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

*U.S. Department of Education*

Type of School: \_[X]{.underline}\_ Elementary \_\_ Middle \_\_ High
\_\_ K-12

Name of Principal: [Dr. Precious Elaine Broadnax]{.underline}

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

Official School Name: [Abrams Elementary School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address: [600 Chiles Ave.]{.underline}

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

[Fort Carson, Colorado 80913-5019]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County: [El Paso County]{.underline} School Code
Number\*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_1334\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Telephone [(719) 382-1490]{.underline} Fax [: (719)
382-8572]{.underline}

Website/URL [http://www.ffc8.org/abrams/]{.underline} E-mail
[ebroadnax@ffc8.org]{.underline}

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

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

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Mr. Dwight Jones]{.underline}

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

District Name[: El Paso County School District Number Eight]{.underline}
Tel. [( 719 )382-1300]{.underline}

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

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson: Mr. Rod Ermel

(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**

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: \_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_
Elementary schools

\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_ Middle schools

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

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_ High schools

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_ Other (Alternative High School)

\_[10]{.underline}\_\_\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$ 5788.59]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$5519.22]{.underline}

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

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

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

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

[NA]{.underline} If fewer than three years, how long was the previous
principal at this school?

5\. Number of students as of October 1 (2004-05) 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**    16        12                     **28**       **7**       NA        NA          NA

  **K**       57        65                     **122**      **8**       NA        NA          NA

  **1**       55        59                     **114**      **9**       NA        NA          NA

  **2**       62        46                     **108**      **10**      NA        NA          NA

  **3**       54        52                     **106**      **11**      NA        NA          NA

  **4**       41        35                     **76**       **12**      NA        NA          NA

  **5**       37        31                     **68**       **Other**   NA        NA          NA

  **6**       NA        NA                     NA                       NA        NA          NA

                                    **TOTAL                                                   622
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [50%]{.underline} White

the students in the school: [21%]{.underline} Black or African American

[20%]{.underline} Hispanic or Latino

[05%]{.underline} Asian/Pacific Islander

[04%]{.underline} American Indian/Alaskan Native

100% Total

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
\_\_\_[16]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_%

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      40
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      55
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 95
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 604
                            the school as of October 1  
                            (2003-04)                   

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided 0.16
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           16%
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [4%]{.underline}

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

Number of languages represented: [7]{.underline}

Specify languages: [German, Khmer, Korean, Lakota, Samoan, Spanish,
Thai]{.underline}

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [54%]{.underline}

Total number students who qualify: [256]{.underline}

10\. Students receiving special education services: [12.86%]{.underline}

[80]{.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.

\_[2]{.underline} \_Autism \_\_ [0]{.underline}\_\_ Orthopedic
Impairment

\_[0]{.underline}\_ Deafness \_\_[12]{.underline}\_\_Other Health
Impaired

\_[0]{.underline}\_ Deaf-Blindness \_\_[21]{.underline}\_\_Specific
Learning Disability

\_[1]{.underline}\_ Hearing Impairment \_\_[37]{.underline}\_\_Speech or
Language Impairment

\_[3]{.underline} \_Mental Retardation \_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_ Traumatic
Brain Injury

\_[4]{.underline} \_Multiple Disabilities \_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_ Visual
Impairment Including Blindness

\_[3]{.underline} \_Emotional Disturbance

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) \_\_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_\_[32]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_[11]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_\_[5]{.underline}\_\_\_
> \_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_[57]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
\_\_\_[19:1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

13\. Attendance Patterns

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

  Daily student attendance  93.8 %      94.7 %      96.5 %      95.07 %     95.56 %

  Daily teacher attendance  96.7 %      94.7 %      95.1 %      94.1 %      94.0 %

  Teacher turnover rate     24.0 %      28.0 %      31.0 %      19.0 %      19 %

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

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

**PART III -- SUMMARY** *Parents Off to War*

Abrams Elementary is not just your typical Title One public school. Even
with constant military transitions and extreme war conditions, Abrams
has managed to consistently increase achievement across the school and
to also diminish ethnicity and gender achievement disparities. This
little red school house is located on the Fort Carson Army Post at the
south end of Colorado Springs, Colorado. Since the vast majority of the
students and many of the staff are military dependents, enrollment is
very unstable and sometimes quite unpredictable. Even though the average
tenure of students is three years, recent events such as September 11
and the war in Iraq have caused drastic movements in families that are
sometimes unexpected. To make matters even more challenging, many of the
troops on Fort Carson lost their lives in Iraq. For these reasons,
families feel stresses that filter into the lives of the children at
school that affect emotional and academic performances. The mission of
the school then becomes not only a place to learn, but also a safe
stable haven in the times of trouble. Initially, the staff found it very
difficult to close gaps in achievement; teachers were frustrated, moral
was down and achievement declined on the Colorado State Assessment
Program (CSAP) as indicated in Figure A. After an unnerving three-year
decline in state scores from 1999 to 2002, and a change in school and
district administration, the staff embraced the No Child Left Behind
philosophy and began to teach Every Child Every Day with great focus and
intensity. The difference: All students were expected to learn the same
standards as quickly as possible without any excuses. During the 2002-03
school year, achievement began to drastically increase and stabilize for
all students, without achievement gaps for different ethnic and
socioeconomic groups.

