem solving skills. For example, third
    graders study beyond traditional assessment methods by using
    open-ended questions that have been written and chosen from
    different sources requiring students to communicate their
    mathematical thinking. Our students feel more confident showing
    understanding at test time with proficient and well-supported test
    answers.

-   A strong literacy curriculum integrating reading, writing, speaking,
    and listening forms the foundation for all curricular areas. For
    example, after reading about snakes in their basal readers, the
    second graders formed groups, studied about snakes in the library
    and on the computer, and then prepared presentations.

-   Conceptual development spirals and increases in difficulty as
    students progress through the grade levels in mathematics. For
    example, first graders keep an individual running assessment on
    their developing skills in addition, subtraction, money. Parents are
    kept aware of their child's development of skills through teacher to
    home notes.

-   Homework is an expectation that develops an explicit connection
    between school and home to reinforce and expand children's learning
    and unites teacher/parent relationships. Parent awareness of daily
    schoolwork supports understanding of a child's strengths and
    weaknesses.

-   Planned enrichment experiences such as field trips, art enrichment
    programs and cultural arts programs build background knowledge and
    engage the diverse interests of all children. High school Spanish
    students visit K-3 classrooms weekly, introducing Spanish language
    skills.

-   An Outdoor Educational Learning Lab, The Prairie Project, develops
    inquiry-based learning experiences and supports each child's
    individual learning style while encouraging habitat restoration.
    Each student is encouraged to learn about native plants and grasses,
    to plant seeds and bulbs and to view and identify native birds and
    butterflies.

-   A variety of assessments including state-assessments, district-wide
    achievement tests, diagnostic reading evaluations, and portfolios
    help inform instruction and evaluate the needs of individual
    children. For example, the Accelerated Reader Program is based on
    individual ability, with success and reading levels that are matched
    to students' individual skills. They are encouraged to get a book
    for enjoyment of reading and testing and one for the parents to read
    to them.

-10-

-   High quality resources, (literature, textbooks, technology and high
    school students), selected by the staff, support the varied
    interests and abilities of children and enable students to reach
    their learning potential. High school students serve as tutors and
    teacher helpers.

-   Our school provides resources that enhance a student's education
    through the use of technology, including networked computers,
    curriculum specific software and the Internet. Our goal in providing
    technology resources is to promote educational excellence by
    facilitating resource sharing, innovation, communication and
    collaboration.

# [Part V, #2 -- Reading Curriculum]{.underline}

Our school district has high expectations for students and desired a
reading program that would aid them in becoming flourishing and enduring
readers. Teachers collaborated within the district and researched
reading programs implemented in other school districts. Our school
district selected the [Scott Foresman]{.underline} literature based
reading series. This reading series contains high-quality literature
which integrates writing, grammar and spelling into its curriculum.
Supplementary materials include audiotapes that introduce vocabulary to
students, read-alongs and a website resource for students, parents and
educators. Test preparation provided in this reading program assists
students in becoming successful readers who are prepared for state and
national tests.

Teachers use various teaching methods to aid students in reaching their
maximum reading potential:

-   Phonemic awareness, sound/symbol association, letter recognition,
    phonics, word identification, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension
    are incorporated into instructional lessons in the reading program.

-   Independent study and shared reading activities allow students to
    develop comprehension of material and fluency while reading.

-   High school helpers are available to assist students with reading
    material.

-   Progress is measured by informal and formal assessment measures-
    fluency in oral readings, vocabulary quizzes following each story
    and a test following each book.

-   Different reading levels are incorporated into the reading program
    to adapt to individualized performance.

-   Reading Recovery, a program designed for at risk 1^st^ grade
    students, provides individual assistance by a specialized reading
    teacher.

-   Title I is a program offered to elementary students who display
    difficulty developing grade-level reading skills; it gives students
    the opportunity to receive assistance from a specialized reading
    teacher in a small group.

-   A gifted program in our district encourages students to excel by
    offering more challenging material.

-   Accelerated Reader is a program designed to allow students to read
    at their grade level while progressing in difficulty; comprehension
    and retention of material are measured by a quiz at the end of each
    book.

