##### U.S. Department of Education November 2002

**2002-2003 *No Child Left Behind---Blue Ribbon Schools Program***

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Mrs. Laura L. DuPont]{.underline}

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

Official School Name\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ [Glenridge Elementary
School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [7447 Wellington Way]{.underline}

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

# Clayton Missouri 63105-2925 

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel.\_\_[(314) 854-6200]{.underline} Fax\_\_[(314) 854-6290]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.glenridge.clayton.k12.mo.us]{.underline} Email
[laura_dupont@](mailto:laura_Dupont@clayton.k12.mo.us)[clayton.k12.mo.us]{.underline}

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

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

(Principal's Signature)

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

Name of Superintendent [Dr. Don Senti]{.underline}

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

District Name[\_\_ Clayton School District]{.underline} Tel.\_\_[(314)
854-6000]{.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 [Mrs. Amy B. Murphy]{.underline}

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

I have reviewed the information in this package, including the
eligibility requirements on page 2, and

certify that to the best of my knowledge it is accurate.

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

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

**[PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA]{.underline}**

**[\_\_]{.underline}**

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [3]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[1]{.underline} Middle schools

[NA]{.underline} Junior high schools

[1]{.underline} High schools

[5]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$ 13,885]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$ 6,991]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. [6]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

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

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

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

  **K**       34        26                     **60**       **7**                             

  **1**       33        26                     **59**       **8**                             

  **2**       32        30                     **62**       **9**                             

  **3**       27        24                     **51**       **10**                            

  **4**       40        25                     **65**       **11**                            

  **5**       35        32                     **67**       **12**                            

  **6**                                                     Other                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   **364**
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [61]{.underline}% White

the students in the school: [20]{.underline}% Black or African American

[3]{.underline}% Hispanic or Latino

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

\_ [0]{.underline}% American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year [2.5
%]{.underline}

(This rate includes the total number of students who transferred to or
from different schools between October 1 and the end of the school year,
divided by the total number of students in the school as of October 1,
multiplied by 100.)

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

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 5
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        9
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    354
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .025
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    2.5
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [14
%]{.underline}

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

Number of languages represented: [15]{.underline}

Specify languages: Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Russian,
Syrian, Hindi, Urdu, Telugu, Nepalese, Italian, Spanish, German,
Bulgarian, and Croatian.

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [16 %]{.underline}

[56]{.underline} Total Number Students Who Qualify

> If this method is not a reasonably 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:
> \_\_[11]{.underline}\_\_%

\_\_[39]{.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.

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_Autism \_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_Orthopedic
Impairment

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

\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_[27]{.underline}\_\_Specific
Learning Disability

\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_[9]{.underline}\_\_Speech
or Language Impairment

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_Mental Retardation
\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_Multiple Disabilities
\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_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}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_[19]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_[13]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_[9]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_[46]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

12\. Student-"classroom teacher" ratio: \_\_[20:1]{.underline}\_\_\_

13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students. 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 and drop-off rates.

  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                           2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999   1997-1998

  Daily student attendance 95.4%       95.9%       94.3%       96.1%       N/A

  Daily teacher attendance 96.1%       96.1%       95.9%       96.9%       N/A

  Teacher turnover rate    14%         7%          3%          3%          7%

  Student dropout rate                                                     

  Student drop-off rate                                                    
  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

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

Glenridge Elementary School in Clayton, Missouri, anchors its
neighborhood as an identifying landmark in terms of its physical and
educational presence. Upon entering this 75-year old building, one can
feel its positive energy. Visitors are greeted by a colorful wall of
photographs with the smiling faces of all Glenridge students. The one
school rule, the CLAYMO Promise, is painted in the main entry for all to
see: " I will take good care of myself, all the people around me, and,
all the things around me." The hallways are filled with children's art
work, fiction and non-fiction writing, research reports and projects. By
observing the children and adults in action, it is evident that
Glenridge is a vibrant and inviting place to live and learn.

As one of only three elementary schools in the School District of
Clayton, Glenridge maintains its tradition of academic excellence with a
student population that is unusually diverse. Twenty percent of its
students are African American who commute daily from the city of St.
Louis as participants in the Voluntary Student Transfer program.
Seventeen percent of the Glenridge student body originate from fourteen
countries. Fifty-eight flags hang throughout the school representing
children from around the world and reminding everyone of our global
community. This ethnic diversity contributes significantly to the
breadth and depth of teaching and learning at Glenridge.

Fifteen years ago, the District's curriculum was enlivened by
implementing teacher-written curriculum and by creating a
student-centered philosophy and pedagogy. In the last five years there
has been a purposeful design of learner objectives, instructional
practices, and assessments in each curriculum area to align with
Missouri Content and Process Standards. With this alignment in mind,
teachers are more intentional in defining the critical learnings or
understandings in each subject area, designing learning activities to
help students develop those understandings and skills, and assessing
students for what they have learned. Technology supports all learning
and is embedded in the curriculum. Our technology capabilities and our
innovative use of computers to support teaching and learning were
recognized by the U.S. Department of Education in 1997 with a Technology
Award given in recognition of an outstanding technology program.

