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

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

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Patti Arnold]{.underline}

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

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

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [P.O. Box 249 160 West Clay Street]{.underline}

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

[Fredericksburg Ohio 44627-0249]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [(330) 695-2741]{.underline} Fax [(330 ) 695-2116]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.southeast.k-12.oh.us./fredrcks]{.underline} E-mail
[soea_parnold@tccsa.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\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Steve Sayers]{.underline}

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

District Name [Southeast Local School District]{.underline} Tel. [( 330
) 698-3001]{.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 Sue Williams

(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 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.

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: \_\_\_4\_\_ Elementary schools

\_\_\_1\_\_ Middle schools

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

\_\_\_1\_ High schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Other (Briefly explain)

\_\_6\_\_\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,214.08]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,441]{.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\. [3]{.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**       19        11                     **30**       **7**       3         5           8

  **1**       25        14                     **39**       **8**       2         3           5

  **2**       20        9                      **29**       **9**                             

  **3**       9         18                     **27**       **10**                            

  **4**       10        8                      **18**       **11**                            

  **5**       12        93                     **15**       **12**                            

  **6**       18        6                      24           Other                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   195
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [99.5%]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [\_0.5%]{.underline} % Black or African
American

\% Hispanic or Latino

\% Asian/Pacific Islander

\% American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
[2.5%]{.underline}

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

  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------
  **(1)**     Number of students who transferred 0
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 5
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        5
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    200
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .025
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    2.5%
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: \_\_\_\_0\_\_\_%

\_\_\_\_\_0\_\_Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: \_\_0\_\_\_\_\_\_

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [52.2%]{.underline}

[105]{.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: [14.9%]{.underline}

[29]{.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\_\_Autism \_\_\_\_Orthopedic Impairment

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

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_\_2\_\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_15\_\_Speech or Language Impairment

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

\_7\_\_\_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\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_12\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_5\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_1\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_3\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_12\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_33\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_1\_\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
\_\_20:1\_\_\_\_\_

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 [95.4]{.underline}   [96.1]{.underline}    [96.4]{.underline}   [93]{.underline}     [95.6]{.underline}

  Daily teacher attendance [97.9]{.underline}   [96.2]{.underline}    [95.8]{.underline}   [96.1]{.underline}   [97.3]{.underline}

  Teacher turnover rate    [6.1]{.underline}    [18.18]{.underline}   [9.1]{.underline}    [9.1]{.underline}    [0]{.underline}

  Student dropout rate     [NA]{.underline}     [NA]{.underline}      [NA]{.underline}     [NA]{.underline}     [NA]{.underline}

  Student drop-off rate    NA                   NA                    NA                   NA                   NA
  ------------------------ -------------------- --------------------- -------------------- -------------------- --------------------

# Part III -- Summary

Fredericksburg Elementary School (ES) is located in the village of
Fredericksburg, Ohio, in Wayne County. This community is located in the
16^th^ Federal Congressional District, which is in the southern most
section of northeastern Ohio and is adjacent to the designated
Appalachia Region. Fredericksburg ES is part of the Southeast Local
School District whose median income is \$27,050. Fredericksburg ES
enrollment is 195 students in kindergarten through eighth grade, housed
in a 113 year-old facility. Our strengths are founded in a rural
atmosphere that supports the learning community of the school and a
dedicated staff, all being Highly Qualified, committed to increasing
student achievement.

Fredericksburg ES has a diverse and culturally blended enrollment of
which 42% is from the Amish culture. Many of our students begin their
education with a pre-school experience and some have none. Students
enter into our educational process with a huge variation in knowledge,
and in experience. Each classroom reflects a diversity of student
interests, culture, and family expectations that are brought to the
learning process.

Fredericksburg ES school's mission statement is "*a united commitment to
learning*: *united* effort, *united* responsibility, and *united*
success." Each school day begins with the staff, students, parents, and
community being challenged to fulfill their roles as active members in
our learning environment. To facilitate the mission statement, we have
created six values: we believe that all children can learn; we believe
that being fair does not mean the same for everyone; we believe that
students need to take ownership of their learning and their classroom;
we believe that educating a child is a partnership with the students,
parents, and community; we believe that teacher instruction should meet
different learning styles; and we believe that success needs to be
celebrated. These values are listed separately, but are interrelated.

