##### *REVISED 3-22-05*

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

*U.S. Department of Education September 2004*

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

Name of Principal [Dr. Charlynne J.
Hopkins\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address\_\_\_[26064 School Lane]{.underline}
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

\_\_\_[Millsboro]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[DE]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[19966-9246]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County
\_\_\_\_[Sussex]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_School
Code
Number\*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[0690]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Telephone [( 302 ) 945-6200]{.underline} Fax [( 302 ) 945-6203
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.longneckelementary.com]{.underline} E-mail
\_\_[chopkina@irsd.k12.de.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\* \_\_\_\_\_\_[Mrs. Lois Hobbs]{.underline}

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

District Name [Indian River School District]{.underline} Tel. [( 302 )
436-1000]{.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 Mr. Harvey Walls

President/Chairperson

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

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

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

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: \_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_
Elementary schools

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

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

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

\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_ Other (Briefly explain):

One Magnet School, One Alternative School, and

One Special Needs School

\_\_[14]{.underline}\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure:
\_\_\_\_[\$8,491]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure:
\_\_\_[\$10,008]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

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

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

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

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

\_\_\_[3]{.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**    9         5                      **14**       **7**                             

  **K**       40        39                     **79**       **8**                             

  **1**       43        40                     **83**       **9**                             

  **2**       40        52                     **92**       **10**                            

  **3**       51        48                     **99**       **11**                            

  **4**       43        46                     **89**       **12**                            

  **5**       53        43                     **96**       **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   552
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of \_\_\_[72]{.underline} % White

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

[\_\_\_\_7]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

\_\_\_\_1 % American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

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

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

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

  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**                   Number of students who      65
                            transferred ***to*** the    
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      47
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 112
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 530
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided .21
                            by total in row (4)         

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

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

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals:
\_\_\_[51]{.underline}\_\_\_%

Total number students who qualify: \_\_\_[279]{.underline}\_\_\_

> If this method does not produce an accurate estimate of the percentage
> of students from low‑income families or the school does not
> participate in the federally‑supported lunch program, specify a more
> accurate estimate, tell why the school chose it, and explain how it
> arrived at this estimate.

10\. Students receiving special education services:
\_\_\_[20]{.underline}\_\_\_%

\_\_\_[109]{.underline}\_\_Total Number of Students Served

> Indicate below the number of students with disabilities according to
> conditions designated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education
> Act.

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

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_[5]{.underline}\_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_[72]{.underline}\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment \_[30]{.underline}\_Speech or Language
Impairment

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

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

\_\_\_\_ Emotional Disturbance

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

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

Classroom teachers \_\_\_[31]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_[5]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_[15]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_\_[71]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[5]{.underline}\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio: \_\_[18 to
1]{.underline}\_\_\_

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

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

  Daily student attendance   94%         95%         94%         95%         95%

  Daily teacher attendance   93%         93%         93%         93%         92%

  Teacher turnover rate      \<1%        \<1%        \<1%        \<1%        \<1%

  Student dropout rate       N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A
  (middle/high)                                                              

  Student drop-off rate      N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A         N/A
  (high school)                                                              
  -------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Long Neck Elementary School (LNES) is located in the rural town of
Millsboro, Delaware. It is one of seven elementary schools in the Indian
River School District. The school has a total student population of 552
students in grades PK -- 5. The racial composition of the diverse
student body includes 72% Caucasian, 20% African American, 7% Hispanic,
and 1 % American Indian. LNES houses a large portion of low socio
economic students with 51.7% of the students population receiving free
or reduced meals. LNES also houses an Intensive Learning Center along
with the other special education services. Regardless of their
limitations, all students are instructed in the district standards-based
curricula.

Long Neck Elementary is a community school where parents, teachers,
support staff and community members collaborate for the benefit of all
students. The staff consists of 2 administrators, 2 secretaries, 4
custodians, 8 cafeteria workers, 5 paraprofessionals, 1 nurse, 1
counselor, 1 family intervention therapist, 1 reading specialist, 1
reading teacher, 1 math teacher, 13 specialists, and 31 teachers. Our
active Parent Teacher Organization provides a vehicle for parents to
support the school's programs. Parents and community members partner
with the school via the Creative Mentoring Program, classroom volunteer
opportunities, "adopt a class" program, and a weekly career corner on
the LNES televised news program. Students are challenged academically,
and they are encouraged to demonstrate model behavior. Good citizenship
is reinforced via our Character Education Program where students are
honored monthly with certificates and medals for demonstrating the Six
Pillars of Good Character (responsibility, citizenship, respect,
trustworthiness, and fairness). The school wide discipline program,
"Caught Being Good," promotes making positive choices and becoming a
productive member of society.

The Long Neck staff is committed to providing students with the skills
required to reason, communicate, and live in a literate society. The
staff seeks to provide instruction that allows all students to reach
their fullest potential. They assist students in gaining academic
competence and the responsibility to find success through their school
years and into the world of work. This is done through after school
programs, differentiated instruction, and extra support programs. Staff
members have written and received grants amounting to well over
\$150,000 over the past six years to purchase materials and fund special
programs to meet students' needs. Over 48% of the teaching staff have
master's degrees, two staff members have their National Board
Certifications, and one staff member has her Doctorate.

Our school goals include increasing the percentage of students who meet
or exceed the state standards in all academic areas, providing
professional development for instructional staff, increasing the
availability of technology to enhance learning and instruction, creating
a professional learning community, and finally, increasing parental and
community involvement opportunities.

Long Neck Elementary School is unique. In spite of our size (student
population), our school has resulted in the creation of a nurturing
learning environment for students. This has also led to the development
of a professional learning community where teachers work closely
together, both within and across grade levels, to promote learning.
Instructional staff members participate in numerous learning-focused
professional development activities, which enable them to provide our
students with instructional strategies that are sound and
research-based. Our School Improvement Committee, which consists of
staff, parents, and community members, identifies and allocates
resources to enhance achievement for all students. Since 51.7% of our
student population comes from homes with low incomes we qualify as a
Title I school. The staff's efforts and students' achievements have been
recognized as closing the achievement gap. The school also received a
Superior rating by the state of Delaware for 2003 and 2004.

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

**Long Neck Elementary School's Assessment Results in Reading and
Mathematics**

The staff of Long Neck Elementary School use multiple indicators to
track student growth and the gains of various student populations and to
gauge overall academic success of the school. Student progress toward
the state standards is monitored using a variety of measures, including
performance assessment, portfolio and norm-referenced testing.

Although we use multiple measures, the Delaware Student Testing Program
(DSTP) serves as our primary indicator of student progress toward the
state standards. This test is administered annually and has been
expanded to include grades 2 through 10. The data presented for our
school will focus on grades 3 and 5, as the more recently adopted
assessments at the other grade levels are not yet supported by more than
3 years of data.

The DSTP assesses reading using literary, informative, and technical
texts. Students are required to demonstrate understanding of the text by
completing multiple choice, short answer, and extended response
questions. The percentage of 3^rd^ grade students at LNES who have met
or exceeded the reading standard (reflected at performance levels 3, 4,
and 5) has increased from 69% to 90% between 1999 and 2004. Likewise,
significant improvement is evident in the range of 5^th^ graders meeting
and exceeding the standard from 68% in 1999 to 92% in 2004. Nationally
normed data also reflect reading gains for the six-year period. On the
Stanford Achievement Test Reading Comprehension subtest from 1999 to
2004 those students with a NCE above the 50th percentile score has risen
from 55% to 73% in grade 3 and from 56% to 65% in grade 5.

