##### *2006-2007 No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon Schools Program*

*U.S. Department of Education*

**Cover Sheet** Type of School: (Check all that apply) \[x \] Elementary
\[ \] Middle \[ \] High \[ \] K-12 \[ \] Charter

Name of Principal: [Ms. Susan Burgess]{.underline}

Official School Name: [George Washington Elementary School
#22]{.underline}

School Mailing Address: [800 Scott Street]{.underline}

Baltimore Maryland 21230-1824

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_NA\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
State School Code Number\*[0022]{.underline}

Telephone [( 410 ) 396-1445]{.underline} Fax [( 410 ) 396-3392
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Web site/UR: [www.baltimorecityschools.org]{.underline} E-mail:
[SBurgess@bcps.k12.md.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)

Name of Superintendent\* [Dr. Charlene Cooper Boston]{.underline}

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

District Name: [Baltimore City Public School System]{.underline}
[Tel]{.underline}. [( 410 ) 396-8898]{.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. Brian Morris

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

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\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

2.  The school has made adequate yearly progress each year for the past
    two years and has not 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 2006-2007 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 2001 and has not received the No Child Left
    Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools award in the past five years.

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

6.  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
    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: [100]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[33]{.underline} Middle schools

\-- Junior high schools

[48]{.underline} High schools

[27]{.underline} Other (Charter)

[208]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$11,605 (]{.underline}as per James
Figlozzi-Office of Chief Financial

Officer)

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: \_[\_\_\_
\$9,661\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. [\_\_\_\_4\_\_]{.underline}Number of years the principal has been in
her/his position at this school.

[\-\-\--]{.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**    17        15                     **32**       **7**                             

  **K**       23        22                     **45**       **8**                             

  **1**       15        17                     **32**       **9**                             

  **2**       15        19                     **34**       **10**                            

  **3**       23        21                     **44**       **11**                            

  **4**       14        14                     **28**       **12**                            

  **5**       13        13                     **26**       **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   241
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

the school: [94]{.underline}% Black or African American

[\--]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

[\--]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander

[\--]{.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:
[17%]{.underline}

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      3
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year   

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      37
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year   

  **(3)**                   Total of all transferred    40
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 241
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Total transferred students  .17
                            in row (3) divided by total 
                            students in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           17
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

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

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

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

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [90%]{.underline}

Total number students who qualify: [217]{.underline}

10\. Students receiving special education services: [15%]{.underline}

[36]{.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 [5]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [5]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Emotional Disturbance [13]{.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\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_1\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_\_11\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_0\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_\_2\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_1\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_6\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_0\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_\_6\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_0\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_26\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_2\_\_\_\_

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

students in the school divided by the FTE of classroom teachers, e.g.,
22:1 \_\_\_\_21:1\_\_\_

13\. Show the attendance patterns of teachers and students as a
percentage.

  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                            2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Daily student attendance  92%         94%         92%         92%         93%

  Daily teacher attendance  \*78%       74%         na%         na%         na%

  Teacher turnover rate     \*\*14%     14%         0%          38%         36%

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

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

**\***Teacher rate can be attributed to maternity leaves and long term
illnesses.

\*\*Teacher turn over rate stabilized as a result of principal turn
over.

**[PART III ‑ SUMMARY]{.underline}**

George Washington Elementary #022 in a Snapshot

*Vision and Mission*

-   Accelerating the academic achievement of all students, in
    partnership with the entire community, to ensure that all students
    have the attitudes, skills, and proficiencies needed to succeed in
    college and in the 21^st^ century global workforce.

-   Accelerating student progress through effective implementation of
    Baltimore City Public School's Master Plan, focusing on quality
    instruction and sustaining a culture of excellence.

George Washington Elementary #22 is a pre-kindergarten through grade
five Baltimore City Public School located in South Baltimore. This area
is referred to as Washington Village/Pig Town. It is located "in the
shadows" of both Oriole Park at Camden Yards, home of the Baltimore
Orioles professional baseball team and M&T Bank Stadium, home of the
Ravens, the city's professional football team. The neighborhood itself
is currently in a rejuvenation and renovation phase. New homes are being
built, and older ones are being renovated. New or existing businesses
are being enticed to locate into the area.

