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

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

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Mrs. Rhonda Glaze McCallie]{.underline}

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

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

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [P.O. Box 99, 615 N. Broad]{.underline}

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

[Chandler Texas 75758 - 0099]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [(903 )849-3400]{.underline} Fax [(903)849-3628]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.brownsboro.k12.tx.us](http://www.brownsboro.k12.tx.us/)
E-mail [mccallier.ces@brownsboro.k12.tx.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\* [Mr. Elton Caldwell]{.underline}

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

District Name [Brownsboro Independent School District]{.underline} Tel.
[( 903 )852-3701]{.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. Terry Herrington

(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)

1 of 18

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

2.  The school has not been in school improvement status or been
    identified by the state as \"persistently dangerous\" within the
    last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the
    state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2003-2004 school
    year.

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

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

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

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

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

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

2 of 18

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [2]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[2]{.underline} Middle schools

[1]{.underline} Junior high schools

[1]{.underline} High schools

[1]{.underline} ALPHA Alternative Campus

[7]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$6,052]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$7,088]{.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\. [6]{.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**       58        57                     115          **7**                             

  **1**       58        51                     109          **8**                             

  **2**       56        59                     115          **9**                             

  **3**       58        45                     103          **10**                            

  **4**                                                     **11**                            

  **5**                                                     **12**                            

  **6**                                                     Other       16        21          37

                                    **TOTAL                                                   479
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

3 of 18

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [83.7]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [7.7]{.underline} % Black or African
American

[7.7]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
[31]{.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 76
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 63
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        139
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    452
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .3075
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    30.75
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [2]{.underline} %

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

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

Specify languages: Spanish and Urdu

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [49]{.underline} %

[237]{.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. 10\. Students receiving special education services: [12]{.underline}
    %

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

4 of 18

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

\_\_\_\_Autism [3]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness [4]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [11]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment [51]{.underline} Speech or Language
Impairment

[1]{.underline} Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

\_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment Including
Blindness

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) [2]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers [23]{.underline} [1]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists [3]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals [8]{.underline} [1]{.underline}

> Support staff [9]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number [45]{.underline} [2]{.underline}

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio: [18 to
1]{.underline}

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

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

  Daily student attendance 95.10%      96.56%      95.99%      95.73%      95.87%

  Daily teacher attendance 95.2%       94.5%       95.1%       95.2%       93.7%

  Teacher turnover rate    7.1%        16.7%       6.7%        6.3%        6.5%

  Student dropout rate     n/a         n/a         n/a         n/a         n/a

  Student drop-off rate    n/a         n/a         n/a         n/a         n/a
  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

5 of 18

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Chandler Elementary School in Chandler, Texas is located on the eastern
end of Henderson County and is part of the Brownsboro Independent School
District. Brownsboro ISD is a rural district that encompasses 192 square
miles and includes the small towns of Brownsboro and Chandler, part of
Lake Palestine, and an extensive rural area. The town of Chandler is a
very close-knit community that is home to residents from diverse
economic levels. The community is comprised of several businesses, two
medical clinics, two banks, a community center, several churches, and
recreational and competitive athletic organizations for children and
youth. Chandler Elementary is the "heart" of the community and maintains
close relationships with the local businesses and community members.

Chandler Elementary School is a school-wide Title I pre-kindergarten
through 3^rd^ grade campus. Previously, the campus housed grades
pre-kindergarten through 5; however, in the fall of 2002, Brownsboro ISD
opened a new Intermediate campus, moving grades 4 and 5 to the new
campus and converting Chandler Elementary to a primary-level elementary
campus. Significant growth in the community has produced challenges for
the school. Chandler Elementary currently has an enrollment of 479
students.

The mission of Chandler Elementary is "to ensure that every child
receives a quality education by creating an academically challenging and
safe environment for all children to achieve to their fullest potential.
Students shall be provided the opportunity to develop cognitively,
emotionally, physically, and socially in order to help each child become
a productive member of society and promote lifelong learning".

Our focus is to provide "individualized" instruction for every student
according to his/her particular needs and learning styles. School
administrators ensure that highly qualified teachers are placed in every
classroom. Our instructional curriculum is based upon the Texas
Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS); however, teachers utilize a
variety of instructional practices to successfully meet the unique needs
of learners. The foundation of teachers' instructional strategies is
determined by current, success-driven, research-based methods.

