##### *Revised 3-16-05*

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

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: \_\_\_ Elementary \_\_\_ Middle \_\_\_
High \_\_\_ K-12

Name of Principal

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

Official School Name

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing
Address\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

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

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_School
Code Number\*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Telephone \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Fax
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Website/URL\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ E-mail
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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\*
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

District Name Tel.
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

(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)

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

2.  The school has not been in school improvement status or been
    identified by the state as \"persistently dangerous\" within the
    last two years. To meet final eligibility, the school must meet the
    state's adequate yearly progress requirement in the 2004-2005 school
    year.

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

4.  The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from
    at least September 1999 and has not received the 2003 or 2004 *No
    Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools Award.*

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

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

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

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

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

\_\_\_\_\_ Other

\_\_\_\_\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**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
>
> \[ x \] Suburban
>
> \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area
>
> \[ \] Rural

4\. Number of years the principal has been in her/his position at this
school.

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

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

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

  **PreK**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**       38        28                     **66**       **8**                             

  **1**       38        46                     **84**       **9**                             

  **2**       42        42                     **84**       **10**                            

  **3**       38        34                     **72**       **11**                            

  **4**       40        51                     **91**       **12**                            

  **5**                                                     **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   397
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of % White

the students in the school: % Black or African American

\% Hispanic or Latino

\% Asian/Pacific Islander

\% 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:
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_%

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      13
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      4
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

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

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 351
                            the school as of October 1. 

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided .0484
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           4.84
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

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

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

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

Specify languages: Russian, Tagalog, Other

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_%

Total number students who qualify: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> 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: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_%

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Total Number of Students Served

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

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

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

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

\_\_\_\_Emotional Disturbance \_\_\_\_Speech or Language Impairment

\_\_\_\_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) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

![](media/image1.wmf){width="0.175in" height="0.11666666666666667in"}

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

> Support staff \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

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

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

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

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

  Teacher turnover rate     10%         9%          15%         6%          12%

  Student dropout rate      N/A%        N/A%        N/A%        N/A%        N/A%
  (middle/high)                                                             

  Student drop-off rate     N/A%        N/A%        N/A%        N/A%        N/A%
  (high school)                                                             
  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Arthur Road Elementary School is one of four kindergarten through fourth
grade elementary schools in the Solon City School District, located in
the city of Solon about 30 minutes southeast of Cleveland, Ohio. The
school is also home to the district's Integrated Preschool Program. The
school's total enrollment for students in grades K-4 for the 2004-05
school year is 397 students, who come from diverse backgrounds.

Arthur Road Elementary is known as a warm, welcoming, child-centered
school. The school's vision sets forth the high aspirations students and
staff members alike strive to attain:

***Arthur Road Elementary School will become a caring community of
learners and leaders,***

***where through emphasis on academic achievement, personal pride and
mutual respect, both***

***students and staff will be encouraged to reach their full
potential.***

Arthur Road students approach their academic and social education
cognizant of the school's "3R's:" Be Respectful, Be Responsible and
Remember the Golden Rule. Everyone at Arthur Road takes these school
expectations seriously and the results are reflected in the respectful
and positive school climate that exists.

Once a month, Arthur Road celebrates a school Spirit Day, which begins
as two fourth grade students lead the entire student body in reciting
the school motto ("Arthur Road is a welcoming and safe place for all
learners") and the school pledge ("We pledge to do our best, to be
respectful, responsible and kind to everyone so that we all can grow,
have fun and learn from our teachers and from each other"). Both the
motto and the pledge reflect the value the school places on a positive
learning environment for all students.

Students at Arthur Road have many opportunities to receive recognition
for their accomplishments, including the setting and achieving of
personal goals through the school's Star Student Program. Twice a month,
each teacher is able to nominate one student from the class to be a Star
Student. The Star Students from each grade level have lunch with the
principal, who shares with the group the teachers' specific and
descriptive feedback regarding the reasons each student was deserving of
the honor.

Similarly, the Arthur Road staff pursues the setting and attainment of
personal and professional goals through the development of a strong,
collegial Professional Learning Community. Grade level teams meet twice
weekly, with one meeting focused on student learning and the other on
discussion of curriculum and assessment-related topics. The Solon City
Schools places a high priority on staff development, thus the Arthur
Road staff is skilled in many facets of education, including
differentiated instruction and formative assessment. Teachers use a
Standards-Based Report Card, which clearly communicates to parents what
their children need to know and be able to do at each grade level and
how they are progressing toward those educational benchmarks.

