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

*U.S. Department of Education*

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

Name of Principal [Mrs. Marcia A. Harrison]{.underline}

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

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

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [700 Walker Rd]{.underline} (If address is P.O.
Box, also include street address)

[Dover]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Delaware]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[\_19904-3497]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County [Kent]{.underline} State School Code Number[\*
130638]{.underline}

Telephone [(302 ) 672-1645]{.underline} Fax [( 302)
672-1654]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.k12.de.us/Fairview]{.underline} E-mail
[mharrison@capital.k12.de.us]{.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\* [Dr. Michael D. Thomas]{.underline}

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

District Name [Capital School District]{.underline} Tel. [( 302)
672-1556]{.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 [Mr. Michael Adams]{.underline}

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

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

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

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [7]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[1]{.underline} Middle schools

[1]{.underline} Junior high schools

[1]{.underline} High schools

[2]{.underline} Other

[12]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,925]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$6, 998]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. [4]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

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

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

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

  **PreK**    4         3                      **7**        **7**                             

  **K**       32        28                     **60**       **8**                             

  **1**       40        37                     **77**       **9**                             

  **2**       31        35                     **66**       **10**                            

  **3**       21        19                     **40**       **11**                            

  **4**       29        25                     **54**       **12**                            

  **5**                                                     **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   304
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [43%]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [50%]{.underline} % Black or African
American

[5%]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

[1%]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander

[1%]{.underline} % American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

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

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
[17%]{.underline}

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      25
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      27
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Total of all transferred    52
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 304
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .17
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           17
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [1]{.underline} %

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

Number of languages represented: [2]{.underline}

Specify languages: Spanish, French Creole

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [44%]{.underline}

Total number students who qualify: [133]{.underline}

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

10\. Students receiving special education services: [19%]{.underline}

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

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

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

\_\_\_\_Deafness [5]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [30]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Emotional Disturbance [19]{.underline} Speech or Language
Impairment

[2]{.underline} Hearing Impairment \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

> \_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment Including
> Blindness
>
> \_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) [1]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers [18]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists [6]{.underline} [1]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [5]{.underline} [1]{.underline}

> Support staff [2]{.underline} [1]{.underline}
>
> Total number [32]{.underline} [3]{.underline}

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers:
[15:1]{.underline}

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

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

  Daily student attendance   94%         94%         93%         94%         95%

  Daily teacher attendance   96%         96%         95%         96%         95%

  Teacher turnover rate      \<1%        \<1%        \<2%        \<1%        \<1%

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

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

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Fairview Elementary School is located in historic Dover, Delaware, our
state's capital. The school serves approximately 304 students from the
downtown Dover area and is one of seven elementary schools in the
Capital School District. Fairview's diverse population includes 50%
African American students, 43% White, 5% Hispanic, and 2% Asian.
Nineteen percent of the students at Fairview Elementary are identified
as special needs. Forty-four percent of our students qualify as low
income, and the school also provides income-based pre-school services
(Delaware Early Choices Pre-School Program). The school's small size and
culturally rich student and staff population enhance the educational and
socio-emotional growth of our children and affords us the opportunity to
personalize the learning experience for all.

As a school-wide Title I program, Fairview Elementary is committed to
meeting the needs of its diverse population. The mission of Fairview
Elementary School is to offer the best educational program possible in
order to develop the mind and character of each child. To accomplish
this goal we must foster academic excellence, encourage artistic
expression, nurture creativity, explore technology, celebrate diversity,
and enhance confidence in self. We have established high expectations
for all children and communicate these expectations daily in our work
with students. We provide an environment that celebrates and promotes
understanding of self and others and expect that everyone will behave in
a manner that represents the standards we have set for our school
community. We have established close working relationships with our
parents and the community and depend on their support to help us meet
our goals.

A Reading First school, Fairview Elementary is committed to a vision
that every child will become a proficient reader. It is this fundamental
belief that provides a catalyst for forming and maintaining a
collaborative effort towards reaching this goal. The incredible growth
of all children in reading over the past five years is evident in the
decreases in the achievement gaps between all subgroups of children
served in the school. Not only are we meeting yearly targets for all
subgroups set by the state and our district, we are also moving more
children into the higher achievement levels. The growth our children
have made is a direct result of our staff's use of data to make
instructional decisions and their willingness to reflect on
instructional practices that will impact student learning. Through
monitoring student progress on a regular basis and collaboration with
teachers, interventions are outlined, implemented, and adjusted to
provide exemplary instructional services for each and every child.
Alignment and coordination of instructional resources such as the Pre
School program, Full Day Kindergarten programs, Title I, Special
Education, and intensive reading interventions guarantee that children
meet with success at the earliest levels. In cooperation with Big
Brothers/Big Sisters, Fairview matches community volunteers as mentors
for students. Mentors serve as positive role models and visit on a
weekly basis.