Chandler Elementary provides several special programs to help all
students be successful and achieve mastery levels at or above grade
level. We provide special programs for at-risk students, students with
limited English proficiency, migrant students, dyslexic students, and
students with disabilities. In addition, we provide a program for gifted
and talented students. We utilize a campus-based "Academic Intervention
Team" (AIT) to address particular needs of students who are not
achieving success. The AIT reviews the academic history of students
referred for assistance and makes recommendations regarding an
individualized plan to meet their needs and to help them make adequate
yearly progress.

Chandler Elementary participates in a unique partnership with The
University of Texas at Tyler, which is a four-year university located
approximately 20 miles from Chandler. The Chandler campus is a
designated site for the university's teacher-training program and houses
a "Center for the Professional Development of Teachers". Students who
are majoring in education and are completing the semester just prior to
their student teaching are enrolled in this program. These university
students do their coursework and field experience on the Chandler campus
for the entire semester. This partnership provides a rich dialogue
between university supervisors, classroom teachers, and pre-service
teachers. It also helps Chandler Elementary participate in the training
of future teachers and provides assistance to our classroom teachers by
enhancing small-group instruction and reducing the teacher/student
ratio.

6 of 18

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

**1.** **Assessment Results**

Chandler Elementary students have made significant progress in the past
three years on state accountability testing. The state of Texas began
administering the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) to
students in grades 3 through 11 in the 2002-2003 school year. Prior to
that year, students took the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS).
The two tests are similar with TAKS being more challenging and based
entirely on the TEKS, which outlines skills students are expected to
learn at each particular grade level. Students who are enrolled in the
special education program and have a disability based on conditions
specified in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) have
the option of taking the State-Developed Alternative Assessment that is
based on their ability level.

The assessment results for Chandler Elementary students in the area of
reading have shown significant gains in the percentage of students who
perform successfully. For example, the percentage of 3^rd^ grade
students who passed the reading TAAS/TAKS has increased from 79% in 2000
to 94% in 2003. Scores indicate the percentage of 4^th^ grade students
who passed the reading TAAS/TAKS increased from 81% to 88%, and the
percentage of 5^th^ grade students who passed the reading TAAS/TAKS
increased from 87% to 93%.

Mathematics has been an even greater area of improvement in
accountability assessment, especially in grades 3 and 4. Assessment
results indicate the percentage of 3^rd^ grade students who passed the
mathematics TAAS/TAKS has increased from 67% in 2000 to 99% in 2003.
Test scores show that the percentage of 4^th^ grade students who passed
the mathematics TAAS/TAKS has increased from 82% to 92%, and the
percentage of 5^th^ grade students who passed the mathematics TAAS/TAKS
has ranged from 92% in 2000 to 91% in 2002.

We are also very proud that particular subgroups of students have made
significant gains, especially students who are economically
disadvantaged. Since the spring 2000 testing administration, the
percentage of economically disadvantaged students who passed the
TAAS/TAKS reading showed a gain of 75% to 92% in 3^rd^ grade, 76% to 83%
in 4^th^ grade, and 75% to 89% in 5^th^ grade. In addition, the
percentage of economically disadvantaged students who passed the
TAAS/TAKS mathematics showed increases of 59% to 98% in 3^rd^ grade, 72%
to 88% in 4^th^ grade, and 82% to 83% in 5^th^ grade.

A strong commitment to ensuring success for every child and fulfilling
the mission of Chandler Elementary combined with the increase in
assessment scores for our school resulted in Chandler moving from an
"Academically Acceptable" rating to a "Recognized" rating in 2002. Since
the spring 2003 testing was the first administration of the new TAKS,
the state of Texas did not issue new accountability ratings for that
year; however, if ratings had been given, Chandler Elementary's test
scores would have resulted in an "Exemplary" rating.

7 of 18

2.  **Use of Assessment Data**

Chandler Elementary School utilizes multiple assessment data to
continually improve student performance. Third grade students take the
TAKS each spring in the subject areas of reading and mathematics. Each
year school personnel review the campus Academic Excellence Indicator
System (AEIS), which is a campus "report card" based on students' TAKS
scores, and conduct an individual item analysis of student responses
from the previous year's test results. The information from the TAKS
scores is used to determine strengths and areas for improvement in our
instructional program, plan for instruction and/or modify instructional
practices as needed, determine staff development needs for teachers, and
plan the school budget.