In the mathematics portion of the DSTP, the students are required to
demonstrate key concepts by solving "real-life" problems. In 1999, only
67% of the school's 3^rd^ graders met or exceeded the standard in
mathematics. In 2004, that percentage had increased to 87%. In 1999,
only 65% of the 5^th^ graders were meeting or exceeding the standard, as
compared to 89% in 2004. On the Stanford Achievement Test Math subtest
from 1999 to 2004 students with a NCE above the 50th percentile score
has risen from 57% to 81% in grade 3 and from 60% to 65% in grade 5.

The data in a small school is impeded by the concern for statistical
significance. Our student population in a grade level ranges from 14
students in Pre-Kindergarten to 95 students in fifth grade. Looking at
our data, one realizes that there are fluctuations in population numbers
that make it more difficult to track every group over the 6-yr span.
However, looking at the disaggregated data that is significant, a
pattern is easy to discern. LNES's at risk populations are making gains.
In reading, our third grade low-income students steadily came from 68%
in 1999, as compared to 87% meeting the standard in 2004. In reading our
fifth grade low income students went from 51% in 1999, as compared to
87% meeting the standard in 2004.

All disaggregated populations of math students made gains. In third
grade our low-income students grew from a 62% meeting the math standard
in 1999 to 79% meeting it in 2004. Our third grade African Americans
steadily rose from only 53% meeting or exceeding the standard in 1999 to
89% meeting or exceeding in 2004. Our African American fifth grade
students have made progress moving from 47% meeting the standard in 1999
to 75% meeting the standard in 2004. Our goal is to move all students in
this population to meeting or exceeding the standards.

A look at our data makes one realize LNES's school culture embraces all
children. Our results demonstrate high expectations and a
standards-based philosophy. Our staff takes great pride in our students'
achievement. This focus on success was recognized by the State of
Delaware when Long Neck Elementary received a Superior School Award
based on Delaware School Accountability Ratings in 2003 and 2004.

**LNES's ability to use assessment data to understand and improve
student and school performance**

Assessment data is the catalyst for problem solving and decision-making
at LNES. "Data Day" is a school-wide in-service event, which compels
LNES staff to examine the evidence of student progress. In June, the
staff spent a day analyzing the 2004 DSTP data that was released in May.
These results were compared to in house assessments and report card
grades. Professional reflection focused on the following: Where are our
students? What are their strengths? What are their weaknesses? What are
individual and group instructional needs? What does the disaggregated
data imply? Are we meeting the instructional needs of all student
populations? Are the in-house assessments and report card grades aligned
with the state standards? The outcome of this day were school-wide goals
focusing on reading and math instruction as well as better alignment of
assessments and grading practices with the content standards. Grade
levels articulated expectations about reading and math in relation to
the state standards. Enhancing reading and math skills and the need for
additional training in these areas became goals for staff development.
Professional development needs surfaced for assistance in text-based
writing, answering extended responses in math, and guided reading. An
in-service was held in August to present guided reading strategies, and
plans were developed to expand grade level and school-wide reading
opportunities. Reading Counts and after school reading programs focused
on identified weaknesses. Additional instructional time was allocated to
reading and math with better integration into content areas. Data
collection and analysis is continued more informally at regular
Professional Learning Community (PLC) meetings as teachers examine
students' daily progress. Theme tests, math unit assessments, and
writing assessments are benchmarks to determine the direction of
instruction. This data is shared at PLC meetings and quarterly Promotion
and Review meetings. Other more formal measures of student progress are
used to look for trends and to determine the degree to which students
are achieving the standards. They include: The Star Reading Test, Grade
A+ by AGS for K and 1, Computer Curriculum Corporation (CCC), and the
Work Sampling Portfolio for PK, K and 1. Data is disaggregated and
analyzed with consideration of needs for students, curriculum,
instructional strategies, teacher support, and instructional time.

**Long Neck Elementary School's Communication of Student Performance**

LNES communicates student performance, including assessment data, to
parents, students, and the community in a variety of ways. One of the
school's goals reads, "All students will meet or exceed the state
standards." Subsequently, progress toward that goal is measured and
shared with the public through the school's monthly newsletter, school
website, and the local newspaper. The latter not only publishes results
and features news articles about growth between the current year and the
previous year, but also compares LNES to schools throughout the state.
Moreover, student performance data is presented during public session to
the Board of Education in late summer. Delaware Student Testing Program
results are shared with both parents and students. Parents are urged to
contact their child's teacher with questions. Additionally, the school
annually presents achievement data to parents at "Open House" in late
August, at a fall PTO meeting, family literacy night, and during parent
conferences. School staff shares results at community meetings. The LNES
school profile is annually distributed to parents and is available to
the community. The school's monthly newsletter provides student
performance details, and the school's website also contains information
about testing results. LNES's School Improvement Committee, which is
comprised of parents, community members, and staff, uses data as it
plans and allocates funds for the succeeding year to reflect student
performance results. Classroom teachers keep parents informed of
progress through having tests signed, nightly homework and communication
folders, Friday packets reflecting weekly progress, student assignment
books with teacher comments, and conferences. Formal communications
involve progress reports and report cards. Teachers communicate with
students in many ways using individual student conferences and by
explaining progress using rubrics that detail strengths and weaknesses.
The principal and assistant principal also conference with each student
in grades 3 and 5 individually and share information from their
cumulative folder and the results of the DSTP.

**Sharing our Successes with Others**

First, LNES shares its successes with other Indian River schools through
the networking system that currently exists within the district.
Principals, assistant principals, and reading specialists meet with
their peers on a regular basis. Frequent agenda topics include "best
practice" instruction, student performance results, and achievement gap
data. In essence, student performance and strategies for its enhancement
are featured since the primary Indian River School District (IRSD) goal
is "All students will meet or exceed the state standards." Additionally,
staff members are willing to conduct professional development sessions
in nearby schools, throughout the state, and at national conferences.
This is already a current practice as teachers present on such topics as
Social Studies instructional strategies, implementing a National Council
of Teachers of Math (NCTM) standards based math program, early
intervention programs such as preschool and all day kindergarten,
Dimensions of Learning, and Learning-Focused strategies for closing the
achievement gap. We will continue our practice of providing inservice
training to local day care centers to share the strategies that we have
found to be successful with our students.

The Assistant Principal is on the Planning Committee for the Leadership
Institute in Indian River. The Leadership Institute is part of a
professional development cluster approved by the Department of Education
to train our administrators to be instructional leaders. He has
presented to staff, PTO, and community organizations on keys to creating
a Professional Learning Community.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

**Long Neck Elementary School's Curriculum**

Long Neck Elementary's curriculum has been designed to reflect
Delaware's rigorous content area standards. At its core is a balanced
literacy program published by Houghton Mifflin (HM). Students experience
worldwide adventures via the authentic literary selections while
strengthening their comprehension skills, practicing decoding and
textural analysis strategies, expanding vocabulary, and increasing
fluency. As a supplement for those who warrant additional phonics
instruction, LNES has selected to use Open Court to more effectively
meet students' needs. Since reading and writing are naturally
integrated, students hone their text-based writing skills in relation to
the narrative, informational, or technical texts included in their
anthologies. Additionally, the pupils respond to "stand alone" writing
prompts related to numerous topics and concepts. In order to enrich
their students' learning experiences, LNES's staff members have improved
their instructional skills through participation in the Delaware Writing
Project and the Delaware Reading Project. To ensure that all students
are meeting the standards in reading, supplemental reading programs are
available, such as Soar to Success, Early Success, Earobics, and
Horizons.