In educating its youth, the School District of Clayton states that we
"...will strive to develop in all our children the strength of
character, the skills, the knowledge, and the wisdom necessary to build
creative, productive lives and to contribute to a global society." With
this statement as a foundation, Glenridge's Mission states: Glenridge
School is a diverse community where students, parents, and staff create
an environment to meet the academic, physical, and emotional needs of
its members. This learning environment is supported by: opportunities
for intellectual and creative challenge; opportunities to grow in
assuming responsibility for how we think, feel and act; a belief that
respect and understanding for the world around us and the world within
us must be followed by responsible action; and, use of a variety of
resources that enrich and enhance the learning process. Members of our
Glenridge community including outstanding teachers, excellent support
staff, supportive parents, and energetic volunteers, work together to
support each child's success.

In summary, outstanding schools have strong academic programs with
opportunities for intellectual and creative challenge. Our diverse
Glenridge community focuses on learning with a variety of experiences
and resources for all students. Every child is taught, supported, cared
for, and appreciated. Outstanding schools also have environments in
which children have opportunities to grow in assuming responsibility for
how they think, feel, and act. When schools are places of belonging,
discovery, and goal-setting for every child, no child is left behind.
The Glenridge School community fosters the development of respectful,
responsible, caring and competent human beings.

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

### Public Schools

**1**. **Describe the meaning of the assessment results in such a way
that someone not intimately familiar with the tests can easily
understand them.**

The Missouri state assessment system referred to as the MAP (Missouri
Assessment Program) currently assesses students in Communication Arts in
grades 3, 7, 11 and in Mathematics in grades 4, 8, and 10. The
assessments contain multiple choice (selected response), short answer
(constructed response), and essay-type (performance task) items. Item
content reflects State Standards and measures concepts, processes, and
objectives aligned with district curriculum in Communication Arts
(Reading and Language) at grade 3 and Mathematics at grade 4. An
achievement level measuring student progress toward the Missouri Show-Me
Standards is determined. Levels of achievement are identified by one of
five descriptors -- **Step 1, Progressing, Nearing Proficiency,
Proficient, and Advanced.** At **Step 1**, students are substantially
behind in terms of meeting the Missouri Show-Me Standards. Students who
are **Progressing** are beginning to use their knowledge of simple
concepts to solve basic problems, but they still make many errors.
Students in the **Nearing Proficiency** category understand many key
concepts, although their application of that knowledge is limited.
**Proficient** is the desired achievement level for all students;
students demonstrate the knowledge and skill called for by the Missouri
Show-Me Standards. **Advanced** students demonstrate an in-depth
understanding of all concepts and apply that knowledge in complex ways.
The state of Missouri considers students **At** or **Above Basic** to be
those scoring at the **Nearing Proficiency** level or above. The
national percentile score describes student performance on only the
multiple choice session of the MAP. The median national percentile score
in Communication Arts indicates that in 2002 for example, Glenridge
third graders performed better than 80 percent of third graders
nationally.

**a**. MAP results are disaggregated by ethnic group and by
socioeconomic information based on free/reduced lunch program
participation. When there are less than five students in any of these
groups at any grade level, disaggregated data are not provided to
districts. On the attached charts the numbers of students in the
subgroups of Free/Reduced and Black range from 6 to 15; therefore, the
determination of their statistical significance must take into account
these numbers. The charts also show that the achievement of Black
students at Glenridge has been improving in some areas. The percentages
of Black fourth graders at or above Basics in Mathematics, has steadily
increased since 1998, from 6% in 1998 to 15% at or above Basic in 2002.
The national percentile scores in Communication Arts increase from the
20^th^ percentile in 1999 to the 69^th^ percentile in 2001, with a drop
to the 48^th^ percentile in 2002. The academic achievement of Glenridge
African American students continues to be a priority area; however,
caution must be observed when interpreting results comparing scores of
Black and White subgroups due to the small number of African American
students assessed at Glenridge.

**b**. As noted in the attached information and charts, a small number
of students were excluded in some years of testing. The State of
Missouri allows Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students to be exempt
from participation in the Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) in their
first, second, or third year in the United States. The students in these
groups were enrolled in Glenridge's ELL (English Language Learners)
program and were excluded from testing based on their individual LAS
(Language Assessment Scales) scores. They were assessed by the LAS
instrument that assesses students' language functioning according to
three levels.

**c**. Test data charts for Communication Arts (Reading and Language)
and Mathematics are included at the end of this application, pages 13-18
.

