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

*U.S. Department of Education*

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

Name of Principal [Mr. Thomas E. Brackbill]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\_

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

Official School Name [Bart-Colerain Elementary
School]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [1336 Noble
Road]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

[\_Christiana]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[PA]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[17509-9742]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County [Lancaster]{.underline} State School Code
Number\*\_[113367003-000002656]{.underline}

Telephone [( 717 ) 529-2181]{.underline} Fax [( 717 )
529-6879]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Website/URL [http://www.solanco.org](http://www.solanco.org/) E-mail
<tom_brackbill@solanco.k12.pa.us> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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\* [Dr. Jon Rednak]{.underline}

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

District Name [Solanco School District]{.underline} Tel. [( 717 )
786-8401]{.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. Craig Chubb

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

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

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

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [4]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[2]{.underline} Middle schools

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

[1]{.underline} High schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Other

[7]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$6,632.00]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,357.00]{.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
>
> \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area
>
> \[ x \] Rural

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

[8]{.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**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**       26        18                     **44**       **8**                             

  **1**       19        25                     **44**       **9**                             

  **2**       18        21                     **39**       **10**                            

  **3**       26        17                     **43**       **11**                            

  **4**       25        25                     **50**       **12**                            

  **5**       30        19                     **49**       **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   269
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [95]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [2]{.underline} % Black or African American

[2]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

[0]{.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[:
7]{.underline} %

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      10
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      7
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

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

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 249
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .068
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           6.8
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

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

[3]{.underline} Total Number Limited English Proficient Number of
languages represented: [1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Specify languages: Spanish

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals:
\_\_\_[24]{.underline}\_\_\_%

Total number students who qualify: [64]{.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: [9]{.underline} %

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

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

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

\_\_\_\_Deafness [2]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [4]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Emotional Disturbance [16]{.underline} Speech or Language
Impairment

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

> \_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment Including
> Blindness
>
> \_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) [1]{.underline} [0]{.underline}\_\_\_

Classroom teachers [11]{.underline} [1]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists [1]{.underline} [13]{.underline}

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

> Support staff [4]{.underline} [2]{.underline}
>
> Total number [17]{.underline} [23]{.underline}

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers:
[22:1]{.underline}

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

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

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

  Daily teacher attendance   96%         96%         96%         95%         96%

  Teacher turnover rate      0%          18%         0%          0%          9%

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

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

**[PART III -- SUMMARY]{.underline}**

The Solanco School District is located in the southern half of Lancaster
County. It covers over 180

square miles and provides educational services to about 4,000 students.
The district is mostly rural farmland with gently, rolling hills.
Bart-Colerain Elementary School is located in the southeast corner of
the district and serves students from the townships of Bart and
Colerain. Our school building is surrounded by Amish farms and boasts a
very serene and picturesque setting. The movie "Witness", starring
Harrison Ford and Kelly McGillis, was filmed in our backyard and is a
testament to the beauty of our surroundings.

Community support has been evidenced in our school since before the
school opened. In September of 1960 our new school was scheduled to open
but a railroad strike prevented the school furniture from arriving in a
timely manner. The night before school was scheduled to open, over 50
parents, school board members, faculty, and students traveled 25 miles
to load the furniture from a railroad car and deliver it back to the
school site. These people worked until midnight to assemble and position
the furniture for the opening of school the next morning. They cared
then and continue to care about education today.

Our district has 4 elementary buildings, 2 middle schools, and one high
school. Bart-Colerain Elementary, the smallest building, is structured
to house two classrooms of each grade Kindergarten through Grade 5, with
enrollments at approximately 270 students. Bart-Colerain, one of 73
elementary schools in our county, achieved the highest rates of
proficiency on the 2005 PSSA state assessments in both math and reading.
Our math proficiency rate was 100% with 80% of our students scoring
advanced.

Over the past three years, Solanco elementary schools have taken
advantage of a state initiated Accountability Block Grant to begin
offering an extended day kindergarten program for our academically needy
students. Currently we serve about 40% of our district-wide kindergarten
population with a literacy-based and standards driven program to
accelerate the early literacy skills our students need to succeed.

Staying true to the mission statement of Solanco School District: "To
provide educational opportunities in a safe and secure environment that
enables all students to maximize their academic performance, to become
productive members of society and to engage in life-long learning" is
evidenced by our students, parents, and community being actively
involved and caring about our success. Our faculty, students, and
parents are proud of the school's accomplishments and continually
promote the school's mantra of going

"Above and Beyond".

