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

*U.S. Department of Education*

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

**Name of Principal** [Ms. Patricia Hunter]{.underline}

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

**Official School Name** [Maple Elementary School]{.underline}

*(As it should appear in the official records)*

**School Mailing Address** [4925 Corson Avenue
South]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

[Seattle\_]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[WA]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[98108-1834]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)**

**County**
[King]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
**State School Code Number\*** [17001 2353]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Telephone** [(206) 252-8310]{.underline} **Fax** [(206)
252-8311]{.underline}

**Website/URL**
<http://www.seattleschools.org/area/main/ShowSchool?sid=252>

**E-mail** <phunter@seattleschools.org>

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. Raj Manhas]{.underline}

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

**District Name** [Seattle]{.underline} Tel. [(206)
252-0000]{.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** [Ms. Brita Butler-Wall]{.underline}

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

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

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

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: \_[66]{.underline}\_\_ Elementary
schools

\_[11]{.underline}\_\_ Middle schools

\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_ Junior high schools

\_[12]{.underline}\_\_ High schools

\_[15]{.underline}\_\_ Other

\_[104]{.underline}\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\_\_\_\$,9342]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\_\_\_\$7,658\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. [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 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**       37        38                     **75**       **8**       \--       \--         \--

  **1**       36        43                     **79**       **9**       \--       \--         \--

  **2**       38        35                     **73**       **10**      \--       \--         \--

  **3**       36        33                     **69**       **11**      \--       \--         \--

  **4**       27        36                     **63**       **12**      \--       \--         \--

  **5**       40        36                     **76**       **Other**   \--       \--         \--

  **6**       \--       \--                    \--                                            

                                    **TOTAL                                                   **435**
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [7]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [10]{.underline} % Black or African American

[15]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

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

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
\_\_[11\_]{.underline}\_\_\_%

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      23
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

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

  **(3)**                   Total of all transferred    48
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 428
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .11
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           11
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school:
\_[38]{.underline}\_\_\_\_%

\_[161\_]{.underline}\_\_Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: \_\_[16\_]{.underline}\_\_\_

Specify languages: Cantonese, Chinese, Mandarin, Tagalog, Ilokano,
Spanish, Samoan, Arabic, Panjabi, Vietnamese, Toishanese, Cambodian,
Laotian, Amharic, Oromo, Somalian

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals:
\_\_\_[63]{.underline}\_\_\_%

Total number students who qualify: \_\_[268]{.underline}\_\_\_

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

10\. Students receiving special education services: \_\_\_\_7\_\_\_%

\_\_\_[29]{.underline}\_\_\_Total Number of Students Served

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

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

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_[3]{.underline}\_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_[15]{.underline}\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_[5]{.underline}\_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) \_\_[\_]{.underline}\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_\_[16]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[4\_]{.underline}\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_[9\_]{.underline}\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_
>
> Total number\* \_\_\_[40]{.underline}\_\_\_
> \_\_\_[12]{.underline}\_\_\_
>
> *\*Total does not include our Seattle University work study students.*

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers:
\_\_[25:1\_]{.underline}\_\_

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

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

  **Daily student           95%             95%             95%             95%             95%
  attendance**                                                                              

  **Daily teacher           91%             92%             93%             94%             96%
  attendance**                                                                              

  **Teacher turnover rate** 7%              13%             12%             3%              18%

  **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**

Maple Elementary School watches Seattle at work every day. From our
school's front door on the west side of Seattle's Beacon Hill, we can
see the vast Boeing complex sprawling on the flats below; hear freight
trains rumbling between container terminals on the waterfront; and look
up at planes slowing overhead as they prepare to land at nearby Boeing
Field.

Seattle grew as a gateway to the world. And Maple Elementary, which
looks out every day on the tangible examples of this gateway at work, is
a gateway itself, welcoming students whose families hail from all over
the world. Nearly 40% of our 428 students arrive at the school with
limited English; they speak more than 17 languages at home; and they
celebrate a multitude of different cultures every day.