**2**. **At Glenridge assessment data is carefully looked at from
several perspectives in order to understand and improve student and
school performance**. First of all, when standardized test results
become available in early fall, a meeting is held with the principal,
counselor, (our school's coordinator of standardized testing) and the
District's Assessment Director. We examine overall school performance
noting trends, improvements, and any gaps. We are particularly pleased
with our students' performance on 2002 tests requiring written responses
and believe this is a result of our school-wide emphasis on the teaching
of writing to express clear thinking.

The next series of meetings scheduled with each grade level of teachers,
the counselor, and the principal are critically important. Since
standardized tests are administered in the spring and the results are
available in early fall, it is necessary that each teacher receives a
copy of his/her current students' test results along with copies of last
year's students' results. This enables each teacher to use the previous
year's test results to assess curriculum and instruction. The Content
Standards Summary Report provides specific information about level of
mastery with respect to the Missouri Content Standards by grade level
and content area. This allows each grade level to keep pace with an
alignment of our curriculum to the State Standards. Item analyses
summaries also show strengths and weaknesses between local and national
performances. These item analyses also pinpoint more specifically areas
of strength and weakness within a particular curriculum.

Teachers also look at individual student test results compared to
classroom performance and progress that is recorded by report cards,
teacher observation and portfolio contents. Test results that do not
correlate with the data on file are carefully examined and strategies
and interventions are put into place to bridge these gaps. Disaggregated
reports for gender, race, and ethnicity are used in similar ways. In
summary, with this close scrutiny of assessment data and individual
student performance, we are more intentional in the use of our resources
and structures to ensure every child's success.

**3.** **Student performance is communicated in multiple ways to parents
and students**. The progress report is one tool to communicate
information about a child's academic and social growth and development.
Glenridge students and their parents receive elementary progress reports
at the conclusion of the second and fourth quarters. The student's
individual progress report is organized by academic content areas; life
skills; student effort; teacher comments on a student's strengths and
areas of concern; and parent response. Student growth is marked on a
continuum of development that describes how the child is performing on
specific learner objectives in relation to grade level expectations.
These grade level expectations or "benchmarks" are aligned with Missouri
Content and Process Standards. Parents are asked to review the report
with their child and to respond with goals that the student and the
parent have set for second semester.

Another opportunity for communication to parents is at the conclusion of
the first and third quarters when parents and teachers participate in
individual conferences. At Glenridge we have 100% parent participation
in our conferences. Students can also participate in the third quarter
conference sharing the contents of their portfolio. The conferences and
progress reports provide parents with meaningful communication
opportunities. And, most importantly, these quarterly
conferences/reports reflect the cumulative on-going assessment of
students that happens on a daily and weekly basis.

Standardized test results are reported to parents annually. Parents
receive standardized assessment reports with accompanying explanatory
letters and forms that help guide their reading and interpretation of
their child's scores. Our classroom teachers, school counselor, and
principal are able to answer any questions parents might have regarding
the assessment data. Communication to the Clayton community regarding
student performance in each of its schools is reported annually in the
District's Report Card, a publication required by the state.

**4.** **There are many ways Glenridge can share its successes with
other schools**. First, within our own District there are multiple
opportunities for principals and teachers to share successes in our
monthly administrative meetings and our District's Curriculum
Committees. For example, our District has recognized the unique
professional development program we have created at Glenridge over the
past few years. Other schools are looking closely at our purposeful
restructing of faculty meetings that focus on one goal (Increasing
students' achievement in Writing). This simple, no-cost approach to
meaningful faculty meetings is a technique any school can adopt. We
intend to write an article on our approach to professional development
and submit it for publication in "Educational Leadership." Our teachers
belong to professional organizations and attend state and national
conferences. Both of these situations also provide many possible
opportunities for sharing our successes.

Glenridge has recently been recognized as a "top ten" performing school
in the state by Missouri's CSSO (Chief State School Officer). This
recognition is based upon our students' 2002 performance on
state-mandated assessments. This recognition has been released to
newspapers throughout the state. Our Glenridge website proudly displays
this recognition and invites any school to contact us for information
about our programs. All of our teachers and staff are connected to the
Internet and are available through e-mail. Additionally, our principal
has recently completed participation in the Technology Leadership
Academy sponsored by DESE (Dept. of Elementary and Secondary Education)
that links our school to schools throughout Missouri. These broad-based
connections through the Internet make it possible for us to share our
successes with any interested schools throughout the state and the
nation.