-11-

**[Part V, #3 -- Writing Curriculum]{.underline}**

It is our mission to build students' strengths toward their full
personal potentials. Through a comprehensive writing curriculum, it is
our objective to provide the opportunities for students to develop a
solid foundation for communication for a variety of purposes. Journal
writing, letter writing, reports, comparison essays, and descriptive
essays are a few of our on-going writing curriculum activities. Of
course, narrative, persuasive, and expository writing are a large part
of our program since we are tested in those areas. The Four Square
method is implemented to achieve success in those areas. Science and
social studies units are often reviewed by having the students write
expository essays. To improve our writing skills, we utilize great
literature in order to increase the students' vocabulary and increase
their thought and imagination. Therefore, we are lucky to have an
outstanding library/media specialist who introduces the students to
various types of literature and discusses the writing styles of
different authors. Another part of our writing program consists of the
mechanics. We use Daily Oral Language to emphasize this part of writing.
Writing is encouraged across all content areas so that students
recognize its relevance in every aspect of life.

# [Part V, #4 -- Instructional Methods]{.underline}

Teachers at Milledgeville Elementary School utilize a variety of
instructional methods to improve student learning. They align the
curricula to meet the Illinois Learning Standards and set high
expectations for student achievement. Their research-based methods of
instruction help meet the needs of all students regardless of their
learning styles. Some of the strategies used include:

-   Direct instruction, which develops skills necessary to become
    independent learners.

-   Cooperative learning experiences in many subject areas to help
    promote learning and build social skills.

-   Problem-based learning experiences to help students apply what they
    are learning to the real world. This gives their learning meaning.

-   Modeling, guided practice, and the use of manipulatives to reach
    students with a variety of learning styles.

-   Small, flexible grouping strategies allow the teacher or aides to
    work with smaller numbers of students on specific skills or subject
    areas (one-on-one instruction, differentiated instruction for
    special needs students).

-   Specialized instruction for students with IEPs. Regular classroom
    teachers work closely with support staff to individualize
    instruction and provide needed accommodations.

-   Technology/media center use. All classrooms are equipped with
    computers and have Internet access. Each class has scheduled visits
    to the computer lab and library.

-12-

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

The Data Display Table is illustrated on the following page.

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

Grade [3 Reading]{.underline}

Test [Illinois Standards Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [1999-2003]{.underline} Publisher [Illinois
State Board of Education]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered:

1999 = 52

2000 = 63

2001 = 38

2002 = 33

2003 = 36

Number of students who took the test:

1999 = 42

2000 = 60

2001 = 38

2002 = 33

2003 = 36

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

Prior to 2001 some students with IEP's were excluded as the result of
the IEP team's decision that standardized testing in reading was not
appropriate. Excluded students were assessed by locally-developed tests.

Number excluded Year Percent excluded

2 1999 4

3 2000 5

0 2001 0

0 2002 0

0 2003 0

For the school and state, report scores as the percentage of students
tested whose performance was scored at or above the cutpoint used by the
state for 1) basic, 2) proficient, and 3) advanced, or similar
categories as defined by the state. States will vary in their
terminology and cutpoints. Note that the reported percentage of students
scoring above the basic cutpoint should include students scoring above
the proficiency, and advanced cutpoints.

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

-13-

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

Data Display Table for Reading

+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
|                                     | **2 | *   | *   | *   | *   |
|                                     | 002 | *20 | *20 | *19 | *19 |
|                                     | -** | 01- | 00- | 99- | 98- |
|                                     |     | 200 | 200 | 200 | 199 |
|                                     | **  | 2** | 1** | 0** | 9** |
|                                     | 200 |     |     |     |     |
|                                     | 3** |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Testing Month -- March/April        |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| # SCHOOL SCORES                     |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Total -- Percent of students...     |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 97  | 95  | 98  | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 9   | 88  | 87  | 75  | 69  |
|                                     | 1.7 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 5   | 27  | 24  | 18  | 5   |
|                                     | 5.6 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Number of students tested           | 36  | 33  | 38  | 60  | 4   |
|                                     |     |     |     |     | 2\* |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Percent of total students tested    | 100 | 100 | 100 | 95  | 8   |
|                                     |     |     |     |     | 1\* |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Number of students excluded         | 0   | 0   | 0   | 3   | 2   |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Percent of students excluded        | 0   | 0   | 0   | 5   | 4   |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| # Subgroup Scores                   |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 1\. **Non-Disabled**                |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 100 | 100 | 98  | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 9   | 100 | 94  | 75  | 69  |
|                                     | 1.7 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 5   | 32  | 28  | 18  | 5   |
|                                     | 5.6 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 2\. **Not Low Income**              |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 96  | 93  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 100 | 88  | 84  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 63  | 28  | 28  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 3\. **Female**                      |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 100 | 89  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 95  | 84  | 77  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 65  | 38  | 24  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 4\. **Male**                        |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 95  | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 8   | 90  | 95  |     |     |
|                                     | 7.6 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 4   | 20  | 24  |     |     |
|                                     | 3.8 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| State Scores                        |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Total-- Percent of students...      |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 9   | 94  | 93  | 94  | 92  |
|                                     | 1.9 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 62  | 63  | 62  | 62  | 61  |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 2   | 19  | 19  | 21  | 17  |
|                                     | 1.9 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+

