**REVISED**

**March 24, 2005**

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

*U.S. Department of Education*

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

Name of Principal [Mr. Wes Pierce]{.underline}

Official School Name [Saint Jo Elementary]{.underline}

School Mailing Address [Drawer L (105 West Evans Street)]{.underline}

[Saint Jo TX 76265-0320]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County [Montague]{.underline} School Code Number
[169-911-101]{.underline}

Telephone [(940) 995-2541]{.underline} Fax [(940) 995-2087]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.saintjoisd.net](http://www.saintjoisd.net/) E-mail
<wes.pierce@esc9.net>

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. Rick Moss]{.underline}

District Name [Saint Jo ISD]{.underline} Tel. [(940)
995-2668]{.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. Leeton Phillips]{.underline}

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

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

**DISTRICT**

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

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

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

[1]{.underline} High school

\_\_\_\_\_ Other

[2]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$5,158]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,029]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. [2]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

[29]{.underline} 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**    11        8                      19           **7**                             

  **K**       9         11                     20           **8**                             

  **1**       12        8                      20           **9**                             

  **2**       10        13                     23           **10**                            

  **3**       5         11                     16           **11**                            

  **4**       12        9                      21           **12**                            

  **5**       11        5                      16           **Other**                         

  **6**       11        13                     24                                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   159
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [92]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [0]{.underline} % Black or African American

[7]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

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

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

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      12
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      22
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 34
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 162
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided .2099
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           21
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [0]{.underline} %

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

Number of languages represented: [1]{.underline}

Specify languages: English

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [42]{.underline} %

Total number students who qualify: [68]{.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: \_[15]{.underline} %

\_ [24]{.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.

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

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_[1]{.underline}\_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_[10]{.underline}\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_[13]{.underline}\_Speech or Language
Impairment

\_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

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

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

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

Classroom teachers [15]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists [2]{.underline} [1]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals [2]{.underline} [2]{.underline}

> Support staff [1]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number [21]{.underline} [3]{.underline}

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
[10:1]{.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.)

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

  Daily student attendance   97%         98%         98%         97%         97%

  Daily teacher attendance   92%         95%         96%         97%         97%

  Teacher turnover rate      12%         8%          12%         12%         14%

  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

*It takes teamwork to make the dream work.* The motto of Saint Jo
Elementary school resounds throughout all aspects of our school
environment. Because we are a small school, we pride ourselves in
working together not only as a close-knit staff that cares deeply about
our children, but also as a community of caring individuals, which
includes school employees, parents, community members and students. It
is our mission to prepare students with the needed knowledge and skills
to be productive citizens instilled with a lifelong love of learning. We
accomplish this goal by offering students a recipe for success, which
includes a caring community, challenging quality curriculum, dedicated
and knowledgeable staff, and a supportive, positive learning
environment.

Saint Jo Elementary believes that the first ingredient to our success is
our community and parental support. Our small town of approximately 977
people is nestled among the rolling hills of North Texas. Our student
body consists of 159 children in Pre-K through 6^th^ grade. Although our
students come from modest means, the community takes a great interest in
their learning and activities. Elderly community members often comment
on how much they enjoy reading our weekly elementary news segments in
the local "Saint Jo Tribune." Our teachers take the time to write weekly
articles that highlight student successes, as well as inform the
community of upcoming events. When these events occur, such as our
annual Christmas musical, our Kindergarten Thanksgiving feast,
six-weeks' assemblies, or our Meet the Teacher night, the community
responds by coming out to support our students and staff. Parents and
community members also serve on our Campus Improvement Team, and provide
great insight as to how we can continuously improve our school. They
often contribute time and money through our P.T.O.

Another key ingredient to our success is our caring staff. In a recent
survey, one staff member said, "Our teachers are dedicated to making
learning a positive experience." These teachers and support personnel
work together to accomplish goals by communicating specific student
needs to each other. It is not uncommon to have teachers at different
grade levels volunteer to help each other out with materials,
curriculum, or student issues. It is this mutual respect among our
educators that is carried over into the relationships with our students.
Our principal also plays a key role by having a vision for greatness. He
visits each room daily and welcomes everyone personally. He works
closely with teachers to assist them with student or parent concerns,
curriculum needs, and the implementation of new teaching strategies. He
also volunteers to teach mini-lessons when teachers ask for new ideas or
strategies. This close working relationship between the staff, the
principal, and the students helps create a great rapport among all
stakeholders.