The school's PTA is strong and keenly involved in many aspects of life
at Arthur Road Elementary. Volunteers are present in the classrooms
daily as well as spending many hours working on the 32 active Arthur
Road committees. Each year in May the staff and student body honor and
thank the volunteers with a luncheon and program to demonstrate the
value of volunteerism.

Arthur Road Elementary School is a vivid example of the goals of No
Child Left Behind in action. Each member of the skilled and dedicated
staff believes that all children can and will learn at consistently high
levels and embraces the accountability measures that demonstrate student
achievement.

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

1.  **The meaning of Arthur Road Elementary School's assessment
    results.**

Ohio has utilized criterion-referenced "Proficiency" tests in reading
since the mid 1990s at the fourth grade level and is now undertaking a
change to standards-based "achievement" tests in grades three through
eight in reading. The percentage of students in all of the Solon City
Schools, including Arthur Road Elementary, that pass these tests,
whether proficiency or achievement tests, are reported to parents and
the community in the form of District Report Cards issued by the Ohio
Department of Education yearly and posted on the department's web site.
Individual student scores reported directly to parents rank students
according to performance. In grade four, students are accessed in
writing, reading, math, science and citizenship. Third graders are
assessed in reading and for 2005 will take a high-stakes math
assessment. For proficiency tests, students are ranked as either Below
Basic, Basic, Proficient or Advanced with the latter two categories as
an acceptable goal. For the new achievement tests, there are five
rankings: Limited, Basic, Proficient, Accelerated and Advanced with the
latter three rankings preferred. Data is also disaggregated to give more
information regarding program success across all subcategories of
children, including those with Learning Disabilities. More information
about Ohio's assessment is available at:
<http://www.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency/technical_data/StatSumm_AchievementTests.asp>
(for Third Grade Achievement Tests) and
[www.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency/standards.asp](http://www.ode.state.oh.us/proficiency/standards.asp)
(for Fourth Grade Proficiency Tests).

Illustrating the benefits of changes to reading instruction for Arthur
Road students are the data from these test results. In 1997, 70% of the
students at Arthur Road were proficient in reading. Similar results were
shown for 1998, with 71.1% reading proficiency. In the last two years of
data collection from these state tests, many signs of marked growth in
student achievement are noticeable in the table below:

+------+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
| Sc   | Third Grade Reading           | Fourth Grade Reading         |
| hool | Achievement                   | Proficiency                  |
| Year |                               |                              |
+------+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 200  | Not yet implemented           | -   93% of all students      |
| 2-03 |                               |     passed                   |
|      |                               |                              |
|      |                               | -   92% of learning disabled |
|      |                               |                              |
|      |                               | > students passed            |
+------+-------------------------------+------------------------------+
| 200  | -   99% of all 3^rd^ grade    | -   92% of all students      |
| 3-04 |     passed                    |     passed                   |
|      |                               |                              |
|      | ```{=html}                    |                              |
|      | <!-- -->                      |                              |
|      | ```                           |                              |
|      | -   100% of learning disabled |                              |
|      |     students                  |                              |
|      |                               |                              |
|      | passed                        |                              |
+------+-------------------------------+------------------------------+

Source: Ohio Department of Education School Report Cards, 1997-2003.

Trends from the past seven years demonstrate that although Arthur Road
students were not meeting state goals of 75% passage early on, they are
now achieving at very high levels in reading on state assessments and
surpassing the state goals by significant margins. Reading Recovery, the
20-week intervention program Arthur Road teachers use to address reading
gaps for the lowest achieving first graders, is showing success as well
by helping students maintain their gains over time. Specifically, 100%
of Reading Recovery students maintained gains and passed the third grade
achievement test and 91.6% passed the fourth grade test in 2003-04.
These data show remarkable increases in student achievement and reward
the efforts and resources of the school's staff, parents and children.

In mathematics, Arthur Road's fourth grade students have continually
scored above the standard in math proficiency. In the 2002-03 school
year, Arthur Road students achieved a passing rate of 88%. Subsequently,
Arthur Road fourth grade student scores improved during the 2003-04
school year, with 97% of students achieving a passing score. In
analyzing the results, staff attribute these improved results to greater
classroom focus on the benchmarks and indicators, which provided a
stronger balance between content and process. The proficiency results
were further evaluated to determine strengths and weaknesses. For
example, fourth graders show strengths in knowledge and skill (93%),
conceptual understanding (92%), number relations (92%) and geometry
(92%), but demonstrate relative weaknesses in problem-solving (80%) and
estimation (83%). This information helps to guide classroom instruction
and improve on student learning in target areas.