*United* effort is demonstrated by the increase in the number of
students completing their daily homework and participating in our
Homework Heroes Program (45% to 72% in a three year period). Over 85% of
our students receive passing grades each nine weeks. Each classroom has
implemented consistent building rules and a discipline system. Parents
assist with homework when needed, support the school in discipline
situations, and support our annual auction fundraiser. The 98%
attendance rate at our fall parent-teacher conferences demonstrates
their effort. During the school year, 100% of the staff attends
professional development to promote growth in initiatives at the
district and building levels.

*United* responsibility is seen each day as our students take ownership
of their learning through goal setting. The staff works to create
meaningful lessons that engage and challenge students. Parents are
involved in the educational process at all levels. They are encouraged
to read to their children nightly as well as to sign assignment books
and homework folders. The number of parent volunteers has increased from
four (4) three years ago to over 30. The PTO sponsors an annual auction
that generates over \$25,000 to supplement the educational process.
These additional dollars support extra programs implemented for student
success. They also provide classroom supplies and equipment, such as
amplification systems, which enhance the educational process.

*United* success is celebrated daily to provide continued momentum for
increased student achievement. Recognition of classroom and individual
goals is accomplished through the local newspaper, daily announcements,
special incentive programs (Homework Heroes and students receiving all
A's have lunch with the principal), wall of retired classroom goals, our
learning basket for individual goals, phone calls home to share success,
and congratulatory notes sent home.

Our continued commitment to achieve excellence in all facets of the
educational process qualifies Fredericksburg Elementary School for
recognition as a No Child Left Behind-Blue Ribbon School.

# Indicators Of Academic Success

Fredericksburg Elementary School participates in Ohio's Proficiency
Tests (OPT), at the fourth and sixth grade levels. The OPT applies to
the five following content areas: reading, writing, math, science, and
citizenship. These tests are administered each March with the exception
of the fourth-grade reading test. This test is administered twice, once
in October and again in March. The OPT levels of proficiency are basic,
proficient, and advanced at each content area. The "basic level" was
added in 2002-2003 to accommodate the scores of students having IEP's
(special education students), who prior to 2002-2003 had been exempted
from the OPT testing. Students with multi disabilities are administrated
an "alternative assessment" in lieu of the OPT. The State of Ohio has
set a 75% proficiency rate as a passage indicator for each content area.
It is our goal for all students to obtain the proficient and advanced
level.

A five year review of the 4th grade OPT scores shows for Fredericksburg
ES an increase in the reading scores at the combined proficient and
advanced levels of 11.3% and in math an increase of 25.8%. The advanced
level alone has shown an increase of 16.7% in reading and an increase in
math of 4.7% over the five-year period. The OPT scores for the
economically disadvantaged subgroup in both the reading and math content
areas---combined proficient and advanced levels--- shows an increase of
12.5%

A five-year review of the 6^th^ grade OPT scores shows an increase in
the reading scores at the combined proficient and advanced levels of
35.2% and in math an increase of 42.3%. The advanced level alone has
shown an increase of 46.7% in reading and an increase in math of 38.5%
over the five-year period. The OPT scores for the economically
disadvantaged subgroup in reading shows an increase of 13.1% and math
5.4% respectively.

Four students---three in 4^th^ grade and one in 6^th^ grade---were
excluded from the administration of the OPT testing because they are
special education students identified as multiple handicapped. These
four students were given alternate assessments in both reading and math
aligned with their IEP goals.

The summary of this data, points out our steady increase in student
achievement in the reading and math content areas. The data provides
evidence that our economically disadvantaged students within the general
population have demonstrated academic improvement.

There was a significant increase from 2000-2003, which in part might be
attributed to be an 18.18% teacher turnover rate in the building that
brought new perspective to the mind set of the staff, and in the
implementation of the Quality Education Improvement initiative which
gave students ownership of their learning.

> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST**
>
> Grade[\_\_\_4\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Test [Ohio Fourth-Grade Reading
> Proficiency
> Test]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year\_\_[\_2003]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Publisher
> [\_Ohio Department of Education]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered
> \_\_\_15\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students who took the test \_\_\_15\_\_\_\_
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Under IDEA '97 guidelines]{.underline}, [multi handicapped
> students are excluded because of special education identification and
> are administered alternative assessment.]{.underline}
>
> Number excluded\_\_\_\_\_3\_\_\_ Percent excluded\_\_\_16.7%\_\_\_\_\_
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, Ohio required 4^th^, 6^th^ and 9^th^
> grade proficiency tests in reading, writing, mathematics, citizenship,
> and science. These assessments are based on Ohio's academic content
> standards that delineate what a student should know and be able to do
> at each grade level. The academic content standards are composed of
> standards, benchmarks and grade-level indicators.
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, reading scores for the fourth-grade
> proficiency test were reported as advanced, proficient, basic or below
> basic. The scaled score standards were:

+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| #### Fourth-Grade Reading |                  |                       |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| #### Category             | #                | #### 2002-2003        |
|                           | ### Scaled Score |                       |
|                           |                  | #### State Percentage |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At Advanced               | 250 and higher   | 9.3%                  |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above proficient    | 217 and higher   | 66.3%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above basic         | 198 and higher   | 90.6%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| Below basic               | below 198        | 9.4%                  |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+

Performance standards were established by the State Board of Education
based on recommendations of standard-setting committees (comprised
mainly of Ohio teachers at the appropriate grade levels) and reports
from the Testing Steering Committee (comprised of school
administrators), the Fairness/Sensitivity review panel (comprised of
representatives of the diversity in Ohio looking at equity issues), and
the Technical Advisory Committee (comprised of national and state
testing experts and psychometricians looking at technical issues).

# Ohio Fourth-Grade Reading Proficiency Test

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

  Testing month                                                                       

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                   

  \% At or Above Basic                16.7        N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient           66.6        66.7        65.2        52.4        72

  \% At Advanced                      16.7        0           13          4.8         0

  Number of students tested           15          15          20          21          25

  Percent of total students tested    100         100         100         100         100

  Number of students excluded         0           0           0           0           0

  Percent of students excluded        0           0           0           0           0

                                                                                      

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                     

  1\. [Economically                                                                   
  Disadvantaged]{.underline} (specify                                                 
  subgroup)                                                                           

  \% At or Above Basic                0           NA          NA          NA          NA

  \% At or Above Proficient           75          33.3        51.7        66.7        87.5

  \% At Advanced                      25          33.3        28.5        33.3        0

  Number of students tested           8           3           7           7           8

  2\. (specify subgroup)                                                              

  \% At or Above Basic                            NA          NA          NA          NA

  \% At or Above Proficient                                                           

  \% At Advanced                                                                      

  Number of students tested                                                           

                                                                                      

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                    

  \% At or Above Basic                90.6%       N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient           66.3%       67.7%       56.0%       58.2%       59.2%

  \% At Advanced                      9.3%        7.0%        7.0%        6.0%        4.0%
  ----------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left
Behind Act, Ohio\'s calculation of

proficiency percentages in 2002-2003 changed in two significant ways
from calculations in prior years. First, some students with disabilities
who were previously exempted from the accountability calculations were
included in all proficiency calculations. Second, students were required
to be enrolled in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be
included in the proficiency calculations for that school. These two
changes may cause the data from the 2002-2003 school year to appear
markedly different from the data from previous years for some schools.

# STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST

> Grade[\_\_\_4\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Test [Ohio Fourth-Grade
> Mathematics Proficiency
> Test]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year\_\_[\_2003]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Publisher
> [\_Ohio Department of Education]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered
> \_\_15\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students who took the test \_\_\_15\_\_\_\_
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Under IDEA '97 guidelines]{.underline}, [multi handicapped
> students are excluded because of special education identification and
> are administered alternative assessment.]{.underline}
>
> Number excluded\_\_3\_\_\_\_\_\_ Percent excluded\_\_\_\_16.7%\_\_\_\_
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, Ohio required 4^th^, 6^th^ and 9^th^
> grade proficiency tests in reading, writing, mathematics, citizenship,
> and science. These assessments are based on Ohio's academic content
> standards that delineate what a student should know and be able to do
> at each grade level. The academic content standards are composed of
> standards, benchmarks and grade-level indicators.
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, mathematics scores for the fourth-grade
> proficiency test were reported as advanced, proficient, basic or below
> basic. The scaled score standards were:

+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| ####                      |                  |                       |
|  Fourth-Grade Mathematics |                  |                       |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| #### Category             | #                | #### 2002-2003        |
|                           | ### Scaled Score |                       |
|                           |                  | #### State Percentage |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At Advanced               | 250 and higher   | 14.6%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above proficient    | 218 and higher   | 58.6%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above basic         | 208 and higher   | 70.4%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| Below basic               | below 208        | 29.6%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+

Performance standards were established by the State Board of Education
based on recommendations of standard-setting committees (comprised
mainly of Ohio teachers at the appropriate grade levels) and reports
from the Testing Steering Committee (comprised of school
administrators), the Fairness/Sensitivity review panel (comprised of
representatives of the diversity in Ohio looking at equity issues), and
the Technical Advisory Committee (comprised of national and state
testing experts and psychometricians looking at technical issues).

## Ohio Fourth-Grade Mathematics Proficiency Test

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

  Testing month                                                                      

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                  

  \% At or Above Basic               5.6         N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient          61.1        46.7        82.6        38.1        40

  \% At Advanced                     16.7        20          13          23.8        12

  Number of students tested          15          15          20          21          25

  Percent of total students tested   100         100         100         100         100

  Number of students excluded        0           0           0           0           0

  Percent of students excluded       0           0           0           0           0

                                                                                     

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                    

  1\. [Economically                                                                  
  Disadvantaged]{.underline}                                                         
  (specify subgroup)                                                                 

  \% At or Above Basic               0           NA          NA          NA          NA

  \% At or Above Proficient          75          33.3        51.7        83.3        87.5

  \% At Advanced                     25          33.3        28.5        16.7        0

  Number of students tested          8           3           7           7           8

  2\. (specify subgroup)                                                             

  \% At or Above Basic                           NA          NA          NA          NA

  \% At or Above Proficient                                                          

  \% At Advanced                                                                     

  Number of students tested                                                          

                                                                                     

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                   

  \% At or Above Basic               70.4%       N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient          58.6%       62.9%       59.4%       48.9%       50.6%

  \% At Advanced                     14.6%       17.0%       16.0%       11.0%       12.0%
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left
Behind Act, Ohio\'s calculation of

proficiency percentages in 2002-2003 changed in two significant ways
from calculations in prior years. First, some students with disabilities
who were previously exempted from the accountability calculations were
included in all proficiency calculations. Second, students were required
to be enrolled in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be
included in the proficiency calculations for that school. These two
changes may cause the data from the 2002-2003 school year to appear
markedly different from the data from previous years for some schools.

# STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST

> Grade[\_\_\_6\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Test [Ohio Sixth-Grade Reading
> Proficiency
> Test]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year\_\_[\_2003]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Publisher
> [\_Ohio Department of Education]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered
> \_\_23\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students who took the test \_\_23\_\_\_\_\_
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Under IDEA '97 guidelines]{.underline}, [multi handicapped
> students are excluded because of special education identification and
> are administered alternative assessment.]{.underline}
>
> Number excluded\_\_\_\_1\_\_\_\_ Percent excluded\_\_\_\_4.2%\_\_\_\_
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, Ohio required 4^th^, 6^th^ and 9^th^
> grade proficiency tests in reading, writing, mathematics, citizenship,
> and science. These assessments are based on Ohio's academic content
> standards that delineate what a student should know and be able to do
> at each grade level. The academic content standards are composed of
> standards, benchmarks and grade-level indicators.
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, reading scores for the sixth-grade
> proficiency test were reported as advanced, proficient, basic or below
> basic. The scaled score standards were:

+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| #### Sixth-Grade Reading  |                  |                       |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| #### Category             | #                | #### 2002-2003        |
|                           | ### Scaled Score |                       |
|                           |                  | #### State Percentage |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At Advanced               | 250 and higher   | 26.1%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above proficient    | 222 and higher   | 65.0%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above basic         | 201 and higher   | 82.7%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| Below proficient          | below 201        | 17.3%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+

Performance standards were established by the State Board of Education
based on recommendations of standard-setting committees (comprised
mainly of Ohio teachers at the appropriate grade levels) and reports
from the Testing Steering Committee (comprised of school
administrators), the Fairness/Sensitivity review panel (comprised of
representatives of the diversity in Ohio looking at equity issues), and
the Technical Advisory Committee (comprised of national and state
testing experts and psychometricians looking at technical issues).