Students come first at Saint Jo Elementary---academically, spiritually,
and emotionally. This is possibly the most important ingredient to our
success. At our school, students experience a friendly, safe, and
welcoming atmosphere where they are free to take risks and know that
their school community will support them in their endeavors. We provide
our students with a challenging curriculum enhanced by small group
instruction. Not only do students enjoy small class sizes (Our
student-teacher ratio is 9.5:1), but also the opportunity to receive
small group instruction. Our school provides accelerated instruction for
our struggling learners as well as our more advanced students. We
believe that small group time can help our teachers provide
individualized instruction no matter what level a student is on.
Students also enjoy several motivational tools utilized by our school.
We celebrate student successes with assemblies, participation in reading
programs such as Book It, Six Hour Reading Club, and Accelerated Reader,
and PALs (Positive Attitude in Leadership).

It takes all the ingredients described above to create one of the
greatest learning environments students could possibly experience.
Parents, students, teachers, and community members agree---Saint Jo
Elementary is just such a place. When we work together as a team, the
dreams of our students are realized.

PART IV -- 1. ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Saint Jo Elementary strives to help its students achieve in all academic
areas. As a result, we received commended performance acknowledgements
in reading, writing, and math on our 2004 Texas Assessment of Knowledge
and Skills results. We were also acknowledged for our student
attendance.

Just nine years ago, Saint Jo Elementary had less than 65% passing rate
averages in reading and math on the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills.
Through hard work and effective classroom instruction, those rates have
climbed to 100% passing in most areas and 95% in others. Over the past
five years, our campus has strived to maintain these high passing rates
on our state assessment instrument while continuously increasing the
percentages of students reaching commended performance on these tests.
Two years ago, the state made the transition from the Texas Assessment
of Academic Skills to the more stringent Texas Assessment of Knowledge
and Skills (TAKS). Although officials warned that scores across the
state would most likely fall due to the new higher expectations,
students at Saint Jo Elementary were up to the task. Passing rates on
the 2002-2003 test remained extremely high, and commended performance
levels for individual students were above the state averages in almost
every grade level and subject. It then became our task as educators to
look at the 2002-2003 assessment data and set goals for the 2003-2004
school year. As we analyzed the data, we set expectations that we would
not only maintain the high passing rates, but also increase the
percentage of students achieving commended performance on the TAKS.

As a result of our goal setting, we maintained 100% passing rates on the
math TAKS at all grade levels (3^rd^-6^th^). We also achieved 100%
passing rates on the reading TAKS at 3^rd^ and 4^th^ grades, with 95%
passing rates at 5^th^ and 6^th^ grades. Commended performance levels
soared on our 3^rd^ grade tests, doubling our percentage of commended
performers from 2003 to 2004. 88% of our 3^rd^ graders were recognized
as achieving commended levels compared to only 35% at the state level.
50% of these 3^rd^ graders were commended in math while only 25% of
Texas 3^rd^ graders attained this honor. We are extremely proud that we
not only doubled our 3^rd^ grade commended levels in both subject areas
during the past year, but also that we had at least twice as many
commended 3^rd^ graders than the state as a whole.

These commended rates are not just reserved for our 3^rd^ graders. At
Saint Jo, 4^th^, 5^th^, and 6^th^ graders outperformed other students in
the state by achieving higher levels of commended performance and much
higher passing rates than their state counterparts. Our student
achievement does not stop there, however. We are proud to say that we
have no great disparities in our student populations. Our economically
disadvantaged students performed at or many times above levels of their
non-disadvantaged peers. For example, 100% of all economically
disadvantaged students passed at all grade levels in reading and math
except for 5^th^ grade reading (83%). In several of these grade level
areas, we had higher percentages of economically disadvantaged students
achieving commended performance than our student body as a whole. We
take pride in the fact that an education at Saint Jo Elementary levels
the playing field for all students, regardless of their backgrounds.

The State of Texas requires all 3^rd^ graders to pass the reading test
to be promoted to 4^th^ grade. If a student does not meet state
standards, a school must remediate that student and retest. After the
third attempt, a failing student must go to a grade placement committee.
We are proud to say that all Saint Jo 3^rd^ graders have passed the TAKS
on their first attempt, thus eliminating the need for the additional
steps. We are extremely proud of the accomplishments of all of our
talented students!