At many schools, this much cultural and linguistic diversity could pose
a real challenge. But at Maple Elementary, students' diversity is our
school's greatest strength, much as Seattle's willingness to embrace the
world has been its strength throughout its history. A commitment to the
contributions of many cultures and many places is reflected in
everything that happens at our school. It is reflected in the clocks in
our front hall, which show the time in Seattle and in Hong Kong, in
Seoul and in London, to remind students of the lives other people -- and
maybe even their families -- are living in other places. It is reflected
in our creed: "I know that our country was built by people of all races,
and I know that people of all races keep our country great." And it is
reflected in our mission, which commits that "every student will attain
his or her highest potential and be empowered to become a life-long
learner."

Motivated Achievers Perform, Learn and Excel, begins our school's
vision; and it goes on to commit that "the Maple School community of
parents, staff, volunteers, and students is responsible for providing
each student with the opportunity to have a positive and meaningful
education in a pluralistic learning environment." *Each* student can
thrive at Maple Elementary; each student with his or her individual
skills, experiences, and needs. And that is the secret to our school's
success: a commitment to the needs of each child in a way that is built
on Seattle's globe-spanning past and responds to the challenges of its
future.

Because Maple's students arrive at the school with such different skill
levels, the faculty and staff don't attempt a one-size-fits-all
approach; instead, we tailor our instruction to each student's needs. We
assess each student's performance regularly, compare what we know about
students and their progress, and then act on what we learn. We created
an intervention team to help teachers get extra resources for students
who are struggling, and we schedule instructional aides' time so that
students who need the most help get it quickly. We raised money for a
computer lab and trained our staff in computing to help our students
bridge the digital divide. We've made writing the foundation of our
curriculum, and have adopted a variety of innovative approaches to help
students learn to read, to comprehend, and then to write fluently. We've
made Maple Elementary an inquiry-based school, challenging students to
learn by exploring the world around them and then communicating what
they learn. Our data told us that we were not meeting the needs of our
Latino students so we placed fluent Spanish-speaking teachers in one
kindergarten and one first grade class and provided instruction in
English and Spanish to honor their culture, communicate effectively with
parents, and offer them early language support. And we've involved
parents in everything we do, from preparing for assessment exams to
rebuilding our playground to celebrating our successes.

It's only natural in Seattle that this harbor city on the edge of the
Pacific Rim should have succeeded by welcoming the world. And it's only
natural at Maple Elementary, where we welcome students every day from
cultures around the world, that we should succeed in just the same way:
by embracing their differences and their skills, and by creating a place
where each child can feel at home.

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

**1. Assessment Results (in reading and mathematics):**

In spring 2005, 87% of Maple Elementary's 4^th^ grade students met
Washington State standards in the reading portion of the Washington
Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) exam; 79% met the standard in
mathematics; and 73% met the standard in writing.

These results were significantly higher than the average for either the
Seattle Public Schools or Washington State (see table below), placing
Maple Elementary 13^th^ in rank out of Seattle's 66 elementary schools,
and well within the score ranges of Washington State's most elite
suburban schools. Scores this high would not be surprising, in fact, if
Maple was located in the suburbs and drew a homogeneous group of
upper-middle class students. But our school is located in the heart of
Seattle, 38% of our students qualify for bilingual education, and 63%
qualify for free or reduced-price lunches.

+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **Washington    |                 |                 |                 |
| Assessment of   |                 |                 |                 |
| Student         |                 |                 |                 |
| Learning**      |                 |                 |                 |
|                 |                 |                 |                 |
| **Fourth Grade  |                 |                 |                 |
| Students        |                 |                 |                 |
| Meeting         |                 |                 |                 |
| Standard,       |                 |                 |                 |
| Spring 2005**   |                 |                 |                 |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **Test Group**  | **Reading**     | **Mathematics** | **Writing**     |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Washington      | 79%             | 61%             | 58%             |
| State           |                 |                 |                 |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| Seattle Public  | 77%             | 59%             | 58%             |
| Schools         |                 |                 |                 |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **Maple         | **87%**         | **79%**         | **73%**         |
| Elementary**    |                 |                 |                 |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+

Our test scores were not always this high. In spring 2000, our students'
test scores were more consistent with what was expected for a poor,
inner-city school: only 64% met the standard in reading, 35% in math,
and 51% in writing. That fall, we began a School Transformation process
that focused on an analysis of what we needed to do to help our students
improve. Our initial analysis led us to strengthen our school's math
instruction, concentrating our strategies on the WASL-related skills of
understanding the questions and using National Urban Alliance (NUA)
writing strategies to explain the answers. Reading and writing were
particularly important skills for our students, as so many of them
arrived at the school with only a limited command of English.