With the provision of diagnostic mathematics tests for students in
kindergarten through second grade last year, staff was able to more
completely evaluate how Arthur Road's primary students were progressing
toward meeting state indicators in mathematics. The collated results of
the diagnostic assessments showed that among kindergarten students 92%
are reaching on-track status. In grade one, 88% of students achieved
on-track status and finally, 97% second graders demonstrated they were
on track. Children identified as not meeting the designated on-track
status were targeted early in their next school year for special
attention to close their achievement gaps.

**2**. **How Arthur Road Elementary School uses assessment data to
understand and improve student and school performance**.

Arthur Road School uses a variety of formative and summative assessment
data daily to drive instruction and improve student and school
performance. Before the school year begins, teachers utilize the
district's student information system to access summative data about
individual student's performance in reading, writing, spelling, math,
science and social studies. Additionally, standardized test data, such
as achievement or proficiency data, is shared with teachers. Teachers
also engage in weekly grade level meetings at the beginning of the year
that are focused on analyzing student data and determining a grade level
SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Results-Oriented, Time-Bound)
goal for the coming school year.

Within the first month of a new school year, teachers utilize diagnostic
tools to assess all children in the areas of reading, writing and
spelling to determine the best placement for students within
differentiated learning groups. Daily, teachers are involved in
providing specific, immediate feedback to students in all content areas
(assessment "for" learning) to ensure understanding and to improve
academic performance. For example, in the *Trailblazers* math program,
assessments "for" learning are embedded throughout each unit. This
allows the teacher to intervene or accelerate students as needed
throughout the unit, rather than waiting until the end of the unit for
intervention or acceleration. Weekly, teachers continue the grade level
team meetings initiated at the beginning of the year with a refined
focus, discussing students who are having difficulty in the classroom.
Teachers bring current data to the meeting to assist in determining the
student's strengths and weaknesses. These meetings provide a
collaborative framework through which staff can identify effective
solutions for students who may need interventions of some kind to
bolster their mastery of academic content.

As the school year ends, teachers at Arthur Road share the results of
their SMART goal data with one another to extend their learning
professionally. In addition, students are formally assessed
diagnostically in reading, writing, spelling and math to ensure that
they have completed the school year achieving adequate yearly progress
as well as to lay the ground work for guiding individualized instruction
for the next school year.

# 3. How Arthur Road communicates assessment data to parents, students and the community.

The academic success of Arthur Road Elementary students is a reflection
of the commitment to excellence and partnership among the students,
staff and parents. The key to the effectiveness of this educational
partnership is adherence to a communications philosophy based on
continuous and open communication with the district's target audiences,
such as students, staff, parents, the community at large, legislators
and elected officials at the local, state and federal levels, as well as
the media. The focus of this ongoing communication is creating dialogue
regarding educational goals and initiatives, namely student achievement
as measured by assessment results.

Specifically, parents of Arthur Road students receive information about
upcoming state assessments through letters from the principal.
Subsequent to receiving the results, the school mails the assessment
report generated by the state of Ohio's assessment vendor to parents
with each student's year-end report card. As district report cards are
issued by the state of Ohio each year, the Solon City Schools reports on
these results in a variety of ways. Information is disseminated to
parents through the PTA and reports on student achievement are routinely
included in press releases issued to the media and posted on the
district's web site. Inherent in this communication is ongoing media
contacts to ensure coverage about assessment results is accurate.

In addition, these releases are emailed to all families in the district
(Internet connection among Solon families is well over 95%). Articles
detailing assessment results and student achievement are regularly
included in the district's community-wide newsletter, *Know Your
Schools*. Reports related to assessment data are also made regularly
during district Board of Education meetings, which are broadcast on
Solon Education Television, a cable access station for the Solon Schools
funded by the city of Solon's cable franchise fees.

Together, these coordinated communications assist students, parents and
the community in clearly understanding today's standards-based
educational arena.