# Ohio Sixth-Grade Reading Proficiency Test

+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                  | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    | 1    |
|                                  | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- | 998- |
|                                  | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                    |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 3.8  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 38.5 | 59.1 | 38.5 | 58.8 | 50   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   | 53.8 | 40.9 | 26.9 | 23.5 | 7.1  |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested        | 23   | 22   | 26   | 20   | 13   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students tested | 100  | 100  | 100  | 100  | 100  |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students excluded      | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students excluded     | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| 1.  [Economically                |      |      |      |      |      |
|     Disadvantaged]{.underline}   |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                  |      |      |      |      |      |
| > (specify subgroup)             |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 0    | NA   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 61.5 | 62.5 | 37.5 | 50   | 71.4 |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   | 23   | 0    | 37.5 | 16.7 | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested        | 13   | 8    | 8    | 6    | 7    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| 2\. (specify subgroup)           |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             |      | NA   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested        |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                 |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 8    | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
|                                  | 2.7% |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 6    | 5    | 5    | 5    | 5    |
|                                  | 5.0% | 8.2% | 8.3% | 3.2% | 2.1% |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    | 1    |
|                                  | 6.1% | 2.0% | 3.0% | 5.0% | 8.0% |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left
Behind Act, Ohio\'s calculation of

proficiency percentages in 2002-2003 changed in two significant ways
from calculations in prior years. First, some students with disabilities
who were previously exempted from the accountability calculations were
included in all proficiency calculations. Second, students were required
to be enrolled in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be
included in the proficiency calculations for that school. These two
changes may cause the data from the 2002-2003 school year to appear
markedly different from the data from previous years for some schools.

# STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST

> Grade[\_\_\_6\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} Test [Ohio Sixth-Grade
> Mathematics Proficiency
> Test]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year\_\_[\_2003]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Publisher
> [\_Ohio Department of Education]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered
> \_\_\_\_23\_\_\_
>
> Number of students who took the test \_\_\_23\_\_\_\_
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Under IDEA '97 guidelines]{.underline}, [multi handicapped
> students are excluded because of special education identification and
> are administered alternative assessment.]{.underline}
>
> Number excluded\_\_\_\_1\_\_\_\_ Percent excluded\_\_\_\_4.2%\_\_\_\_
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, Ohio required 4^th^, 6^th^ and 9^th^
> grade proficiency tests in reading, writing, mathematics, citizenship,
> and science. These assessments are based on Ohio's academic content
> standards that delineate what a student should know and be able to do
> at each grade level. The academic content standards are composed of
> standards, benchmarks and grade-level indicators.
>
> For the 2002-2003 school year, mathematics scores for the sixth-grade
> proficiency test were reported as advanced, proficient, basic or below
> basic. The scaled score standards were:

+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| ###                       |                  |                       |
| # Sixth-Grade Mathematics |                  |                       |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| #### Category             | #                | #### 2002-2003        |
|                           | ### Scaled Score |                       |
|                           |                  | #### State Percentage |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At Advanced               | 250 and higher   | 6.3%                  |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above proficient    | 200 and higher   | 52.8%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| At or above basic         | 190 and higher   | 64.6%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+
| Below basic               | below 190        | 35.4%                 |
+---------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+

Performance standards were established by the State Board of Education
based on recommendations of standard-setting committees (comprised
mainly of Ohio teachers at the appropriate grade levels) and reports
from the Testing Steering Committee (comprised of school
administrators), the Fairness/Sensitivity review panel (comprised of
representatives of the diversity in Ohio looking at equity issues), and
the Technical Advisory Committee (comprised of national and state
testing experts and psychometricians looking at technical issues).

## Ohio Sixth-Grade Mathematics Proficiency Test

+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                  | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    | 1    |
|                                  | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- | 998- |
|                                  | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                    |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 3.8  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 53.8 | 63.6 | 57.7 | 35.3 | 50   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   | 38.5 | 36.4 | 19.2 | 35.3 | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested        | 23   | 22   | 26   | 22   | 13   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students tested | 100  | 100  | 100  | 100  | 100  |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students excluded      | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students excluded     | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| SUBGROUP SCORES                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| 1.  [Economically                |      |      |      |      |      |
|     Disadvantaged]{.underline}   |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                  |      |      |      |      |      |
| > (specify subgroup)             |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 0    | NA   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 61.5 | 87.5 | 37.5 | 16.7 | 71.4 |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   | 15.3 | 0    | 37.5 | 50   | 0    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested        | 13   | 8    | 8    | 6    | 7    |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| 2\. (specify subgroup)           |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             |      | NA   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested        |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                 |      |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 6    | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
|                                  | 4.6% |      |      |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 5    | 6    | 6    | 5    | 5    |
|                                  | 2.8% | 1.7% | 1.1% | 4.4% | 1.4% |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| \% At Advanced                   | 6.3% | 9.0% | 1    | 8.0% | 7.0% |
|                                  |      |      | 2.0% |      |      |
+----------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left
Behind Act, Ohio\'s calculation of

