##### U.S. Department of Education September 2003

**2003-2004 *No Child Left Behind---Blue Ribbon Schools Program***

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Mrs. Christina Small]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Liholiho Elementary School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [3430 Maunaloa Ave.]{.underline}

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

[Honolulu, Hawaii 96816 -2138]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [( 808 ) 733-4850]{.underline} Fax [( 808 ) 733-4856]{.underline}

Website/URL [liholiho.k12.hi.us]{.underline} E-mail
Christina_small@notes.k12.hi.us

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

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

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent [Ms. Pat Hamamoto]{.underline}

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

District Name Tel. [( )]{.underline}

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

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson [Mr. Breene Harimoto]{.underline}

[(Specify]{.underline}: Ms., Miss, Mrs., Dr., Mr., Other)

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

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

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

**[PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION]{.underline}**

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 2003-2004 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 1998.

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]{.underline}**

1\. Number of schools in the district: [174]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[37]{.underline} Middle schools

[None]{.underline} Junior high schools

[35]{.underline} High schools

[35]{.underline} Other (Charter Schools)

[281]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,375 .]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8,375 .]{.underline}

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

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

4\. [11 years]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in
her/his position at this school.

[N/A]{.underline} If fewer than three years, how long was the previous
principal at this school?

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

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Grade</strong></td>
<td><strong># of Males</strong></td>
<td colspan="2"><strong># of Females</strong></td>
<td><strong>Grade Total</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>Grade</strong></td>
<td><strong># of Males</strong></td>
<td><strong># of Females</strong></td>
<td><strong>Grade Total</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>K</strong></td>
<td>26</td>
<td colspan="2">21</td>
<td><strong>47</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>7</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>1</strong></td>
<td>20</td>
<td colspan="2">22</td>
<td><strong>42</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>8</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>2</strong></td>
<td>11</td>
<td colspan="2">30</td>
<td><strong>41</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>9</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td>26</td>
<td colspan="2">20</td>
<td><strong>46</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>4</strong></td>
<td>40</td>
<td colspan="2">23</td>
<td><strong>63</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>11</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>5</strong></td>
<td>32</td>
<td colspan="2">35</td>
<td><strong>67</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>12</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td>9</td>
<td colspan="2">16</td>
<td><strong>25</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td>Other <strong>*</strong>Special</td>
<td><p>4</p>
<p>Ed. Pre-</p></td>
<td><p>4</p>
<p>School</p></td>
<td>8</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="6"><strong>TOTAL STUDENTS IN THE APPLYING
SCHOOL</strong></td>
<td>339</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [.05]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [.005]{.underline} % Black or African
American

[.02]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

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

**100% Total**

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

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

  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------
  **(1)**     Number of students who transferred 23
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 18
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        41
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    326
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     0.13
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    13
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [5]{.underline} %

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

Number of languages represented: [9 .]{.underline}

Specify languages: Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Mandarin, Vietnamese,

Taiwanese, Tagalog, Micronesian, Spanish,

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [32.2]{.underline}
%

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

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

10\. Students receiving special education services: [12.4]{.underline} %

[42]{.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.

[19]{.underline} Developmentally Delayed [2]{.underline} Emotionally
Disturbed

[1]{.underline} Autism [0]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment

[0]{.underline} Deafness [4]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

[0]{.underline} Deaf-Blindness [13]{.underline} Specific Learning
Disability

[0]{.underline} Hearing Impairment [2]{.underline} Speech or Language
Impairment

[1]{.underline} Mental Retardation [0]{.underline} Traumatic Brain
Injury

[0]{.underline} Multiple Disabilities [0]{.underline} Visual Impairment
Including Blindness

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

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

Classroom teachers [18]{.underline} [7]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists [5]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals [5]{.underline} \_\_\_[2\_\_\_]{.underline}

> Support staff [4]{.underline} [\_\_\_6\_\_\_]{.underline}
>
> Total number [33]{.underline} [15]{.underline}

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio**:
[22:1]{.underline} Grades K-2**

**[25:1\_\_]{.underline}Grades 3-6**

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.)

+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
|                        | 2002  | 200    | 200    | 199    | 199    |
|                        | -2003 | 1-2002 | 0-2001 | 9-2000 | 8-1999 |
+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Daily student          | [96.  | [      | [      | [      | [      |
| attendance             | 5%]{. | 96.5%] | 96.1%] | 96.0%] | 95.7%] |
|                        | under | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde |
|                        | line} | rline} | rline} | rline} | rline} |
+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Daily teacher          | [99.  | [      | [      | [      | [      |
| attendance             | 0%]{. | 99.0%] | 99.0%] | 99.0%] | 99.0%] |
|                        | under | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde |
|                        | line} | rline} | rline} | rline} | rline} |
+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Teacher turnover rate  | [     | [.08%] | [0%]   | [.04%] | [0%]   |
|                        | 0%]{. | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde |
|                        | under | rline} | rline} | rline} | rline} |
|                        | line} |        |        | 1      |        |
|                        |       | 2      |        | tr     |        |
|                        |       | r      |        | ansfer |        |
|                        |       | etired |        |        |        |
+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Student dropout rate   | [N    | [N/A]  | [N/A]  | [N/A]  | [N/A]  |
|                        | /A]{. | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde | {.unde |
|                        | under | rline} | rline} | rline} | rline} |
|                        | line} |        |        |        |        |
+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| Student drop-off rate  | N/A   | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    | N/A    |
+------------------------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