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

**1. Describe the school's curriculum and show how all students are
engaged with significant content based on high standards.**

The Glenridge Curriculum consists of **Literacy, Mathematics, Social
Studies, Science, Health, Music,** **Physical Education, Art, Spanish,**
and **Character Education**. The **Literacy** curriculum includes
written and oral communication, **Reading**, **Spelling**, and
**Handwriting**. Glenridge teachers have developed written communication
curriculum and assessments using the Six Traits of Writing designed by
NWREL (Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory). This Six Traits
format offers common language and common scoring guides in the writing
traits of organization, ideas, sentence structure, voice, word choice,
and conventions. Our work with the Six Traits has increased documented
achievement for each student. The **Reading** curriculum uses authentic
literature taught in a variety of guided and independent reading
lessons. In developing lessons, teachers are guided by our District Key
Stage benchmarks aligned with Missouri Standards and literature
recommendations by the District's Literacy Committee. Quarterly
assessments of progress are performed by individual students and results
are used to determine the best differentiated curriculum and instruction
for each student. The **Spelling** curriculum is generated by the Key
Stage word lists, student selection, content vocabulary, and by
authentically-embedded spelling instruction in the written communication
curriculum. **Handwriting** is taught in grades K-5. Teachers have
created aligned Communication Arts performance assessments, which
integrate the strands of the Literacy curriculum and require content
knowledge with process and reasoning competence in the application of
these concepts.

The Clayton **Mathematics** curriculum is the National Science
Foundation funded Everyday Math program published by SRA McGraw-Hill.
Teachers are guided by learning goals of Everyday Math which are aligned
with District grade level benchmarks and Missouri State Standards for
mathematics and the revised standards of NCTM (National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics). Teachers attend quarterly meetings with
support personnel to present formal and informal assessment information
on student progress and to determine differentiation strategies to
assure mathematical progress for each student. The **Science** and
**Health** curriculums are written and revised on a regular schedule by
the District Science Committee and classroom teachers. The curriculum is
based on district grade level benchmarks that align with state learning
outcomes and National Standards. Science and Health materials consist of
selections of non-fiction books and hands-on equipment which correlate
to expand the inquiry model of the science/health curriculum.
Assessments of students' progress reflect their understanding of
concepts and ability to apply the scientific process and reasoning. The
**Social Studies** curriculum is designed to explore the strands of
culture, government, history, economics, and geography in grade level
topics. Specific topics are explored through inquiry projects,
non-fiction books, maps, data, and simulation activities. The district's
curriculum documents and grade level benchmarks are revised to best
align with the Missouri state learning outcomes, and the standards of
the National Council of Teachers of Social Studies. Materials in all
content and core areas are modified, instruction is differentiated, and
project expectations are tiered so that each student has access to a
rigorous Social Studies curriculum. The **Spanish** curriculum for
grades 1-5 is designed to correlate to the vocabulary and concepts of
units in Science, Social Studies, and Health, while embedding Spanish
language processes. The **Character Education** curriculum is a
combination of Character Plus and the Lion's Quest "Skills for Growing"
programs in weekly lessons taught by the counselor and principal. Grade
level expectations and concepts are taught and reinforced with
school-wide projects, discussions of Life Skills, positive discipline,
and counseling. **Vocal** and **Instrumental Music**, **Art** and
**Physical Education** curriculums align with district, state, and
national learning outcomes and standards. Students are routinely
assessed in each of these subjects. Progress toward the standards of
performance is reported at the end of each semester on each student's
District Elementary Progress Report.

**2. Describe the school's reading curriculum including why the school
chose this particular approach to reading.** The Reading curriculum at
Glenridge is part of a comprehensive District - designed Language
Literacy program that uses an integrated, literature-based curriculum.
Reading and writing are taught together as reciprocal processes. The
skills and strategies (systems) of languages are conceptualized in
reading and writing activities. Phonics, spelling, grammar, vocabulary,
and handwriting are embedded in the teaching of reading and writing from
the beginning of Kindergarten through fifth grade. This particular
approach to reading was based on an extensive review of the research on
the teaching and learning of literacy undertaken by our District's
Language Literacy Committee in 1992. This work was updated in 2001. The
Committee's review and comprehensive study led to the development of our
District's Language Literacy program that we believe represents the best
practices in the teaching of Literacy.

The instructional approaches of our program include a balance of seven
"Essential Classroom Practices". These essential practices are shared
reading, independent reading, assigned writing, writer's workshop,
discussions, inquiry experiences, and demonstrations/celebrations of
students' work. All classroom teachers, K-5, incorporate these essential
practices into their literacy instruction providing a continuity for
both students and teachers throughout the school. For assessment
purposes, teachers are guided by our Districts' Key Stage benchmarks
(indicated on a student's progress report) that are aligned with
Missouri Standards. Assessment of all students' performance and progress
in reading is continual, but there are also quarterly assessments for
individual students who may be struggling in reading. These assessment
results are used to determine the best differentiated instructional
practices and intervention strategies that support each child's progress
in reading. Our quarterly Learning Support meetings held with classroom
teachers, two Learning Support teachers, teacher interns and the
principal ensure that each child is closely monitored and progressing as
a successful reader.