proficiency percentages in 2002-2003 changed in two significant ways
from calculations in prior years. First, some students with disabilities
who were previously exempted from the accountability calculations were
included in all proficiency calculations. Second, students were required
to be enrolled in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be
included in the proficiency calculations for that school. These two
changes may cause the data from the 2002-2003 school year to appear
markedly different from the data from previous years for some schools.

# Assessment Data Use

At Fredericksburg Elementary School, we use assessment results to
identify students not achieving at their ability/grade level, to
identify gifted students, and identify specific curriculum objectives
that are not being mastered. The following assessments are used:
Stanford Achievement Test, Otis-Lennon Ability Test and the Ohio
Proficiency Tests (4^th^ & 6^th^ grade). The test scores are used to
identify overall weaknesses and strengths in the classroom, which assist
teachers in making the appropriate interventions to improve each
student's achievement.

An intervention based assistance team (IBA Team) provides assistance to
students not achieving academic or behavioral success in the classroom.
This collaborative team is comprised of the classroom teacher, parents,
and support staff, which provide interventions to promote student
success in the classroom. The IBA Team meets on a monthly basis.

Classroom assessments are reviewed each spring to determine our
building's strengths and weaknesses. To assure alignment, we compare our
building results to the district's strengths and weaknesses. We then
identify possible areas for improvement, select a building goal, and
redefine our goal each year. For example, our building goal for the past
two years has been to improve student achievement in mathematics. We
will continue to focus on this goal for a minimum of three years in
order to obtain a sufficient amount of data to determine our progress
and future direction.

The building's student achievement committee reviews the assessment
results annually to insure that our curriculum and instruction are
aligned and no weaknesses exit. Proper measures are then implemented to
improve the areas of need. Student progress is monitored through
classroom assessment, district testing, and state testing. Monthly team
meetings provide a continual forum for dialogue to monitor the progress
of the yearly goals. These meetings provide an opportunity for the
teachers to reflect and share ideas.

# Student Performance Communication

In keeping with the values of our mission statement, providing
information to all the stakeholders of our learning community not only
demonstrates our partnership with the stakeholders, but also gives our
students ownership of their learning.

The State of Ohio Department of Education compiles an annual local
report card (LRC) for each district in the state of Ohio. Hard copies of
this LRC are mailed directly to all school district residents and an
electronic copy is posted to be the Ohio Department of Education
website, [www.ode.state.oh.us](http://www.ode.state.oh.us/).

*The Wooster Daily Record*, Wayne County's largest newspaper regularly
publishes proficiency test scores of schools within the county that
allows readers to view and to compare school performance at the fourth
and sixth grade levels. *The Akron Beacon Journal*, the region's largest
newspaper provides region wide comparison results of the Ohio
Proficiency testing.

The Southeast Local School District publishes a quarterly district
newsletter that provides the information from the assessment results to
the community along with explanations. Results from the Stanford
Achievement Test, Otis-Lennon Ability Test and Ohio Proficiency Tests
are sent to our parents at the conclusion of each school year.
Parent-Teacher conferences provide an opportunity for the staff to share
and to discuss test results with our community. Fourth and sixth grade
teachers explain the results from the Ohio Proficiency Tests to each
fourth and sixth grade student individually.

# 

# 

# School Success Shared With Other Schools

The entire staff of Fredericksburg ES shares its successes on a daily
basis through a variety of avenues.

We submit news releases to *The Wooster Daily Record*, Wayne County's
largest newspaper for publication. These articles discuss academic and
instructional initiatives, student achievements, and community
activities. The Tri-County Educational Service Center provides a forum
for our staff to participate in on going professional development and to
share best practices and our local initiatives with other schools in the
tri-county area.