By spring 2001, our school's math average had improved by 21 percentage
points. We continued to work, focusing next on our low writing scores
and developing strategies to help students write more fluently. By
spring 2002, our scores had climbed again: to 63% for both writing and
math.

Even as we witnessed significant gains in writing and math, we remained
concerned that our reading scores had remained stagnant, particularly
for our Latino students, who have consistently lagged about 10 points
behind their peers. Our data showed that while students did well in
comprehending literal text, they were less successful in vocabulary
development and comprehending literature-based text. We began the
computerized Read Naturally Program, which works on both reading fluency
and comprehension. We also scheduled both instructional aides and tutors
to practice fluency and retelling with students in first and second
grades and intensified our reading comprehension efforts. Since then,
reading scores have increased by 15 points.

The State WASL is only one of our assessment measures. We continue to
monitor it, even as we use teachers' judgment and classroom-based
assessments to ensure that each student's needs are being met, and to
identify trends and skills that will help our students continue to
thrive.

**2. Using Assessment Results:**

Maple Elementary's high test scores did not happen by accident. Rather,
they were the result of five years of intensive work by our school's
faculty and staff to understand, first, what assessment results can tell
us about how our students are learning; and second, how we can do a
better job to help them learn.

Each spring, before leaving school for the summer, the Maple staff meets
to preview the needs of rising students and to develop "student learning
plans" as needed. Each student's plan is based on assessment data,
written work, and input from classroom teachers and support staff. When
school starts in September, the plan is reviewed by the classroom
teacher, modified as necessary, presented to the Student Intervention
Team (SIT, which consists of the school's principal, a special-education
teacher, classroom teacher, and counselor), and then presented to the
student and parents (with translators, if necessary), to ensure that
struggling students get the extra resources they need to succeed.
Preparing student learning plans helps our teachers develop an in-depth
understanding of the skills, needs and learning style of each student,
even before the school year starts. Teachers then build on this
information with their observations in the classroom, adjusting their
learning plans as needed to match students' successes and setbacks.

Writing is a key focus for all students, and begins in kindergarten. We
use a variety of strategies to help students strengthen their writing
skills across all content areas so that they can clearly articulate
their thinking whether they are responding to a reading question or
solving problems in math or science on the assessment exams.

Cooperation and communication among faculty and staff are a key part of
our use of assessment data. Our school's open classroom floor plan
facilitates frequent meetings among grade level teachers, and we have
organized our schedule to allow for regular "vertical" and "horizontal"
team time. This helps us focus on students' needs and analyze successful
instructional strategies. We believe that "many heads on their worst day
are always better than one head on its best day." We are a data-driven
school. We do not measure our success by how much we teach our students.
Rather, we measure it by how well they learn, and by how well they can
articulate what they've learned.

**3. Communicating Assessment Results:**

As any visitor to our school will quickly notice, we are very proud of
our assessment results! We have our WASL test scores posted on large
sheets of paper right inside the school's front door, where students and
teachers can see them every day. Making our test scores a part of our
daily life at Maple helps us focus on our goal: to help every student
continue to improve, every year.

We also have several more formal mechanisms for communicating assessment
results. As noted above, teachers receive each student's results before
the start of the school year, and use the information to plan an
instructional strategy for each child. We also mail test results home to
each family early in the school year, and supplement that communication
with a workshop at the school for our parents and families, to ensure
that parents understand how we are doing and what we are striving to
achieve.

We also communicate our assessment results to the larger community
through the Seattle Public Schools' regular communications and school
rankings, our school and district websites, our local news media, and
our state Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.

In addition, because of our published success over the last several
years, our faculty and staff have been pleased to have the opportunity
to share our successes -- and our strategies -- with faculty from other
schools and districts.

**4. Sharing Success:**

We've worked hard to help Maple Elementary students succeed, and we're
very proud of the results. Over the last several years we've developed a
variety of strategies and programs particularly suited to help English
Language Learners improve their reading fluency, reading comprehension,
and writing, and we're delighted to share what we've learned with other
teachers.

We share our success in several ways. Within the Seattle Public Schools,
we serve as a model for other diverse inner city schools by hosting
teacher groups and presenting at teacher training sessions. Several of
our teachers are being trained as National Urban Alliance (NUA) and
Guided Language Acquisition Design (GLAD) trainers so that they can
provide extra support to their peers in the teaching methods we use.
We're also happy to help schools in other districts, and have hosted a
number of teacher delegations from around the state, who have toured
Maple and met with our teachers and principal to share strategies and
resources.