Fairview Elementary School can best be described as a "professional
learning community", with a common vision of raising achievement for all
students. Collaborative decision-making and the participation of staff,
parents, and community in this process are what sets Fairview apart. The
dedication and commitment of the staff at Fairview Elementary is
extraordinary. Staff member participate in numerous professional Book
Clubs, designed to identify research based practices that directly
impact student achievement. Students are encouraged to set their own
goals, monitor their progress towards meeting these goals, and celebrate
their accomplishments. The Fairview Parent Resource Center, developed
with the University of Delaware AmeriCorps VISTA program provides books,
games, videos, flash cards, and other learning materials for members of
the Fairview learning community. Over 1,000 items are available for
parents and staff to check out for use in the classroom or at home.
Fairview Elementary School continues to strive to build a community of
literacy, one that builds collaborative relationships and supports
diverse learners.

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

> 1\. The Delaware Student Testing Program (DSTP) Adequate Yearly
> Progress accountability system is utilized to determine each school's
> rating. The rating is based on the performance of students taught in
> the school. A student's DSTP test results are assigned to the school
> that the student attends. Student categories that are measured include
> all students, race/ethnicity, low income, limited English proficient,
> and students with disabilities. All subgroups must meet annual
> percentages each year or show a decrease of at least 10% in the number
> of students not meeting the standards in order for a school to
> successfully meet Adequate Yearly Progress or AYP requirements.
> Schools must also meet State Progress Targets consisting of scaled
> composite scores representing the percentage of students in each of
> five performance levels for reading, math, science, and social studies
> tests. A school will receive an overall rating determined by a
> combination of AYP and State Progress ratings. There must be at least
> 40 students in any category before that category is utilized in
> measuring a school's progress towards meeting target goals. Data is
> reported if there are at least 15 students in a subgroup. Ninety-five
> percent of all students must participate in the DSTP assessments in
> order for a school to make adequate yearly progress. The school must
> also maintain progress from the previous year for other academic
> indicators. At the elementary level, the cell that is used is the
> "all" students cell for average scale scores for reading and math
> combined for students scoring below the standard compared to the
> previous year ***(source: Delaware School Accountability System, web
> site: http://www.doe.state.de.us).*** The state targets for Adequate
> Yearly Progress for the 2003-2004 school year were 63% in reading and
> 41% in mathematics. The state required participation rate was 95%.
>
> **Reading Assessment Results**
>
> An analysis of Fairview Elementary School's 2004-2005 DSTP reading
> data indicates that all subgroups exceed goals in reading as measured
> on the DSTP reading assessment. Reading scores show that (95%) of
> students in Grade 3 Meet or Exceed the state standards. 100% percent
> of African American students Meet or Exceed the standard. Eighty-five
> percent of white students met or exceeded the standard while 100% of
> Low Income students Meet or Exceed the standard. This data indicates
> that Fairview students are making significant gains at all levels and
> that there are more students meeting or exceeding the standard as
> measured by the DSTP each assessment cycle. There is also evidence
> that the achievement gap is closing. African American students made a
> 14% gain during this assessment cycle. Special education students
> showed a 10% gain (although this score was not reported as there were
> fewer than 40 students in the category). Low income students
> demonstrated a 13% gain.
>
> Data received through the DSTP is utilized to identify student needs.
> Needs are identified and plans are developed to address specific needs
> through our Student Achievement Review Process (SARP). Our school
> improvement plan contains activities designed to meet the specific
> needs of students. Individual goals (Individual Improvement Plans or
> IIPs) for each student not meeting the standards are designed with
> interventions to meet each student's needs. Literacy Support Teams
> meet to discuss identified needs and to select interventions that will
> target instruction that is both diagnostic and prescriptive. The
> Literacy Support Team determines what intervention will be
> implemented, for how long, and by whom. Intervention services are
> delivered by the classroom teacher, the reading specialist,
> paraprofessionals, extra time programs, and through special education.

######  

######  Mathematics Assessment Data

> Mathematics performance overall for the last assessment cycle showed
> significant improvement with Fairview Elementary School scores showing
> an increase of 9% gain over last year's scores. Fairview students
> scored higher than district and state averages on the assessment (86%
> met or exceeded state standards). African American students
> demonstrated an 11% gain with 79% meeting or exceeding standards.
> Eighty-six percent of low income students met or exceeded the
> standards and made gains of 14% over last year. All subgroups met or
> exceeded Adequate Yearly Progress target goals. While gaps in
> achievement remain between subgroups, scores in the area of
> mathematics are above average for all students and there are
> indications that achievement gaps are closing.
>
> The district adopted mathematics program (*Trailblazers)* has been
> highly successful in meeting student needs. It is research based and
> is focused on problem solving and higher order thinking skills.
> Teachers are participating in ongoing professional development focused
> on the *Trailblazers* program and are utilizing what they learn to
> improve instruction.
>
> **Using Assessment Results**
>
> > 2\. A comprehensive system of assessment serves as the nerve center
> > within a successful school. Assessments monitor progress, sense
> > difficulty, and report on the regular health of a school. For a
> > prevention-oriented, school-based system of assessment to be
> > comprehensive and effective it must reliably serve several
> > functions:

-   It must measure growth in each content area.