**3.** **Describe one other curriculum area and show how it relates to
essential skills and knowledge based on the school's mission.** The
Everyday Mathematics curriculum is based on a spiral of conceptual
understanding and problem solving proficiencies from Kindergarten to
fifth grade. Each math unit's learning objectives are identified with
expectations that the child's skills will be either "secure",
"developing" or "just beginning proficiency" by the end of the unit.
Students are pre-tested on each unit to determine their knowledge and
skill base of the unit's topic and to guide decisions about individual
instructional needs. Students and teachers work together to gather
evidence of progress toward the learner objectives during the unit
through formative assignments, observations, slate activities, and
on-going assessments. Rich content and active instruction can be
differentiated according to student readiness and competence,
maintaining the high standards for each student to accomplish the secure
goals of the unit, while also providing opportunities for more advanced
math students to expand proficiency to goals identified as developing
and beginning.

Teachers supplement unit lessons with support strategies for students
who have specific conceptual challenges by using manipulatives, visuals,
technology, reteaching and reinforcement options from the textbook and
other resources. Teachers enrich the unit lessons for students who
exceed the expectations, consulting with the school's Enrichment
Specialist to obtain challenging problem solving tasks, technology
integrations, and advanced math connections to the unit concepts. This
supports the Glenridge Mission which charges the school "to develop
skills for students to have productive lives by offering opportunities
for intellectual and creative challenge and by using a variety of
resources that enrich and enhance the learning process." By identifying
the clear learning outcomes for each student and the acceptable evidence
that will indicate that understanding has been achieved, teachers
creatively plan differentiated math lessons that facilitate the
achievement of mathematical competencies for every student.

**4.** **Describe the different instructional methods the school uses to
improve student learning.**

For each of our curriculum areas, teachers use a Backwards Design Model
(Wiggins and McTighe, 1998) to improve student learning. With this
model, teachers first identify the learner objectives for any unit, then
they decide what assessment would be acceptable evidence of a student's
understanding of the learning objectives. Lessons and activities are
then purposefully planned to help each student meet the learner
objectives. Differentiated instruction throughout the unit of study is
used to ensure each student's success. Also, with ongoing formal and
informal assessments, teachers determine the need for one-on-one, small
group, or in-class support for students having difficulty meeting
identified learner objectives.

Student learning is also improved by the use of several methods within
the classroom that include pre-testing; post-testing; student-led
conferences; student goal-setting; clearly identified learner
objectives; the use of scoring guides or rubrics; lessons based on
multiple intelligences and different learning styles; flexible grouping;
performance assessment; mini-lessons developed as a result of
assessment; and, continual observations to meet individual and group
needs. Additional instructional support is provided to students in
one-on-one or small group learning situations by two Learning Support
teachers in Reading and Math; one Enrichment facilitator; two Special
Education Resource teachers for students identified with an I.E.P.
(Individual Education Plan); an E.L.L.(English Language Learner)
teacher; and a Teacher Intern at every grade level. This additional
instruction can be done as a push-in to the classroom or a pull-out. In
summary, with this intentional use of a wide variety of instructional
methods, all students are on track for improved learning.

**5.** **Describe the school's professional development program and its
impact on student learning.** "Learning is a journey not a destination."
With this belief in mind, the teachers of Glenridge have spent the last
few years designing a professional development program that creates a
shared understanding of our practice and the collection of student data.
To create a shared understanding the staff formed the Glenridge
Professional Development Committee (GPDC) comprised of approximately
twelve members including grade level representatives, representative
specialists, and the principal. This Committee uses research on
effective professional staff development and student data in order to
guide our focus on one goal.

During the past two years our one goal has been to improve student
achievement in Writing. In order to do this we have worked to establish
structures to support our learning in the teaching of writing. One such
structure is our Tuesday mornings with an hour before school devoted to
staff development. Flexible models of learning and connections are
ensured through the use of a variety of activities including experience
panels; discussions at Keystage I (Kdg- Gr. 2) and II (Gr. 3-5);
adjacent grade level discussions; grade level scoring of students'
writing prompts; assessment discussions refining the rubrics and scoring
guides used with students' writing; and individual teacher reflection.
The content of our learning has focused on the purposeful sharing from
conferences attended, such as The Six Traits of Writing developed by
NWREL (Northwest Regional Educational and Laboratory); guest writers,
such as Ralph Fletcher; and book studies, such as [What a Writer
Needs]{.underline} by Ralph Fletcher and [Understanding by]{.underline}
[Design]{.underline} by Wiggins and McTighe.

There has been a remarkable impact on student achievement with our
focused work on the writing goal. Our MAP (Missouri Assessment Program)
Communication Arts scores have steadily increased and we now rank in the
top ten elementary schools within our state. The ERB (Educational Record
Bureau) Writing Assessment Program is a standardized assessment
administered annually to our fifth graders. Results in 2001 and 2002
were significantly higher in all areas of writing than in previous
years. Our own student writing assessments at every grade level have
shown steady growth. And, reflections from teachers, students, and
parents have noted what a difference our focus has made in our students'
writing success! Learning at Glenridge is truly a journey that has
successful connections for ALL.