We've also written about our success and the lessons we've learned.
Principal Patricia Hunter has published an article on Maple's
instructional strategies in *New Horizons for Learning*, presented data
and strategies to the Seattle School Board, and plans to continue to
reply to requests on Maple's success from interested educators around
the country.

We believe that our faculty and staff are the key to our success, and
they are also key to sharing our success. They have been most generous
with their time and will continue to share their passion for education
with other teachers around the city, state and country.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

**1. Curriculum:**

Writing is the foundation of Maple's curriculum. Writing is a crucial
skill for all students, of course, but it is particularly important at
our school with its many English Language Learners. As we help them
learn to read English and to comprehend what they are reading, we also
help them learn to write fluently so that they can express their
thoughts on any subject. (Or, to quote Gushneet, a fourth grade student,
whose recent essay argued for a laptop on every desk, "If you disagree,
please read this again!")

Teaching students to write well is a time-consuming activity and that is
especially the case at Maple. But our faculty and staff see the benefits
of students' writing skills every day, and attribute our students'
marked improvement in assessment scores largely to their ability to
write clearly.

Our teachers have adopted a variety of innovative strategies to help
students improve their reading and writing skills, and have integrated
those strategies into every aspect of our curriculum. We use the Guided
Language Acquisition Design (GLAD) model to help our multilingual
students start their journey into the English language. GLAD integrates
listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills into all subject areas,
allowing students to learn language skills in a way that is relevant and
rewarding. In addition, all Maple staff also use strategies taught by
the National Urban Alliance's (NUA) Seattle Literacy Initiative. These
methods begin with our Kindergartners, a majority of whom are English
Language Learners. They are taught to write in their own words, using
best-guess spelling. This journal writing in language, science and math
continues through fifth grade.

Reading is the other key underpinning of Maple Elementary's curriculum.
Students can't learn to write well -- and can't succeed in other
subjects -- until they can read well and understand what they've read.
Teaching reading at Maple is complicated by the fact that so many of our
students don't speak English at home. As a result, we use strategies to
help students decode words, build their vocabulary, increase their
reading fluency, and improve their reading comprehension. We integrate
reading skills into every subject, and constantly stress the connection
between reading and writing, between thinking and saying.

Mathematics and Science instruction have both benefited tremendously
from our implementation of the National Science Foundation's (NSF)
inquiry-based learning method. This method of learning is student-driven
and requires students to read and write extensively, recording their
analytical observations and problem-solving strategies in math and
science journals. By focusing so much of our substantive curriculum on
problem-solving, we help our students become skilled at organizing and
analyzing information, and using graphic organizers across the content
areas. These "backbone" skills help them organize their thoughts in
class and on assessment exams.

Art and music instruction are key to help students learn to understand
patterns, observe the world around them, and express their creativity.
Our art and music instruction incorporates concepts from many different
cultures to build on our students' diverse backgrounds and help them
understand the importance of math, reading and writing in the fine arts.

Home-School Connections are often not thought of as part of a school's
curriculum, but they are very important at Maple Elementary. We involve
all our families in reading, writing, and helping their students
achieve; and we reach out to our students' multicultural and
multilingual parents to make them a valued part of our community. Our
back-to-school multi-ethnic dinner is a delicious event that is enjoyed
by all!

**2. Reading (Elementary Schools):**

Maple's reading program uses an inquiry-based instruction method
balanced between fiction and non-fiction. Reading is integrated across
all subject areas, to help students with the key skills of vocabulary
development and text comprehension. We pay particular attention to
reading at Maple because so many of our students are learning English as
a Second Language, and are hampered in all subject areas if they can't
learn to read well.

Because of our students' diversity, we've adopted a variety of
approaches to help students learn to read and then to write. We use a
networked Read Naturally program on our computers, which allows students
to hear selections read aloud to them while they follow along. We're
part of the National Urban Alliance's Seattle Literacy Initiative, which
has helped our teachers translate the standards-based learning system
into instructional strategies, with a focus on accelerating students'
acquisition of reading, writing, and communications skills. And teachers
in every subject and at every grade guide students to speak their
thoughts first, then write them down, and then read them aloud, so that
reading and writing skills develop organically. Students begin keeping
journals in Kindergarten, and soon learn to write out their thoughts in
science, math, and social studies as well.