-   It must reliably screen all students and provide data for levels of
    interventions.

-   It must reliably predict progress towards meeting essential
    knowledge and skills.

-   It must accurately monitor progress.

-   It must hold all stakeholders accountable.

-   It must be efficient and economical to administer with minimal
    disruptions of instructional time.

> Fairview Elementary utilizes a comprehensive system of assessment that
> incorporates screening, progress monitoring, diagnostic, and
> accountability measures to review student progress on a regular basis.
> This system is called the Student Achievement Review Process (SARP). A
> grade level Assessment Matrix outlines when assessments are delivered
> in each content area. Reading Assessments (DIBELS and PALS) are given
> to students using Tungsten T-5 Palm Pilots. Reporting systems through
> M-Class enable teachers to have immediate access to assessment
> results. Each teacher has a Data Notebook with current benchmark and
> progress monitoring information. Experience shows that getting a
> report and using a report are vastly different. So, teachers meet in
> grade level teams to review the data and identify students that need
> additional interventions. During these meetings, discussion and
> collaboration enable teachers to identify ways to improve student
> learning. Through sharing of strategies and instructional practices
> teachers learn new ways to meet student needs. All students not
> meeting the standard must be matched to an intervention and teachers
> complete an Action Plan or Classroom Profile that identifies what
> changes will occur as a result of the data review and discussions. All
> decisions about instruction are based on student achievement data. The
> Action Plans and Student Achievement Review Process (SARP) forms are
> submitted to the building administrator to monitor student, classroom,
> and grade level progress towards essential skills and knowledge. The
> building administrator meets with individual teachers to discuss
> student progress and determine whether more instructional support is
> needed from content specialists. In addition, the Student Achievement
> Review Process (SARP) and other student achievement data guide all
> professional development so teachers can broaden their knowledge of
> skills and strategies that will directly impact identified needs.
>
> **Communicating Student Performance**

3\. The goal of an assessment system is to provide a steady stream of
data to all stakeholders. Assessments are also a system of
communication. They inform administrators, teachers, parents and
students about progress. For administrators, the overall health and
upward growth of the program is key. For teachers, parents, and
students, specific data on individual progress is key. Teachers need to
know the strengths and weaknesses of their students. Parents need to
know if their children are making progress and how they are doing
compared to the rest of the class. Students need to know about their
progress and if they are struggling what they can do to improve. For
accountability purposes, the results of the Delaware Student Testing
Program (DSTP) are mailed to each home. In addition, teachers review
student progress and test scores on the DSTP at Fall Parent Teacher
Conferences and Individual Instructional Plans (IIP's) are developed
with parents for all students not meeting the standard. The IIP outlines
the programs and strategies that will be utilized by the teacher over
the course of the school year to help the student meet grade level
benchmarks. During the Open House in September, the building principal
communicates the results from the DSTP and outlines instructional goals
and priorities for the current school year.

This information is also included in school newsletters and progress
towards these instructional priorities and goals are discussed on a
monthly basis. Fairview Elementary also develops a School Plan in
collaboration with the Fairview Advisory Council. This council includes
teachers, support staff, and parents. Student achievement data is
reviewed and achievement goals and activities are developed based on
identified needs. It is important to make the progress of students a
"public document." Student progress needs to be shared within and across
grade level teams. Open discussion encourages problem solving and
accountability.

Students, too, need to know how they are doing. This is especially true
of those who struggle to read. Knowing that they are becoming better
readers stimulates motivation and interest and develops efficacy.
Including students in parent conferences and having teachers meet with
individual students to review accomplishments are ways to foster student
responsibility for learning. Report cards and progress reports present
concrete information on current reading levels and skills mastery. The
report card includes a rubric that is aligned to essential skills and
knowledge and more specifically defines benchmark goals in each content
area. Annually, all school districts in Delaware are required to develop
district and school level profiles as a report to the community about
the district's and schools' progress. School accountability data,
general information about schools and their staff and programs are
highlighted. General information about the school and program offerings
is also included. Copies of profiles are sent home with each child in
the fall. Copies of all profiles are also available to the public and
may be accessed through the Department of Education's Web Site for
School Profiles.