In addition to TAKS information, assessments are conducted throughout
the school year to monitor student progress and plan the instructional
program. All kindergarten students take a developmental readiness test
at the beginning of the school year, and then they are given the Texas
Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI) at mid-year and at the end of the year
to determine instructional level and/or growth. The TPRI is administered
to all first and second grade students at the beginning, middle, and end
of the school year for the same purposes. Third grade administers
pre-tests in reading and math to all students and post-tests for
summative information at the end of the year. Students in all grades
take periodic fluency and comprehension tests so teachers can use this
information to monitor progress and plan instruction accordingly.

Benchmark assessments aligned with the TEKS in reading and mathematics
are given each 6-weeks grading period. These results are considered in
identifying students for tutorials and the extended day program. In
addition, staff members also use this information to plan instruction
across the grade levels, as well as for vertical teaming to maximize
student success.

3.  **Communicating Student Performance**

The staff of Chandler Elementary strongly believes that education should
be a partnership between the school and parents and the community.
Therefore, communication of students' academic performance to parents
and the community is critical to our success. Student performance
information is communicated to parents through several methods. Formal
grade reports are given to parents each 6 weeks, and 3-week progress
reports are distributed to parents at the mid-point of each grading
period to inform them of the student's progress in mastering the
appropriate grade level curriculum. Also, teachers hold conferences with
parents to discuss student progress throughout the school year. In
addition, the results of pre- and post-benchmark tests in reading and
math, periodic reading fluency tests, and 6-weeks benchmark assessments
are shared with parents. Students in kindergarten and first grade take
home folders daily with samples of student work and/or graded
assignments. The second and third grade students take home folders
weekly with their graded assignments for the parents to review. Parents
sign the folders and return them to the teacher. The principal
periodically sends "Good News from School" postcards to parents to
positively reinforce students' successes. Student performance
information is also communicated to parents and the community through
articles in the campus newsletter and the local newspaper. The principal
and teachers also host a reading and math "Family Learning Night" for
parents of students in second and third grades to review the "Student
Success Initiative" guidelines of the state accountability requirements
for student success and promotion. Brochures explaining the "Student
Success Initiative" are given to parents of all students in kindergarten
through third grade.

Every school in the state of Texas receives a campus report card each
year that details the campus accountability rating and information
regarding student performance on the TAKS. A public meeting is held by
the Brownsboro ISD Board of Trustees in January of each year to review
the district-wide accountability report issued by the state of Texas.
Chandler Elementary holds an open meeting each year for parents and
community members to discuss the assessment information contained in the
campus accountability report.

8 of 18

4.  **Sharing Success**

The staff of Chandler Elementary School believes that education is
important to our society as a whole, and we want to contribute
positively to the quality of education in general. We have been involved
in sharing our success with other schools and educational professionals
in the past and would certainly commit to continue that process as a *No
Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon School*. We have had previous visits
both from professionals within our district and from other districts,
and we welcome the opportunity for both teachers and administrators to
visit our campus and observe in our classrooms. We are committed to
continually pursuing excellence in education and would proudly serve as
a mentor school.

Chandler Elementary is the first campus in our district to utilize the
services of a literacy facilitator who trains our teachers in best
practices regarding reading instruction. She provides on-going staff
development and conducts "peer-coaching" with the teachers. Our campus
literacy facilitator also instructs educational professionals at the
statewide literacy institute held each year for reading
teachers/specialists in the state of Texas. In addition, one of our
classroom teachers is a state-level instructor for the state of Texas
"Third Grade Reading Academy". She has trained teachers from across the
state, our campus, and other campuses in our district in the components
of a research-based reading and language arts program.

Chandler Elementary maintains a partnership with the University of Texas
at Tyler in which we host student teachers-in-training who receive their
university coursework on our campus and observe and teach in our
classrooms. This is a vital collaboration in which we are able to share
effective instructional practices with future educational professionals.

Our campus also hosts meetings for parents to train them in strategies
they can use at home to improve their child's academic success. We
instruct parents in the student success requirements of the state of
Texas and the federal *No Child Left Behind Act of 2001*. We also inform
parents of their child's progress in meeting these standards and
communicate to them our high expectations for all of our students.