As of September 2005, the official count of students enrolled in George
Washington Elementary was 276 students. Of these 276 students, 232 were
African American, 41 were white, 1 was Asian/Pacific Islander, and 2
were Hispanic. The percentage of students receiving free or reduced
meals was 93% and 15% of the school's population received special
education services. The students were taught by 67% of highly qualified
teachers. In addition, the entire teaching staff held the following
state issued professional certificates: 35% Advanced, 53% standard, and
12% Conditional.

Although the neighborhood is experiencing a renaissance, the school's
population is being adversely affected. The overall number of students
attending George Washington has dropped over the last three years.
Families have had to move due to houses being sold to "rehabbers" or
being rehabbed by owners of former rental properties. As a result of
this population shift, there is only one second, one fifth grade and one
self contained special education class in the 2006-07 school year and
two classes each at the kindergarten, first, fourth grade levels.

On a positive note, George Washington continues to "beat the odds" and
outperforms similar schools in the city and the state, as the state test
scores demonstrate over the last three years. These scores show
consistent growth over time as reflected in enclosed data charts for
reading and math.

George Washington's success can be attributed to many factors; most
important are the various stakeholders. Although funded by various
sources and having differing criteria, the stakeholders have an enormous
impact on the school. For example, St. Jerome's Head Start Preschool
Program, funded through Catholic Charities, helps prepare four and five
year olds for the rigor of elementary school. The after school BOOST
Program and the Carol White Physical Education Program, funded by the
YMCA directly impacts the school's climate and attendance. Title I funds
provide an Instructional Support Teacher and an Instrumental Music
position. Additional after school groups include: After School Homework,
Boy Scouts, Brownies, and an Intermediate Girls' Etiquette Group.

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

**1. Assessment Results**: Data show that 90% all students at George
Washington Elementary School scored at the proficient/advanced level in
reading and 92% of all students scored at the proficient/advanced level
in mathematics as measured by Maryland State Assessment. The MSA
(Maryland State Assessment) test is a criterion referenced test that
measures student proficiency and advanced proficiency on the Maryland
content standards which are embedded in the reading and mathematics
Voluntary State Curriculum. Each child receives a score in each content
area that categorizes their performance as basic, proficient or
advanced. Student performance is also compared to national, state, and
district achievement. Items on the MSA include selected response
(multiple choice) and brief constructed response as well as extended
response items.

Accountability is recognized by Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Schools,
districts, and the State of Maryland must show that students are making
AYP in reading and math. Information on the state assessment system may
be found at [www.mdk12.org](http://www.mdk12.org/) and
[www.mdreportcard.org]{.underline}

MSA data beginning with the SY2003-04, show that third grade performance
levels in reading increased from 46% advanced/proficient to 76% in
2004-05 and 96% in 2005-06. In mathematics, 59% were at the
advanced/proficient level in 2003-04, increased to 73% in

2004-05, and increased again in 2005-06 to 91%.

MSA data beginning with the SY 2003-04 show that fourth grade
performance levels in reading increased from 56% advanced/proficient to
87% in 2004-05 and 94% in 2005-06. In mathematics, 44% were at the
advanced/proficient level in 2003-04, increased to 80% to in 2004-05,
and increased again in 2005-06 to 97%.

MSA data beginning with the SY 2003-04 show that fifth grade performance
levels in reading increased from 50% advanced/proficient to 83% in
2004-05 and dipped slightly to 81% in 2005-06. The slight dip could be
attributed to pupil mobility. In mathematics, 73% were at the
advanced/proficient level in 2003-04, increased to 80% to in 2004-05,
and increased again in 2005-06 to 88%.

George Washington Elementary, an inner city school continues to "beat
the odds" and outperforms similar schools in Baltimore City and the
State of Maryland as the state assessment scores have demonstrated over
the last three years. These scores show consistent growth over time as
shown in enclosed data charts for reading and math.

Prior to 2004-05, state scores were higher than George Washington's
scores. But for the last two years in reading and math, GW students have
outperformed, scored at the same level or scored slightly below the
State of Maryland. GW third graders have outperformed or performed the
same as state scores with 96% in 2005-06 and 76% in 2004-05 while the
State scored 78% in 2005-06 and 76% in 2004-05. In math, GW third
graders outperformed or scored slightly below the state with 91% in
2005-06 and 73% in 2004-05 while the state scored 79% in 2005-06 and 77%
in 2004-05

In reading, GW fourth graders outperformed State of MD scores with 94%
in 2005-06 and 87% in 20040-05 while the State scored 82 % in 2005-06
and 74% in 2004-05. In math GW fourth graders outperformed the state
with 97% in 2005-06 and 80% in 2004-05 while the State of MD scored 82%
in 2005-06 and 77% in 2004-05.