NOTE: Empty cells = data not available as a part of the State's
assessment reports.

\* = 3 students absent and 5 tests not scored by State

-14-

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

The Data Display Table is illustrated on the following page.

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

Grade [3 Math]{.underline}

Test [Illinois Standards Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [1999-2003]{.underline} Publisher [Illinois
State Board of Education]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered:

1999 = 52

2000 = 63

2001 = 38

2002 = 33

2003 = 36

Number of students who took the test:

1999 = 49

2000 = 60

2001 = 38

2002 = 33

2003 = 36

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

Prior to 2001 some students with IEP's were excluded as the result of
the IEP team's decision that standardized testing in math was not
appropriate. Excluded students were assessed by locally-developed tests.

Number excluded Year Percent excluded

2 1999 4

3 2000 5

0 2001 0

0 2002 0

0 2003 0

For the school and state, report scores as the percentage of students
tested whose performance was scored at or above the cutpoint used by the
state for 1) basic, 2) proficient, and 3) advanced, or similar
categories as defined by the state. States will vary in their
terminology and cutpoints. Note that the reported percentage of students
scoring above the basic cutpoint should include students scoring above
the proficiency, and advanced cutpoints.

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

-15-

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

Data Display Table for Math

+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
|                                     | **2 | *   | *   | *   | *   |
|                                     | 002 | *20 | *20 | *19 | *19 |
|                                     | -** | 01- | 00- | 99- | 98- |
|                                     |     | 200 | 200 | 200 | 199 |
|                                     | **  | 2** | 1** | 0** | 9** |
|                                     | 200 |     |     |     |     |
|                                     | 3** |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Testing Month -- March/April        |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| # SCHOOL SCORES                     |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Total -- Percent of students...     | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 91  | 98  | 100 | 97  |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 91  | 87  | 95  | 81  |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 75  | 61  | 50  | 33  | 20  |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Number of students tested           | 36  | 33  | 38  | 60  | 4   |
|                                     |     |     |     |     | 9\* |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Percent of total students tested    | 100 | 100 | 100 | 95  | 9   |
|                                     |     |     |     |     | 4\* |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Number of students excluded         | 0   | 0   | 0   | 3   | 2   |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Percent of students excluded        | 0   | 0   | 0   | 5   | 4   |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| # Subgroup Scores                   |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 1\. **Non-Disabled**                |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 100 | 100 | 90  | 95  | 83  |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 75  | 69  | 56  | 33  | 21  |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 2\. **Not Low Income**              |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 92  | 96  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 100 | 92  | 87  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 7   | 67  | 53  |     |     |
|                                     | 7.8 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 3\. **Female**                      |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 86  | 94  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 100 | 86  | 70  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 80  | 43  | 35  |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| 4\. **Male**                        |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 100 | 95  | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 100 | 95  | 100 |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 6   | 74  | 62  |     |     |
|                                     | 8.8 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| State Scores                        |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Total-- Percent of students...      |     |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Academic Warning        | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Below Standards         | 9   | 93  | 92  | 90  | 88  |
|                                     | 3.1 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Meeting Standards       | 7   | 74  | 74  | 69  | 68  |
|                                     | 5.7 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| At or above Exceeds Standards       | 3   | 30  | 28  | 23  | 21  |
|                                     | 1.1 |     |     |     |     |
+-------------------------------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+

NOTE: Empty cells = data not available as a part of the State's
assessment reports.

\* = 1 student absent

-16-