9 of 18

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

1.  **School Curriculum**

Chandler Elementary School is dedicated to a philosophy that children
must learn a foundation of appropriate academic skills and develop the
ability to think critically and engage in problem solving for long-term
success in life. Our curriculum supports this philosophy and is based on
the TEKS, which is the required educational curriculum of the state of
Texas. This curriculum is designed so that students will learn
foundational skills at each grade level to develop an appropriate
knowledge base of the various content areas required for future growth
and academic success. The staff at Chandler Elementary is dedicated to
maintaining high expectations for all of our students. We not only
believe that every student can learn, but that it is incumbent upon our
staff to provide instruction in an individualized manner so that every
student does learn. All students, regardless of economic status, race,
disabilities, or limited English proficiency are expected to make
adequate yearly progress to meet the state standards for their grade
level.

Based on these beliefs, our curriculum for students in pre-kindergarten
through third grade includes instruction in the core subject areas of
reading, language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, and
health. The majority of the school day is dedicated to instruction of
reading, language arts, and math skills, with science, social studies,
and health taught in an integrated format. Students receive a minimum of
60 minutes of fine arts instruction and 240 minutes of physical
education instruction weekly. Critical thinking and problem solving
based on *Bloom's Taxonom*y of higher order thinking skills are also
integrated into the daily curriculum and instruction. The foundation of
our language arts program is immersion in both oral and written text for
beginning learners. Students are expected to develop strong early
reading strategies by the end of first grade, and the second and third
grade reading curriculum further develops these reading strategies with
an increased emphasis on word-work, comprehension, and critical
thinking. The foundation of our math curriculum is instruction utilizing
models and representations and then progressing into computation and
higher-level problem solving. Success is mandatory, rather than
optional, and teachers modify and adjust instructional practices to
ensure that every student is successful.

A variety of interventions involving specialized instructional settings
to accelerate learning are available for students who are performing
below grade level expectations. Also, special services and/or
accommodations are provided for students who have particular
disabilities according to state and federal law. An English as a Second
Language (ESL) program is provided for students who speak or hear a
language other than English in their home and possess deficiencies in
oral or written usage of the English language. In addition to the
remedial programs, an accelerated, differentiated curriculum is provided
for gifted and talented students.

Development of technology skills is a critical component of our
curriculum, and technology is an important instructional resource that
is utilized across the curriculum. There are student computers in every
classroom that are used for conducting research, writing projects,
producing mathematical representations, reinforcing skills with learning
programs, and assessing reading skills with the *Accelerated Reader*
program.

Chandler Elementary participates in a school-wide character education
program, *Core Essentials*, sponsored by Chick-Fil-A. This program
teaches character values to students so they will "treat others right,
make smart decisions, and maximize their potential". The *Core
Essentials* program is a key component of our curriculum that supports
our mission to educate children emotionally and socially, as well as
academically.

Teachers collaborate both horizontally and vertically to insure
continuity in all areas of the curriculum. Curriculum content and
instructional strategies are designed to connect skills learned in
school with real-world applications. Our curriculum fully supports the
goal of Chandler Elementary to produce students who become successful
members of society and engage in lifelong learning.

10 of 18

2.  **Reading Curriculum**

We believe that reading is the most important skill we teach our
students at Chandler Elementary. Our reading curriculum and
instructional practices are based on the twelve components and features
of a literacy research-based reading program as recommended by the
*Texas Reading Initiative*. These techniques and strategies have proven
successful with diverse learners and are based on the most current
information regarding reading theory. The teachers are trained in these
research-based practices through modeling, reflecting, and peer coaching
by our campus literacy facilitator.

Teachers use an integrated approach to teaching language arts, and
students learn literacy skills during authentic reading and writing
experiences. Components of a balanced literacy program that are
implemented in our instruction include: reading aloud, shared reading,
guided reading, independent reading, language experiences, interactive
writing, writing workshop, and independent writing. The teachers possess
the skills and tools to meet the students' needs individually and
incorporate numerous effective practices to teach the reading and
writing process. Reading groups are designed homogeneously, and
meaningful independent learning stations are utilized to reinforce
development of reading and writing skills. Classrooms have learning
environments that are conducive to fostering active student involvement
and guiding children into independent learning.