PART IV - 2. USE OF ASSESSMENT DATA

Saint Jo Elementary faculty members know that the assessment of data is
an integral part of knowing a student's individual needs. Through test
data, faculty members learn not only to identify weak areas that must be
addressed, but also see where our strengths lie. It is important to our
school to focus on the positive and to be proud of our accomplishments.

At the beginning of each school year, the faculty meets to review survey
data from the prior year and assessment data collected through the Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), the Iowa Test of Basic Skills
(ITBS), The Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI), and the Kindergarten
Diagnostic Instrument (KDI). During this disaggregation of data, the
group creates a comprehensive needs assessment, which includes what
information was reviewed, what the group discovered, and the group's
recommendations for the upcoming school year. This session allows the
faculty to locate weak areas and find a means to target these areas.
This is also a time that the group can identify strategies that have
been effective. The faculty then begins planning implementation
strategies. Teachers can go back to their classrooms and find ways to
strengthen areas of need. They also use this data to begin accelerated
instruction to help meet each student's individual needs.

Saint Jo Elementary also emphasizes the importance of vertical planning
and accountability. For example, 5^th^ grade science scores dropped last
year. As a team, all teachers sat down and brainstormed how each grade
level could focus on science TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and
Skills). As a result of this needs assessment and brainstorming, a new
science discovery lab was born. Through teamwork, the faculty and staff
of Saint Jo Elementary met a need that was identified through
disaggregating assessment data.

PART IV -- 3. COMMUNICATING STUDENT PERFORMANCE

Keeping an open line of communication with parents is a priority at
Saint Jo Elementary. Through a variety of methods, parents and teachers
can keep track of a student's progress and identify needs as they arise.

At the end of the first six-week grading period, mandatory report card
conferences are held. Teachers meet with each parent not only to discuss
subject area grades, but also to review state assessment data (Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills) from the previous spring, as well as
results of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and other local test data.
Primary grades also discuss new data gleaned from the Texas Primary
Reading Inventory and the Kindergarten Diagnostic Instrument (KDI) taken
at the beginning of the year. During these meetings, teachers point out
strengths and areas of concern. A plan of action is then derived.
Parents are given information about the various programs offered at our
school that will help meet the needs of individual students.

Our school also celebrates the accomplishments of its students. Sixth
graders lead the student body in morning pledges each day. Afterwards,
student successes are often acknowledged over the intercom. Kindergarten
through 2^nd^ grade has weekly PALS (Positive Attitude in Leadership)
assemblies. All grade levels also meet for six-week assemblies. During
these gatherings, student accomplishments are praised, and parents are
invited to come and help celebrate. These accomplishments are also
shared through weekly articles in our local newspaper. We also have a
special showcase in our foyer that serves as a display for parent
information, a place to display pictures of students who have been
acknowledged for certain accomplishments, and as a place to display
student work samples for all to see.

Although we send report cards home after each six-week period and
notices of concern to parents of struggling students after each
three-week period, our teachers also call parents frequently to check on
absent students, or to inform parents of specific concerns. Staff
members are also currently working to utilize technology by establishing
and maintaining an informative website that displays information about
our school.

PART IV -- 4. SHARING SUCCESSES

Saint Jo Elementary has an open-door policy. We welcome other schools to
e-mail us or stop by for a visit; however, because our small town is in
a rural area, we usually share our successes by informal contact with
other teachers while attending workshops at our Regional Education
Service Center.

If our school attains the prestigious honor of being selected as a No
Child Left Behind---Blue Ribbon Award winning campus, it is our goal to
continue offering site visits and communication to other schools that
would like to see the great things going on at Saint Jo Elementary.

Our Campus Improvement Team is a wonderful resource, and its members
would be willing to meet with other teams to explain what we think makes
our school special. Our principal plans to attend Share and Exchange
meetings at our local Education Service Center to give other principals
a chance to learn about our successful strategies.

It is also our goal to have our teachers collaborate to potentially
become presenters at workshops such as Great Expectations or to other
groups such as the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors
Association (TEPSA). Through these outlets, we can share how our
students achieve at such a high level.