In reading, GW fifth graders have outperformed the state scores with 81%
in 2005-06 and 83% in 20040-05 while the State scored 77% in 2005-06 and
74% in 2004-05. In math, GW fifth graders outperformed the state with
91% in 2005-06 and dipped slightly to 73% in 2004-05 while the state
scored 79% in 2005-06 and 77% in 2004-05.

**2. Using Assessment Results**: George Washington's faculty and staff
develop the school's improvement plan based on Maryland State Assessment
results. First, results are analyzed for overall findings and
contributing factors in the "evidence of need" portion of the school
improvement plan.

Findings address both strengths and weaknesses in the areas of reading,
math, and attendance. In addition, climate, mobility rate, parent/family
and community involvement and special education service results are
included in the plan. Statistics for "all students" and subgroups (five
or larger) are reported by the state and are planned for in the school
improvement plan for the coming year. "All students" and Subgroup
objectives are developed for implementation.

Then, action plans are developed and include school-wide goals,
objectives, and quarterly milestones. This quarterly monitoring is
divided into four milestones that increase in percentages throughout the
year. Within the action plan section, strategies and activities for
implementation are planned and monitored regularly. Action plans are
developed based on assessed needs as well as best practices that need to
continue in order for the school to move forward and continue meeting
Adequate Yearly Progress as set by the state of Maryland.

Faculty and staff professional development is planned and reflects
Baltimore City Public Schools' goals for reading and math. Specific
school needs based on Maryland State Assessment results are guided by
The School Improvement Plan and steered by the School Improvement Team.
A management plan is developed as part of the school improvement plan.
This process reflects George Washington's use of data to understand and
improve student and school performance.

**3. Communicating Assessment Results:** At the school level, George
Washington Elementary sends home a principal's letter explaining the
levels of achievement (advanced, proficient, basic) and what levels are
considered as passing (advanced or proficient). Along with the
principal's letter, the school sends home individual test scores.
Parents are made very aware at the beginning of the school year as to
their child's performance on this "high stakes" testing program that is
administered in March. The first "Back to School Night" in September
serves as the initial in depth sharing of assessment results. At the
classroom level, grade newsletters also inform parents about grade level
results.

In addition to the above mentioned ways of communicating with parents,
the School Improvement Plan, which is based on test scores, is the tool
which the School Improvement Team (parents, teachers, administrators,
and community people) uses to drive the inner workings of daily
instruction. The School Improvement Team meets quarterly to reassess the
plan, makes revisions, and adjustments so that goals may be met. Thus
all stakeholders are aware of school-wide, grade-wide and individual
strengths and needs of all students.

**4. Sharing Success:** The successes of George Washington Elementary
have been shared state-wide, city-wide, and community-wide with media
news conferences at Maryland State Department of Education and Baltimore
City Public Schools Headquarters. There have been articles in Baltimore
Sun Newspaper, local community newspapers, and Baltimore Teachers Union
Informational Sheets. A "Blue Ribbon School" flag flies over the school
informing all who pass by of the school's success. The above has been
coupled with systemic news releases and CEO's Bulletin.

The Maryland State Department of Education had a February event planned
at the school. Local and state dignitaries are attending the event along
with media personnel. Later in March, another recognition ceremony will
be held at the state capital, Annapolis. Steps outlined in Part 3
"Communicating Assessment Results" also demonstrate the means by which
successes have been communicated with parents and the community at
large.

In addition, GW has hosted school teams, local resident principal groups
and others to demonstrate best practices, strategies, lesson learned
etc. Staff has presented to area principal groups as to best practices
and daily instruction. GW serves as a pre-teaching teaching center for
Towson University providing students with urban teaching experience.
Staff members also are part of a locally based group of teachers who
discuss best practices and successful teaching methods, then share and
create supplemental materials. At the primary level, a model first grade
program "Whole Day First Grade" which is the foundation for intermediate
success is in place and has been recognized with a visit by The First
Lady, Laura Bush. This year 2006-07 George Washington Elementary was
recognized Nationally as Model Title I School.