Furthermore, the National Science Foundation (NSF)-researched Math
Trailblazers program (Kendall Hunt) has been implemented in all
pre-kindergarten through fifth grade classrooms. Emphasizing
conceptual-learning rather than the memorization of algorithms or the
mastery of computational skills, the Math Trailblazers curriculum has
dramatically changed math instruction at LNES. To better meet students'
math needs, as well as to transition to more interactive, experiential
methods of teaching, the staff has participated in Math Club
professional development sessions, where grade level peers prepare for
upcoming units, discuss strategies for student success, and explore
effective assessment of what students know and are able to do
mathematically. Math lead teachers also provide demonstration lessons
for their peers. Assessments are closely aligned with the state content
standards, and the math curriculum requires students to reflect and
analyze data and explain their answers, much like the state assessment.

Indian River partners with other districts in the state's Science
Coalition. All of the district teachers have been trained to use
Smithsonian Project science kits, which enable students to experience
hands-on science so that they can meet the state's science standards.
Included in their science curriculum is the opportunity to explore
nature in the district's Outdoor Education Center at Ingram Pond. Again,
since Delaware's science standards stress conceptual knowledge rather
than isolated fact memorization, LNES's students learn science by doing,
discussing, drawing conclusions, and writing about their observations,
experiences, and analyses.

Social studies is the fourth standards-based core content area to which
a portion of the educational time is devoted. District staff use
Houghton Mifflin's *We the People* curriculum, which they supplement
with various materials and activities. Since Delaware's high stakes
accountability focuses on students' reading achievement, teachers use
the opportunity to integrate geography, civics, history, and economics
standards through their reading materials. The district has invested in
social studies-linked "tradebooks" for students' instructional and
recreational reading. A LNES team is currently working with district
peers and University of Delaware personnel to design thematic units and
standards-based performance assessments as a part of the Delaware Social
Studies Project. Common features of all curricular activities and
materials is the emphasis on conceptual understanding, problem solving,
justification of answers, evaluative thinking, multiple perspectives,
and generalization to new situations.

In addition to the regular classroom instruction in the standards-linked
core content areas, LNES's students weekly engage in physical education,
art, vocal and instrumental music, computer-assisted instruction,
library, and guidance. Students who need additional learning
opportunities are served by a Title I reading assistants, one reading
specialist, one reading teacher, a computer teacher for individualized
CCC math and reading instruction, and a special education department.

**Long Neck Elementary School's Reading Curriculum**

Using Delaware English Language Arts (ELA) content standards, a district
committee examined reading research and commercial material. Houghton
Mifflin's Invitations to Literacy (ITL) was adopted as the foundation of
LNES's reading program. ITL uses a systematic and spiraling approach
that integrates the ELA standards of reading, writing, viewing,
speaking, and listening. LNES students experience a balanced reading
approach incorporating whole class and small flexible group instruction.
On going assessment through the use of fluency checks, sight word
recognition surveys, and comprehension measures allow staff to adjust
and differentiate instruction and materials to meet each child's needs.
The purchase of HM guided readers for below, on, and above readers
enable the students to become strategic readers while being engaged with
material on their own instructional levels. The primary grades utilize
the Open Court Phonics program to enhance the phonemic awareness and
phonics components of reading. Supplemental programs such as Horizons,
Early Success and Soar to Success are provided for students needing
additional support. HM theme tests were revised to align more directly
with the Delaware Standards. Rubrics have been rewritten to reflect
Delaware's expectations. In an effort to facilitate experiences with
literary, informative, and technical genre, LNES staff provides many
different types of material across content areas including informative
trade books, newspapers, and research documents, which correlate to the
ELA standards. Grants have provided classroom libraries to allow for a
rich, varied assortment of books. Reading incentive programs encourage
personal reading. The primary grades participate in Reading Is
Fundamental that culminates in an ice cream party for students meeting
their reading goals. The intermediate grades are rewarded with a field
trip to a local baseball team game. Other students, non-teaching staff,
and community leaders were invited to read aloud to encourage the
enjoyment of reading to preschool through grade five students.

**Prescriptive Learning**

LNES staff strives to provide opportunities for all students to reach
their full potential. Fifty one percent of our school population is
defined as low income. One area of concern is the ability to
consistently monitor individual student progress and to accommodate
individual students with specifically needed instruction in the required
content areas, so Professional Learning Communities (PLC) were
introduced. By prescribing what individual students need to learn and
how to best facilitate learning is the focus of the PLC. Teachers are
able to meet every six days to compare results of student assessment and
revise instruction. Each PLC consists of all teachers within a specific
grade level. With the use of team leaders trained in the best practices,
each grade level is able to facilitate action plans for curriculum,
instruction, and assessment. Within the PLC, teachers are able to
collaboratively measure individual student achievement, revise
assessment measures to align with Department of Education (DOE)
indicators, and rearrange instructional student grouping thus allowing
for individual differences in acquisition of knowledge. The PLC is able
to discuss teaching strategies resulting in adaptation of those methods
that increase student achievement. Minutes of these discussions are
shared with the entire staff allowing other grades to benefit from the
shared knowledge thus impacting all students. A cross grade level PLC
meets monthly to review overall student achievement and recommend needed
inservices to promote learning. LNES has an after-school reading/math
intervention program to further assist those students needing additional
instruction. A mentoring program is available to students requiring
alternative support. Bridges, our extended year program, provides
students an additional 20 days of instruction in the summer. A full day
kindergarten for students demonstrating academic deficiencies is
offered. The collaborative efforts of staff to consistently monitor
assessment, modify instruction, and provide appropriate grouping has
resulted in continued improvement in demonstrated academic ability.

**Instructional Methods to Improve Student Learning**

The Indian River School District developed a grant from the University
of Delaware to create a leadership cluster that has provided
professional development for building administrators to become more
effective instructional leaders. Through the grant we have brought Max
Thompson, Robert Marzano, Larry Lazotte, Rick and Julie DuFour, and
Steven Zemelman to our district. Lead teachers participated in the
trainings to become a catalyst for the development of a Professional
Learning Community focused on student learning and achievement.