**[PART IV INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS]{.underline}**

**1. Assessment Results**

The Pennsylvania System of School Assessments (PSSA) is administered to
every fifth grade student during the month of April. The assessment
measures student achievement in math and reading for all classifications
of the student body, ie. IEP, ESL, Title 1. The state provides school
and individual student results that reflect the four levels of student
performance (Advanced, Proficient, Basic, and Below Basic).

For the past four years Bart-Colerain's student scores demonstrated that
90% of our students are reading at the proficient or advanced level.
They also demonstrated similar mastery with mathematics with at least
87% or higher rates of proficiency or advanced levels. The 2005
assessment revealed that 100% of our students were proficient or
advanced in mathematics. There is no disaggregated data available for
sub-groups that are too small.

A measure of the difficulty of the state assessment is the proficiency
benchmarks for Annual Yearly Progress. In Pennsylvania, Annual Yearly
Progress is met by having 54% of the student population score proficient
or advanced in reading and 45% proficient or advanced in math.
Bart-Colerain has far exceeded those benchmarks for the past five years.

Additional information about the Pennsylvania System of School
Assessment is available at [http://www.pde.state.pa.us.]{.underline}

**2. Using Assessment Results**

We live by the mantra "Assessment drives Instruction". Our school
monitors and documents student progress through numerous data sources:
classroom-based assessments, DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early
Literacy Skills) Benchmarks, Sucessmaker reading and math program
reports, Houghton-Mifflin theme tests, district-designed accuracy and
fluency measures, STAR Computer Adapative Reading Diagnostic
Assessments, and annual Stanford Achievement Tests. Title 1, special
education and grade level teams analyze the school's performance data to
set short and long term goals for the school and students to progress
toward established benchmarks and standards. Instructional and/or
behavior interventions are developed for identified students based on
intensity of identified needs. To track the effectiveness of these
interventions, progress monitoring is implemented on a bi-weekly basis.
To continue the upward trajectory of student performance, monitoring
results are used to make ongoing and necessary changes to instructional
interventions. In addition, the district has access to Pennsylvania's
Value Added data mining system that allows a more in-depth process of
predicting student progress and applying interventions when expected
results show needs.

**3. Communicating Assessment Results**

Bart-Colerain Elementary communicates school and student performance to
parents, students, and community stakeholders in a variety of ways.
Parents of third, fourth and fifth grade students are able to track
their students' classroom assignments and grades on-line. PSSA and
Stanford Achievement results for each student are communicated with and
explained to parents each year. Parent conferences are scheduled for all
students and teachers are available to meet and discuss parent concerns
at any time of the year.

Our local media reports the district results of PSSA evaluations when
they are released by the PA Department of Education. The district also
prepares a building report card for each school that communicates
building and student progress. These report cards are mailed with our
quarterly district newsletter to all district residents.

Our Superintendent of Schools convenes a monthly Advisory Council
consisting of community, business, faculty, and parent members that
discuss timely issues and student achievement progress.

**4. Sharing Success**

Our building's success is shared both internally and externally. Within
the district, our faculty members provide leadership during curriculum
writing projects, staff development programs, and district-wide
in-service days. The Title 1 staff from our building also hosts regular
training seminars for the district-wide reading specialists and reading
aides.

Outside the district, our successes are shared with the local chapter of
Phi Delta Kappa, the local Elementary Principals' Association, and with
the member school districts of our Intermediate Unit. We also host many
faculty and staff visitation teams from other school districts that are
investigating the reasons for our success. They show interest in our
building-wide balanced literacy approach, our extended-day Kindergarten
program and how we effectively utilize technology to increase student
achievement.

**[PART V CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION]{.underline}**

**1. Curriculum**

The Bart-Colerain Elementary curriculum is both standards-based and
comprehensive in nature. Our core curriculum areas include reading,
language arts including English and spelling, writing, math, penmanship,
social studies, science/health, technology, art, music, physical
education, and library science. The supplemental curriculum includes
developmental counseling, keyboarding, choral music, music lessons for
strings and instruments, and an elementary band and orchestra.

All core curriculum components are designed to meet or exceed the
Pennsylvania State Standards established for each subject. In most
instances, our teachers have prioritized and expanded the rigorous
expectations for our students. They consistently focus on transferring
knowledge and concepts from one subject area to another.