Because of the cultural diversity of our school community -- our
families speak languages from Amharic to Toishanese -- we work hard to
incorporate students' cultures and families in the reading process as
well. We've developed a culturally relevant curriculum that includes
guided reading groups beginning in Kindergarten, and we've implemented a
School-Home reading connection that involves parents in their students'
reading success.

**3. Mathematics, Science, Art, Etc. (select one subject area):**

Mathematics is a key part of our curriculum at Maple, and here, too,
we've adopted a variety of strategies tailored to our diverse students'
individual needs. Because our state assessment exam, the WASL, requires
students to explain their reasoning on math problems rather than simply
providing an answer, we realized quickly that if students couldn't read
or write well, they couldn't succeed at math. As a result, we've
integrated our reading and writing strategies into our math curriculum:
students keep math journals, engage in daily WASL word problem practice,
and become accustomed to explaining their reasoning on math challenges
either verbally or in writing.

Maple is an inquiry-based school, and all our teachers have received
training in the National Science Foundation's inquiry-based method of
teaching. We use the TERC K-5 math curriculum, which focuses on probing,
discussing, and understanding mathematical relationships and problems.
Although students do need to learn their "math facts" -- and our P.E.
teacher provides ongoing, student-centered math drills -- we want to
make sure that their knowledge of mathematics is much more than merely
rote memorization, and the inquiry-based approach helps us do that.

Because students learn in different ways, we've set up math centers in
each of our classroom areas. Each math center is equipped with
grade-appropriate manipulatives and inquiry-based activities, allowing
students to experiment with what they've been learning. Our computer
teacher has set up an assessment program that gives students the
opportunity to test their math skills and provides teachers with
immediate feedback on how well students are understanding new skills in
each of the math strands.

**4. Instructional Methods:**

Because our student body is so diverse and because each child learns in
a different way, we use a variety of instructional methods at Maple
Elementary. All of our instruction, however, is united by our use of the
National Science Foundation's inquiry-based learning approach, which
helps students achieve by exploring the world around them and then
explaining what they learn. All of our teachers have been trained in
inquiry-based instructional methods, and have integrated an
inquiry-based approach into every subject they teach.

We also use a variety of language acquisition, reading, and writing
approaches specifically targeted at students who are learning English as
a Second Language. These methods include the Guided Language Acquisition
Design (GLAD) model for language acquisition and vocabulary development;
the Read Naturally program for reading fluency, decoding, and
comprehension; the National Urban Alliance's Seattle Literacy Initiative
to accelerate reading, writing, and communications skills; and,
teacher-created math lessons, TERC, Math Their Way, and Addison Wesley
mathematics tools.

We use computers as an integral part of the curriculum, both to provide
an additional way for students to practice their skills and also to help
them bridge the digital divide, since a majority of them are low income
and do not have access to a computer at home. We use culturally relevant
curriculum materials to reflect the fact that our students come from a
variety of different countries and cultures and speak over 17 languages
at home. And we work hard to include students' parents and families in
everything we do at the school -- from our School-Home reading
connection to our multicultural, multilingual PTSA -- with support from
our multilingual teachers and instructional assistants to help parents
who may be new to America and our educational system help their children
succeed at school.

**5. Professional Development:**

Maple's faculty and staff are the key to our success. But they can't
help students succeed without support, and we have provided support in
the form of targeted professional development as well as the conscious
organization of each school day to allow teachers to work with and learn
from each other as they focus on helping our students succeed.

Communication among teachers has been particularly important to their
growth as professionals and to the achievement gains we've witnessed in
our students. As we developed our Transformation Plan during the early
2000s, we realized that more time for communication between teachers was
imperative in order to accelerate student achievement. We then
restructured our school day to provide regular time for both horizontal
(across each grade level) and vertical (from one grade level to the
next) team meetings. Our school's open concept architecture facilitates
this type of teamwork, and we are committed to continuing it as we feel
it is vital to our students' success.