LNES teachers have infused the principles of Dimensions of Learning,
(Marzano's Classroom Instruction), and Learning Concepts in their daily
interactions with students. The principles of these philosophies are the
basis for exemplary schools and serve as the framework for LNES
teachers. Knowing how children become strategic learners guides their
education plan. Classroom instruction utilizes critical thinking
strategies of compare/contrast, cause/effect, classify/categorize,
analogies/metaphors, and summarizing. Teachers promote independence
through the use of reciprocal teaching allowing the student to emulate
and model techniques of predicting, clarifying, self-questioning, and
summarizing. All content instruction encompasses these strategies that
most impact student achievement. **R**ephrase the question, **A**nswer
the question, **R**easons for answer, **E**xplanation for the answer
(RARE) and **F**ind the keywords in the question, **U**se the keywords
in the topic sentence, **S**upport answer with text information,
**E**xplain how text support answers the question (FUSE) are acronyms
used to refine student ability to answer questions efficiently by using
supporting information from the test and providing explanations to
incorporate the text information into the answer. Graphic organizers are
utilized to enable students to organize their information. Flexible
grouping provides for all levels of achievement. Learning Concepts
lesson plan format -- EATS (essential question, activating strategies,
teaching strategies, summarizing) is an on going project. This format
allows teachers to organize information and strategies into lessons by
providing focused instruction, guided and independent practice, and
assessment. Discovery through hands-on learning using cooperative groups
is the instructional format associated with the math and science
curriculums. Procedures for reinforcing student efforts, providing
positive feedback, and recognizing accomplishments are instructional
strategies that are reflected by the professional learning community.
The key questions that guide our classroom instruction are as follows:
What is it we expect them to learn? How do we know if they're learning
it? How do we respond when they don't learn? How do we respond when they
have learned? Based on the most current cognitive psychology and brain
research and the analysis of high-performing schools, the LFS framework
connects exemplary practice teaching strategies to teacher planning and
instruction. These connections accommodate and enhance the diverse
skills, abilities, and cultural background of all students. Thus, as an
extension of its Dimensions of Learning initiative, the Learning-Focused
School Model, which employs much of Marzano's *What Works in Schools:
Translating Research into Action* (2003) and *Classroom Instruction That
Works* (2001), converts research into active improved learning
techniques. The mantra at LNES is "Teachers emphasize learning rather
than teaching." (DeFour/Eaker, 1998)

**Our Professional Development Program and its Impact on Student
Achievement**

After analysis of national standardized, district, and local school
tests, areas of weakness were determined. As a result, LNES's main goal
for the 2003-2004 was to improve student reading comprehension ability.
Three professional development activities were scheduled. The
instructional need concentrated on extending and refining student higher
order thinking strategies (HOTS) by devising questions for verbal and
written responses. A recognized authority in the field conducted these
workshops. The October inservice focused on explanation of critical
thinking skills and practical application. Following the inservice,
teachers were to apply the best practice techniques. Reading
comprehension tests, STAR reading assessment, and Scholastic Reading
Inventory were given to each student. A follow up in service was
scheduled for January. Teachers were able to readdress HOTS, discuss
results of the comprehension tests and revise questions if needed. Grade
levels shared results during a presentation at a faculty meeting.
Exemplary practices utilizing HOTS were discussed and incorporated into
classroom programs. In an effort to allow for different rates of student
achievement, a flexible grouping inservice was provided. This allowed
teachers to continually assess student ability to apply critical
thinking skills. Flexible groups allowed teachers to reteach or extend
lessons to small groups of students depending on need. Demonstration
lessons were also given to support flexible grouping in the classroom.
Staff members participated in book clubs emphasizing current trends in
education. Dimensions of Learning model continues to be a focus.
Dimension of Learning #3 (extending and refining knowledge) has been
adopted this year. Teacher observations have focused on DOL 3 and the
monitoring of improved questioning techniques as it applies to HOTS.
Math, Smithsonian Science, district wide in-service through the Delaware
Reading and Writing Project continue to be offered to the staff
utilizing our professional development funds to provide substitute
coverage.

**[Delaware State Testing Program]{.underline}**

**[A Criterion-Referenced Assessment]{.underline}**

This overview applies to: Table 1a Reading Grade 3 page 15

Table 1b Reading Grade 5 page 16

Table 1c Math Grade 3 page 17

Table 1d Math Grade 5 page 18

Table 1e Writing Grade 3 page 19

Table 1f Writing Grade 5 page 20

Grade: [3, 5]{.underline} (end of standards cluster years) Test:
[Delaware State Testing Program]{.underline}

Edition/publication year: [1996]{.underline} Publisher: [Harcourt
Educational Measurement Systems]{.underline}

What groups were excluded from testing? [0]{.underline} Why, and how
were they assessed? [All student populations are assessed at LNES. Every
effort is made to ensure all students take the assessment. Absent
students must make up the assessment the following week. Schools
automatically receive scores of 0 for students who do not participate in
the assessment.]{.underline}

The DSTP Student Performance levels and cut scores were established by
Delaware educators and community members from around the state. These
cut-scores were approved by the State Board of Education in September
1999.

There are five performance levels in reading, writing, and mathematics.
The following describe each level:

  ------------- -------------------------- -------------------------------
  **DSTP                                   
  Student                                  
  Performance                              
  Levels**                                 

  **Level**     **Category**               **Description**

  5             Distinguished              Excellent Performance

  4             Exceeds the Standard       Very Good Performance

  3             Meets the Standard         Good Performance

  2             Below the Standard         Needs Improvement

  1             Well Below the Standard    Needs Significant Improvement
  ------------- -------------------------- -------------------------------

The cut score for DSTP appear in the tables at the bottom of each
content area and grade level chart. The indicated number represents the
lowest possible score a student can earn and still be within the
indicated performance levels.

The DSTP involves fire separate days of assessment. Two days are for
reading, two days for math, and one day for writing. The test takes in
excess of 2 hours daily.

**Long Neck Elementary Table 1a**

**Delaware State Testing Program- Reading -Grade 3**

**Criterion-Referenced** Testing developed by state with Harcourt
Education Measurement Systems

  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                          2003-2004       2002-2003       2001-2002       2000-2001       1999-2000       1998-1999

  Testing Month           March           March           March           March           April           April

  READING SCORES Long                                                                                     
  Neck GR 3                                                                                               

  Total                                                                                                   

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 38%             38%             29%             19%             29%             18%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          52%             43%             55%             59%             55%             51%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 10%             19%             17%             23%             16%             31%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Number of Students      79              81              97              102             82              93
  Tested                                                                                                  

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

  Number of students      0               0               0               0               0               0
  excluded                                                                                                

  Percentage of students  0%              0%              0%              0%              0%              0%
  excluded                                                                                                

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                         

  1.Low income \# in      38              37              38              51              33              47
  population                                                                                              

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 26%             35%             32%             18%             18%             9%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          61%             38%             53%             51%             64%             60%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 13%             27%             21%             31 %            18%             32%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Low income mean scaled  445             443             442             429             433             425
  score                                                                                                   

  2\. Not Low income \#   41              44              59              51              43              46
  in population                                                                                           

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 49%             41%             30%             20%             26%             28%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          44%             48%             56%             67%             65%             41%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 7%              11%             14%             14%             9%              30%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Not Low Income mean     464             452             445             445             452             439
  scaled score                                                                                            

  3.African American \#   19              20              18              8               19              22
  in population                                                                                           

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 26%             25%             17%             Not             11%             0%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          58%             55%             56%             Statistically   68%             63%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 16%             20%             28%             Significant     21%             37%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  African American Mean   446             437             429             "               430             414
  Scaled Score                                                                                            

  4 .Hispanic \# in       2               6               2               4               1               4
  population                                                                                              

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. Not             Not             Not             Not             Not             Not
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Hispanic Mean Scaled    "               "               "               "               "               "
  Score                                                                                                   