# 4. How Arthur Road has shared and will continue to share its success with other schools.

The Arthur Road learning community has readily embraced the infusion of
accountability and public reporting of assessment results into
education. However, at the same time, it has rebuked the concept that
the methods used to achieve student academic success and analyze
assessment data in such a way that they can truly impact instruction and
student progress is proprietary. Unlike the business world where
"secrets to success" are closely guarded to benefit only that
corporation's clients, the Arthur Road staff believes strongly that as
educators they have the responsibility to share educational best
practices with all colleagues to benefit all students.

As such, the staff collaborates with colleagues at the other elementary
buildings in the district on a regular basis, refining and enhancing
instructional strategies and assessment data analysis. The staff's
philosophy is that individual teachers are not alone responsible for
student success; instead all professionals have a collective
responsibility to ensure each and every student meets his or her
academic goals.

Similarly, the staff collaborates and models best teaching practices for
teachers and administrators in other school districts as well. Hardly a
week goes by that a cadre of teachers is not visiting Arthur Road to
observe student and teacher work in classrooms, particularly with regard
to the staff's implementation of the components of comprehensive
literacy -- reading and writing workshops and word study. In addition,
Arthur Road teachers willingly take time to travel to other districts as
well to share their teaching strategies and model lessons with those
teachers' own students.

Arthur Road teachers also share with other schools and teaching
professionals by participating in state of Ohio curriculum and
assessment committees and serving as instructors for professional
development courses offered for teachers by the state of Ohio. In
addition, Arthur Road staff members eagerly participate in research
studies to help demonstrate the effectiveness of teaching strategies
that impact student achievement. For example, a recent article published
in the journal, *Reading Teacher,* was written by teachers, many of whom
are on the Arthur Road staff, to report the results of their research,
which illustrates the benefits of the district's word study instruction.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

1.  **Arthur Road's core curriculum and student engagement in academic**

**content standards.**

The curriculum at Arthur Road and the Solon City Schools is aligned with
all of Ohio's Academic Content Standards, including the core curricular
areas of English language arts, math, science and social studies.
Teachers from Arthur Road in each grade level have served on a number of
district-wide curriculum committees in the past few years to ensure that
the core curriculum is aligned with the state standards as soon as they
are adopted by the state of Ohio.

The language arts program is centered on research-based practices in
comprehensive literacy. The five components of reading (phonemic
awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension) are taught in
a variety of ways through a reading workshop approach. All children
receive direct strategy instruction through whole group reading
instruction; students read independently to sustain time for individual
practice; and students are served by their teachers in needs-based
guided reading groups regularly. Decision making in the reading program
is based on regular, on-going assessment. The writing program, too, is
taught through a workshop approach. Instruction at Arthur Road includes
direct strategy instruction on the craft and conventions of writing and
includes ample opportunities for small group interaction and individual
practice on teacher-selected and child-selected topics. Children receive
regular feedback on their abilities as well as instruction that attempts
to nurture writing development toward district standards and benchmarks.
District developed rubrics are utilized as a tool to provide descriptive
feedback to students on an on-going basis. Arthur Road takes a
developmental word study approach to spelling, as teachers view this as
the "cement" between the two processes of reading and writing. Teachers
at Arthur Road meet regularly and systematically with students in small
groups to provide instruction along a developmentally sequenced course
in word study.

The math support material adopted by the Solon City Schools for students
in kindergarten through fifth grade and used at Arthur Road Elementary
School is *Trailblazers*. Math content is centered on the Ohio Academic
Content Standards that are derived from the National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics' standards. The core content in math includes number
sense and operations; measurement, geometry and spatial sense; patterns,
functions and algebra; data analysis and probability; and mathematical
processes. Through careful analysis, teachers have also determined the
areas of *Trailblazers* that are not well-aligned with the standards and
have developed supplements to ensure that all content standards are
addressed. Consequently, Arthur Road math students are party to a rich
experience based on collaborative learning and idea sharing, deep
problem-solving and reasoning, and the application and analyzing of the
concepts they are studying. By working in small groups using
manipulatives and other math tools, and communicating their mathematical
thinking with one another, students are better able to connect math
concepts with real-life experiences and other areas of study, a critical
skill for using math throughout their lifetime.

The science and social studies curricula reflect a hands-on,
inquiry-based approach to learning. Modeled after the Ohio academic
content standards, teachers at Arthur Road have used a backward design
approach to unit development. Teachers utilize the course of study to
understand the big ideas, write proposition statements to understand the
core content and write essential questions that will guide instruction.
Common assessments are developed after teachers have a clear
understanding of the content. Hands-on, inquiry-based learning
activities are then chosen based on the academic content standards and
the assessment. Science curriculum includes earth and space sciences,
life sciences, physical sciences, science and technology, scientific
inquiry and scientific ways of knowing. Social studies curriculum
includes history, people in societies, geography, government,
citizenship, rights and responsibilities and economics.