Our district's reading program is based on Pennsylvania's standards for
Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening. The curriculum is delivered
with a "balanced literacy approach" called Four Blocks. Each day our
children are instructed in Guided Reading (direct instruction), Reading
Workshop (independent reading), Writing Workshop (direct instruction),
and Working with Words (phonics instruction). We are constantly focused
on teaching the literacy skills of phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency,
accuracy, vocabulary, comprehension and responses to literature.

The math curriculum starts with learning your math facts "as well as you
know your own name" and progresses to requiring written responses to
math performance tasks. Math instruction focuses on the state standards
and skills related to numbers/number operations, geometry, data
analysis, algebra, and measurement. Teachers utilize real-life
situations to bring problem solving instruction to a level that focuses
on identifying and justifying an answer. Our students' math and reading
instruction are supplemented by the Successmaker tutorial software
program that students make use of every day.

The social studies curriculum addresses the state standards related to
history, government, geography, economics, and citizenship. Our units of
study focus on the ever-widening horizons of student and family, their
neighborhood, their community, their nation and world. Likewise, our
science program is focused on the state standards for physical, earth
and life sciences. Science instruction is activity based and heavily
integrated with utilizing their mathematical skills. We also have a
Successmaker tutorial software program available to supplement our
science program.

When examining the arts curriculum, Bart-Colerain offers a wide variety
of opportunities. Not only do our students receive weekly instruction in
art and music, if interested they also are provided with free
instrumental lessons during the school day. Our district also supports a
chorus at each building and a district elementary band and orchestra
that performs during the annual Fine Arts concert.

**2. Reading**

Based on Pennsylvania's Academic Standards for Reading, Writing,
Speaking, and Listening, the Solanco School District implements a
Balanced Literacy Framework, grades K-5 for its reading and language
arts curriculum. Using a comprehensive approach to implement this
literacy framework, Bart-Colerain Elementary uses explicit and
scaffolded teaching of reading skills and strategies to develop
strategic and analytical readers. The reading program consists of four
daily components: reading *to* students at their listening level;
reading *with* students during *shared* and *guided* reading at their
instructional level; and reading *by* students at their independent
level. Ongoing literacy assessments and progress monitoring data
determine flexible grouping for differentiated instruction in the areas
of phonemic awareness and phonic skills, vocabulary, reading fluency,
comprehension skills and strategies before, during, and after reading.
To reinforce critical reading skills and to provide support to build
strong affective reading behaviors, core and supplemental instructional
reading materials are widely used. Anthologies from the Houghton-Mifflin
Legacy of Literacy program, literature novels, trade books, decodable
books, Big Books, leveled readers, Accelerated Reader program, CCC
Successmaker Reading Program, KidBiz 3000 Differentiated Instruction for
Reading and Technology (gr. 5) together represent a variety of
resources, genres and authors for narrative, informational, and
persuasive text study.

Through co-teaching, small group intervention, use of developmentally
appropriate texts and repeated readings, a focus on word solving,
phonemic awareness, critical thinking, consistency between supplementary
and classroom instruction, and on-going assessment of students'
progress, the Bart-Colerain staff implements a distinguished reading
program that transforms students into readers who value books and
literacy in all of its forms.

**3. Technology Curriculum**

Our students and teachers utilize technology every school day. The
software or web based sites that we have selected are critical to
reinforcing the essential academic skills related to reading, writing
and mathematics. At Bart-Colerain we realize that the computer is only a
tool and the real "secret" to using this technology successfully is how
our classroom teachers utilize the software, monitor the student's
progress and motivate learners to go "above and beyond" with their
learning.

Our small school's computer resources are impressive. We have a
Waterford lab of computers for our kindergarten and selected primary
students for the development of early literacy skills. In grade 1-5, a
fixed computer lab is utilized by every student for 30 minutes each day
to complete individual tutorial lessons in reading and math with the
SuccessMaker software. This software program provides our classroom
teachers with an abundance of data that will help them monitor progress
and instruct individual students. Students in grades 3, 4, and 5
participate with the Accelerated Reader program, which is used to
promote recreational reading in and out of school. Our third and fifth
grade students make use of Study Island, a web-based math program built
on the PA math standards that is both tutorial and assessment driven and
can be accessed from home or school. Finally, our fifth grade students
use KidBiz, a reading/writing web-based site, built on PA Reading
standards, that involves reading and responding to real-life news
articles. Our media center boasts another lab of student computers used
for keyboarding skills and book location and an I-book lab of mobile
computers for student projects. All computers are networked and have
access to the Internet.