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

**1. Curriculum:** George Washington Elementary School uses the Maryland
State Department of Education Voluntary State Curriculum (VSC) as
dictated by Baltimore City Public Schools' (BCPSS) systemic initiative.
This curriculum is based on National Content Standards K-12 for
reading/language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, etc. and
incorporates assessment limits for specific subjects and grade levels.
The voluntary state curriculum (VSC) is the document that identifies the
Maryland Content Standards and aligns them with the Maryland Assessment
Program. The curriculum documents are formatted so that each begins with
content standards or broad, measurable statements about what students
should know and be able to do. Indicator statements provide the next
level of specificity and begin to narrow the focus for teachers. The
objectives provide teachers with clear information about what specific
learning should occur. When the objective is tested on the Maryland
State Reading and Mathematics Assessments, it will be followed by an
assessment limit. In order to provide teachers and students with quality
instruction, BCPSS has revised its curricula or obtained curricula from
other successful districts in Maryland for reading/language arts (PK-8)
and mathematics (PK-8).

To support the selected curriculum the following materials are used
throughout the grades**:** reading-grades PK-5, SRA's Open Court
Reading, mathematics-grades K-5, McGraw-Hill's [Math in My
World,]{.underline} science-grades PK-5, Houghton Mifflin's Discovery
Works, social studies-grades PK-5, Macmillan/McGraw-Hill. Intervention
components are included as part of Open Court Reading and Voyager
Password are used with students repeating the grade or scoring "basic"
on the state assessment.

At George Washington teachers strictly adhered to the state's Voluntary
State Curriculum and its assessment limits. High level teaching
incorporated teacher explanation, modeling, guided practice, release of
students to practice individually, assessment, reteaching of students as
needed, and challenging students who are able. Assessment, instructional
modification and adjustments were on going events based on analysis of
student work. For areas of weakness, action plans were developed and
followed.

**2. Reading:** George Washington's reading curriculum and selection
process was discussed previously in section labeled "1. Curriculum;"
nevertheless, as previously stated individual schools may not select nor
may they deviate from systemic decisions in reference to programs,
strategies or materials. The use of the Voluntary State Curriculum/Open
Court Reading Alignment and Pacing Guide document are required by local
and state directives.

The pacing guide helps teachers gauge short and long range planning. It
divides units into suggested lesson windows aligned with Open Court
Reading Program and BCPSS approved calendar. The Curriculum Aligned
Document for Reading, Writing, Controlling Language, Listening, and
Speaking addresses the connection between Maryland Voluntary State
Curriculum Content Standards and the skill development within the Open
Court Reading Program. This document aligns subject matter, instruction,
and assessment in reading/language arts. Open Court Reading end of unit
and lesson assessments provide information for instructional planning.
Teachers use the information in the alignment document to augment
instruction within the Open Court Reading Program.

**3. Mathematics:** Mathematics instruction at George Washington,
although guided and structured by Maryland's Voluntary State Mathematics
Curriculum, is modified and adjusted by "Math Works" which consists of
materials generated by a professional learning community of teachers.
This locally based group designs lessons around best practices in
mathematics and focuses on repeated exposure to a skill through daily
homework assignments, and daily reviews. They operate under the premise
that, "It can take a child as many as 24 exposures to a skill before it
becomes a part of their long term memory. Once students understand and
master skills for an objective then, students are provided opportunities
for practice over time." Steps in teaching VSC objectives must provide
hands-on activities, modeling and guided practice, teacher checking,
differentiation with suggestions built in for re-teaching, checking
again, and teacher supervised practice. For those students in need of
enrichment or extension, suggestions are also provided. The "Math Works"
group of teachers learns about math concepts, discusses best practices
and successful teaching methods, shares teacher created supplemental
materials, and clarifies what is to be taught.