We also will continue to use local media to share what is going on at
Saint Jo Elementary. We recently had a news crew from a local television
station come and do a report on a local drug prevention program
presented to our 3^rd^ graders. Through these avenues, our parents and
community members see our successes, as do other schools in the region.

PART V -- 1. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION

The Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) is the foundation for
the curriculum provided to students at Saint Jo Elementary. These
state-developed learning objectives were designed by Texas educators to
provide high expectations for learning in all subject areas. Faculty
members at Saint Jo Elementary use not only state adopted textbooks, but
also supplemental materials to cover the TEKS objectives. These
additional materials enhance learning by challenging our students beyond
the texts and help them to meet standards set by our state
accountability system and the No Child Left Behind Act.

[Mathematics:]{.underline} Through Saxon Math, our core math curriculum,
students receive spiraling objectives that build upon each other. This
program also provides a constant review of information covered in prior
lessons. This curriculum provides consistency among grade levels and
class sections, but as with any program or textbook, weak areas still
exist. Our teachers work diligently to provide supplemental teacher-made
math games and materials, as well as published materials such as [Step
Up to the TAKS,]{.underline} which provides additional work on TEKS
skills that will be assessed on the TAKS. These supplemental materials
are a crucial part of our accelerated math instruction program, which
provides two to three days of assistance per week to struggling
learners, while using the other days to extend and challenge
higher-level students.

[Language Arts:]{.underline} Language Arts objectives are woven
throughout the curriculum at Saint Jo Elementary. We use a balanced
literacy approach to teaching reading, and are striving to integrate
writing across the curriculum. Teachers at the primary level have story
time, when books are enjoyed, discussed, and analyzed. Through
activities tied to these shared readings, teachers model skills such as
summarization, fact and opinion, etc. Primary students also learn
phonics via Saxon Phonics. These phonics skills and TEKS skills learned
through shared readings assist students in reading independently through
our Accelerated Reading program.

[Science:]{.underline} Through our campus needs assessment, science was
targeted as a focus area for the 2004-2005 school year. Teachers
reviewed science TEKS and our Houghton Mifflin science textbooks and
created a list of needed materials and supplies. Our campus purchased
these supplies and stocked a Discovery Lab where teachers can take
students to do experiments or to learn about science-related topics.
This lab has been featured in our local newspaper, and our faculty is
very proud of it. We recently held training in the 5E model---Using
Tools to Explore Matter, which was conducted through a grant with North
Central Texas College (NCTC). Presenters from NCTC provided our teachers
with some hands-on strategies that have already been put to use in our
lab.

[Social Studies:]{.underline} As with all core subjects, Saint Jo
Elementary has an adopted textbook that is used to help cover our social
studies TEKS. Teachers also utilize supplemental materials such as
Weekly Reader, Scholastic, Time for Kids, and daily newspapers. In 5^th^
grade, students are also involved in creating and starring in a historic
wax museum in which students portray characters and settings from
throughout history. Sixth graders also create individual power point
presentations that are shared with all classmates.

[Fine Arts:]{.underline} As a small school, we are extremely proud to
have a thriving art program in which all kindergarten through 6^th^
graders are involved. All students explore various art media (paints,
pencil, crayon, charcoal, pastels, sculpture, wire, and paper). They
study famous artists' lives and their styles of art. Students create
their own art as expressions of their thoughts and feelings. They study
how art touches our everyday lives, and they use elements of reading,
math, history, and science in creating art. Student work is exhibited
annually in a public art show, and their work has been submitted to a
world famous artist's website where several students' pieces were
selected and featured as artwork for the month.

PART V -- 2. READING CURRICULUM

Reading is the key that opens the door to learning. For this reason,
Saint Jo Elementary takes a systematic approach to teaching reading that
includes frequent monitoring and assessment. Our school takes a balanced
literacy approach to teaching reading. Throughout previous decades, the
pendulum of reading research has swung from a heavy emphasis on phonics
back to a whole language approach. We are now seeing the benefits of
both. Through teaching phonics, while also offering a print-rich
environment where teachers often share literature with students, the
needs of students with varying learning styles are met.

Through balanced literacy, students work on phonemic awareness skills,
decoding strategies, and comprehension in primary grades. With these
foundational skills in place, older students can strive to gain
higher-level comprehension skills and expand their vocabulary. We are
able to achieve these skills by employing a variety of strategies,
methods, and programs.