As a School of Promise in the State of Ohio, a team of teachers from
Fredericksburg ES will share strategies and initiatives that have led to
our success with improving student achievement at the Ohio School of
Promise Conference in the fall of 2004. Fredericksburg ES will extend an
open invitation to school districts in surrounding counties to visit our
building and observe our programs. In June 2004 a team of primary
teachers will present our program of success at a Quality Improvement
Academy. The presentation will focus on how the tenets of the Quality
Education Initiative have given students ownership of their learning and
have led to significant student achievement. Members of our staff also
share and facilitate professional development opportunities during our
district's annual inservice.

Upon being recognized as a No Child Left Behind-Blue Ribbon Award
School, we will gladly share our strategies of success with other
schools, meet with school personnel, provide needed information that is
requested, and share the journey of our learning community because we
value celebrating success.

Curriculum and Instruction

[Core Curriculum]{.underline}

Our core curriculum is standards driven. Our teaching staff has examined
the State of Ohio Academic Content Standards in the areas of language
arts, math, science, and social studies and has aligned our local
curriculum. We have identified the necessary skills needed to reach the
indicators and benchmarks in each of the content areas in grades K-8,
and have introduced, developed and mastered these skills at each level.

As a team the staff has developed curriculum maps of the content areas
of language arts and math. These curriculum maps contain the content
standard, indicators, necessary skills, necessary materials, as well as
specific assessment methods to demonstrate student understanding of the
standards. Knowledge is connected to other content areas and real-life
on a daily basis in an attempt to increase student understanding of what
they are learning.

Our instructional staff refers to these standards when writing their
lesson plans for language arts, math, science, and social studies.
Weekly lesson plans are required to have an objective, procedure, and
evaluation.

We utilize our Title I staff to reduce classroom size and to create
co-teaching environments. Students are placed in heterogeneous and
homogenous groups; each situation is viewed individually and arranged to
provide optimum student success.

The 4-Block literacy framework is used to implement the language arts
curriculum. Each block: guided reading, working with words, writing, and
self-selected reading, focuses on the best practices of language arts
instruction. This framework allows for differentiated instruction to
occur. Differentiated instruction allows the classroom teacher to
increase student achievement at all individual ability levels.
Volunteers and staff provide additional reinforcement to meet specific
individual needs, practicing vocabulary words, or reviewing key
concepts. Demonstrating that instruction can meet the needs of our
students by addressing their individual learning styles. This result
being that all children can and do learn.

Math content is built sequentially from year to year. The staff is
focusing on measurement, fractions, and geometry across all grade levels
to improve student success in the Ohio Proficiency Test and the Stanford
Achievement Test. Weekly timed tests on math facts are given in grades
1-6 to increase students' computational abilities, allowing students to
focus on higher level problem-solving skills.

Ohio Academic Content Standards guide the science and social studies
curriculum. Instruction within these content areas emphasizes higher
level thinking skills and integrates language arts and mathematics,
utilizing a variety of instructional methods.

Technology is integrated at all levels of instruction and is used as a
tool to enhance the learning process. Computers are provided in the
classrooms and in a lab setting. This technology allows students to
utilize programs to practice specific skills, create written
compositions, and create projects that demonstrate their knowledge to be
assessed by the classroom teacher.

# Reading Curriculum

Our reading curriculum is delivered through the 4-Block framework. To
teach reading, we use the Harcourt Collection reading series and
supplemental materials. This collection incorporates the language arts
content areas of reading, writing, and spelling and supports the Ohio
Academic Content Standards in language arts.

We believe that daily practice in reading, writing, and spelling are
crucial components for student success. Within the district, we are one
of four elementary schools; we strive to be consistent in all curriculum
areas. As a district, we chose this format because it incorporates best
practices and is research-based. This allows us to provide a common
curriculum for students as they enter into one middle school.

The 4-Block framework allows the classroom teacher to teach grade level
skills, but also to challenge the higher-ability reader and to provide
success for the at-risk reader.

Students receive daily language arts instruction in the following
manner: [guided reading]{.underline}- provides reading skills at grade
level and below grade level; [self-selected reading]{.underline}-
students choose books at their reading ability level and interest to
read with the teacher, who conferences with them on a regular basis;
[working with words]{.underline}- students practice common grade level
vocabulary in all learning modalities; and [writing]{.underline}-
students participate in the writing process with the teacher modeling
and providing specific grade level skills.