Technology is integrated within all of the core subject areas. Arthur
Road has a computer lab as well as five computers in each classroom to
meet district-adopted technology competencies and state standards at
each grade level.

**2a. Arthur Road's reading curriculum.**

Before the recommendations of the National Reading Panel and before the
inception of No Child Left Behind, Arthur Road Elementary and the Solon
City Schools were pursuing a research-based literacy curriculum.
Understanding the critical importance of literacy, particularly reading,
the district began studying the research to identify approaches,
materials and interventions that would result in student success. As a
result of consulting the research, Solon teachers chose not to adopt any
commercial programs; instead, they implemented a Comprehensive Literacy
approach for all kindergarten through sixth grade classrooms, relying
heavily on small-group guided instruction as the mainstay of daily
instruction. As a staff, the teachers engaged in small study groups and
larger in-service groups and utilized a literacy coach to model best
teaching practices in classrooms to increase the staff's knowledge base
about high-quality literacy instruction. Guided by the philosophy of
making the classroom teacher the first line of intervention, all
children receive differentiated instruction in reading, writing and
spelling to meet the unique needs of the school's diverse student
population. The research about reading instruction compelled the staff
to transform its practice from a "one-size-fits-all" approach to a more
differentiated and diagnostic approach to reading in which the best
teaching is based on assessment of student strengths and weaknesses. To
identify the strengths and weaknesses of individual children, teachers
implement classroom-based formative assessment by using individually
administered assessments to assess fluency, processing and decoding,
strategy use and comprehension to identify appropriate text levels and
needs for instruction. Using all components of Comprehensive
Literacy---read aloud, shared reading, guided reading and independent
reading---teachers design instruction based upon student needs in
relation to Ohio English Language Arts Content Standards.

For the majority of children, the classroom teacher *is* the
intervention---he or she diagnostically determines strengths and
weaknesses and then appropriately selects reading materials and
research-based strategies to instruct in small, guided reading groups,
resulting in increased student learning. As a safety net to this
high-quality diagnostic teaching, the staff also consulted the research
about reading intervention and determined that *early* intervention is
best and that interventions should match classroom practices as well as
be based on current research. In the 2000-01 school year, the Solon
Schools, including Arthur Road, implemented Reading Recovery because it
provides early, intensive, research-based intervention and because its
success is well-documented. Additionally, the school's special education
teachers were trained in research-based techniques and interventions and
are required to utilize the same assessments, materials and approaches
used by classroom teachers. This combination of high-quality diagnostic
teaching, solid research-based early intervention and special education
that matches classroom practices has resulted in increased student
achievement in reading for all students.

# 3. How Arthur Road's math curriculum contributes to students' development of essential skills and knowledge.

#  

Arthur Road teachers believe strongly that math is best learned in an
environment that encourages students to share their thinking so that
they can learn from one another. Students often work with a partner or
in groups. They know that their teachers will often ask them to solve a
problem more than one way. Developing a math classroom culture has
helped children to feel comfortable sharing their solutions and focus on
learning from each other as well as their teacher.

The Solon City Schools adopted *Math Trailblazers* at the beginning of
the 2003-04 school year to provide the core resource for mathematics
instruction. This textbook series provides the balance of instruction
between content and process that the staff desires. It also involves
students in many hands-on, concrete lessons to provide the scaffold to
learning new concepts. Classrooms are stocked with a variety of math
manipulatives to which children have easy access. Learning math with
such materials helps all children to develop deep, conceptual
understanding that scaffolds them to the abstract learning at their own
pace.

Arthur Road teachers typically use 80 minutes of daily instructional
time for math. This includes 20 minutes for calendar time or daily
problem-solving along with a 60-minute, teacher-directed math lesson.
There are also opportunities within a week for students to use classroom
or lab computers to create spreadsheets, solve math problems or practice
basic facts.