Frequent assessment is a critical component of our reading program and
guides teacher decision-making. The TPRI, Observation Survey, and
6-weeks benchmark tests are formal assessments that are administered to
students. Informal assessments such as running records, fluency tests,
and skill tests are given to monitor student progress on a daily/weekly
basis. Students who enter school reading and writing below grade level
are immediately identified, and an acceleration plan is developed for
them. Our reading program has led to improvement in the students'
academic abilities and yielded significant gains in accountability test
scores.

3.  **Math Curriculum**

Mathematics is an essential component of the Chandler Elementary
curriculum in accordance with the standards of the state curriculum, the
TEKS. Students are expected to master advanced math skills that will
prepare them for higher education and twenty-first century careers.
Therefore, the primary focus of our math curriculum and instruction is
the development of problem solving and critical thinking skills.
Numerous effective practices are implemented to teach math to our
students. The students receive a minimum of one hundred minutes of math
instruction daily, and math skills are also integrated into other
content areas throughout the day. Concrete models and representations
are utilized in introducing math concepts at all grade levels to ensure
students develop a solid skill foundation. Basic computation and
mathematics vocabulary are taught primarily as tools to utilize in
solving problems. Teachers involve students in a variety of
high-interest games that provide five to ten minutes daily of
maintenance review in basic computation skills. Multiple resources are
used in developing students' problem solving skills that include: a
state-adopted math textbook; the *[Excel]{.underline}* math program;
TAKS "Target" math board program; and materials from several
supplemental math resources. In addition, we conduct daily activities
that promote long-term maintenance and review, and monitor student
progress with frequent benchmark assessments. Teachers plan and
implement activities that coordinate with the levels of *Bloom's
Taxonomy* to build students' critical thinking skills.

Technology resources also enhance our math curriculum. Instructional
software is available in the classrooms, and all students complete a
technology product each grading period that demonstrates knowledge and
understanding of particular math skills. Our school district has
implemented the *Gayle Fuller Vertical Alignment* framework in grades
K-12 to ensure continuity across the grade levels in our math program.
Our students' math scores have continually increased the past 5 years,
which indicates effectiveness in our math program.

11 of 18

4.  **Instructional Methods**

Chandler Elementary teachers employ many instructional methods to meet
the individual needs of every student. At Chandler, we embrace the
philosophy that children possess varying learning styles; therefore, as
educators we must incorporate a diverse range of teaching strategies to
make [every]{.underline} child successful. We incorporate strategies
which have proven to be successful and based on research-driven
methodologies. Academic learning time in which students are actively
engaged in learning activities with a high level of success is critical
to student achievement. Therefore, teachers organize their instructional
day so that student time on task is maximized. Students are involved in
learning activities even during transitional periods throughout the day.

All of our classrooms are organized into self-contained homeroom classes
that are heterogeneously grouped. However, teachers frequently assemble
small groups of students for instruction based on their needs and/or
abilities. We have found small-group instruction to be one of our most
valuable tools in producing student success, especially among at-risk
and hard-to-accelerate students. We focus on teaching an accelerated
curriculum that involves students in activities at the higher levels of
*Bloom's Taxonomy* and integrate critical thinking skills into all
subject areas. In addition, students in kindergarten through third grade
participate in independent learning stations that reinforce reading and
math skills.

Students performing below grade level attend tutorial sessions for a
minimum of 90 minutes weekly. Also, we provide an Accelerated Reading
Intervention program in which students who are not reading at grade
level receive 30 minutes daily of intensive reading instruction in a
small group setting that is taught by a professional teacher. We conduct
frequent benchmark assessments with students, analyze the data from
these assessments, and plan instruction according to the strengths and
weaknesses exhibited. Continual improvement of student progress is our
primary goal, and instructional strategies are implemented that will be
successful in achieving that goal.

5.  **Professional Development**

Professional development supports our school mission and directly
correlates to campus needs assessments based on student performance
information. We continually strive to stay abreast of success-driven,
research-based instructional practices. The principal and instructional
staff enrich their knowledge of effective practices through reading
professional journals, attending educational conferences and workshops,
training with consultants, and maintaining a university partnership
between our school and the teacher preparation program at the University
of Texas at Tyler. Faculty meetings provide opportunities for staff
members to engage in "study groups" on current topics related to
effective instructional practices and research-based information in the
field of education. In addition, teachers provide demonstration lessons
for their co-workers on successful strategies they implement in their
classrooms.