[PART III -- SUMMARY]{.underline}

Our vision, **"Liholiho Elementary\...A Community of Caring, Competent
and Creative Learners"**, captures the essence of our school.
Educational opportunities are provided for all children regardless of
race, sex, creed or ability. Our mission is "to support our vision by
conducting research, encouraging communication and developing
resources."

Liholiho Elementary was established in urban Honolulu in 1926. A
significant increase of disadvantaged students entered our school within
the past ten years. Students participating in our Free/Reduced Meal
Program, increased from 24%(1992) to 32.3%(2003). In 2003, our fifth
grader students met the Title I criteria of 40% receiving free/reduced
meals. Forty-five percent of our students attend on Geographic
Exceptions, residing outside our school boundaries. Our Special
Education enrollment (12.4%) has tripled and our English Second Language
Learner Program enrollment has doubled over the past decade. More than
twelve diverse cultures exist within our 99.9% Asian/Pacific Islander
population, each having different cultural values.

Our local governance body, School/Community-Based Management Council
(SCBM) established a collaborative, continuous school improvement
process, to address the growing needs of our student population. The
SCBM Council is comprised of six role groups: Parents, Community,
Students, Teachers, Classified Support Staff and Administration.

SCBM school teams analyzed Hawaii State Assessment reading and math data
to identify specific needs. School-wide Learner Outcomes (SLOs) and a
Standards Implementation Design (SID) Action Plan were developed.
Instructional practices were aligned with national standards and the
Hawaii Content and Performance Standards. Curriculum was redesigned to
be more challenging and relevant. Our Parent-Teacher Association, Parent
Community Network Center Facilitator (PCNC) Program and SCBM Council
coordinated efforts to involve parents and the community in our school
improvement process.

A Comprehensive Student Support System (CSSS) was established, to
provide academic and social support programs for students. Programs were
developed or adopted. Reading intervention programs were established for
kindergarten through sixth grade students (Early Literacy Program,
Primary Tutoring Program). The Positive Behavioral Support System (PBS)
and a Character Education Program (TRIBES) were systematized to provide
additional social support for our students. A partnership, the
Elementary School Attendance Program **(**ESAP) was formed between
Hawaii's National Guard, the Honolulu Police Department and our school,
to increase student attendance.

A pro-active team of teachers, a counselor, a psychologist, educational
aides, a social worker and student services coordinator work with the
administrator, parents and students to promote student success via our
Primary School Adjustment Program (PSAP). Our PSAP program has been
nominated by our school district for national recognition.

Hawaii State Assessment results indicate our school has been successful
in meeting the diverse needs of our students, particularly our
disadvantaged population. Increases in our Hawaii State Assessment
reading and math scores for all students and subgroups (See Pages
16-19), provide evidence our students are succeeding. Liholiho
Elementary School ranks in the top academic 5% of Hawaii's schools. We
were identified as a Department of Education SAT9 Honor Roll School, for
continual high achievement in reading and math. Other honors include:
Five years of sustained high scores in the School Inspection Program and
recognition from the Hawaii Medical Service Association for an exemplary
Drug Free Schools Program.

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

**[Reading and Math Assessment Results]{.underline}**

Annual Grade 3 and 5 Hawaii State Assessment data is utilized to
identify needs and to guide curriculum and instruction. The Hawaii State
Assessment consists of the (norm-reference) SAT Abbreviated Reading and
Math Tests and the (criterion-reference) Hawaii Content and Performance
Standards-Based Assessment. Hawaii's Annual Yearly Progress (AYP)
benchmarks are used as guides to meet the No Child Left Behind
requirements.

Liholiho Elementary School was ranked fifteenth in the state, based on
the Hawaii State Assessment reading and math scores, thus placing the
school in the top academic 5% of Hawaii public schools. Students in
Grades 3 and 5 had an average of 66% Meeting/Exceeding Proficiency in
Reading and Writing, and 38% Meeting/Exceeding Proficiency in Math.
These scores improved significantly over the previous year's scores with
an average increase of 13% in Grades 3 and 5 students Meeting/Exceeding
Proficiency in Reading, and an average increase of 15% in Grades 3 and 5
students Meeting/Exceeding Proficiency in Math (See Pages 16-19). The
Department of Education identified Liholiho as "Exemplary" in overall
status. The school was "Academically Exemplary" with 100% of the Annual
Yearly Progress targets met. Hawaii's Department of Education developed
the targets and indicators to meet No Child Left Behind requirements.