We have also provided teachers with opportunities to enhance their
skills and to ensure that teachers throughout Maple share the same
toolbox of instructional approaches. All Maple teachers have been
trained in the National Science Foundation's inquiry-based learning
method, and all teachers have now integrated inquiry-based learning into
their science, math, reading, and other subject-area classes. All
teachers have been trained in the effective use of computers in the
classroom to help our mostly low-income students bridge the digital
divide. And our teachers continue to work -- both with their peers
within the school and at schools around the District -- to learn about
the latest approaches in teaching and in assessment and to learn to
understand and use the wealth of data now available to us through our
state's assessment program.

**PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS:**

**Subject:** Reading **Grade:** 4

**Test:** Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (OSPI)

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Reading WASL -- 4^th^ Grade**      | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | April | A    | April | April |
|                                      |       | pril |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **% At or Above Meets State          | **    | **7  | **    | **    |
| Standards**                          | 87%** | 8%** | 59%** | 62%** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At Exceeds State Standards        | 40%   | 37%  | 14.7% | 16%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 77    | 74   | 70    | 73    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 99%   | 100% | 93%   | 97%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 96%   | 80%  | 65%   | 66%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 49    | 49   | 49    | 47    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 67%   | 69%  | N/A   | 50%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 12    | 13   | \< 10 | 10    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 84%   | 73%  | 56%   | 50%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 50    | 44   | 55    | 44    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 81%   | 37%  | 39%   | 38%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 27    | 19   | 23    | 21    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+

**Subject:** Writing **Grade:** 4

**Test:** Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (OSPI)

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Writing WASL -- 4^th^ Grade**      | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | April | A    | April | April |
|                                      |       | pril |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **% At or Above Meets State          | **    | **7  | **    | **    |
| Standards**                          | 73%** | 0%** | 68%** | 63%** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At Exceeds State Standards        | 31%   | 20%  | N/A\* | N/A\* |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 76    | 74   | 69    | 73    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 97%   | 100% | 92%   | 97%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 78%   | 78%  | 78%   | 70%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 49    | 49   | 49    | 47    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 58%   | 54%  | N/A   | 40%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 12    | 13   | \< 10 | 10    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 64%   | 64%  | 64%   | 55%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 50    | 44   | 55    | 44    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 56%   | 37%  | 57%   | 38%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 27    | 19   | 23    | 21    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+

> *\*Prior to Spring 2004, the Writing WASL had only two scores: "meets
> standard" and "does not meet standard."*

**Subject:** Mathematics **Grade:** 4

**Test:** Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (OSPI)

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Mathematics WASL -- 4^th^ Grade**  | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | April | A    | April | April |
|                                      |       | pril |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **% At or Above Meets State          | **    | **7  | **    | **    |
| Standards**                          | 79%** | 8%** | 53%** | 63%** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At Exceeds State Standards        | 60%   | 50%  | 35%   | 38%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 78    | 74   | 70    | 73    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 100%  | 100% | 93%   | 97%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 88%   | 84%  | 61%   | 74%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 50    | 49   | 49    | 47    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 67%   | 54%  | N/A   | 30%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 12    | 13   | \< 10 | 10    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 73%   | 75%  | 47%   | 50%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 51    | 44   | 55    | 44    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 78%   | 26%  | 26%   | 38%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 27    | 19   | 23    | 21    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+

**Subject:** Reading **Grade:** 2 (Spring)

**Test:** Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (OSPI)

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Reading DRA -- 2^nd^ Grade**       | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | May   | May  | May   | May   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **% At or Above Meets State          | **    | **9  | **    | **    |
| Standards**                          | 90%** | 2%** | 91%** | 86%** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 60    | 59   | 76    | 72    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 98%   | 95%  | 100%  | 100%  |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 93%   | 97%  | 94%   | 90%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 43    | 37   | 50    | 50    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | N/A   | 89%  | 71%   | 69%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | \< 10 | 9    | 14    | 13    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 84%   | 85%  | 86%   | 77%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 37    | 34   | 50    | 35    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 92%   | 88%  | 88%   | 63%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 26    | 25   | 40    | 19    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+