**[FORMAT FOR STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

The Data Display Table is illustrated on the following page.

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics. Complete a separate form for reading
(language arts or English) and mathematics at each grade level.

Grade[\_\_\_\_3]{.underline}\_\_\_ Test\_\_[Missouri Assessment Program
-- Communication Arts]{.underline}

Edition/publication year\_\_\_[2002]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Publisher
\_\_\_[CTB/ McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[No exemptions in 2002]{.underline}

Number excluded\_\_\_[NA]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_ Percent
excluded\_\_\_[NA]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

**NOTE: For an explanation of the test results, refer to Part IV --
Indicators of Academic Success on page 7 of 18.**

**[FORMAT FOR STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS, Continued]{.underline}**

**Data Display Table for Reading and Language Arts**

#### Missouri Assessment Program - Communication Arts Grade 3

+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
|                           | 2    | 200    | 199    | 199    | 1    |
|                           | 001- | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 | 997- |
|                           | 2002 |        |        |        | 1998 |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Testing month             | 0    | 04/01  | 04/00  | 04/99  | 0    |
|                           | 4/02 |        |        |        | 4/98 |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| ###### SCHOOL SCORES      |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Total Number              | 57   | 62     | 74     | 62     | 67   |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 49 / | 54 /   | 59 /   | 41 /   | 53 / |
| % of students)            | 86%  | 87.1%  | 79.7%  | 66.1%  | 7    |
|                           |      |        |        |        | 9.1% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 41 / | 36 /   | 44 /   | 24 /   | 35 / |
|                           | 7    | 58.1%  | 59.5%  | 38.7%  | 5    |
|                           | 1.9% |        |        |        | 2.2% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At Advanced               | 2 /  | 2 /    | 4 /    | 2 /    | 3 /  |
|                           | 3.5% | 3.2%   | 5.4%   | 3.2%   | 4.5% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Number of students tested | 57   | 59     | 70     | 61     | 67   |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Percent of total students | 100% | 95.2%  | 94.6%  | 98.4%  | 100% |
| tested                    |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Number of students        | 0    | 3      | 4      | 1      | 0    |
| excluded                  |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Percent of students       | 0%   | 4.8%   | 5.4%   | 1.6%   | 0%   |
| excluded                  |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**       |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| 1.Free and reduced Lunch  | 6    | 10     | NA     | 12     | 10   |
| TOTAL Number              |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 3 /  | 8 /    | NA     | 4 /    | 3 /  |
| % of students)            | 50%  | 80%    |        | 33.3%  | 30%  |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 2 /  | 6 /    | NA     | 1 /    | 1 /  |
|                           | 3    | 60%    |        | 8.3%   | 10%  |
|                           | 3.3% |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At Advanced               | 0 /  | 0 / 0% | NA     | 0 / 0% | 0 /  |
|                           | 0%   |        |        |        | 0%   |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| 2.Black (not Hispanic)    | 11   | 15     | 16     | 13     | 14   |
| TOTAL Number              |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 6 /  | 13 /   | 10 /   | 2 /    | 5 /  |
| % of students)            | 5    | 86.7%  | 62.5%  | 15.4%  | 3    |
|                           | 4.5% |        |        |        | 5.7% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 3 /  | 6 /    | 3 /    | 0 / 0% | 2 /  |
|                           | 2    | 40%    | 18.8%  |        | 1    |
|                           | 7.3% |        |        |        | 4.3% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At Advanced               | 0 /  | 0 / 0% | 0 / 0% | 0 / 0% | 0 /  |
|                           | 0%   |        |        |        | 0%   |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| 3.White (not Hispanic)    | 41   | 37     | 46     | 36     | 44   |
| TOTAL Number              |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 39 / | 34 /   | 43 /   | 28 /   | 41 / |
| % of students)            | 9    | 91.9%  | 93.5%  | 77.8%  | 9    |
|                           | 5.1% |        |        |        | 3.2% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 34 / | 25 /   | 37 /   | 20 /   | 26 / |
|                           | 8    | 67.6%  | 80.4%  | 55.6%  | 5    |
|                           | 2.9% |        |        |        | 9.1% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At Advanced               | 2 /  | 1 /    | 4 /    | 1 /    | 2 /  |
|                           | 4.9% | 2.7%   | 8.7%   | 2.8%   | 4.5% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| ###### STATE SCORES       |      |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Total NUMBER              | 68   | 71,716 | 71,261 | 70,630 | 53   |
|                           | ,905 |        |        |        | ,163 |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Basic         | 50   | 50,343 | 48,705 | 47,004 | 33   |
|                           | ,148 |        |        |        | ,990 |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Percentage of students    | 7    | 70.2%  | 68.3%  | 66.5%  | 6    |
|                           | 2.8% |        |        |        | 3.9% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 24   | 22,284 | 22,103 | 19,917 | 14   |
|                           | ,062 |        |        |        | ,641 |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Percentage of students    | 3    | 31.1%  | 31.0%  | 28.2%  | 2    |
|                           | 4.9% |        |        |        | 7.5% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| At Advanced               | 1    | 717    | 1,126  | 851    | 420  |
|                           | ,215 |        |        |        |      |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+
| Percentage of students    | 1.8% | 1.0%   | 1.6%   | 1.2%   | 0.8% |
+---------------------------+------+--------+--------+--------+------+