The most critical component of our campus professional development is
our training under the leadership of a reading/literacy consultant.
Teachers have been trained in intensive reading and writing theory. They
participate in formative staff development and "peer coaching" that
leads to reflection and modeling of the reading and writing process.
Their training is aligned with the components of a research-based
reading program as outlined and recommended by the *Texas Reading
Initiative*. This training has significantly improved our reading and
language arts instruction school-wide and has been the single most
important element in contributing to our increase in student assessment
scores.

12 of 18

> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS -- Texas Assessment of Academic
> Skills (TAAS) and Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)**

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

> Edition/publication year [1999-2003]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
> Education Agency]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Special Education students receiving modified instruction
> significantly below grade level were given an appropriate alternative
> assessment based on the ARD committee recommendations.]{.underline}

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

  Testing month -- March, 2003;                                                       
  April, 1999-2002                                                                    

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                   

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      94%         81%         85%         79%         86%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives\*       26%         43%         63%         49%         56%

  Number of students tested           90          81          73          75          64

  Percent of total students tested    94%         98%         100%        96%         90%

  Number of students excluded         6           2           0           3           7

  Percent of students excluded        6%          2%          0%          4%          10%

                                                                                      

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                     

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                                      

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      92%         77%         82%         75%         78%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives\*       26%         31%         47%         41%         52%

  Number of students tested           39          26          17          32          23

  2\. White                                                                           

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      95%         81%         86%         80%         87%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives         26%         47%         65%         51%         59%

  Number of students tested           78          68          65          70          54

  3\. African American                                                                

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      100%        67%         80%         60%         60%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives         29%         17%         40%         20%         20%

  Number of students tested           7           6           5           5           5

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                    

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      89.6%       88%         86.8%       87.9%       88%
  standard)                                                                           
  ----------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*In the spring, 2003, testing, the *% mastering all objectives* moved
to a higher standard called *Commended Performance*.

13 of 18

> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS -- TAAS and TAKS**

Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Math]{.underline}

> Edition/publication year [1999-2003]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
> Education Agency]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Special Education students receiving modified instruction
> significantly below grade level were given an appropriate alternative
> assessment based on the ARD committee recommendations.]{.underline}

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

  Testing month - March, 2003; April,                                                 
  1999-2002                                                                           

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                   

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      99%         89%         85%         67%         81%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives\*       29%         15%         17%         27%         31%

  Number of students tested           93          80          72          75          68

  Percent of total students tested    99%         96%         99%         96%         96%

  Number of students excluded         1           3           1           3           3

  Percent of students excluded        1%          4%          1%          4%          4%

                                                                                      

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                     

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                                      

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      98%         88%         69%         59%         68%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives         18%         8%          13%         16%         16%

  Number of students tested           40          25          16          32          25

  2\. White                                                                           

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      100%        88%         88%         70%         83%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives         31%         15%         19%         29%         31%

  Number of students tested           81          68          64          69          58

  3\. African American                                                                

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      100%        80%         40%         20%         40%
  standard)                                                                           

  \% mastering all objectives         29%         0%          0%          0%          0%

  Number of students tested           7           5           5           5           5

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                    

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing      90.8%       87.4%       83.1%       80.6%       83.1%
  standard)                                                                           
  ----------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* In the spring, 2003, testing, the *% mastering all objectives* moved
to a higher standard called *Commended Performance.*

14 of 18

> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS -- TAAS and TAKS**

Grade [4]{.underline} Test [Reading]{.underline}

> Edition/publication year [1999-2002]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
> Education Agency]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Special Education students receiving modified instruction
> significantly below grade level were given an appropriate alternative
> assessment based on the ARD committee recommendations.]{.underline}

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

  Testing month -- April                                                      

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                           

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          88%         92%         81%         87%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             54%         55%         44%         37%

  Number of students tested               72          60          64          67

  Percent of total students tested        97%         97%         91%         87%

  Number of students excluded             2           2           6           10

  Percent of students excluded            3%          3%          9%          13%

                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                             

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                              

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          83%         63%         76%         73%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             39%         23%         16%         15%

  Number of students tested               23          30          25          26

  2\. White                                                                   

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          89%         84%         80%         86%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             58%         39%         45%         38%

  Number of students tested               62          62          55          65

  3\. African American                                                        

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          67%         40%         N/A\*       N/A
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             17%         20%         N/A         N/A

  Number of students tested               6           5           N/A         N/A

  **STATE SCORES**                                                            

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          92.5%       90.8%       89.9%       88.8%
  standard)                                                                   
  --------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* No data reported for fewer than 5 students.