**4. Instructional Methods:** The various instructional methods used at
George Washington are incorporated throughout this application. The
manner in which assessment results are used (mentioned in Part IV, 2.
Using Assessment Results) demonstrates the importance of analyzing,
studying findings, understanding contributing factors and developing
goals, milestones and action plans. Long and short term goals are
established and monitored. In Part IV (1. Curriculum, 2.Reading, and 3.
Mathematics), the recurring methods are modeling, guided practice,
repeated exposure, assessment, differentiation, re-teaching,
challenging, extending, hands-on, analyzing student work, instructional
modifications through adjustments, making connections, building
background, and other research based best practices. It seems that a
successful school is able to juggle all of the above at the proper time
and place with the properly identified students. "Knowing your students"
is paramount. The faculty and staff at George Washington Elementary work
very hard to "know" their students.

Cultural Arts

Despite limited resources and personnel, GW strives to provide and
expose students to a variety of experiences. Being in the city allows
students opportunities to visit and participate in cultural outreach
programs with The Baltimore Museum of Art, The Reginald F. Lewis Museum
of African American Culture, The Sports Legends Museum, The Ballet
Company, The Baltimore Symphony Orchestra and others. In addition, GW is
allotted an art teacher and an instrumental music teacher for 2 ½ days
per each week. Students do participate in physical education classes
twice a week. Various clubs and activities are held after school and
taught by school staff. These activities include: modern dance, book
club, homework club, computer club, Junior Achievement, Boy Scouts, and
Girl Scouts. Visiting programs also enhance student exposure to the
arts. For example, a modern dance troupe performed and taught students
several professional dance techniques and Baltimore Clay Works staff
worked with young artists at GW.

**5. Professional Development**: Professional development is both
systemic and school based. The systemic professional development ensures
support and implementation of Baltimore City Public Schools curricula.
The School Improvement Plan provides guidance from the school based
perspective. Coupling these efforts with effective and ongoing
job-embedded professional development at the school level for classroom
teachers provides learning and coaching opportunities, for teachers to
effectively teach, assess student learning, and adjust teaching
strategies based on current student performance. Teachers studied
student work in order to identify next steps for instruction. Topics
have been as varied as differentiation of instruction, linking formative
and summative assessments with daily instruction, developing higher
level questions to extend and enhance critical thinking, Voluntary State
Curriculum, analysis of local and state assessments for areas of
instructional focus, writing brief constructed response questions, Open
Court Reading Program and its components, McGraw-Hill Mathematics and
its components, Math Works and others.

**[PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULT]{.underline}**

In order to interpret Maryland State Assessments (MSA) results, take
into account that the Maryland State Department of Education defines
results in terms of the following subgroups: African American, White,
Hispanic, FARMS, special education, and limited English proficiency. At
George Washington Elementary, only two of the above mentioned subgroups
apply. Those subgroups are African American and FARMS. There are not
enough children to create additional subgroups.

Subject**:** [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test:
[Maryland State Assessment]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2005-2006]{.underline} Publisher: [SRA
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                       2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                                                        

  SCHOOL SCORES\*                                                                      

  \% proficient plus advanced          96          76          46          33          

  \% advanced                          11          14          5           0           

  Number of students tested            44          37          39          55          

  Percent of total students tested     100         100         100         100         

  Number of students alternatively     1           0           1           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    2           0           2           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. African American                 94          79          41          28          

  \% proficient plus advanced          9           \--         \--         \--         

  \% advanced                          30          30          28          40          

  Number of students tested                                                            

  2\. FARMS                                                                            

  \% proficient plus advanced          95          74          52          34          

  \% advanced                          14          \-\--       \--         \--         

  Number of students tested            36          32          28          44          

  3\. Special Education                \*          \*          \*          \*          

                                                                                       

  State Scores                                                                         

  \% proficient plus advanced          78          76          71                      

  \% advanced                          15          18          13                      
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*Too few to constitute subgroup

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [4]{.underline} Test: [Maryland
State Assessment]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2005-2006]{.underline} Publisher: [SRA
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                       2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                                                        

  SCHOOL SCORES\*                                                                      

  \% proficient plus advanced          94          87          56          NA          

  \% advanced                          48          18          6                       

  Number of students tested            28          39          48                      

  Percent of total students tested     100         100         100                     

  Number of students alternatively     1           1           1                       
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    4           3           2                       
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. African American                 93          91          47          NA          

  \% proficient plus advanced          48          \--         \--                     

  \% advanced                          29          31          \--                     

  Number of students tested                                                            

  2\. FARMS                                                                            

  \% proficient plus advanced          93          94          57          NA          

  \% advanced                          47          \--         \--                     

  Number of students tested            30          32          \--                     

  3\. Special Education                \*          \*          \*          \*          

                                                                                       