Building Blocks, a kindergarten adopted version of the 4-Block framework
is used in our full day, every

day kindergarten program. Building Blocks provides a smooth transition
into the first grade 4-Block framework.

# Math Curriculum

Improving student achievement in mathematics has been our building goal
for the past two years. This goal was selected because math was
identified through test data as a weak area in our building and
district. Our commitment to *united* effort, *united* responsibility,
and *united* success has driven us to setting this goal for improving
student achievement.

The staff chose to focus on the following academic weaknesses in math:
measurement, fractions, geometry, and timed tests. Each classroom in
grades 1-6 participates in weekly timed tests in an effort to improve
student knowledge of math computation. Other resources provided to help
teachers improve student learning are: *Aims*, a hands-on activity
magazine focused on math activities; educational journal articles
provide the best practices in math; and Mind Benders, a supplemental
activity book for kindergarten through eighth grade to develop problem
solving skills.

Harcourt Brace Math Advantage is the series used to teach our math
curriculum. The staff utilizes all of the learning modalities in
teaching the math curriculum. A list of all available math manipulatives
was complied and distributed to the staff. This resource enables staff
to provide activities that address all learning modalities, thus
improving student achievement. This is done through teaching patterns,
hands-on activities, games, and application to real-life.

The classroom teachers use technology to enhance student learning. The
computer lab is utilized for this component of our math instruction.
Students can participate in drill programs for math, as well as
problem-solving activities involving the application of math skills.

# Instructional Methods To Improve Student Learning

The belief of our staff is that recognizing and addressing different
learning styles is one of the keys to increasing student achievement.
Therefore, they use a variety of methodologies including verbal
instruction, hands-on learning, inquiry, written information, computer
assisted instruction, reading buddies, cooperative groups, group
investigation, and other strategies to insure student participation

.

Teachers observe student needs and select the method(s), which will
provide the optimum student engagement and result in successful
learning. The following are examples that are practiced at
Fredericksburg ES. Computer-based programs and applications are provided
to enhance the learning process. By providing students with a technology
program, students can practice math facts or create a power point
presentation on character traits in reading class. Project-based
instruction is a great technique to engage students and to integrate
different content areas. Hands-on learning enables students to better
understand specific science or social studies concepts, as well as
exploration and investigation techniques.

Data collection is essential in order to improve student achievement. A
cumulative file of individual student data is passed on from teacher to
teacher that provides a reference to determine the instructional needs
of each student. Classroom teachers also collect baseline data at the
beginning of the school year through teacher observations, informal and
formal assessments, including state and district assessments. The
baseline information is then used to develop an action plan to maximize
student achievement through daily classroom instruction.

# Professional Development Program

The Fredericksburg ES teachers participate in a professional development
program at both the district level and the building level. The
components of which are aimed at creating growth in the teaching staff
to continually improve the learning process for both our teachers and
our students.

At the building level, assessment results are discussed yearly with the
staff. It is through this dialogue that ideas are generated and interest
is expressed to look at new strategies for delivering classroom
instruction. These discussions drive the professional development for
the upcoming year. They also drive the type of workshops or conferences
the staff selects to attend during the school year. Differentiated
instruction, for example, is being investigated in our building this
year. Teachers are attending conferences and workshops on the topic of
differentiate instruction to gain more knowledge.

Monthly staff meetings address specific topics, such as differentiated
instruction through a book study and viewing videos with learning
activities. Monthly team meetings provide dialogue to discuss concerns
and provide a time to bring in professional assistance. There is also a
common planning time to provide for collaboration and discussion among
the primary staff. Educational journal articles focused on current
issues and topics are provided to the staff on a regular basis. Daily
e-mails provide an avenue to communicate specific ideas and needs.

Professional development at the district level is spearheaded by two
entities, administration and the district staff development committee.
These entities also collaborate to improve student achievement.
Profession development is delivered on two levels, at the building level
and the district level. An effort is made to build upon the common
initiatives being implemented within the district. Continuing to provide
staff development with the 4-Block framework is a direct result of this
professional development. Our district-wide grade level meetings provide
a time for teachers to discuss best practices and to review possible
needs. It is through this *united* responsibility and *united* effort
that the staff grows professionally, developing techniques to improve
student achievement.