> 15 of 18
>
> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS -- TAAS and TAKS**

Grade [4]{.underline} Test [Math]{.underline}

> Edition/publication year [1999-2002]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
> Education Agency]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Special Education students receiving modified instruction
> significantly below grade level were given an appropriate alternative
> assessment based on the ARD committee recommendations.]{.underline}

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

  Testing month - April                                                       

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                           

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          92%         87%         82%         86%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             11%         18%         23%         35%

  Number of students tested               73          62          66          69

  Percent of total students tested        99%         100%        94%         90%

  Number of students excluded             1           0           4           8

  Percent of students excluded            1%          0%          6%          10%

                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                             

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                              

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          88%         71%         72%         78%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             0%          0%          8%          19%

  Number of students tested               24          31          25          27

  2\. White                                                                   

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          92%         83%         82%         87%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             13%         3%          20%         34%

  Number of students tested               63          64          56          67

  3\. African American                                                        

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          83%         40%         N/A\*       NA/
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             0%          0%          N/A         N/A

  Number of students tested               6           5           N/A         N/A

  **STATE SCORES**                                                            

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          94.1%       91.3%       87.1%       87.6%
  standard)                                                                   
  --------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* No data reported for fewer than 5 students.

> 16 of 18
>
> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS -- TAAS and TAKS**

Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Reading]{.underline}

> Edition/publication year [1999-2002]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
> Education Agency]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Special Education students receiving modified instruction
> significantly below grade level were given an appropriate alternative
> assessment based on the ARD committee recommendations.]{.underline}

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

  Testing month - April                                                       

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                           

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          93%         92%         87%         89%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             57%         55%         43%         36%

  Number of students tested               67          60          63          64

  Percent of total students tested        97%         97%         93%         98%

  Number of students excluded             2           2           5           1

  Percent of students excluded            3%          3%          7%          2%

                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                             

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                              

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          89%         76%         75%         81%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             41%         35%         21%         6%

  Number of students tested               27          17          24          21

  2\. White                                                                   

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          97%         90%         86%         90%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             58%         58%         42%         29%

  Number of students tested               59          52          59          62

  3\. African American                                                        

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          60%         N/A\*       N/A         N/A
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             40%         N/A         N/A         N/A

  Number of students tested               5           N/A         N/A         N/A

  **STATE SCORES**                                                            

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          92.7%       90.2%       87.8%       86.4%
  standard)                                                                   
  --------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* No data reported for fewer than 5 students.

> 17 of 18
>
> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS --TAAS and TAKS**

Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Math]{.underline}

> Edition/publication year [1999-2002]{.underline} Publisher [Texas
> Education Agency]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed? [Special Education students receiving modified instruction
> significantly below grade level were given an appropriate alternative
> assessment based on the ARD committee recommendations.]{.underline}

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

  Testing month                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                           

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          91%         87%         92%         96%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             14%         18%         23%         40%

  Number of students tested               69          62          61          57

  Percent of total students tested        100%        100%        90%         92%

  Number of students excluded             0           0           7           6

  Percent of students excluded            0%          0%          10%         8%

                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                             

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                              

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          83%         82%         82%         91%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             10%         0%          18%         10%

  Number of students tested               29          17          22          22

  2\. White                                                                   

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          95%         85%         91%         90%
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             13%         19%         21%         29%

  Number of students tested               60          54          57          62

  3\. African American                                                        

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          67%         N/A\*       N/A         N/A
  standard)                                                                   

  \% mastering all objectives             0%          N/A         N/A         N/A

  Number of students tested               6           N/A         N/A         N/A

  **STATE SCORES**                                                            

  \% at or above 70 TLI (passing          96.2%       94.6%       92.1%       90.1%
  standard)                                                                   
  --------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\* No data reported for fewer than 5 students.

18 of 18