Primary students are introduced to Saxon phonics beginning in
kindergarten. Students learn key decoding skills while practicing with
take-home books that are shared with parents. Early learners also create
word books of their own that they can read. Primary classes also use
songs, chants, and poems to enhance the reading curriculum.

As students move into 1^st^ grade, they are introduced to the
Accelerated Reader program. Although this is a supplemental program, it
allows students to have independent reading practice on an individual's
reading level. Through a combination of reading methods, students are
often able to challenge themselves and move into reading books above
their current grade levels. This flexibility assists teachers in meeting
the individual needs of all students.

Another key ingredient in our reading program's success is our
Accelerated Reading Instruction (ARI) time---not to be confused with the
Accelerated Reader program. ARI is a small group setting that we have
allotted for all students at Saint Jo Elementary. Students' strengths
and weaknesses are identified through administration of the Texas
Primary Reading Inventory (grades K-2) and TAKS pre-assessments (grades
3-6). Students rotate between ARI time and computer or art classes.
Stuggling students spend 2 to 3 days per week in small group reading
instruction, while more advanced learners spend 1 to 2 days per week on
extension activities.

PART V -- 3. TECHNOLOGY

One area that we have not highlighted in the above sections is our
technology curriculum. This is a rapidly evolving part of our curriculum
at Saint Jo Elementary. Although we are still in the early stages of
development, we have implemented many changes in our technology
curriculum that have strengthened our students' understanding of the
state technology TEKS.

We have transitioned from teachers bringing their own classes to the lab
once a week, to having a full-time technology teacher that works with
student groups opposite our Accelerated Instruction classroom times.
This teacher is able to use varying instructional methods to improve
student learning at all grade levels.

Using interesting lessons, activities, worksheets, and projects has
helped students with computer concepts while having fun. Students grasp
new concepts by using hands-on, step-by-step activities. Students at all
grade levels, beginning in 1^st^ grade, are learning keyboarding.
Reinforcement through games makes keyboarding more fun for the students.
Our technology teacher also uses the Internet to integrate social
studies, science, math, and language arts into the technology
curriculum. Students have used drawing tools to practice mouse control
and to integrate math and science into lessons.

Our students have become familiar with Microsoft Word and have learned
how to change fonts, styles, and colors; how to insert and remove clip
art; and how to save files. In PowerPoint, students have learned how to
create and edit slide show presentations. We also have a computer
program called HeartBeeps, where students can hone reading, math, and
writing skills.

By creating a technology program, we have been able to not only teach
our technology TEKS more effectively, but also strengthen
cross-curricular skills.

PART V -- 4. IMPROVING STUDENT LEARNING

A successful school does not rely on one particular philosophy or method
to help its students reach their potential. Instead, success comes by
having research-based lesson delivery methods and curriculum materials.
These methods and materials are used to achieve goals set by data-driven
decision making. Our school analyzes data from state assessments,
nationally-normed achievement tests, and daily classwork to improve
student learning. This approach would not be complete without the most
important instructional method of all---caring.

Our students thrive in small group instructional settings. Through these
small groups, teachers can use individualized teaching methods where the
class is introduced to skills as a whole, then students are able to work
at more of their individual paces. Teachers have the time and ability to
challenge higher-level students while spending more time helping
struggling learners. Teachers can then use a variety of learning
materials to meet the needs of students with different learning styles.

We have taken this a step further by creating small group instructional
settings for both math and reading. Through these dedicated times,
skills in both areas can be reviewed, re-taught, or expanded upon. It is
our belief that small groups do not just help struggling learners master
skills. Through these groups, more advanced learners can achieve at even
higher levels.

In these settings, teachers can implement a variety of instructional
materials. Teachers use hands-on manipulatives to introduce and re-teach
both math and reading lessons. Our teachers recently received Reading
Rod kits that have been utilized in reading classrooms. These
manipulatives help students in primary grades with word building skills,
while older students practice sentence structure. Manipulatives are also
used in math to introduce and reinforce math concepts. Visual aids and
other multi-sensory materials help meet the needs of the differing
learning styles represented in each classroom.

Most importantly, our teachers utilize the instructional method of
caring. By showing a true interest in our students, our teachers help
students see the importance of a quality education and also the value of
being a good citizen. By creating a strong rapport with students, our
entire school becomes an extended family that cares for each member.