Technology can also be something other than computers. About one half of
our classrooms are outfitted with an audio-enhanced sound system that
gives unprecedented clarity to the teacher's voice when teaching.

**4. Instructional Methods**

At Bart-Colerain Elementary School we believe that assessment and
instruction are tightly woven. We have modified our instructional
methods and classroom assessments to resemble the PA System of School
Assessments. We are sensitive to not "Teach to the Test", however, we do
strive to give every child a fair opportunity to show what they know.

Examples of how instruction and assessment are linked would include
having the students and teachers using the PA Writing Rubric when
planning, writing and assessing authentic student writing, including an
appropriate primary rubric for writing. Our students and faculty also
make use of the state developed rubrics for open-ended written responses
in math and reading assessments. Math and reading instruction now
includes teaching students how to respond to open-ended, multiple step
problems. Teachers use state released sample questions that have answers
for each student performance level. Our students are then able to score
their own responses and identify the areas in which they could improve
their answer.

Recent staff development initiatives have also increased our teachers'
competency. Ten years ago our elementary faculty began implementing the
Cooperative Learning instructional strategy. It was, and still is, an
integral part of our school's instructional pedagogy. More recently our
teachers received training in the Learning Focused School model that
promotes consistent and pervasive instructional strategies throughout
the building and is coupled with curriculum prioritization. This faculty
training, curriculum priorities, and on-going student assessment with
progress monitoring allow our students to become strategic and empowered
learners who are better equipped to communicate their learning to
others.

**5. Professional Development**

Solanco School District recognizes that highly trained teachers with an
expansive pedagogy will positively impact student achievement. To that
end our district has developed a supervision program that meets the
differentiated needs of our professional staff. Our program meets the
needs of a first-year novice with a mentoring program to the
distinguished educator with a wealth of information to share. Each
teacher is involved with a mode of supervision that meets his or her
professional needs. Non-tenured staff follow a prescriptive mode to
ensure proficient development and tenured staff have multiple mode
selections. The goal is to allow teachers to take control and ownership
of their professional growth with the support of their administrator.

Throughout the school year, our building faculty makes use of weekly
staff development meetings to address a multitude of topics. Faculty
meetings, technology training, and grade level meetings occur monthly
before the start of the school day. As a result, we have a cohesive
faculty that is focused on instructional improvement for increased
student achievement.

The district conducts full days of in-service for staff development.
These days are either district-wide or building based. New initiatives
are a priority for staff development. Exciting new initiatives in recent
years has included Learning Focused School training, data driven
decision-making, DIBELS assessments, and technology integration.

In addition to the district's scheduled in-service days, the district
provides financial support each year for professional workshops and
college credits.

**[PART VII ASSESSMENT RESULTS]{.underline}**

**State Criterion-Referenced Tests**

The Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) is a mandated state
assessment in reading and mathematics. Student scores are reported as
the percentage of students tested whose performance were Below Basic,
Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. These categories are defined as
follows:

**Advanced --** Superior academic performance indicating an in-depth
understanding and exemplary display of the skills included in
Pennsylvania's Academic Standards.

**Proficient --** Satisfactory academic performance indicating a solid
understanding and adequate display of the skills included in
Pennsylvania's Academic Standards.

**Basic --** Marginal academic performance work approaching, but not yet
reaching, satisfactory performance. Performance indicates a partial
understanding and limited display of the skills included in the
Pennsylvania's Academic Standards, and the student may need additional
instructional opportunities and/or increased student academic commitment
to achieve the Proficient level.

**Below Basic --** Inadequate academic performance that indicates little
understanding and minimal display of the skills included in
Pennsylvania's Academic Content Standards. There is a major need for
additional instructional opportunities and/or increased student academic
commitment to achieve the Proficient level.