Figure A: Abrams Historical CSAP Data of % Proficient/Advanced Students
1999-2004

  -------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- -------- --------
                       [1999]{.mark}   [2000]{.mark}   [2001]{.mark}   [2002]{.mark}   2003     2004

  3^rd^ Gr. Reading    [67]{.mark}     [77]{.mark}     [67]{.mark}     [57]{.mark}     77       78

  4^th^ Gr. Writing    [49]{.mark}     [41]{.mark}     [39]{.mark}     [47]{.mark}     56       63

  4^th^ Gr. Reading    [63]{.mark}     [60]{.mark}     [56]{.mark}     [58]{.mark}     58       74
  -------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- -------- --------

*A School in Crisis*

Under the new leadership of Dr. Precious Broadnax as principal and Mrs.
Sue Freeburg as assistant principal in 2001 changes began to take place.
The combination of scrutiny for declining scores, a new administration
and the September 11, 2001 tragedy increased the pressure on the Abrams
staff and the threat of reconstructing the school was imminent. The
support and leadership of district superintendents Dr. Dale Gasser and
Mr. Dwight Jones respectively, were crucial to the success of the
school. For months the staff endured daily long waits at the gates,
parking in distant lots far from the school and occasional searches at
the door. Once the alert was lowered, there was hope of normalcy but the
troops were soon called to war during testing cycles. Even so, student
achievement began a trend of improvement in 2002 in practically every
grade level on every assessment.

*Closing the Achievement Gap*

> In 2001, overall student achievement was well below state averages,
> but by 2004 the students were outperforming their counterparts
> throughout the state. Not only did overall student achievement
> improve, but significant gains were made in closing or eliminating the
> achievement gap. Performance for all subgroups of students was
> uniformly high and significantly above the performance for like groups
> in Colorado. This is the story of Abrams Elementary School.

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

1\. One of the most significant indicators of success for Abrams was
moving from a low to high rating on the 2002-03 Colorado School
Accountability Report (SAR). This state report rates the performance of
schools by the Colorado State Assessment Program (CSAP), which measures
the academic performance of students \[
[www.state.co.us/schools](http://www.state.co.us/schools)[\].]{.underline}
Abrams Elementary was rated Average on the SAR on 2002, but moved from
the low to high range in this category, earning a "Significant
Improvement" ranking in 2003 which was the highest in the school
district in 2003.

Other indicators were evident from the 2000-2004 CSAP data. CSAP student
performance levels are defined as "Unsatisfactory", "Partially
Proficient", "Proficient" and "Advanced". For the purposes of this
analysis, the following data is adjusted to match the United Stated
Department of Education NCLB Annual Yearly Progress criterion as
indicated by Figure C in the index.

*Third Grade Points of Interest in Tables 1 and 5*

-   The reading performance of third grade students has steadily
    increased since 2001 in all areas and subgroups including males,
    females, ethnicities and free/reduced lunch students. The "At or
    Above Proficient" scores increased from 57% to 78% and rose above
    state averages.

-   Gender: Females typically outscore males in reading, but at Abrams
    the third grade males and females have been closely aligned in
    "Above Basic" and "Proficient" scores for four years (2000-2004).
    The males even surpassed the females in "Advanced" 2002-2004 scores
    and all were above the state averages. In writing the scores are
    impressively equal in many cases.

-   Ethnicity: Another surprising result in reading is that for four
    years (2000-2004) Blacks, Whites and Hispanics have acquired scores
    that are very similar with either the Hispanics or Blacks surpassing
    their White counterparts on occasion. For example: the 2000-01
    Hispanic scores were 100% "At or Above Basic" which was higher than
    the other two and in 2001-02 and 2003-04 the Blacks scored higher.
    These scores are also higher than the state averages. Some of the
    same trends are also evident in the writing scores.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Free/Reduced Lunch: Another pleasant surprise was that the
    Free/Reduced Lunch students are also beginning to score higher than
    the state averages. In reading 2002-03 the "At or Above Proficient"
    and in 2003-04 the "At or Above Basic" percentages were above the
    state averages.

*Fourth Grade Points of Interest in Tables 2 and 6*

-   Fourth grade students have also had consistent gains in reading and
    writing for the past three to four years. From 2000-04 the "At or
    Above Proficient" reading scores increased from 56% to 74%, which is
    18 percentage points. Writing increased from 27% to 74% over four
    years, which is a 46 percentage point increase.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Gender: Continuing the trend of third grade, the fourth grade boys
    are consistently matching or surpassing the girls in reading and
    writing in most areas, and again these scores are also surpassing
    the state averages. For example, in reading 2003-04 all "At or Above
    Basic" and "At or Above Proficient" scores are above the state and
    the males and females are equal; no gap.