PART V -- 5. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Striving to improve is the basis for continued growth at Saint Jo
Elementary. Through professional development opportunities, teachers are
able to gain new strategies to meet our campus goals.

Before each summer, teachers complete a survey of intended professional
development plans for the next school year. Teachers are required to
attend a minimum of four days of workshops prior to the beginning of
school. Other professional opportunities are then offered on campus.
During these four days, teachers look at campus needs and find sessions
pertaining to these needs.

Our school is currently in the implementation phase of a program known
as Great Expectations. Through this program, students model respect for
others in a safe, risk-free environment where high expectations are
demanded of both students and teachers. Our principal and three teachers
were initially trained in this methodology and returned to the school to
present a summary of the program to other staff members. We are
currently planning to send the remaining teachers to training this
summer.

During the school year, our reading and math teachers also took
advantage of reading and math workshops provided through our Regional
Education Service Center. These workshops, funded through the Texas
Education Agency, provided teaching strategies and materials for our
Accelerated Math and Reading Instruction programs. "Group Solutions" was
one of the math workshops offered. Through this training, our teachers
gained additional knowledge about cooperative learning and problem
solving. The reading workshops focused on reading comprehension through
deductive reasoning. It was through this training that we were able to
attain new math and reading manipulatives. For example, our teachers
received kits of Reading Rods, which are letter and word blocks that can
be manipulated to teach word and sentence building skills. We will
continue planning professional development such as the workshops
mentioned above that will enhance student achievement.

PART VII -- ASSESSMENT RESULTS

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS**

The following data tables describe Saint Jo Elementary's performance on
the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (2000-2002) and the Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (2003-2004). Nine years ago, these
data tables would have indicated average scores below 65%. The campus
team has since worked to improve these scores dramatically, and the
tables will show how our team now is dedicated to maintaining high
passing rates and high numbers of students attaining commended
performance.

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act, Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003 changed in
significant ways from calculations in prior years. First, the test
changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills to the much more
rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. Second, some students
with disabilities who were previously exempted from the accountability
calculations were included in all proficiency calculations. Third,
students were required to be enrolled in a school for 120 consecutive
days in order to be included in the calculations for that school. These
changes may cause the data from the 2002-2003 school year and beyond to
appear different from the data from previous years for some schools. In
addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in Spanish,
Limited English Proficient, and Special Education. Grade 3 scores are
cumulative, given over the course of the year to facilitate promotion.
By law, if students don't pass the 3rd grade reading test, they are not
promoted to the next grade.

[Grades Tested:]{.underline} 3rd-6th

[Test:]{.underline} TAAS (Texas Assessment of Academic Skills),
2000-2002; TAKS (Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills), 2003-2004

[Publisher:]{.underline} Texas Education Agency

[Number of students in the grade in which the test was
administered:]{.underline} *See Table*

[Number of students who took the test:]{.underline} *See Table*

[Number alternatively assessed:]{.underline} *See Table* [Percent
alternatively assessed:]{.underline} *See Table*

[Test Standards:]{.underline} Two standards are reported for the state
assessments included in this table. For TAAS, students could \**Meet
Minimum Expectations.* For TAKS, students are reported to have *Met the
Standard*. The data tables also include percentages of students who
achieved \*\**Commended Performance* on TAKS.

*\*Met the Standard/Met Minimum Expectations --* This category
represents satisfactory academic achievement. Students in this category
performed at a level that was at or above the state passing standard.
Students in this category can be assumed to have a sufficient
understanding of the knowledge and skills measured at this grade.

*\*\*Commended Performance --* This category represents high academic
achievement. Students in this category performed at a level that was
considerably above the state passing standard. Further, students in this
category can be assumed to have a thorough understanding of the
knowledge and skills measured at this grade.