**NOTE:**

1\. Results from the Missouri Assessment Program are reported here as
numbers of students at each achievement level and the percentage of
students at that level.

2\. For fields displaying "NA", the information was not available.

####### FORMAT FOR DISPLAYING ASSESSMENTS

**[REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS]{.underline}**

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics. Show at least three years of data.
Complete a separate form for each test and grade level.

Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Missouri Assessment Program - Communication
Arts]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [2002 \*]{.underline} Publisher [CTB/
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[LEP (Limited English Proficiency) students were excluded as based on
Language Assessment Scales in years 2001, 2000, and 1999.]{.underline}

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

**\*** New editions are published each year the assessment is
administered.

  ----------------------------- -- ----------- -- ----------- -- ----------- -- ----------- -- -----------
                                   2001-2002      2000-2001      1999-2000      1998-1999      1997-1998

  Testing month                    04/02          04/01          04/00          04/99          04/98

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                            

  Total Score                      80             85             80             62             80

  Number of students tested        57             59             70             61             67

  Percent of total students        100%           95%            95%            98%            100%
  tested                                                                                       

  Number of students excluded      0              3              4              1              0

  Percent of students excluded     0%             5%             5%             2%             0%

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                                          

  1\. Free and Reduced Lunch       NA             73             NA             32             36
  TOTAL                                                                                        

  2\. Black (Not Hispanic)         48             69             53             20             NA
  TOTAL                                                                                        

  3\. White (Not Hispanic)         84             89             97             75             NA
  TOTAL                                                                                        

                                                                                               

                                                                                               
  ----------------------------- -- ----------- -- ----------- -- ----------- -- ----------- -- -----------

**NOTE:** For any fields displaying "NA", the information was not
available.

If the reports use scaled scores, provide the national score (mean
score) and standard deviation for the total test and each subtest.

**NOTE:** The Missouri Assessment Program does not use scaled scores.

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                 2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999   1997-1998

  **NATIONAL SCORES**                                                            

  Total Score                                                                    

  **STANDARD DEVIATIONS**                                                        

  Total Standard Deviation                                                       
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**[FORMAT FOR STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

The Data Display Table is illustrated on the following page.

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics. Complete a separate form for reading
(language arts or English) and mathematics at each grade level.

Grade\_\_[4]{.underline} Test\_\_[\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Mathematics]{.underline}

Edition/publication year\_\_[2002]{.underline} Publisher \_\_\_\_[CTB
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
assessed?\_[No exemptions in 2002]{.underline}

Number excluded\_\_[NA]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_ Percent
excluded\_\_\_\_[NA]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