-   Ethnicity Gaps: Again, the Hispanics and Blacks are higher or
    slightly different from Whites in reading 2002-04 and writing 2004
    in "At or Above Basic" and "Proficient" levels. Impressively
    "Advanced" Blacks exceed Whites in reading 2004 and Hispanics have
    been consistently 100% "At or Above Basic" for three years, 2001-04.
    What A Fantastic Achievement!!

-   Free/Reduced Lunch: In one area of 2002-02 and all areas of 2003-04
    the Free/Reduced Lunch students surpass the state averages in the
    percent "At or Above Basic".

*Fifth Grade Points of Interest in Tables3, 4 and 7*

-   Ethnicity and Gender Gaps: Some of the same trends are evident in
    the fifth grade data. In 2002-03 reading the "At or Above
    Proficient" scores of the Blacks were equal to their White
    counterparts. In 2003-04 the scores were within four points of each
    other. In math, the females have matched are passed the males for
    two years (2002-04) in the "At or Above Proficient" levels.

-   Free/Reduced Lunch: In 2003-04 reading, math and writing, the
    students scored above state (89%).

***2. Using Assessment Data to Improve School and Student Performance***

*Identifying Research Based Assessments*

Frequent formative assessments are a central element of the Abrams
teaching process because it is imperative that the progress of each
student is consistently monitored by the teachers and administration. To
achieve this, the following research and standards-based, reliable and
user friendly assessments were identified: Accelerated Readers STAR
electronic assessment, Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills
(DIBELS) and Tungsten Benchmark. Each of the assessments is unique in
its own way and provides instant access to the evaluative data. STAR is
an informal reading inventory that gives an approximate reading level,
DIBELS gives indicators of levels for the five parts of reading and
Benchmark indicates achievement of the various Colorado State standards.
Teachers can monitor progress monthly and closely identify the needs of
the students to adjust instruction.

*A Paradigm Shift*

The assessments are designed to monitor the success of the students and
not for punitive grades. The teachers have embraced the paradigm that
assessments drive instruction and indicate the needs of the students.
This means that when students are found to not be performing, the
teachers find avenues to improve or adjust instruction with best
research-based practices to help the student to improve.

*Alignment to Five Big Ideas*

Another vital aspect of the assessments is that they are all aligned to
the NCLB ideas of reading and the Colorado standards. Many of them also
model the state assessment format which allows the students to learn the
process during regular instruction. We monitor students for success and
not for just grades.

*Collecting Historical Data*

Finally, the data helps to develop longitudinal and historical data that
indicates school strengths and weaknesses. This data is collected by
individual students, groups of students, individual teachers and grade
levels. The administrators have immediate access to all electronic data
for monthly monitoring of student achievement. Administrators and
teachers consistently meet during common planning to discuss student
progress and to pool information to improve achievement.

***3. Communicating to the Public***

*Students*

The Abrams staff recognizes the importance of establishing and
maintaining open communication with all stakeholders of education. First
of all the importance of achievement is communicated daily to the
students by the statement of lesson objectives and their importance.
These objectives are written daily on the board for easy observation.
When students are able to understand the purpose of lessons, their
achievement improves. Teachers discuss results of assessments with
individual students and they work together to set goals and to help
students monitor their individual progress.

*Parents*

The effect is even greater when parents are also actively involved in
their education; therefore they are always invited to volunteer and
visit the school. Prior to the first day of school, parents are invited
to attend an Ice Cream Social, and an Open House a few weeks later, to
meet the staff. Primary orientations are held in the spring with free
"How To" books and "Get Ready" school supplies. Information nights are
held in the winter prior to assessments to help parents get involved in
the process. Daily notes on school purchased agendas, weekly progress
reports and electronic mail encourage parents to help their children
through classroom-based incentive programs. School state assessment
results are published for the parents and community via monthly school
newsletters and by district publication distribution and also on the
district and school website. There is also grade level information about
dates and times of various assessments. Parents also receive monthly
benchmark reports and informal reading inventories reports that are
reader friendly. They also offer explanations of the instructional
levels of their children and also suggestions for home involvement.
Quarterly school-wide parent/teacher conferences are conducted over a
three day period that includes evening and morning sessions to
accommodate the working parents.

*Community*

On a larger scale, Abrams and the Fountain-Fort Carson District have
conducted parent information nights that allow the parents opportunities
to learn about different teaching practices and school initiatives.
Also, the school district offers more in-depth community meetings that
involve establishing the visions, goals and accomplishments of the
district. Superintendent Dwight Jones and his staff develop strategic
district planning sessions in an open forum format that are inviting and
insightful. This information is formally disseminated throughout the
district via newspapers, district publications and the State
Accreditation Report. Other information is also disseminated throughout
the community by the involvement of the school administration and
counselor's participation in family forums, post committees, and
organization that are specific to the military dependents. Abrams works
very closely with the military educational liaisons by attending
meetings to share information.