Arthur Road teachers strive to help every child achieve in mathematics.
They use data from state assessments as well as information from
formative assessments. Classroom observations are recorded and plans are
made to assist every child in reaching every indicator. The strength of
the school's math curriculum lies in the continual emphasis on students
viewing themselves as mathematicians and understanding that math exists
all around them in their daily lives. Teachers clearly outline a
specific learning target for the students to make clear correlations
between the math concepts they are studying and real-life examples.
Additionally, students spend quite a bit of time communicating their
thoughts and answers to their peers and discussing alternate ways to
solve the problems they are considering. In this way, teachers are
better able to guide students in achieving the school's mission of
creating a collaborative learning environment built on mutual respect
and developing the skills and knowledge they need to reach their full
potential.

**4. Differentiated instruction methods used at Arthur Road to improve
student learning.**

The Arthur Road staff differentiates curriculum to meet the diverse
needs of all learners. Teachers differentiate curriculum in the areas of
reading, writing and word study through a comprehensive literacy

approach. Diagnostic assessment data is collected on every student at
Arthur Road at the beginning of the year in language arts. Instructional
methods are then tailored to meet the needs of each child in the
classroom.

In the curriculum areas of science and social studies, Arthur Road
teachers use an inquiry-based model to explore science and social
studies concepts. Students are presented with guiding questions, which
lend to exploration through experimentation. Consistent use of the
scientific process is embraced in science to challenge students to
"think like a scientist."

Math instructional methods are constructivist in nature. Students are
challenged to solve problems using methods that make sense to them. As
they develop deep conceptual understanding using methods that are
developmentally appropriate for them, other methods are then introduced
to help learners become more efficient in their problem-solving
abilities. *First in Math* is a web-based computer program Arthur Road
students use to supplement their study of math facts. As students
practice math facts at home through the use of this program, their
ability to manipulate numbers increases and their mastery of the facts
becomes more fluid, leaving more instructional time at school to solve
problems and explore math concepts that have a higher cognitive
complexity level.

Consistent, daily collaboration occurs between regular education
teachers and support (special education and gifted education) teachers
to ensure that all students are being challenged to reach their full
potential.

**5. Arthur Road's professional development program and its effect on
student achievement.**

The Solon City Schools and Arthur Road Elementary place a high premium
on the value of professional development and have made considerable
commitments to furthering the education of its staff through
professional development with both time and resources. This is because
the Arthur Road staff has acknowledged the research demonstrating
improvements in student learning cannot occur in the absence of
continual teacher learning.

Arthur Road's professional development plan is based on a combination of
teacher learning with the assistance of content area consultants as well
as in-depth collaborative learning in groups with content area experts
within the district. The Solon City Schools employs full-time literacy
and math resource teachers, who work collaboratively with teachers in
the classroom setting. Additionally, these content area experts provide
numerous opportunities for professional development within the school
system. Arthur Road also has a full-time curriculum resource teacher who
collaborates, co-teaches and provides additional support materials to
teachers on a flexible, as-needed basis. Arthur Road teachers are also
engaged in directly aligning lessons within *Math Trailblazers* to the
Ohio Academic Content Standards. Pacing guides have been developed to
ensure that teachers are on track in teaching mathematics to ensure
students have the knowledge and skills to demonstrate their
understanding for state outcome measures as required by state standards.
Science and social studies committee members are working to develop new
units based on the content standards, as well. At monthly staff
meetings, in-service programs are provided to all teachers to share the
work that committee members have undertaken. Lastly, administrators and
teacher leaders are currently engaged in the study and deeper
implementation of assessment literacy to fully embed teacher learning
about the impact of formative assessment and teacher reflection on
student learning.

**PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST**

Subject **Reading** Grade **3** Test **Ohio Achievement Test**

Edition/Publication Year **2004** Publisher **Ohio Department of
Education**

  ------------------------------------ --------- ---------------------------
                                       2003-04   **The Third-Grade Reading
                                                 Achievement Test was not
                                                 administered prior to
                                                 2003-2004.**

  Testing month                        March     

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                              

  \% At or Above Limited               100%      

  \% At or Above Basic                 100%      

  \% At or Above Proficient            99%       

  \% At or Above Accelerated           90%       

  \% At Advanced                       72%       

  Number of students tested            83        

  Percent of total students tested     100%      

  Number of students alternatively     0         
  assessed                                       

  Percent of students alternatively    0%        
  assessed                                       

                                                 

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                

  1\. White (specify subgroup)                   

  \% At or Above Limited               100%      

  \% At or Above Basic                 100%      

  \% At or Above Proficient            100%      

  \% At or Above Accelerated           95%       

  \% At Advanced                       80%       

  Number of students tested            66        

  2\. African American (specify                  
  subgroup)                                      