  5 White \# in           58              53              73              87              59              66
  population                                                                                              

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 43%             43%             34%             20%             34%             24%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          50%             40%             52%             59%             51%             44%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 7%              17%             13%             22%             15%             32%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  White Mean Scaled Score 460             452             448             438             448             436

  STATE SCORES                                                                                            

  Total                                                                                                   

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 32%             30%             29%             23%             24%             21%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          50%             50%             51%             51%             53%             48%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 18%             21%             21%             26%             23%             31%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  State Mean Scaled Score 447             442             441             435             437             428

  School Mean Scaled      455             448             444             437             444             432
  Score                                                                                                   
  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Cut     |             |             |             |             |
| Scores-   |             |             |             |             |
| DSTP**    |             |             |             |             |
| **Reading |             |             |             |             |
| Grade 3** |             |             |             |             |
| (lowest   |             |             |             |             |
| scaled    |             |             |             |             |
| score a   |             |             |             |             |
| student   |             |             |             |             |
| can earn  |             |             |             |             |
| and still |             |             |             |             |
| be within |             |             |             |             |
| the       |             |             |             |             |
| indicated |             |             |             |             |
| pe        |             |             |             |             |
| rformance |             |             |             |             |
| level)    |             |             |             |             |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| ## Grade  | **Below**   | **Meets**   | **Exceeds** | **Dist      |
|           |             |             |             | inguished** |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 3         | 387         | 411         | 465         | 482         |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Long Neck Elementary** **Table 1b**

Delaware State Testing Program- **Reading** -**Grade 5**

Criterion-Referenced Testing developed by state with Harcourt Education
Measurement Systems

  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                          2003-2004       2002-2003       2001-2002       2000-2001       1999-2000       1998-1999

  Testing Month           March           March           March           March           April           April

  READING SCORES --Long                                                                                   
  Neck Gr. 5                                                                                              

  Total                                                                                                   

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 35%             17%             16%             16%             24%             14%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          56%             72%             65%             49%             62%             53%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 8%              11%             19%             35%             14%             33%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Number of Students      85              89              93              117             78              83
  Tested                                                                                                  

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

  Number of students      0               0               0               0               0               0
  excluded                                                                                                

  Percentage of students  0%              0%              0%              0%              0%              0%
  excluded                                                                                                

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                         

  1.Low income            38              47              40              44              35              37

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 13%             6%              5%              16%             23%             8%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          74%             83%             73%             39%             57%             43%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 13%             11%             23%             45%             20%             49%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Low income mean scaled  481             474             463             464             433             443
  score                                                                                                   

  2.Not low income        47              42              53              73              43              46

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 26%             29%             25%             16%             26%             20%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          32%             60%             58%             55%             65%             61%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 4%              12%             17%             29%             9%              20%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Not Low income mean     503             489             485             472             484             478
  scaled score                                                                                            

  3.African American      15              8               25              20              11              15

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 20%             Not             12%             0%              Not             0%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          53%             Statistically   68%             55%             Statistically   33%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 27%             Significant     20%             45%             Significant     67%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  African American mean   476             "               463             442             "               430
  scaled score                                                                                            

  4.Hispanic              2               2               1               4               4               0

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. Not             Not             Not             Not             Not             Not
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  Hispanic mean scaled    "               "               "               "               "               "
  score                                                                                                   

  5.White                 63              76              64              89              62              67

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 41%             18%             16%             21%             27%             18%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          54%             70%             66%             46%             60%             57%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 5%              12%             19%             33%             13%             25%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  White mean scaled score 498             482             479             475             482             469

  STATE SCORES                                                                                            

  Total                                                                                                   

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf. 23%             23%             22%             18%             18%             14%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                           

  \% At or Meets          61%             55%             56%             49%             51%             49%
  (Performance Level 3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard 15%             22%             22%             33%             31%             37%
  (1 & 2)                                                                                                 

  State Mean Scaled       483             480             478             469             470             463
  School                                                                                                  

  School Mean Scaled      493             481             476             469             482             462
  Score                                                                                                   
  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Cut     |             |             |             |             |
| Scores-   |             |             |             |             |
| DSTP**    |             |             |             |             |
| **Reading |             |             |             |             |
| Grade 5** |             |             |             |             |
| (lowest   |             |             |             |             |
| scaled    |             |             |             |             |
| score a   |             |             |             |             |
| student   |             |             |             |             |
| can earn  |             |             |             |             |
| and still |             |             |             |             |
| be within |             |             |             |             |
| the       |             |             |             |             |
| indicated |             |             |             |             |
| pe        |             |             |             |             |
| rformance |             |             |             |             |
| level)    |             |             |             |             |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| ## Grade  | **Below**   | **Meets**   | **Exceeds** | **Dist      |
|           |             |             |             | inguished** |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 5         | 427         | 451         | 508         | 529         |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Long Neck Elementary Table 1c**

Delaware State Testing Program- **Math Grade 3**

Criterion-Referenced Testing developed by state with Harcourt Education
Measurement Systems

  ---------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                         2003-2004       2002-2003       2001-2002       2000-2001       1999-2000       1998-1999

  Testing Month          March           March           March           March           April           April

  MATH SCORES --Long                                                                                     
  Neck Gr. 3                                                                                             

  Total                                                                                                  

  \% At or Exceeds       28%             29%             23%             25%             19%             19%
  (Perf. Levels 4 &5)                                                                                    

  \% At or Meets         59%             52%             52%             53%             64%             47%
  (Performance Level3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below         13%             19%             26%             23%             18%             33%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Number of Students     90              90              97              102             80              93
  Tested                                                                                                 

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

  Number of students     0               0               0               0               0               0
  excluded                                                                                               

  Percentage of students 0%              0%              0%              0%              0%              0%
  excluded                                                                                               

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                        

  1\. Low income         43              45              38              51              31              47

  \% At or Exceeds       21%             27%             18%             18%             13%             13%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               58%             47%             53%             57%             68%             49%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         21%             27%             29%             25%             19%             38%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Low income mean scaled 436             435             431             426             428             418
  score                                                                                                  

  2\. Not Low Income     47              45              59              51              49              46

  \% At or Exceeds       30%             31%             25%             31%             22%             26%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               60%             58%             51%             49%             61%             46%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         6%              11%             24%             20%             16%             28%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Not Low Income mean    449             443             435             445             440             435
  Scaled Score                                                                                           

  3.African American     19              21              18              8               17              19

  \% At or Exceeds       16%             19%             6%              Not             0%              0%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               74%             57%             56%             Statistically   71%             53%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         11%             24%             39%             Significant     29%             47%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  African American Mean  435             431             415             "               418             408
  Scaled Score                                                                                           

  4.Hispanic             3               8               2               4               1               4

  \% At or Exceeds       Not             Not             Not             Not             Not             Not
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Hispanic Mean Scaled   "               "               "               "               "               "
  Score                                                                                                  

  5.White                68              59              73              87              59              66

  \% At or Exceeds       32%             32%             29%             26%             24%             27%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               54%             56%             51%             52%             61%             42%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         13%             12%             21%             22%             15%             30%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  White Mean Scaled      446             444             440             438             439             431
  Score                                                                                                  