***4. Sharing the Abrams Story***

The successes of the Abrams staff have opened several opportunities to
share with the district, community, state and even representatives from
other states. The administration and some of the staff are actively
engaged in public presentations that include samples of written
materials for resources. Dr. Broadnax serves on the Colorado Department
of Education Coalition to Close the Achievement Gap for the past two
years. She also shared her successes with the Black Leadership Forum,
the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the
Colorado Springs Urban League, the University of CO at Colorado Springs
and other various organizations in the community. She has been featured
and quoted in the *Denver Post*, *Rocky Mountain News*, the *Colorado
Springs Gazette and the Fountain Valley News*. The school was also
recognized personally by Governor Owens in his State of the State
Address 2005 for success in drastically raising achievement during
adverse war times.

Dr. Broadnax and Assistant Principal Freeburg have also presented to
other administrators at the district level and by the special request of
Mrs. Wilson, the wife of Commanding General Wilson of Fort Carson,
Colorado, and also presented at the National Military Child Coalition
Summit in August of 2004 in Colorado Springs. As one of only five
schools selected from the state, the teachers and Dr. Broadnax were
invited to present at the Colorado Department of Education Literacy
Summit. The PowerPoint presentation for this summit entitled *Beating
the Odds* can be accessed at [www.state.co.us/schools]{.underline} .
Because of the successes of the school, several of the staff members of
Abrams have been asked to present at the district and state as trainers
for multi-sensory, Step Up to Writing, Six Traits, Lindamood-Bell,
autism and DIBELS. Multi-sensory approaches involve the use of all five
senses to learn to read.

Future plans include locally publishing the results of current Abrams
action research and to add more staff to the list of trainers. The
Abrams staff enjoys sharing their story as well as the visits from
colleagues and friends.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

1\. ***Abrams Curriculum***

[Philosophy:]{.underline} The entire curriculum is based on the Colorado
State Standards for the various disciplines. All materials and resources
were selected according to how well they aligned to the specific
standards. Because there are no perfect matches, teachers supplement
when appropriate. Effectiveness of any curriculum is determined by the
quality of the teachers' instructional strategies. Therefore, the school
uses the same basic core curriculums to ensure a level of curricular
consistency across the K-5 grade levels. Best research-based practices
are consistently monitored by the administration through daily
observations and feedback to teachers. Grade levels plan and design
lessons together to maximize knowledge.

[Reading:]{.underline} The core basis of the Abrams reading curriculum
is centered around the Five Big Ideas of reading identified by the
National Reading Panel: vocabulary, comprehension, phonic awareness,
phonics, and fluency. With this in mind, only those resources that
supported the ideas were strategically selected. This included the Open
Court reading series as the basic foundation and a leveled-book reading
library with hundreds of titles in various fiction and non-fiction
genres. Open Court was chosen because the literature selections include
a wide variety of recent award winning excerpts that address many
ethnicities and also support strategies for the five big ideas of
reading.

[Math:]{.underline} Every Day Math was chosen as the school foundation
because it very effectively addresses the Colorado Math Standards from a
conceptual approach. Students are taught to understand the concepts of
math and to think through many problem solving techniques. These
concepts consistently spiral, or repeat, so that students are given many
chances to learn them. Basic facts and computation skills are emphasized
with games and graphic organizers.

[English/Writing:]{.underline} Staff recognized that students needed a
consistent approach to learning grammar. Abrams adopted the Houghton
Mifflin Language textbooks because of the strong emphasis on
organization, trait-writing as well as grammar. To more adequately
address the organization of writing, Step Up to Writing was implemented
across the school as an initiative. This technique is based on a
formulaic approach to writing that uses graphic organizers and color
codes to help students understand the basics of writing. Research-based
combination of trait and formulaic writing has proved to be effective
tools for the students at Abrams.

[Social Studies/Science:]{.underline} All grade levels use current
Science and Social Studies resources during literacy block as well as
other class times. The school initiative is to directly integrate these
subjects as much as possible and at least three times weekly. Academic
field trip experiences are required in these areas for every grade
level.

[Music, Physical Education, Computer Technology, Library:]{.underline}
All K-5 students are offered weekly classes in these areas. Students
sing, read music, and learn to play a variety of instruments.
Instruments were purchased to be loaned to students without a fee. Mr.
Stinson, the P.E. teacher, also conducts alternative courses for the
severely disabled and enrichment activities before and after school. In
the Running Club, one student was recognized in the Junior Olympic
Competition. A state of the art computer lab includes 30 computers and
interactive boards for instruction that can be linked to everything from
music to math. The librarian is a certified elementary teacher that
integrates all curriculums.

[Art:]{.underline} We are extremely proud of our Art program that is
offered weekly to all K-5 students and also as enrichment after school.
Students participate in standards-based and age appropriate projects
that range from painting to pottery. The artistic abilities of the
students have been displayed in the Colorado Springs Airport, at the
Fine Arts Center and several other local establishments. Our award
winning art teacher, Mrs. Debra Jones, manages to instill her passion
and talent into the hearts of the students and has helped many of them
win local recognition and awards. She has been instrumental in painting
several murals on the school walls to enhance a positive ambience within
the school.