**Sharing Success**

4\. One of the advantages of living in a small state is that teachers
have many opportunities to work with their colleagues in other districts
and with consultants from the Department of Education and local colleges
and universities. Fairview Elementary teachers participate in required
district and school level curriculum meetings to discuss best practices
and to share effective strategies with their colleagues. Fairview's
Advisory Council participates in district-wide school planning
activities annually as schools begin to establish goals and develop
school improvement plans for the following year. A part of the
district-wide meeting involves schools sharing their successes and plans
for the following year. Fairview faculty also participate in after
school math clubs, monthly Reading Support Teachers meetings, Literacy
Coaches meetings at the county and state levels, and often taking a
leadership role by serving as Lead Teachers in math and science.
Fairview staff volunteers to serve on district level curriculum
committees, and on the Instructional Advisory Council. Both of these
activities provide opportunities to highlight successful practices and
programs.

> At both the district and state level, Fairview Elementary School is
> viewed as a Reading First "model school". Teachers from around state
> visit the classrooms at Fairview to see the implementation of
> scientifically based reading practices in action. The teachers at
> Fairview are always willing to share their ideas and personal
> experiences with Reading First and how their instruction has changed
> as a result of this initiative.
>
> A group of teachers from Fairview have also presented at state and
> local conferences regarding Reading First and *Data Driven
> Instruction.* In May of 2005, teachers at Fairview were selected to
> present at the International Reading Conference in San Antonio, Texas.
> The teachers enthusiastically shared their successes with a group of
> approximately 250 teachers from around the world.

**Part V - CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

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

1\. Learning communities are built with a vision of how teachers can
support the achievement of each student through an articulated, seamless
curriculum. Fairview Elementary aligns curriculum in all content areas
to district level initiatives and to state performance standards and
utilizes grade level meetings and discussions to review and update how
students are engaged with significant content based on high standards.
In each content area, a template is used to develop the curriculum.
Grade level benchmarks are broken down into specific skills and subsets
of skills and essential knowledge at marking period intervals. These
skills are taught in coordinated instructional sequences; they include
an instructional pacing chart or timeline, and also incorporate explicit
instructional strategies. Skills are aligned to assessments and are
measured on a quarterly basis using progress monitoring assessments.
Curriculum in all content areas includes the content that will be
taught, the essential questions, skills/benchmarks, assessments, and
activities/strategies. A curriculum is not a lockstep process. Teachers
must be mindful of the progress of each student, knowing when to slow or
accelerate the pace of instruction.

########  Reading/ELA

> The core curriculum in reading and writing at Fairview Elementary is
> aligned with state and national standards and addresses instructional
> priorities at each grade level. The curriculum supports the five
> components identified by the National Reading Panel Report. Our
> curriculum incorporates explicit, direct, instructional approaches to
> teach each of the components identified by the National Reading Panel
> Report. The sequence of instruction in phonological awareness,
> phonics, vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, and writing are outlined
> for each component and insures that students reach reading levels that
> meet or exceed grade level standards. Comprehensive instructional
> materials include a core reading program (Harcourt *Trophies*) and
> intervention and supplemental materials to provide additional support
> and more frequent practice for students who are struggling to learn
> the five essential components of reading. Explicit instruction within
> a sequential delineated set of phonics and phonemic awareness
> activities are taught with feedback, opportunity for application, and
> practice in reading connected text. Teachers use research-based
> practices to teach students the strategies they need to be successful
> readers. Students engage in the writing process as they receive
> instruction for writing across the curriculum for various purposes and
> audiences.

**Mathematics**

> The core curriculum in math at Fairview Elementary maintains a balance
> between the development of math concepts and basic skills. Students
> apply basic math skills while working on meaningful and challenging
> tasks. In addition to traditional math concepts, other topics such as
> estimation, geometry, measurement, patterns and relationships, algebra
> concepts, and statistics and probability are investigated. The program
> (*Trailblazers)* includes activities, labs, daily practice and
> problems, games, adventure books, and assessments. The curriculum is
> student-based and engaging and the big ideas for learning incorporate
> pacing that is critical to build mathematical thinking that leads to
> more advanced conceptualization. Student growth in the area of
> mathematics is evidence that the program of studies and the teachers'
> use of effective instructional strategies and methodologies are
> aligned to meet the need of all students.

**Science**

> Science curriculum is aligned with state and national standards.
> Teachers utilize research-based materials and strategies to provide
> all students with experiences in the life, earth, and physical
> sciences while developing critical thinking and problem-solving
> skills. Students develop an understanding of important science
> concepts as they demonstrate process skills such as observing,
> measuring, predicting, and communicating. The science curriculum
> engages students in hands-on, inquiry-based, integrated units that
> serve as a foundation for success in an increasingly complex
> scientific and technological world. Fairview Elementary School, as
> well as all schools in the Capital School District, participate in the
> State Science Coalition training and utilize Coalition materials as a
> part of their instructional program.