  State Scores                                                                         

  \% proficient plus advanced          82          74          68                      

  \% advanced                          23          18          15                      
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*Too few to constitute subgroup

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Maryland
State Assessment]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2005-2006]{.underline} Publisher: [SRA
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                       2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                                                        

  SCHOOL SCORES\*                                                                      

  \% proficient plus advanced          81          83          50          34          

  \% advanced                          27          37          2           6           

  Number of students tested            24          41          48          53          

  Percent of total students tested     100         100         100         100         

  Number of students alternatively     0           1           0           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    0           2           0           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. African American                                                                 

  \% proficient plus advanced          87          84          47          39          

  \% advanced                          26          \--         \--         \--         

  Number of students tested            23          27          40          33          

  2\. FARMS                                                                            

  \% proficient plus advanced          74          82          50          38          

  \% advanced                          11          \--         \--         \--         

  Number of students tested            19          33          36          40          

  3\. Special Education                \*          \*          \*          \*          

                                                                                       

  State Scores                                                                         

  \% proficient plus advanced          77          74          68                      

  \% advanced                          34          30          29                      
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*Too few to constitute subgroup

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test:
[Maryland State Assessment]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2005-2006]{.underline} Publisher: [SRA
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                       2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                                                        

  SCHOOL SCORES\*                                                                      

  \% proficient plus advanced          91          73          59          45          

  \% advanced                          16          35          10          5           

  Number of students tested            43          37          39          58          

  Percent of total students tested     100         100         100         100         

  Number of students alternatively     1           0           1           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    2           0           2           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. African American                                                                 

  \% proficient plus advanced          88          73          55                      

  \% advanced                          9.4         \--         \--                     

  Number of students tested            30          30          28          41          

  2\. FARMS                                                                            

  \% proficient plus advanced          92          74          66                      

  \% advanced                          13.5        \--         \--                     

  Number of students tested            36          32          28          44          

  3\. Special Education                \*          \*          \*          \*          

                                                                                       

  State Scores                                                                         

  \% proficient plus advanced          79          77          72                      

  \% advanced                          25          26          20                      
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*Too few to constitute subgroup

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [4]{.underline} Test:
[Maryland State Assessment]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2005-2006]{.underline} Publisher: [SRA
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                       2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                                                        

  SCHOOL SCORES\*                                                                      

  \% proficient plus advanced          97          80          44                      

  \% advanced                          71          10          8                       

  Number of students tested            28          39          48                      

  Percent of total students tested     100         100         100                     

  Number of students alternatively     1           3           2                       
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    4           8           4                       
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. African American                                                                 

  \% proficient plus advanced          97          81          38                      

  \% advanced                          72          \--         \--                     

  Number of students tested            29          31          \--                     

  2\. FARMS                                                                            

  \% proficient plus advanced          97          85          43                      

  \% advanced                          70          \--         \--                     

  Number of students tested            30          32          \--                     

  3\. Special Education                \*          \*          \*                      

                                                                                       

  State Scores                                                                         

  \% proficient plus advanced          82          77          70                      

  \% advanced                          32          27          20                      
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*Too few to constitute subgroups

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test:
[Maryland State Assessment]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2005-2006]{.underline} Publisher: [SRA
McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                                       2005-2006   2004-2005   2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002

  Testing month                                                                        

  SCHOOL SCORES\*                                                                      

  \% proficient plus advanced          88          80          73          24          

  \% advanced                          27          23          4           0           

  Number of students tested            24          40          48          53          

  Percent of total students tested     100         100         100         100         

  Number of students alternatively     0           1           0           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    0           2           0           \--         
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. African American                                                                 

  \% proficient plus advanced          91          74          72          21          

  \% advanced                          26          \--         \--         \--         

  Number of students tested            23          27          40          33          

  2\. FARMS                                                                            

  \% proficient plus advanced          84          79          76          25          

  \% advanced                          11          \--         \--         \--         

  Number of students tested            19          33          36          40          

  3\. Special Education                \*          \*          \*          \*          

                                                                                       

  State Scores                                                                         

  \% proficient plus advanced          73          69          63                      

  \% advanced                          19          17          13                      
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

\*Too few to constitute subgroups