# PART VII -- ASSESSMENT RESULTS

# 

# PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT

**FIFTH GRADE MATHEMATICS**

## Edition/Publication years 2001-2005 Publisher: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                          | 2004  | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                          | -2005 | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing Month            | April | April | April | April | April |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| ### School Scores        |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Basic     | 100   | 98    | 100   | 100   | 85    |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above           | 100   | 87    | 89    | 94    | 71    |
| Proficient               |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% Advanced              | 80    | 60    | 61    | 66    | 33    |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of Students       | 25    | 48    | 44    | 50    | 55    |
| tested                   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total         | 100   | 100   | 100   | 100   | 100   |
| students tested          |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students       | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     |
| alternatively assessed   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students      | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     |
| alternatively assessed   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                          |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **Subgroup Scores**      |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| 1\. Economically         | Less  |       |       | Not   | Not   |
| Disadvantaged            |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Basic     | than  | 80    | 80    | rep   | rep   |
|                          |       |       |       | orted | orted |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above           | 10    | 70    | 60    |       |       |
| Proficient               |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% Advanced              | stu   | 40    | 30    |       |       |
|                          | dents |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students       |       | 10    | 10    |       |       |
| tested                   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                          |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

\* The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania does not report demographic scores
for subgroups with an n-count of fewer than 10 students. Economically
disadvantaged was the only category for which data can be reported. Data
for the 2000-01 and 2001-02 economically disadvantaged subgroup was not
reported in state testing documents. No explanation could be found in
the literature for that year to explain the discrepancy.

# PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT

**FIFTH GRADE READING**

## Edition/Publication years 2001-2005 Publisher: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                          | 2004  | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                          | -2005 | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing Month            | April | April | April | April | April |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| ### School Scores        |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Basic     | 100   | 100   | 100   | 100   | 89    |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above           | 96    | 94    | 98    | 90    | 73    |
| Proficient               |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% Advanced              | 32    | 65    | 64    | 62    | 40    |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students       | 25    | 48    | 44    | 50    | 55    |
| tested                   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students      | 100   | 100   | 100   | 100   | 100   |
| tested                   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students       | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     |
| alternatively assessed   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students      | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     | 0     |
| alternatively assessed   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                          |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| **Subgroup Scores**      |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| 1\. Economically         | Less  |       |       | Not   | Not   |
| Disadvantaged            |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above Basic     | than  | 80    | 100   | rep   | rep   |
|                          |       |       |       | orted | orted |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% At or Above           | 10    | 70    | 80    |       |       |
| Proficient               |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| \% Advanced              | stu   | 40    | 40    |       |       |
|                          | dents |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students       |       | 10    | 10    |       |       |
| tested                   |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                          |       |       |       |       |       |
+--------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

\* The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania does not report demographic scores
for subgroups with an n-count of fewer than 10 students. Economically
disadvantaged was the only category for which data can be reported. Data
for the 2000-01 and 2001-02 economically disadvantaged subgroup was not
reported in state testing documents. No explanation could be found in
the literature for that year to explain the discrepancy.

# PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT

**THIRD GRADE MATH**

## Edition/Publication years 2003-2005 Publisher: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
|                                  | 2        | 2        | 2002-2003  |
|                                  | 004-2005 | 003-2004 |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Testing Month                    | April    | April    | April      |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| ### School Scores                |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 100      | 88       | No         |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 89       | 80       | p          |
|                                  |          |          | erformance |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% Advanced                      | 65       | 40       | levels     |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Number of students tested        | 46       | 42       | identified |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Percent of students tested       | 100      | 100      | by         |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Number of students alternatively | 0        | 0        | state      |
| assessed                         |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Percent of students              | 0        | 0        |            |
| alternatively assessed           |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
|                                  |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| **Subgroup Scores**              |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| 1\. Economically Disadvantaged   |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 90       | 80       | Not        |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 90       | 50       | reported   |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% Advanced                      | 70       | 0        |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Number of students tested        | 10       | 10       |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+

# PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT

**THIRD GRADE READING**

## Edition/Publication years 2003-2005 Publisher: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
|                                  | 2        | 2        | 2002-2003  |
|                                  | 004-2005 | 003-2004 |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Testing Month                    | April    | April    | April      |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| ### School Scores                |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 93       | 88       | No         |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 78       | 81       | p          |
|                                  |          |          | erformance |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% Advanced                      | 48       | 40       | levels     |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Number of students tested        | 46       | 42       | identified |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Percent of students tested       | 100      | 100      | by         |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Number of students alternatively | 0        | 0        | state      |
| assessed                         |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Percent of students              | 0        | 0        |            |
| alternatively assessed           |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
|                                  |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| **Subgroup Scores**              |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| 1\. Economically Disadvantaged   |          |          |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Basic             | 100      | 90       | Not        |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% At or Above Proficient        | 100      | 70       | reported   |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| \% Advanced                      | 50       | 10       |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+
| Number of students tested        | 10       | 10       |            |
+----------------------------------+----------+----------+------------+