  \% At or Above Limited               100%      

  \% At or Above Basic                 100%      

  \% At or Above Proficient            100%      

  \% At or Above Accelerated           100%      

  \% At Advanced                       33%       

  Number of students tested            N/C       

                                                 

  **STATE SCORES**                               

  \% At or Above Limited               100%      

  \% At or Above Basic                 90%       

  \% At or Above Proficient            78%       

  \% At or Above Accelerated           59%       

  \% At Advanced                       33%       
  ------------------------------------ --------- ---------------------------

**The table above reflects Ohio's assessment categories and
terminology.**

**N/C in the Part VII -- Assessment Results tables represents "not
calculated" due to fewer than 10 students in the subgroup. With fewer
than 10 students, the subgroup does not comprise sufficient numbers to
be part of the state's assessment report.**

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST**

Subject **Reading** Grade **4** Test **Ohio Proficiency Test**

Edition/Publication Year **2004** Publisher **Ohio Department of
Education**

  ----------------------------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----------
                                      2003-04   2002-03   2001-02   2000-01   1999-2000

  Testing month                       March     March     March     March     March

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                           

  \% At or Above Below Basic          100%      99%       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                100%      99%       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient           93%       93%       93%       82%       88%

  \% At Advanced                      38%       20%       22%       11%       23%

  Number of students tested           66        89        83        N/A       N/A

  Percent of total students tested    100%      100%      100%      N/A       N/A

  Number of students alternatively    0         0         0         N/A       N/A
  assessed                                                                    

  Percent of students alternatively   0%        0%        0%        N/A       N/A
  assessed                                                                    

                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                             

  1\. White (specify subgroup)                                                

  \% At or Above Below Basic          100%      N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                100%      N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient           91%       99%       93%       84%       N/A

  \% At Advanced                      36%       N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A

  Number of students tested           56        66        76%       N/A       N/A

  2\. African American (specify                                               
  subgroup)                                                                   

  \% At or Above Below Basic          100%      N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                100%      N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient           100%      60%       80%       N/A       N/A

  \% At Advanced                      0%        N/A       N/A       N/A       N/A

  Number of students tested           N/C       10        N/C       N/A       N/A

                                                                              

  **STATE SCORES**                                                            

  \% At or Above Below Basic          100%      100%      N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                92%       91%       N/A       N/A       N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient           71%       66%       68%       56%       58%

  \% At Advanced                      15%       9%        7%        7%        6%
  ----------------------------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----------

**The table above reflects Ohio's assessment categories and
terminology.**

**N/C in the Part VII -- Assessment Results tables represents "not
calculated" due to fewer than 10 students in the subgroup. With fewer
than 10 students, the subgroup does not comprise sufficient numbers to
be part of the state's assessment report.**

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST**

Subject **Mathematics** Grade **4** Test **Ohio Proficiency Test**

Edition/Publication Year **2004** Publisher **Ohio Department of
Education**

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

  Testing month                        March       March       March       March       March

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                    

  \% At or Above Below Basic           100%        100%        N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                 100%        93%         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient            97%         88%         95%         95%         77%

  \% At Advanced                       74%         42%         34%         43%         21%

  Number of students tested            66          89          83          N/A         N/A

  Percent of total students tested     100%        100%        100%        N/A         N/A

  Number of students alternatively     0           0           0           N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    0%          0%          0%          N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. White (specify subgroup)                                                         

  \% At or Above Below Basic           100%        N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                 100%        N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient            96%         92%         94%         96%         N/A

  \% At Advanced                       73%         N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  Number of students tested            56          66          75          N/A         N/A

  2\. African American (specify                                                        
  subgroup)                                                                            

  \% At or Above Below Basic           100%        N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                 100%        N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient            100%        50%         80%         N/A         N/A

  \% At Advanced                       0%          N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A

  Number of students tested            N/C         10          N/C         N/A         N/A

                                                                                       

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Below Basic           100%        100%        N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Basic                 77%         70%         N/A         N/A         N/A

  \% At or Above Proficient            66%         59%         63%         59%         49%

  \% At Advanced                       26%         15%         17%         16%         11%
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**The table above reflects Ohio's assessment categories and
terminology.**

**N/C in the Part VII -- Assessment Results tables represents "not
calculated" due to fewer than 10 students in the subgroup. With fewer
than 10 students, the subgroup does not comprise sufficient numbers to
be part of the state's assessment report.**