[Gifted and Talented]{.underline}: All students are encouraged to excel
above the norm through reading, writing, math and spelling competitions.
Advanced (gifted) and enrichment classes are open for all children
willing to excel in reading and math.

2a. ***Abrams Elementary Reading Curriculum***

The reading curriculum is based on the five big ideas of reading:
phonemic awareness, comprehension, fluency, phonics, and vocabulary,
which is in conjunction with the specific skills indicated in the
frameworks of the Colorado State Standards and the Colorado State
Literacy grade level checklists. Through explicit daily direct
instruction for a minimum of 1.5 hours daily, teachers focus on
mini-lessons specific to objectives such as phonemic awareness, main
idea, inferencing, predicting or identifying text evidence. To ensure
that best practices are implemented, the K-2 teachers have been trained
to use various multi-sensory approaches. Other approaches include
meta-cognition techniques that teach students to think about their
thinking. One way this is done is by introducing lessons with the
objective so that students will know what and why they are learning the
information. Another crucial element of the Abrams reading curriculum is
progress monitoring. Along with weekly unit assessments, progress is
monitored bi-monthly with research-based assessments such as the Dynamic
Indicators of Basic Literacy Skills (DIBELS), Accelerated Reader STAR,
or the Tungsten Benchmark. DIBELS gives the teachers avenues to quickly
assess the students in the five big ideas. STAR is an electronic
informal reading assessment; and Benchmark is an electronic assessment
aligned with the Colorado State reading standards. Intermediate teachers
in grades 3-5 are trained in higher level thinking skills such as
compare/contrast, categorizing and inferencing. All teachers use a
variety of graphic organizers and visual supports.

Because of generous Title One and Read to Achieve Grants, Abrams is rich
in research-based resources that support the standards-based curriculum.
They may choose from the Open Court Basal series, an extensive leveled
book reading lab, a well stocked library, Scott-Foresman Science, and a
current Social Studies series. Along with current resources, the
teachers team together and divide students into flexible skills groups
to individualize the needs of students. Flexible means that students are
moved between groups as needed.

3.  Other Effective Curricular Practice: The Abrams Writing Project and
    Every Day Math

In his 2005 State of the State Address, Governor Owens acknowledged the
136 % increase of the fourth graders at Abrams from 1998-2004. We
attribute these gains to the Abrams Writing Project. In 2001, it was
noted that the school's writing curriculum was extremely weak and test
scores were very low. The fourth grade teachers embarked on a action
research project that involved improving the writing of students by
balancing how the children wrote (the process) with the final
composition (the product). With consistent instruction in Step Up to
Writing and Six Traits, student began to improve. As an initiative of
the school, all grade levels began to teach essay writing for at least
one hour daily with an extra block of grammar instruction. To develop an
authentic audience for the compositions of all students, the writings of
every child from preschool to kindergarten are posted to create Walls
that Talk. To strengthen the writing initiative, intensive professional
development was offered to the staff to create teacher leaders. After
completing the required classes, teacher trainers began to coach and
train other staff members to help maintain the school writing focus.

Since math was another area of weakness in 2001, the staff chose Every
Day Math for kindergarten through fifth grade. This program was
initially chosen because of its strong correlation to the Colorado math
standards, but it also has other perks that are important to the highly
transient Abrams population. Because students are constantly moving in
and out, it is important that skills are continually addressed and
reviewed throughout the school year. It is also important that students
learn problem solving and conceptual skills that will support them
throughout their educational careers. A math resource that would support
the consistent spiraling or reteaching of concepts was necessary. Every
Day Math met the needs of the school. Consistent improvement of scores
in all grade levels is evidence of its effectiveness.

3.  ***Improving Instruction through Research Based Practices***

The following instructional practices are implemented as school-wide
initiatives and are consistently monitored by the administration:

[Frequent progress monitoring]{.underline}: Teachers continually assess
students for progress with formal and informal methods. Reliable
Colorado State Standards based electronic assessments have been the most
useful because they are user-friendly, quick and reliable. This is also
the most efficient method to track Annual Yearly Progress for each
student.

[Assessments drive instruction]{.underline}: All grade levels meet
weekly to discuss the progress of the students and to adjust
instruction. The administration monitors individual progress and meets
with teachers consistently.

[Curricular alignment]{.underline}: It is very important to identify
what students need to know, when they need to know it, who needs to know
it and what to do next. Teachers explicitly design instruction to
Colorado standards.

[Flexible skills grouping]{.underline}: Students are placed in skills
groups according to their individual needs. This is powerful because
teachers team together to plan and discuss the best approaches to meet
individual student needs from the most advanced to the disadvantaged
students.

[Teacher tutoring:]{.underline} Approximately one half of the teachers
provide extra tutoring for underachieving students before, after and
sometimes during school planning time.