  STATE SCORES                                                                                           

  Total                                                                                                  

  \% At or Exceeds       29%             25%             26%             22%             21%             15%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               48%             49%             46%             49%             52%             49%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         22%             26%             28%             29%             27%             37%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  State Mean Scaled      439             435             434             430             431             421
  Score                                                                                                  

  School Mean Scaled     443             439             433             436             435             426
  Score                                                                                                  
  ---------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Cut     |             |             |             |             |
| Scores-   |             |             |             |             |
| DSTP Math |             |             |             |             |
| Grade 3** |             |             |             |             |
| (lowest   |             |             |             |             |
| scaled    |             |             |             |             |
| score a   |             |             |             |             |
| student   |             |             |             |             |
| can earn  |             |             |             |             |
| and still |             |             |             |             |
| be within |             |             |             |             |
| the       |             |             |             |             |
| indicated |             |             |             |             |
| pe        |             |             |             |             |
| rformance |             |             |             |             |
| level)    |             |             |             |             |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| ## Grade  | **Below**   | **Meets**   | **Exceeds** | **Dist      |
|           |             |             |             | inguished** |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 3         | 382         | 407         | 464         | 499         |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Long Neck Elementary Table 1d**

**Delaware State Testing Program- -Math-Grade 5**

Criterion-Referenced Testing developed by state with Harcourt Education
Measurement Systems

  ---------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
                         2003-2004       2002-2003       2001-2002       2000-2001       1999-2000       1998-1999

  Testing Month          March           March           March           March           April           April

  MATH SCORES- Long Neck                                                                                 
  Gr. 5                                                                                                  

  Total                                                                                                  

  \% At or Exceeds       20%             11%             12%             10%             17%             17%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               69%             56%             52%             50%             57%             48%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         11%             33%             37%             40%             26%             35%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Number of Students     95              106             93              117             81              83
  Tested                                                                                                 

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

  Number of students     0               0               0               0               0               0
  excluded                                                                                               

  Percentage of students 0%              0%              0%              0%              0%              0%
  excluded                                                                                               

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                        

  1\. Low income         46              57              40              44              36              37

  \% At or Exceeds       9%              5%              13%             9%              17%             8%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               72%             56%             33%             50%             47%             38%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         20%             39%             55%             41%             36%             54%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Low income mean scaled 465             454             452             452             466             443
  score                                                                                                  

  2\. Not Low Income     49              49              53              73              45              46

  \% At or Exceeds       31%             18%             11%             11%             18%             24%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               67%             55%             66%             49%             64%             57%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         2%              27%             23%             40%             18%             20%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Not Low Income mean    488             474             471             458             474             476
  scaled score                                                                                           

  3.African American     20              15              25              20              13              15

  \% At or Exceeds       0%              7%              0%              0%              Not             7%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               75%             33%             40%             50%             Statistically   40%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         25%             60%             60%             50%             Significant     53%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  African American mean  455             442             446             438             "               436
  scaled score                                                                                           

  4 .Hispanic            2               3               1               4               4               0

  \% At or Exceeds       Not             Not             Not             Not             Not             Not
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically   Statistically
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant     Significant
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  Hispanic mean scaled   "               "               "               "               "               "
  score                                                                                                  

  5 White                68              85              64              89              63              67

  \% At or Exceeds       26%             13%             16%             13%             21%             19%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               68%             59%             55%             47%             62%             49%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         6%              28%             30%             39%             17%             31%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  White mean scaled      484             467             467             459             474             467
  score                                                                                                  

  STATE SCORES                                                                                           

  Total                                                                                                  

  \% At or Exceeds       21%             18%             18%             15%             13%             11%
  (Perf. Levels 4 & 5)                                                                                   

  \% At or               55%             53%             50%             48%             49%             44%
  Meets(Performance                                                                                      
  Level 3)                                                                                               

  \% At or Below         25%             29%             33%             38%             38%             45%
  Standard (1 & 2)                                                                                       

  State Mean Scaled      473             468             466             460             460             454
  Score                                                                                                  

  School Mean Scaled     477             463             462             456             470             461
  Score                                                                                                  
  ---------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Cut     |             |             |             |             |
| Scores-   |             |             |             |             |
| DSTP Math |             |             |             |             |
| Grade 5** |             |             |             |             |
| (lowest   |             |             |             |             |
| scaled    |             |             |             |             |
| score a   |             |             |             |             |
| student   |             |             |             |             |
| can earn  |             |             |             |             |
| and still |             |             |             |             |
| be within |             |             |             |             |
| the       |             |             |             |             |
| indicated |             |             |             |             |
| pe        |             |             |             |             |
| rformance |             |             |             |             |
| level)    |             |             |             |             |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| ## Grade  | **Below**   | **Meets**   | **Exceeds** | **Dist      |
|           |             |             |             | inguished** |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 5         | 424         | 449         | 503         | 525         |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Long Neck Elementary Table 1e**

**Delaware State Testing Program- Writing-Grade 3**

Criterion-Referenced Testing developed by state with Harcourt Education
Measurement Systems

  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                           2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999

  Testing Month            March       March       March       March       April       April

  WRITING SCORES --Long                                                                
  Neck Gr. 3                                                                           

  Total                                                                                

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.  0%          0%          2%          0%          3%          3%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                        

  \% At or                 46%         41%         47%         26%         35%         54%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                              
  3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard  54%         59%         51%         76%         63%         42%
  (1 & 2)                                                                              

  Number of Students       90          90          97          102         76          90
  Tested                                                                               

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

  Number of students       0           0           0           0           0           0
  excluded                                                                             

  Percentage of students   0%          0%          0%          0%          0%          0%
  excluded                                                                             

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                      

  1\. Low income           43          45          38          51          31          45

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.  0%          0%          3%          0%          0%          0%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                        

  \% At or                 33%         36%         39%         22%         26%         56%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                              
  3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard  67%         64%         58%         78%         74%         44%
  (1 & 2)                                                                              

  Low income mean          6           6           7           6           6           7

  2\. Not Low Income       47          45          59          51          49          45

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.  0%          0%          2%          0%          4%          7%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                        

  \% At or                 57%         47%         53%         25%         41%         53%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                              
  3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard  43%         53%         46%         75%         55%         40%
  (1 & 2)                                                                              

  Not Low Income mean      6           6           7           6           6           7
  scaled score                                                                         

  STATE SCORES                                                                         

  Total                                                                                

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.  2%          1%          2%          0%          1%          2%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                        

  \% At or                 51%         38%         45%         32%         36%         47%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                              
  3)                                                                                   

  \% At or Below Standard  48%         61%         54%         67%         63%         51%
  (1 & 2)                                                                              

  State Mean Scaled Score  6           6           6           6           6           6

  School Mean Scaled Score 6           6           7           6           6           7
  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| # D        |                           |                             |
| STP Studen |                           |                             |
| t Performa |                           |                             |
| nce Levels |                           |                             |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| **Level**  | **Category**              | **Description**             |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 5          | Distinguished             | Excellent Performance       |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 4          | Exceeds the Standard      | Very Good Performance       |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 3          | Meets the Standard        | Good Performance            |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2          | Below the Standard        | Needs Improvement           |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 1          | Well Below the Standard   | Needs Significant           |
|            |                           | Improvement                 |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+