**Social Studies**

> The Social Studies curriculum incorporates civics, geography, history,
> and economics. Students use tools such as maps, globes, timelines,
> charts, and other geo-graphics to learn about various times and places
> in our world. Studying both primary and secondary resources such as
> artifacts, diaries, photographs, and newspaper accounts enables
> students to research topics and understand a variety of cultures and
> also helps them analyze the causes and effects of events from past to
> the present. The social studies curriculum is integrated across
> content areas and provides students opportunities to apply what they
> learn to their real world experiences.
>
> **Reading Curriculum**

2a. Improving literacy development in today's widely diverse classrooms
will produce proficient and motivated readers. The vision that every
child can be a successful literacy learner is the catalyst for
developing and selecting a particular approach to reading. Initial
instruction in reading is the first line of prevention against reading
failure (Snow, Burns, & Griffen, 1999). Research recommends explicit,
direct instructional approaches to teach phonemic awareness and phonics,
to build reading fluency, teach vocabulary, and to stimulate growth of
active comprehension strategies in young children. Fairview Elementary,
as a part of a district reading initiative, conducted a careful review
of reading research, as well as programs and materials that met the
criteria of scientifically based reading research. Programs and
components were evaluated using the Consumer Guide to Evaluating a Core
Reading Program by Simmons and Kame'enue. This critical elements
analysis identified the most effective programs based on research and
helped the school to determine the approach that was most effective
based on identified student needs. In addition, a curriculum mapping
process was used to establish goals and benchmarks by marking period and
to coordinate the instructional priorities with selected materials.

> While the curriculum itself and the program and materials are
> important, effective instruction in reading involves much more. The
> implementation of effective reading instruction has both global and
> local characteristics. At the global level, both the school and the
> individual teacher are responsible for putting into place a number of
> practices that will insure that students learn to read and enjoy
> reading. Global characteristics of effective instruction include: 1)
> the appropriate allocation and use of time to teach reading 2) the use
> of small groups in the regular classroom 3) a clearly articulated
> curriculum that is aligned with materials and assessments 4) direct
> instruction in reading skills and strategies 5) staff development and
> teacher support 6) and intervention program for struggling readers 7)
> a system of assessment that informs and guides the rest of the
> components. Effective reading instruction exhibits a consistent set of
> characteristics that are research based and guided by ongoing
> assessment of student progress. Classroom teachers must make effective
> use of allocated instructional time and apportion it in the most
> effective manner. They need to teach reading directly and explicitly.
> They need to provide coaching and scaffolding necessary to support
> students as they acquire and apply new skills, and they need to create
> a classroom environment that is stable, organized, and motivating so
> that students master critical skills and the joy of reading.
>
> **Writing's Impact on Essential Skills and Knowledge**

3\. Writing is one area of the curriculum that clearly impacts the level
of understanding of essential skills and knowledge. Writing is the
second important component of literate behavior, and in many ways
attention to writing helps to foster reading skills. Not only must
students read well, they must write well, too. Modeling various types of
writing and integrating writing across the curriculum improves levels of
understanding and the application of content. Writing for different
purposes and audiences is a "life skill". As with reading, writing
instruction in the content areas must emphasize instructional practices
and strategies that build connections between students' past knowledge
and new information.

> Over a period of two years, the staff at Fairview worked with
> consultants from the Kid Writing and
>
> 6 + 1 Traits programs to implement best practices in writing.
> Participation and information from the Delaware Writing Project have
> also contributed to the growing awareness of a more fully integrated
> view of the reading and writing process. Implementation of Writing
> Workshop-a process engaging children in productive behaviors and
> events that lead to ever-increasing writing fluency and
> sophistication-rather than on product, gives students choices and
> responsibility for their work. In implementing these principles,
> teachers also consider the workshop structure, time to conference,
> share, and ways to evaluate progress. As a part of this time,
> mini-lessons are also conducted that demonstrate and model a specific
> skill or strategy. Teachers model the thinking process and guide
> students in thinking about experiences, selecting a topic, and move
> children into writing proficiency. During Writing Workshop, teachers
> also connect expressive, informative, and persuasive writing to
> develop and extend student thinking about subject area topics. Content
> area journals, learning logs, and literature responses are used across
> all content areas to improve understanding of content as well as help
> children think at higher levels. Even in math, students must
> communicate mathematically by writing how they solved a problem. The
> 2004-2005 school year scores showed a dramatic improvement in writing
> achievement over the previous year's scores. Student scores on the
> state writing assessment exceeded district and state scores.
> Eighty-eight percent of all students met the standard (a gain of 35%
> over the previous year). Ninety percent of the African American
> students met the standard (a gain of 50% over the previous year).
> White students realized a 17% gain over the previous year with 83%
> meeting the standard. The improvement in achievement has demonstrated
> the importance writing plays in all content areas.
>
> **Instructional Strategies and Methodologies**

4\. Fairview Elementary utilizes a variety of strategies and
instructional methods to improve student learning. The strategies
selected are those methods that are based on research to directly impact
student learning. Direct, explicit instruction is one example of an
instructional method that is used across content areas. Direct
instruction means that teachers explain the purpose of the strategy or
skill, tell when and how to apply it, and then carefully model its use.
Modeling demands "thinking aloud" while teaching and providing several
examples of how the skill is to be used. After the initial or
introductory phase of instruction, teachers carefully release
responsibility to the students and guide them in the application of the
skill. Students must be given ample time to practice the skill, and the
amount of practice must be adjusted to the efficiency of the learners.
We also call this massed and distributed practice and ensure that
students periodically review the skill over time. Students must also be
given the opportunity to apply the skills on their own.