[Direct explicit instruction:]{.underline} All teachers provide
extensive direct instruction during the school day. Skills are not
assumed but taught explicitly. This initiative is closely monitored by
the administration.

[Team teaching/coaching]{.underline}: Teachers plan together. Resource
teachers teach with general education teachers during the literacy
block.

[Multi-sensory & Phonics]{.underline}: All primary and resource teachers
are expected to use multi-sensory

and phonemic awareness approaches to reading daily.

[Uninterrupted block-time instruction]{.underline}: The Literacy block
is a minimum of 1.5 hours a day for each grade level.

[Graphic Organizers]{.underline}: An Abrams initiative is that every
teacher is expected to use many visuals aids and graphic organizers
during instruction.

[Authentic Audiences]{.underline}: Abrams uses Walls that Talk and
Academic Contests in reading, math and spelling as authentic audiences
to motivate students to be proud of their achievements.

**5. *Improving Instruction through Professional Development***

To improve student achievement, teachers need time, tools and effective
techniques. Once the daily schedule was adjusted to common planning time
and the resources were purchased, professional development was
implemented in these areas: reading, math, writing, assessments and data
analysis. Initially, all staff learned the specific curricular
initiatives such as Six Traits, Every Day Math and Open Court Reading.
The philosophy of the school is that everyone knows and teaches the same
basic concepts from preschool to fifth grade. Professional development
in each area was consistent throughout the school year so that teachers
were exposed over and over again. The administration frequently
monitored the implementation of the concepts and established the best
practices as school initiatives. Lead teachers in each grade level were
identified to become trainers in the specific areas with task of
coaching other teachers. This built the school's leadership density and
empowered teachers to continue the various implementations. Our coaching
model is powerful because when teachers combine their classes together,
the lead teacher teaches the students while teaching the teacher the
techniques and there is no interruption of instruction.

*Assessment for Monitoring*

The entire concept of teaching to mastery switched teachers from the
"grading" to "attainment" mentality. To do this, teachers needed to
learn how to assess more efficiently and learn what to do with the
assessments. Professionals on assessment were retained for the staff to
teach them how to adequately assess for meaning. Once the assessments
were in place, professional development on analyzing data was necessary.
This switch in paradigms was the catalyst to improving achievement. By
looking at the data, the facts were obvious and subjective judgment was
lost. The brutal truth of who and what improves achievement was evident
and the teachers began to "want" to make a difference and to not just
give grades.

*Impact on Improving Student Achievement*

The impact has been phenomenal. One outcome was the desire to know what
children needed to know and then how to best teach them. This prompted
the next generation of professional development to educate the staff on
the Colorado standards and the grade level expectations. The natural
evolution was to teach teachers how to best teach to the standards
(i.e., multi-sensory approaches). Teachers are more confident in what
they are teaching and assessing students for progress and not just
grades because they feel that they can make a difference in students. If
there is little or no progress in a student, the teachers team together
to pool ideas and to change strategies.

Appendix

-   Figure C: Comparison of Rating Levels between CSAP, NCLB & Data
    Tables

-   Table 1: CSAP Third Grade Historical Reading (2000-2004)

-   Table 2: CSAP Fourth Grade Historical Reading (2000-2004)

-   Table 3: CSAP Fifth Grade Historical Reading (2000-2004)

-   Table 4: CSAP Fifth Grade Historical Math (2000-2004)

-   Table 5: CSAP Third Grade Historical Writing (2000-2004)

-   Table 6: CSAP Fourth Grade Historical Writing (2000-2004)

-   Table 7: CSAP Fifth Grade Historical Writing (2000-2004)

*Figure C*

*Comparison of Proficiency Rating Descriptions between CSAP, NCLB & Data
Tables 1-7*

+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| *CSAP*                | *NCLB*                | *Tables 1-7*          |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| -   Unsatisfactory    | -   Basic             |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| -   Partially         | -   Proficient        | -   At or Above Basic |
|     Proficient        |                       |                       |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| -   Proficient        | -   Proficient        | -   At or Above       |
|                       |                       |     Proficient        |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
| -   Advanced          | -   Advanced          | -   Advanced          |
+-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+

Table 1: 2000-2004 CSAP Third Grade Historical Reading (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            93          90          91          96

            % At or Above Proficient       78          77          57          67

            % At Advanced                  6           8           6           4

     Number of students tested             67          110         102         95

     Percent of total students tested      100         99          100         100

     Number of students alternatively      4           0           3           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     6           0           3           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     SUBGROUP SCORES                                                           

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            95          91          90          93

            % At or Above Proficient       79          79          56          65

            % At Advanced                  8           12          4           5

        Number of students tested          38          57          48          43

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            90          89          92          98

            % At or Above Proficient       76          75          59          69

            % At Advanced                  3           4           6           4

        Number of students tested          29          53          51          52

     3.Black                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            94          91          93          90

            % At or Above Proficient       81          81          54          55

            % At Advanced                  0           3           7           0

        Number of students tested          16          32          28          20

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            90          90          91          96