**NOTE: For an explanation of the test results, refer to Part IV --
Indicators of Academic Success on**

**Page 7 of 18.**

**[FORMAT FOR STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS, Continued]{.underline}**

**Data Display Table for Mathematics**

#### Missouri Assessment Program - Mathematics Grade 4

+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
|                           | 200    | 200    | 1999  | 1998  | 1997  |
|                           | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | -2000 | -1999 | -1998 |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Testing month             | 04/02  | 04/01  | 04/00 | 04/99 | 04/98 |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| ###### SCHOOL SCORES      |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Total Number              | 64     | 73     | 64    | 73    | 64    |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 63 /   | 64 /   | 55 /  | 71 /  | 59 /  |
| % of students)            | 98.4%  | 87.7%  | 85.9% | 97.3% | 92.2% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 50 /   | 47 /   | 42 /  | 46 /  | 42 /  |
|                           | 78.1%  | 64.4%  | 65.6% | 63.0% | 65.6% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At Advanced               | 19 /   | 20 /   | 11 /  | 19 /  | 15 /  |
|                           | 29.7%  | 27.4%  | 17.2% | 26.0% | 23.4% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students tested | 64     | 71     | 62    | 73    | 64    |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of total students | 100%   | 97.3%  | 96.9% | 100%  | 100%  |
| tested                    |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Number of students        | 0      | 2      | 2     | 0     | 0     |
| excluded                  |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percent of students       | 0%     | 2.7%   | 3.1%  | 0%    | 0%    |
| excluded                  |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**       |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| 1.Free and reduced Lunch  | 10     | 13     | NA    | 6     | 9     |
| TOTAL Number              |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 9 /    | 11 /   | NA    | 5 /   | 6 /   |
| % of students)            | 90.0%  | 84.6%  |       | 83.3% | 66.7% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 4 /    | 3 /    | NA    | 1 /   | 2 /   |
|                           | 40.0%  | 23.1%  |       | 16.7% | 22.2% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At Advanced               | 1 /    | 0 /    | NA    | 1 /   | 2 /   |
|                           | 10.0%  | 0.0%   |       | 16.7% | 22.2% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| 2.Black (not Hispanic)    | 16     | 16     | 14    | 14    | 9     |
| TOTAL Number              |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 15 /   | 14 /   | 9 /   | 12 /  | 6 /   |
| % of students)            | 93.8%  | 87.5%  | 64.3% | 85.7% | 66.7% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 8 /    | 4 /    | 2 /   | 3 /   | 2 /   |
|                           | 50.0%  | 25.0%  | 14.3% | 21.4% | 22.2% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At Advanced               | 0 /    | 0 /    | 1 /   | 0 /   | 0 /   |
|                           | 0.0%   | 0.0%   | 7.1%  | 0.0%  | 0.0%  |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| 3.White (not Hispanic)    | 39     | 44     | 38    | 50    | 48    |
| TOTAL Number              |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Basic (N and  | 39 /   | 42 /   | 36 /  | 50 /  | 46 /  |
| % of students)            | 100.0% | 95.5%  | 94.7% | 1     | 95.8% |
|                           |        |        |       | 00.0% |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 33 /   | 39 /   | 30 /  | 37 /  | 34 /  |
|                           | 84.6%  | 88.6%  | 78.9% | 74.0% | 70.8% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At Advanced               | 14 /   | 18 /   | 8 /   | 17 /  | 11 /  |
|                           | 35.9%  | 40.9%  | 21.1% | 34.0% | 22.9% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| ###### STATE SCORES       |        |        |       |       |       |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Total NUMBER              | 71,898 | 71,529 | 7     | 6     | 6     |
|                           |        |        | 0,652 | 9,573 | 7,836 |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Basic         | 56,196 | 56,309 | 5     | 5     | 4     |
|                           |        |        | 4,041 | 3,301 | 8,946 |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percentage of students    | 78.2%  | 78.7%  | 76.5% | 76.6% | 72.2% |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At or Above Proficient    | 26,778 | 26,654 | 2     | 2     | 2     |
|                           |        |        | 5,540 | 4,140 | 0,794 |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percentage of students    | 3.7%   | 3.7%   | 3.6%  | 3.5%  | 3.1%  |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| At Advanced               | 5,489  | 5,828  | 5,585 | 4,359 | 3,438 |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| Percentage of students    | 7.6%   | 8.1%   | 7.9%  | 6.3%  | 5.1%  |
+---------------------------+--------+--------+-------+-------+-------+

> **NOTE:**
>
> 1\. Results from the Missouri Assessment Program are reported here as
> numbers
>
> of students at each achievement level and the percentage of students
> at that level.
>
> 2\. For fields displaying "NA", the information was not available.

**[FORMAT FOR DISPLAYING ASSESSMENT]{.underline}**

**[REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS]{.underline}**

Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
arts or English) and mathematics. Show at least three years of data.
Complete a separate form for each test and grade level.

Grade\_[4]{.underline} Test\_[Missouri Assessment Program -
Mathematics]{.underline}

Edition/publication year\_[2002 \*]{.underline} Publisher
\_\_[CTB/McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they assessed?
[LEP (Limited English Proficiency) students were excluded as based on
Language Assessment Scales in years 2001 and 2000.]{.underline}

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

**\*** New editions are published each year the assessment is
administered.

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                 2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999   1997-1998

  Testing month                  04/02       04/01       04/00       04/99       04/98

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                              

  Total Score                    89          87          86          82          82

  Number of students tested      64          71          62          73          64

  Percent of total students      100%        97%         97%         100%        100%
  tested                                                                         

  Number of students excluded    0           2           2           0           0

  Percent of students excluded   0%          3%          3%          0%          0%

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                            

  1.Free and Reduced Lunch TOTAL 68          63          NA          NA          59

  2\. Black (Not Hispanic) TOTAL 78          57          32          59          NA

  3\. White (Not Hispanic) TOTAL 91          91          88          87          NA
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**NOTE:** For any fields displaying "NA", the information was not
available.

If the reports use scaled scores, provide the national score (mean
score) and standard deviation for the total test and each subtest.

**NOTE: The Missouri Assessment Program does not use scaled scores.**

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                 2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999   1997-1998

  **NATIONAL SCORES**                                                            

  Total Score                                                                    

  **STANDARD DEVIATIONS**                                                        

  Total Standard Deviation                                                       
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------