> Small group instruction is another effective method that improves
> student learning. Based on research, the most effective teachers in
> high poverty schools allocated 50 minutes of class time to small group
> instruction, compared to 25 minutes for the less effective classrooms.
> (Taylor, 2001) Small group instruction allows the teacher a number of
> advantages and enables teachers to provide the necessary support and
> scaffolding for students to apply what they learn. Finally, Fairview
> Elementary teaches comprehension strategies to improve content
> knowledge and understanding of text across all curricular areas.
> Comprehension is defined as "intentional thinking during which meaning
> is constructed through interactions between the text and the reader"
> (Harris and Hodges, 1995) Active, purposeful readers use strategies to
> enhance their understanding of text and to repair misunderstanding
> when comprehension breaks down. Teaching the strategies identified in
> the National Reading Panel Report (2000) increases reading
> comprehension in students. These strategies are taught individually
> and then combined into reciprocal dialogues so that students learn to
> use them flexibly and independently. In addition, instruction in
> specific comprehension strategies has also been shown to be an
> effective way to increase reading achievement in children who have
> reading disabilities (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 1997).
>
> **The Impact of Professional Development on Student Achievement**

5.  Professional development both launches and guides the implementation
    of all curriculum and programs. The design for professional
    development follows the work of Joyce (1990) and the National Staff
    Development Council Standards. This research states that in order
    for new instructional ideas to take root in a school and teacher's
    repertoire, it is necessary to not only train the teachers in the
    new instructional ideas and programs but to also improve their
    ability to think about student growth and learning. In addition, the
    professional development activities must be ongoing and integrated
    into classroom practice. All professional development at Fairview
    Elementary is based on student achievement data. In addition, it is
    supported and written into the school plan. Professional development
    can take many forms. For some, a demonstration lesson in the
    classroom is most effective so teachers can observe a new
    instructional approach. Sometimes a more formal presentation and
    discussion are more appropriate. After formal presentations,
    modeling, and practice in a secure setting, Joyce, (1990) finds that
    peer coaching is essential for new ideas to take root. Ultimately,
    the process of staff development becomes a system of self-reflection
    and collaboration as a school grapples with the task of teaching and
    meeting the needs of all students. The staff at Fairview
    participated in five professional Book Study groups during the
    2004-2005 school year. The book study groups give teachers the
    opportunity to gain knowledge about a specific strategy, implement
    the strategy in the classroom, and then come back together to share
    and reflect on what worked. Professional books are always based on
    research and are aligned to essential skills and knowledge and the
    curriculum. Coaching is a professional development model that has
    been shown to improve instruction. In this model, professional
    development begins with reading-specific training that focuses on
    research and instructional practice. Coaching extends this training
    by providing on-site support and guidance. The Literacy Coach at
    Fairview works collaboratively with teachers to set professional
    goals for developing, extending, and improving effective
    research-based instructional skills, strategies and practices.
    Coaches are not evaluators or administrators. Coaches are members of
    the staff who take an active role in improving classroom reading
    instruction by:

*Sharing their expertise through training and in-class support;*

*Demonstrating lessons and helping teachers refine instruction;*

*Observing teachers' practices and providing feedback, support, and
ongoing assistance with SBRR strategies, programs, and assessments;*

*Helping teachers and administrators use assessment data to inform
instruction and professional development.*

Coaching is one part of a high-quality professional development plan.
Research shows that 95% of teachers who receive ongoing support and
guidance through coaching are more likely to learn and implement new
practices in the classroom. Researchers also estimate that teachers
generally need to use a new instructional strategy approximately
twenty-five times before it is transferred into their daily teaching
routine.