+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Cut     |             |             |             |             |
| Scores-   |             |             |             |             |
| DSTP**    |             |             |             |             |
| **Writing |             |             |             |             |
| Grade 3** |             |             |             |             |
| (lowest   |             |             |             |             |
| scaled    |             |             |             |             |
| score a   |             |             |             |             |
| student   |             |             |             |             |
| can earn  |             |             |             |             |
| and still |             |             |             |             |
| be within |             |             |             |             |
| the       |             |             |             |             |
| indicated |             |             |             |             |
| pe        |             |             |             |             |
| rformance |             |             |             |             |
| level)    |             |             |             |             |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| ## Grade  | **Below**   | **Meets**   | **Exceeds** | **Dist      |
|           |             |             |             | inguished** |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 3         | 5           | 7           | 11          | 13          |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**Long Neck Elementary Table 1f**

**Delaware State Testing Program-Writing -Grade 5**

**Criterion-Referenced Testing developed by state with Harcourt
Education Measurement Systems**

  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
                            2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000   1998-1999

  Testing Month             March       March       March       March       April       April

  WRITING SCORES- Long Neck                                                             
  Gr. 5                                                                                 

  Total                                                                                 

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.   4%          3%          5%          0%          3%          7%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                         

  \% At or                  73%         59%         43%         61%         63%         50%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                               
  3)                                                                                    

  \% At or Below Standard   23%         38%         52%         39%         34%         43%
  (1 & 2)                                                                               

  Number of Students Tested 95          106         93          117         76          74

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

  Number of students        0           0           0           0           0           0
  excluded                                                                              

  Percentage of students    0%          0%          0%          0%          0%          0%
  excluded                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                       

  1\. Low income            46          57          40          44          33          28

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.   7%          2%          2%          0%          0%          4%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                         

  \% At or                  63%         60%         30%         55%         67%         46%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                               
  3)                                                                                    

  \% At or Below Standard   30%         39%         68%         45%         33%         50%
  (1 & 2)                                                                               

  Low income mean           8           7           7           8           8           8

  2\. Not Low Income        49          49          53          73          43          46

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.   2%          4%          8%          0%          5%          9%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                         

  \% At or                  82%         59%         53%         64%         60%         52%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                               
  3)                                                                                    

  \% At or Below Standard   16%         37%         40%         36%         35%         39%
  (1 & 2)                                                                               

  Not Low Income mean       8           8           8           8           8           8
  scaled score                                                                          

  STATE SCORES                                                                          

  Total                                                                                 

  \% At or Exceeds (Perf.   4%          4%          8%          4%          2%          5%
  Levels 4 & 5)                                                                         

  \% At or                  56%         56%         41%         47%         34%         46%
  Meets(Performance Level                                                               
  3)                                                                                    

  \% At or Below Standard   40%         40%         51%         49%         65%         49%
  (1 & 2)                                                                               

  State Mean Scaled Score   7           7           7           7           7           8

  School Mean Scaled Score  8           8           7           8           8           8
  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| # D        |                           |                             |
| STP Studen |                           |                             |
| t Performa |                           |                             |
| nce Levels |                           |                             |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| **Level**  | **Category**              | **Description**             |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 5          | Distinguished             | Excellent Performance       |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 4          | Exceeds the Standard      | Very Good Performance       |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 3          | Meets the Standard        | Good Performance            |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 2          | Below the Standard        | Needs Improvement           |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| 1          | Well Below the Standard   | Needs Significant           |
|            |                           | Improvement                 |
+------------+---------------------------+-----------------------------+

+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Cut     |             |             |             |             |
| Scores-   |             |             |             |             |
| DSTP**    |             |             |             |             |
| **Writing |             |             |             |             |
| Grade 5** |             |             |             |             |
| (lowest   |             |             |             |             |
| scaled    |             |             |             |             |
| score a   |             |             |             |             |
| student   |             |             |             |             |
| can earn  |             |             |             |             |
| and still |             |             |             |             |
| be within |             |             |             |             |
| the       |             |             |             |             |
| indicated |             |             |             |             |
| pe        |             |             |             |             |
| rformance |             |             |             |             |
| level)    |             |             |             |             |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| ## Grade  | **Below**   | **Meets**   | **Exceeds** | **Dist      |
|           |             |             |             | inguished** |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| 5         | 6           | 8           | 11          | 13          |
+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

**[Cut Scores DSTP Table 3a]{.underline}**

**[Grade 3 Reading]{.underline}**

The scores in the Cut Scores tables refer to the cut points set forth by
a committee under the guidance of Harcourt Educational Measurement. The
specific grade level tables show how Long Neck Elementary School's
scores compared to the State of Delaware. The levels in which the
students performed can then be measured by using the Cut Scores tables.

  ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------
  **Cut Scores --                                        
  DSTP Reading                                           
  Grade 3**                                              
  (lowest scaled                                         
  score a student                                        
  can earn and                                           
  still be within                                        
  the indicated                                          
  performance                                            
  level)                                                 

  **Well Below the **Below**   **Meets**   **Exceeds**   **Distinguished**
  Standard**                                             

  \<386            387         411         465           482
  ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------

  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Grade 3**    **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**   **1998-1999**

  **Long Neck    455             448             444             437             444             432
  Elementary**                                                                                   

  **State**      447             442             441             435             437             428

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

**[Grade 5 Reading]{.underline}**

  ------------- ------ ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------
  **Cut Scores                                               
  DSTP Reading                                               
  Grade 5**                                                  
  (lowest                                                    
  scaled score                                               
  a student can                                              
  earn and                                                   
  still be                                                   
  within the                                                 
  indicated                                                  
  performance                                                
  level)                                                     

  **Well Below         **Below**   **Meets**   **Exceeds**   **Distinguished**
  the                                                        
  Standard**                                                 

  \<426         427                451         508           529
  ------------- ------ ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------

  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Grade 5**    **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**   **1998-1999**

  **Long Neck    493             481             476             469             482             462
  Elementary**                                                                                   

  **State**      483             480             478             469             470             463
  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**[Cut Scores DSTP Table 3b]{.underline}**

**[Grade 3 Math]{.underline}**

The scores in the Cut Scores tables refer to the cut points set forth by
a committee under the guidance of Harcourt Educational Measurement. The
specific grade level tables show how Long Neck Elementary School's
scores compared to the State of Delaware. The levels in which the
students performed can then be measured by using the Cut Scores tables.

  ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------
  **Cut Scores --                                        
  DSTP Math Grade                                        
  3** (lowest                                            
  scaled score a                                         
  student can earn                                       
  and still be                                           
  within the                                             
  indicated                                              
  performance                                            
  level)                                                 

  **Well Below the **Below**   **Meets**   **Exceeds**   **Distinguished**
  Standard**                                             

  \<381            382         407         464           499
  ---------------- ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------

  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Grade 3**    **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**   **1998-1999**

  **Long Neck    443             439             433             436             435             426
  Elementary**                                                                                   

  **State**      439             435             434             430             431             421
  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**[Grade 5 Math]{.underline}**

  ------------- ------ ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------
  **Cut Scores                                               
  DSTP Math                                                  
  Grade 5**                                                  
  (lowest                                                    
  scaled score                                               
  a student can                                              
  earn and                                                   
  still be                                                   
  within the                                                 
  indicated                                                  
  performance                                                
  level)                                                     

  **Well Below         **Below**   **Meets**   **Exceeds**   **Distinguished**
  the                                                        
  Standard**                                                 

  \<423         424                449         503           525
  ------------- ------ ----------- ----------- ------------- -------------------

  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Grade 5**    **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**   **1998-1999**

  **Long Neck    477             463             462             456             470             461
  Elementary**                                                                                   

  **State**      473             468             466             460             460             454
  -------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

**[Delaware State Assessment Program]{.underline}**

**[Off-Grade Testing]{.underline}**

This overview applies to: Table 4a Reading -- Grades 2 and 4 page 24

Table 4b Math -- Grades 2 and 4 page 25

Grade: [2 and 4 (off-grade testing years)]{.underline} Test: [Stanford
Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year: [1996]{.underline} Publisher: [Harcourt
Educational Measurement Systems]{.underline}

The SAT-9 in grades 2 and 4 were district assessments prior to 2002. The
State of Delaware expanded the Delaware State Testing Program to these
"off-grades" in the 2001-2002 testing year. Both the district and the
state used the Stanford Achievement Test (SAT-9) for off-grade testing.
The reading comprehension subtest and the math problem-solving subtest
are a portion of our current DSTP testing program. For its first year
(2001-2002), there was no summary or disaggregated data prepared by the
state.

**[Long Neck Elementary School -- Table 4a]{.underline}**

**[SAT-9 Reading Comprehension Grades 2 and 4]{.underline}**

  ----------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **[Grade 2]{.underline}**     **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**

  **Testing Month**             **March**       **March**       **March**

  Reading Comprehension                                         

  Mean NCE Score                65              60              56

  Number of Students Tested     91              86              91

  Percent of total students     100%            100%            100%
  tested                                                        

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

  ----------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **[Grade 4]{.underline}**     **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**

  **Testing Month**             **March**       **March**       **March**

  Reading Comprehension                                         

  Mean NCE Score                56              58              52

  Number of Students Tested     93              91              110

  Percent of total students     100%            100%            100%
  tested                                                        

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

**[Long Neck Elementary School -- Table 4b]{.underline}**

**[SAT-9 Math Comprehension Grades 2 and 4]{.underline}**

  ----------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **[Grade 2]{.underline}**     **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**

  **Testing Month**             **March**       **March**       **March**

  Math                                                          

  Mean NCE Score                68              64              58

  Number of Students Tested     91              86              91

  Percent of total students     100%            100%            100%
  tested                                                        

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

  ----------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **[Grade 4]{.underline}**     **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**

  **Testing Month**             **March**       **March**       **March**

  Math                                                          

  Mean NCE Score                61              64              64

  Number of Students Tested     95              93              110

  Percent of total students     100%            100%            100%
  tested                                                        

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

**[Long Neck Elementary School]{.underline}**

**[Special Education Students]{.underline}**

**[Kindergarten -- Total Reading NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               67%                      33%

  2001-2002 (6)               33%                      67%

  2000-2001 (5)               20%                      80%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Long Neck Elementary School]{.underline}**

**[Special Education Students]{.underline}**

**[Grade 1 -- Reading Comprehension NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (10)              100%                     0%

  2001-2002 (7)               29%                      71%

  2000-2001 (5)               20%                      80%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Grade 1 -- Mathematics NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               29%                      71%

  2001-2002 (7)               71%                      29%

  2000-2001 (5)               20%                      80%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Long Neck Elementary School]{.underline}**

**[Special Education Students]{.underline}**

**[Grade 2 -- Reading Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------
                              **[S]{.underline}**    **[U-W]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (6)               100%                   0%

  2001-2002 (8)               88%                    12%

  2000-2001 (5)               N/A                    N/A
  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 2 -- Reading Comprehension NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (6)               100%                     0%

  2001-2002 (8)               63%                      37%

  2000-2001 (5)               20%                      80%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Grade 2 -- Mathematics Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------
                              **[S]{.underline}**    **[U-W]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (6)               83%                    17%

  2001-2002 (8)               75%                    25%

  2000-2001 (5)               N/A                    N/A
  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 2 -- Mathematics Comprehension NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (6)               83%                      17%

  2001-2002 (8)               50%                      50%

  2000-2001 (5)               0%                       100%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Long Neck Elementary School]{.underline}**

**[Special Education Students]{.underline}**

**[Grade 3 -- Reading Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
                              **[3-5]{.underline}**   **[1-2]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               100%                    0%

  2001-2002 (11)              36%                     64%

  2000-2001 (14)              29%                     71%
  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 3 -- Reading Comprehension NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               56%                      44%

  2001-2002 (11)              27%                      73%

  2000-2001 (14)              29%                      71%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Grade 3 -- Mathematics Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
                              **[3-5]{.underline}**   **[1-2]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               89%                     11%

  2001-2002 (11)              55%                     45%

  2000-2001 (14)              21%                     79%
  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 3 -- Mathematics NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               89%                      11%

  2001-2002 (11)              18%                      82%

  2000-2001 (14)              8%                       92%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Long Neck Elementary School]{.underline}**

**[Special Education Students]{.underline}**

**[Grade 4 -- Reading Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------
                              **[S]{.underline}**    **[U-W]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               100%                   0%

  2001-2002 (14)              21%                    89%

  2000-2001 (14)              100%                   0%
  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 4 -- Reading Comprehension NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               100%                     0%

  2001-2002 (14)              14%                      86%

  2000-2001 (16)              13%                      87%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Grade 4 -- Mathematics Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------
                              **[S]{.underline}**    **[U-W]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               56%                    44%

  2001-2002 (14)              50%                    50%

  2000-2001 (14)              N/A                    N/A
  --------------------------- ---------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 4 -- Mathematics NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (9)               78%                      22%

  2001-2002 (14)              50%                      50%

  2000-2001 (14)              29%                      71%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Long Neck Elementary School]{.underline}**

**[Special Education Students]{.underline}**

**[Grade 5 -- Reading Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
                              **[3-5]{.underline}**   **[1-2]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (19)              47%                     53%

  2001-2002 (14)              43%                     57%

  2000-2001 (17)              17%                     83%
  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 5 -- Reading Comprehension NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (19)              36%                      64%

  2001-2002 (14)              14%                      86%

  2000-2001 (17)              17%                      83%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**[Grade 5 -- Mathematics Performance Levels]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
                              **[3-5]{.underline}**   **[1-2]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (19)              11%                     89%

  2001-2002 (14)              7%                      93%

  2000-2001 (17)              0%                      100%
  --------------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------

**[Grade 5 -- Mathematics NCE Distribution]{.underline}**

  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------
                              **[\>50]{.underline}**   **[\<49]{.underline}**

  2002-2003 (19)              21%                      79%

  2001-2002 (14)              7%                       93%

  2000-2001 (17)              12%                      88%
  --------------------------- ------------------------ ------------------------

**Grade K-1 Assessments**: (state-wide as part of DSTP)

K-1 Work Sampling Assessment

Pearson Early Learning Company in conjunction with the Delaware
Department of Education

Edition- 3/01

Replaced Metropolitan Achievement Test This is year 2.

Also,

Grade A+- Group Diagnostic Reading Assessment (school level)

K pre and post form

By AGS

This is the second year. This test replaces K

Metropolitan.