**Subject:** Reading **Grade:** 2 (Fall)

**Test:** Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (OSPI)

+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **    | **2   | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 2005- | 004-2 | 003-2 | 002-2 |
| **Reading DRA -- 2^nd^ Grade**       | 2006\ | 005** | 004** | 003** |
|                                      | *\*** |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | Oc    | Oc    | Oc    | Oc    |
|                                      | tober | tober | tober | tober |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **% At or Above Meets State          | **    | **    | **    | **    |
| Standards**                          | 85%** | 80%** | 77%** | 63%** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 67    | 59    | 61    | 68    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 98%   | 100%  | 100%  | 100%  |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%    | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 93%   | 86%   | 85%   | 67%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 46    | 42    | 39    | 49    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 50%   | N/A   | 70%   | 36%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 12    | \< 10 | 10    | 14    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |       |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 79%   | 83%   | 71%   | 53%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 38    | 36    | 34    | 49    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 81%   | 80%   | 67%   | 48%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 32    | 25    | 24    | 40    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

> *\*\*The Developmental Reading Assessment is administered to all 2^nd^
> grade students both in the fall and then the following spring. Both
> sets of scores are provided here, though please note that this report
> includes the first testing (Fall 2005) for the 2005-2006 school year.*

**Subject:** Reading **Grade:** 1 (Spring)

**Test:** Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public
Instruction (OSPI)

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Reading DRA -- 1^st^ Grade**       | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | May   | May  | May   | May   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **% At or Above Meets State          | **    | **7  | **    | **    |
| Standards**                          | 76%** | 6%** | 80%** | 57%** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 68    | 67   | 59    | 81    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 98%   | 94%  | 100%  | 100%  |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 91%   | 79%  | 90%   | 61%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 43    | 48   | 39    | 49    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 37%   | N/A  | N/A   | 38%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 16    | \<   | \< 10 | 16    |
|                                      |       | 10   |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 70%   | 74%  | 69%   | 49%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 40    | 43   | 35    | 55    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Meets State Standards | 76%   | 80%  | 78%   | 48%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 38    | 35   | 32    | 42    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+

**ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS:**

**Subject:** Reading **Grade:** 3 (Spring)

**Test:** Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** ITBS

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

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Reading ITBS -- 3^rd^ Grade**      | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | March | M    | March | March |
|                                      |       | arch |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **Total Score**                      | *     | **   | *     | *     |
|                                      | *47** | 49** | *48** | *45** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 55    | 71   | 75    | 72    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 96%   | 100% | 96%   | 96%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 49    | 50   | 48    | 45    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 37    | 47   | 53    | 52    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 41    | 44   | 42    | N/A   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 9     | 15   | 13    | \< 10 |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 43    | 46   | 41    | 43    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 32    | 52   | 43    | 51    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 38    | 44   | 27    | 33    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 12    | 23   | 16    | 19    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| NATIONAL MEAN SCORE                  | 48    | 51   | 48    | 42    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION          | 16.2  | 16.8 | 18.2  | 16.8  |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+

**Subject:** Mathematics **Grade:** 3 (Spring)

**Test:** Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS)

**Edition/Publication Year:** 2005

**Publisher:** ITBS

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

+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **MAPLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**          | **2   | *    | **2   | **2   |
|                                      | 004-2 | *200 | 002-2 | 001-2 |
| **Mathematics ITBS -- 3^rd^ Grade**  | 005** | 3-20 | 003** | 002** |
|                                      |       | 04** |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Testing month                        | March | M    | March | March |
|                                      |       | arch |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**                    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **Total Score**                      | *     | **   | *     | *     |
|                                      | *61** | 59** | *61** | *59** |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 55    | 71   | 75    | 72    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students tested     | 96%   | 100% | 96%   | 96%   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students alternatively     | 0     | 0    | 0     | 0     |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students alternatively    | 0%    | 0%   | 0%    | 0%    |
| assessed                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**                  |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **1. Asian**                         |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 68    | 62   | 64    | 63    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 37    | 47   | 53    | 52    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **2. Latino**                        |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 46    | 50   | 52    | N/A   |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 9     | 15   | 13    | \< 10 |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **3. Low income (Free/ reduced       |       |      |       |       |
| lunch)**                             |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 58    | 52   | 55    | 57    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 32    | 52   | 43    | 51    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| **4. Bilingual (In ESL program)**    |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Total score                          | 51    | 54   | 43    | 52    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested            | 12    | 23   | 16    | 19    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
|                                      |       |      |       |       |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| NATIONAL MEAN SCORE                  | 71    | 60   | 70    | 67    |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+
| NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION          | 19.5  | 16.4 | 17.6  | 17.0  |
+--------------------------------------+-------+------+-------+-------+