#######  

####### 

####### 

####### 

####### Delaware Student Testing Program

***[Performance Levels and Cut Scores]{.underline}***

This overview applies to: Tables 1 and 2 Cut Scores

> Table 3 Reading Grade 3

Table 4 Math Grade 3

Grade: [3]{.underline} Test: [Delaware Student Testing
Program]{.underline}

Edition/publication year: [1996]{.underline} Publisher: [Harcourt
Educational Measurement Systems]{.underline}

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

***Delaware's Student Testing Program has been in place since 1998 as a
measure of how well students are performing against the standards
established by Delaware teachers, parents, and community members.
Student results help teachers to identify strengths and instructional
needs. Assessment results also help teachers improve instruction.
Student results on the criterion referenced test are reported as
performance levels.***

+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| # D        |                           |                             |
| STP Studen |                           |                             |
| t Performa |                           |                             |
| nce Levels |                           |                             |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| **Level**  | **Category**              | **Description**             |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 5          | Distinguished             | Excellent Performance       |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 4          | Exceeds the Standard      | Very Good Performance       |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 3          | Meets the Standard        | Good Performance            |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2          | Below the Standard        | Needs Improvement           |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 1          | Well Below the Standard   | Needs Significant           |
|            |                           | Improvement                 |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+

Fairview Elementary School's scores compared to the State of Delaware.
The levels in which the students performed can then be measured by using
the Cut Scores tables.

.

Table 1

  ----------------- ------------ ----------- ------------- -------------------
  **Cut Scores-                                            
  DSTP** **Reading                                         
  Grade 3** (lowest                                        
  scaled score a                                           
  student can earn                                         
  and still be                                             
  within the                                               
  indicated                                                
  performance                                              
  level)                                                   

  **Well Below the  **Below the  **Meets**   **Exceeds**   **Distinguished**
  Standard**        Standard**                             

  \<386             387          411         465           482
  ----------------- ------------ ----------- ------------- -------------------

+-------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| #### Grade 3      | **2004  | **2003  | **2002  | **2001  | **2000  |
|                   | -2005** | -2004** | -2003** | -2002** | -2001** |
+-------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| ### Fa            | 448.8   | 452.6   | 433.10  | 434.54  | 433.27  |
| irview Elementary |         |         |         |         |         |
+-------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| ### State         | 445.7   | 446.5   | 442.49  | 440.74  | 436.21  |
+-------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+

> Table 2

  ----------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- -------------------
  **Cut Scores-                                             
  DSTP** **Math                                             
  Grade 3** (lowest                                         
  scaled score a                                            
  student can earn                                          
  and still be                                              
  within the                                                
  indicated                                                 
  performance                                               
  level)                                                    

  **Well Below the  **Below**    **Meets**    **Exceeds**   **Distinguished**
  Standard**                                                

  \<381             382          407          464           499
  ----------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- -------------------

+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| ########  | **20      | **20      | **20      | **20      | **2000  |
| # Grade 3 | 04-2005** | 03-2004** | 02-2003** | 01-2002** | -2001** |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| *         | 438.7     | 436.8     | 432.33    | 425.96    | 427.40  |
| *Fairview |           |           |           |           |         |
| Ele       |           |           |           |           |         |
| mentary** |           |           |           |           |         |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+
| **State** | 441.2     | 439.3     | 434.79    | 434.08    | 431.93  |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+---------+

**Fairview Elementary School - Table 3**

**Delaware Student Testing Program**

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test:
[Reading]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [1996]{.underline} Publisher: [Harcourt
Educational Measurement Systems]{.underline}

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

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
  Testing year                         2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001

  Testing month                        March       March       March       March       March

  **Fairview Elementary Grade 3-Total                                                  
  Group**                                                                              

  \% At or Above Meets State           95%         92%         69%         73%         74%
  Standards**\***                                                                      

  \% Well Below State Standards        0%          0%          11%         7%          9%

  \% Below State Standards             5%          8%          21%         20%         17%

  \% Meets State Standards             71%         56%         50%         49%         53%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  11%         16%         12%         12%         16%

  \% At Distinguished level            13%         20%         8%          11%         6%

  Number of students tested            38          50          67          81          70

  Percent of total students tested     100%        100%        100%        100%        97.3%

  Number of students alternatively     0           0           0           0           0
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    0           0           0           0           0
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                                  

  **1. [African                                                                        
  American]{.underline}** (specify                                                     
  subgroup)                                                                            

  \% At or Above Meets State           100%        86%         57%         71%         63%
  Standards**\***                                                                      

  \% Well Below State Standards        0%          0%          11%         8%          10%

  \% Below State Standards             0%          14%         31%         22%         26%

  \% Meets State Standards             88%         75%         40%         60%         53%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  12%         7%          11%         8%          10%

  \% At Distinguished level            0%          4%          8%          3%          0%

  Number of students tested            17          28          35          37          40

  **2. [White]{.underline}**                                                           

  \% At or Above Meets State           87%         100%        78%         77%         90%
  Standards**\***                                                                      

  \% Well Below State Standards        0%          0%          11%         8%          7%

  \% Below State Standards             13%         0%          11%         14%         4%

  \% Meets State Standards             67%         35%         59%         39%         55%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  13%         25%         11%         19%         21%

  \% At Distinguished level            7%          40%         7%          19%         14%

  Number of students tested            15          20          27          36          29