**Texas Third-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | Mar  | Mar  | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | /Apr | /Apr | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 88%  | 42%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 16   | 19   | 18   | 19   | 25   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 94%  | 90%  | 100% | 100% | 89%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 1    | 2    | 0    | 0    | 3    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 6%   | 10%  | 0%   | 0%   | 11%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 100% | 50%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | \*   | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 7    | 8    | 6    | 5    | 10   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 1    | 0    | 3    | 2    | 2    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 86%  | 42%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 14   | 19   | 15   | 17   | 23   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 35%  | 26%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 91%  | 89%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 87%  | 86%  | 87%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Third-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 50%  | 22%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 16   | 18   | 17   | 19   | 25   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 94%  | 90%  | 94%  | 100% | 89%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 1    | 2    | 1    | 0    | 3    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 6%   | 10%  | 6%   | 0%   | 11%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 20%  | 0%   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 7    | 7    | 5    | 5    | 10   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 1    | 0    | 3    | 2    | 2    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 50%  | 22%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 14   | 18   | 14   | 17   | 23   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 25%  | 18%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 90%  | 90%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 87%  | 82%  | 80%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Fourth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [4]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 27%  | 33%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 96%  | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 15   | 18   | 19   | 25   | 16   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 88%  | 100% | 100% | 100% | 80%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 2    | 0    | 0    | 0    | 4    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 12%  | 0%   | 0%   | 0%   | 20%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 29%  | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | 86%  | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 7    | 4    | 4    | 7    | 6    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 0    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 0    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 27%  | 38%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 96%  | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 15   | 16   | 17   | 23   | 16   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 25%  | 17%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 85%  | 85%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 92%  | 90%  | 89%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Fourth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [4]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 25%  | 12%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 16   | 17   | 19   | 25   | 15   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 94%  | 94%  | 100% | 100% | 75%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 1    | 1    | 0    | 0    | 5    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 6%   | 6%   | 0%   | 0%   | 25%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 43%  | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | 100% | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 7    | 4    | 4    | 7    | 5    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 0    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 0    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 25%  | 13%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 16   | 15   | 17   | 23   | 15   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 21%  | 15%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 86%  | 87%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 94%  | 91%  | 87%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Fifth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 25%  | 14%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 95%  | 95%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 94%  | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 20   | 22   | 25   | 18   | 16   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 87%  | 92%  | 100% | 100% | 89%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 3    | 2    | 0    | 0    | 2    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 13%  | 8%   | 0%   | 0%   | 11%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 0%   | 0%   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 83%  | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | 83%  | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 6    | 7    | 5    | 6    | 5    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 2    | 2    | 2    | 0    | 4    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 28%  | 15%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 94%  | 95%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 94%  | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 18   | 20   | 23   | 18   | 12   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 25%  | 17%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 79%  | 79%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 92%  | 90%  | 87%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Fifth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 45%  | 23%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 20   | 22   | 24   | 18   | 16   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 87%  | 92%  | 96%  | 100% | 89%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 3    | 2    | 0    | 0    | 2    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 13%  | 8%   | 0%   | 0%   | 11%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 33%  | 14%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | 100% | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 6    | 7    | 5    | 6    | 5    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 2    | 2    | 2    | 0    | 4    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 44%  | 25%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 18   | 20   | 22   | 18   | 12   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 26%  | 17%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 82%  | 86%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 96%  | 94%  | 92%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Sixth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [6]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 32%  | 32%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 95%  | 95%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 95%  | 96%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 19   | 19   | 15   | 19   | 24   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 95%  | 86%  | 100% | 100% | 83%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 1    | 3    | 0    | 0    | 5    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 5%   | 14%  | 0%   | 0%   | 17%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | 17%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | 92%  | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 4    | 6    | 4    | 12   | 5    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 2    | 2    | 0    | 3    | 2    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 35%  | 35%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 94%  | 94%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 94%  | 95%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 17   | 17   | 15   | 16   | 22   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 28%  | 25%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 86%  | 86%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 88%  | 85%  | 86%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable

**Texas Sixth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [6]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 58%  | 37%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 19   | 19   | 15   | 19   | 26   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 95%  | 86%  | 100% | 100% | 90%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 1    | 3    | 0    | 0    | 3    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 5%   | 14%  | 0%   | 0%   | 10%  |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**             |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***1. Economically              |      |      |      |      |      |
| Disadvantaged***                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | 50%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 4    | 6    | 4    | 12   | 7    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***2. Hispanic***               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | \*   | \*   | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | \*   | \*   | \*   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 2    | 2    | 0    | 3    | 2    |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***3. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 65%  | 35%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 17   | 17   | 15   | 16   | 24   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 22%  | 16%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 77%  | 79%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 93%  | 91%  | 88%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

\* Data Not Available -- must be 6 or more students for data to be
included

NA -- Not Applicable