            % At or Above Proficient       83          76          64          74

            % At Advanced                  10          12          7           7

        Number of students tested          30          59          55          57

     5. Hispanic                                                               

            % At or Above Basic            92          85          87          100

            % At or Above Proficient       71          64          40          62

            % At Advanced                  7           7           0           0

        Number of students tested          14          14          15          13

     6. Free/Reduced Lunch                                                     

            % At or Above Basic            88          80          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       80          67          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  5           7           NA          NA

        Number of students tested          40          45          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            92          93          91          92

            % At or Above Proficient       74          74          72          72

            % At Advanced                  8           10          11          10
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 2: 2000-2004 CSAP Fourth Grade Historical Reading (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            97          90          89          84

            % At or Above Proficient       74          58          58          56

            % At Advanced                  3           8           3           2

     Number of students tested             65          106         79          85

     Percent of total students tested      100         99          99          99

     Number of students alternatively      1           3           1           0
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     1           3           1           0
  assessed                                                                     

     SUBGROUP SCORES                                                           

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          91          94          79

            % At or Above Proficient       74          58          59          53

            % At Advanced                  0           4           6           2

        Number of students tested          31          67          32          43

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            97          87          86          88

            % At or Above Proficient       74          59          60          59

            % At Advanced                  6           13          0           0

        Number of students tested          34          39          43          41

     3.Black                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            100         83          88          69

            % At or Above Proficient       73          59          53          38

            % At Advanced                  7           3           0           0

        Number of students tested          15          29          17          16

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            95          90          91          89

            % At or Above Proficient       72          60          61          62

            % At Advanced                  3           10          4           4

        Number of students tested          39          58          46          47

     5.Hispanic                                                                

            % At or Above Basic            100         100         91          87

            % At or Above Proficient       75          64          64          67

            % At Advanced                  0           7           0           0

        Number of students tested          8           14          11          15

     6.Free/Reduced Lunch                                                      

            % At or Above Basic            100         84          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       71          45          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  6           2           NA          NA

        Number of students tested          31          44          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            89          88          87          87

            % At or Above Proficient       63          63          61          63

            % At Advanced                  5           7           6           7
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 3: 2000-2004 CSAP Fifth Grade Historical Reading (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            94          88          86          89

            % At or Above Proficient       63          61          63          58

            % At Advanced                  6           5           7           6

     Number of students tested             62          84          94          88

     Percent of total students tested      98          99          99          100

     Number of students alternatively      2           1           0           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     3           1           0           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     SUBGROUP SCORES                                                           

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            92          80          74          92

            % At or Above Proficient       64          58          42          53

            % At Advanced                  5           5           0           4

        Number of students tested          39          40          53          49

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            96          95          92          86

            % At or Above Proficient       61          64          60          65

            % At Advanced                  9           5           0           8

        Number of students tested          23          44          40          37

     3.Black                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            80          86          67          78

            % At or Above Proficient       53          64          28          44

            % At Advanced                  7           5           0           4

        Number of students tested          15          22          18          27

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          90          96          94

            % At or Above Proficient       71          64          62          60

            % At Advanced                  9           4           0           9

        Number of students tested          35          50          47          47

     5. Hispanic                                                               

            % At or Above Basic            88          78          79          90

            % At or Above Proficient       63          56          43          80

            % At Advanced                  0           11          0           0

        Number of students tested          8           9           14          10

     6. Free/Reduced Lunch                                                     

            % At or Above Basic            94          80          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       52          49          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  3           5           NA          NA

        Number of students tested          31          41          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            89          87          86          88

            % At or Above Proficient       69          66          63          64

            % At Advanced                  9           8           7           8
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 4: 2000-2004 CSAP Fifth Grade Historical Math (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            94          92          81          87

            % At or Above Proficient       65          51          47          45

            % At Advanced                  24          23          5           9

     Number of students tested             62          84          94          67

     Percent of total students tested      98          99          100         100

     Number of students alternatively      2           1           0           0
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     3           1           0           0
  assessed                                                                     

    SCHOOL SUBGROUP SCORES                                                     

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            92          90          79          92

            % At or Above Proficient       67          53          51          54

            % At Advanced                  31          30          4           13

        Number of students tested          39          40          53          39

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            96          93          87          79

            % At or Above Proficient       61          50          42          32

            % At Advanced                  13          16          8           4

        Number of students tested          23          44          38          28

     3.Black                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            87          86          62          67

            % At or Above Proficient       53          50          33          38

            % At Advanced                  20          14          0           5

        Number of students tested          15          22          21          21

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          94          88          97

            % At or Above Proficient       80          58          53          46

            % At Advanced                  29          30          4           9

        Number of students tested          35          50          49          35

     5. Hispanic                                                               

            % At or Above Basic            75          77          86          100

            % At or Above Proficient       50          33          43          67

            % At Advanced                  25          11          14          17

        Number of students tested          8           9           14          6

     6. Free/Reduced Lunch                                                     

            % At or Above Basic            90          90          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       50          38          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  20          15          NA          NA