  **3. [Low Income]{.underline}**                                                      

  \% At or Above Meets State Standards 100%        87%         53%         74%         65%

  \% Well Below State Standards        0%          0%          9%          6%          12%

  \% Below State Standards             0%          13%         38%         21%         24%

  \% Meets State Standards             79%         74%         44%         56%         50%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  11%         4%          6%          15%         12%

  \% At Distinguished level            11%         9%          3%          3%          3%

  Number of students tested            19          23          32          34          34

  **4. [Not Low Income]{.underline}**                                                  

  \% At or Above Meets State Standards 90%         96%         83%         73%         83%

  \% Well Below State Standards        0%          0%          11%         9%          7%

  \% Below State Standards             11%         4%          6%          19%         11%

  \% Meets State Standards             63%         41%         54%         45%         57%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  11%         26%         17%         11%         19%

  \% At Distinguished level            16%         30%         11%         17%         8%

  Number of students tested            19          27          35          47          36

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Meets State Standards 85%         82%         79%         79%         75%

  \% Well Below State Standards        6%          6%          8%          9%          11%

  %Below State Standards               10%         11%         13%         12%         14%

  %Meets State Standards               53%         50%         50%         51%         51%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  16%         15%         15%         15%         13%

  \% At Distinguished level            15%         17%         14%         14%         11%

  Number of students tested            7,654       7,872       8,229       8,074       8,177
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**Fairview Elementary School - Table 4**

**Delaware Student Testing Program**

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test:
[Delaware State Testing Program]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [1996]{.underline} Publisher: [Harcourt
Education Measurement Systems]{.underline}

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

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
  Testing year                         2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001

  Testing month                        March       March       March       March       March

  **Fairview Elementary Grade 3-Total                                                  
  Group**                                                                              

  \% At or Above Meets State           86%         77%         72%         68%         76%
  Standards**\***                                                                      

  \% Well Below State Standards        5%          8%          13%         10%         17%

  \% Below State Standards             10%         15 %        15%         22%         7%

  \% Meets State Standards             62%         49%         48%         48%         61%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  19%         23%         18%         19%         13%

  \% At Distinguished level            5%          6%          6%          1%          1%

  Number of students tested            42          53          67          81          70

  Percent of total students tested     100%        100%        100%        100%        97.3%

  Number of students alternatively     0           0           0           0           0
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    0           0           0           0           0
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                                  

  **1. [African                                                                        
  American]{.underline}** (specify                                                     
  subgroup)                                                                            

  \% At or Above Meets State           79%         68%         60%         61%         71%
  Standards**\***                                                                      

  \% Well Below State Standards        5%          7%          20%         13%         20%

  \% Below State Standards             16%         3%          20%         26%         10%

  \% Meets State Standards             63%         54%         43%         55%         68%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  16%         14%         11%         5%          3%

  \% At Distinguished level            0%          0%          6%          0%          0%

  Number of students tested            19          28          35          38          40

  **2. [White]{.underline}**                                                           

  \% At or Above Meets State           88%         87%         82%         75%         90%
  Standards**\***                                                                      

  \% Well Below State Standards        6%          9%          7%          6%          14%

  \% Below State Standards             6%          4%          11%         19%         4%

  \% Meets State Standards             59%         44%         52%         42%         52%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  18%         30%         26%         30%         28%

  \% At Distinguished level            12%         13%         4%          3%          4%

  Number of students tested            17          23          27          36          29

  **3. [Low Income]{.underline}**                                                      

  \% At or Above Meets State Standards 86%         72%         59%         67%         71%

  \% Well Below State Standards        0%          12%         19%         12%         18%

  \% Below State Standards             14%         16%         22%         21%         12%

  \% Meets State Standards             64%         64%         44%         58%         62%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  18%         8%          13%         9%          9%

  \% At Distinguished level            5%          0%          3%          0%          0%

  Number of students tested            22          25          32          33          34

  **4. [Not Low Income]{.underline}**                                                  

  \% At or Above Meets State Standards 85%         82%         83%         68%         81%

  \% Well Below State Standards        10%         4%          9%          8%          17%

  \% Below State Standards             5%          14%         9%          23%         3%

  \% Meets State Standards             60%         36%         51%         42%         61%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  20%         36%         23%         25%         17%

  \% At Distinguished level            5%          11%         9%          2%          3%

  Number of students tested            20          28          35          47          36

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Meets State Standards 79%         78%         74%         72%         73%

  \% Well Below State Standards        9%          9%          10%         11%         12%

  \% Below State Standards             12%         13%         16%         17%         15%

  \% Meets State Standards             50%         49%         49%         46%         50%

  \% At Exceeds State Standards**\***  20%         21%         18%         19%         16%

  \% At Distinguished level            9%          8%          7%          7%          6%

  Number of students tested            8,534       8,685       8,818       8,144       8,303
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------