        Number of students tested          30          39          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            89          88          88          86

            % At or Above Proficient       59          56          55          51

            % At Advanced                  22          20          20          13
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 5: 2000-2004 CSAP Third Grade Historical Writing (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            97          97          98          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       43          58          34          NA

            % At Advanced                  10          19          2           NA

     Number of students tested             68          108         102         NA

     Percent of total students tested      100         100         100         NA

     Number of students alternatively      4           0           3           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     6           0           3           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     SUBGROUP SCORES                                                           

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          96          98          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       42          50          33          NA

            % At Advanced                  13          15          2           NA

        Number of students tested          38          54          48          NA

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            97          98          98          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       43          67          37          NA

            % At Advanced                  7           22          2           NA

        Number of students tested          30          54          51          NA

     3. Black                                                                  

            % At or Above Basic            100         97          100         NA

            % At or Above Proficient       25          66          29          NA

            % At Advanced                  0           14          0           NA

        Number of students tested          16          29          28          NA

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          98          100         NA

            % At or Above Proficient       55          55          39          NA

            % At Advanced                  21          22          4           NA

        Number of students tested          29          60          54          NA

     5. Hispanic                                                               

            % At or Above Basic            87          93          87          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       40          50          27          NA

            % At Advanced                  7           21          0           NA

        Number of students tested          15          14          15          NA

    6. Free/Reduced Lunch                                                      

            % At or Above Basic            100         96          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       50          44          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  8           11          NA          NA

        Number of students tested          26          45          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            93          94          93          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       52          57          51          NA

            % At Advanced                  12          16          8           NA
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 6: 2000-2004 CSAP Fourth Grade Historical Writing (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            97          94          96          86

            % At or Above Proficient       74          56          47          27

            % At Advanced                  3           13          8           0

     Number of students tested             65          106         79          85

     Percent of total students tested      100         99          99          99

     Number of students alternatively      1           3           1           1
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     1           2           1           1
  assessed                                                                     

     SUBGROUP SCORES                                                           

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          96          94          81

            % At or Above Proficient       74          51          44          21

            % At Advanced                  0           9           13          0

        Number of students tested          31          67          32          43

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            97          92          100         90

            % At or Above Proficient       74          64          51          32

            % At Advanced                  6           21          5           0

        Number of students tested          34          39          43          41

     3.Black                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            100         90          88          87

            % At or Above Proficient       73          52          47          13

            % At Advanced                  7           10          0           0

        Number of students tested          15          29          17          16

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            95          95          100         89

            % At or Above Proficient       72          53          48          28

            % At Advanced                  3           17          13          0

        Number of students tested          39          58          46          47

     5. Hispanic                                                               

            % At or Above Basic            100         100         100         80

            % At or Above Proficient       63          79          36          47

            % At Advanced                  0           7           0           7

        Number of students tested          8           14          11          15

     6. Free/Reduced Lunch                                                     

            % At or Above Basic            100         93          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       71          48          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  6           5           NA          NA

        Number of students tested          31          44          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            89          91          92          87

            % At or Above Proficient       63          52          50          38

            % At Advanced                  5           10          8           2
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 7: 2000-2004 CSAP Fifth Grade Historical Writing (See Figure C)

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

                                                                               

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                            

            % At or Above Basic            96          96          94          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       63          48          46          N/A

            % At Advanced                  8           4           2           N/A

     Number of students tested             61          84          94          N/A

     Percent of total students tested      100         99          99          NA

     Number of students alternatively      1           0           0           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     Percent of students alternatively     1           0           0           NA
  assessed                                                                     

     SUBGROUP SCORES                                                           

     1.Males                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            92          95          92          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       64          48          38          N/A

            % At Advanced                  5           3           2           N/A

        Number of students tested          39          40          53          N/A

     2.Females                                                                 

            % At or Above Basic            96          98          95          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       61          48          55          N/A

            % At Advanced                  9           5           3           N/A

        Number of students tested          23          44          40          N/A

     3. Black                                                                  

            % At or Above Basic            86          95          94          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       50          50          33          N/A

            % At Advanced                  7           5           0           N/A

        Number of students tested          14          22          18          N/A

     4.White                                                                   

            % At or Above Basic            97          98          98          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       71          46          60          N/A

            % At Advanced                  9           2           2           N/A

        Number of students tested          35          50          47          N/A

     5. Hispanic                                                               

            % At or Above Basic            88          88          86          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       63          44          29          N/A

            % At Advanced                  0           11          0           N/A

        Number of students tested          8           9           14          N/A

     6. Free/Reduced Lunch                                                     

            % At or Above Basic            94          95          NA          NA

            % At or Above Proficient       52          34          NA          NA

            % At Advanced                  3           2           NA          NA

        Number of students tested          31          41          NA          NA

  **STATE SCORES**                                                             

            % At or Above Basic            89          93          93          N/A

            % At or Above Proficient       69          53          51          N/A

            % At Advanced                  9           8           8           N/A
  ---------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------