Strengthening our Early Intervention Literacy Program is a part of our
SID Action Plan. The school adopted the Metropolitan Reading Test (MRT)
to assess the effectiveness of the program. Students entering our
Kindergarten program are administered a Pre (Fall) and Post (Spring)
Metropolitan Reading Test. Pre-test MRT data is used to identify
students requiring additional assistance in reading and math. For the
past four years, our pre-test data show an increasing number of
Kindergarten students entering our school with below average scores in
all sub-tests (Beginning Reading Skills, Story Comprehension Skills and
Quantitative Math Skills Measurements). Spring post-test data
consistently show 99% of students tested, gain significantly in all
sub-tests.

Prior to the development of the current Hawaii State Assessment,
Hawaii's Department of Education administered the SAT9 reading and math
tests to all third and fifth grade students. An agency was contracted to
longitudinally track the SAT9 reading and math scores. Third grade
students were longitudinally followed through fifth grade. The growth
curve and results were excellent, with increases in students scoring in
the average and high stanines and decreases in lower stanines in reading
and math. The school was honored as a Department of Education SAT9 Honor
Roll School. To achieve this honor, 77% of a school's student population
in Grades 3 and 5, had to score above national stanine scores in
reading, open-ended reading and math. Students in both Grades 3 and 5
scored above national norms in all three areas for four consecutive
years.

Our school developed the Liholiho Reading Assessment (LRA) as part of a
reading assessment grant we received. The LRA is a formative classroom
assessment tool that has been used and refined over the past four years.
It assesses each student's reading comprehension ability using selected
reading passages and running records. This formative measure enables
teachers to identify student needs and adjust instruction to enable the
student to meet success.

[Assessment Data and School Improvement]{.underline}

A continuous cycle of school improvement, based on needs assessment and
focused on student achievement, is well established. Annual Hawaii State
Assessment data is disaggregated by gender, ethnicity and disability.
Modifications to our Standards Implementation Design (SID) Action Plan
and curriculum are made as new assessment data is received and analyzed.
Thus, a continuous cycle of school improvement is generated, to enable
our students to move to higher proficiency levels.

Teachers utilize individual and grade level data to modify and improve
instruction to meet student

and class needs. School-wide data is utilized to determine whether the
school is successfully providing a coherent and relevant standards-based
curriculum for our students. School Quality Survey results and our
School Status and Improvement Report also provide pertinent information
regarding school climate and parent, student and teacher perceptions
about our school

Strengthening our students' reading, writing and math skills via a
meaningful and rigorous

curriculum is a primary focus of our SID Action Plan. Collaborative SCBM
role group teams identify research-based instructional strategies and
programs to meet national and state standards. Personnel, funding
resources and staff development training are identified to support
implementation of our plan.

Our SCBM Council monitors the implementation of our SID Action Plan.
Team meetings are held monthly. The Council assesses the effectiveness
of the plan and ensures it is congruent with the profile, vision and
mission of our school.

**[Communication]{.underline}**

Communication is critical to creating a sense of community. It begins in
our classrooms as

all teachers keep parents informed via regular class newsletters. School
information is shared through our monthly school newsletters sent to
parents, the Board of Education, Community Neighborhood Boards,
Legislators and other schools. School-wide assessment and student work
is showcased on the office, cafeteria and library/community bulletin
boards, situated along walkways. Hawaii State Assessment and school
level test results are shared at joint SCBM/PTA meetings.

Our PCNC Facilitator coordinates regular parent workshops, including an
annual Hawaii State

Assessment Night. The workshop enables our parents to understand the
general content and components of the Hawaii State Assessment. Teachers
and PCNC coordinate workshops to help parents understand state standards
and student performance expectations. Student works that approach, meet
or exceeds standards are exhibited at Science and Literacy Nights. In
addition, student performances (drama, choral reading, poetry, dance)
are showcased at our Fine Arts Night.

Student led Parent Teacher Conferences are held annually. At this time,
parents receive a copy of their child's Hawaii State Assessment results
and view their child's portfolios

Current Hawaii State Assessment data, School Quality Survey results, and
the School Status and Improvement Report are available for viewing on
the Department of Education's website. Our PTA and school maintain
websites and share information about our school policies, student
handbook, programs and activities. Student projects are also posted on
the school website

**[Sharing Successes]{.underline}**

Technology has widened our ability to share school successes. Access to
our school, DOE and Liholiho PTA websites via the Internet, provides
information to other schools in our state and nation.

The Department of Education shares school successes via a published
statewide newsletter, distributed to each school employee. The public
has access to these publications. Monthly school newsletters are
distributed to other schools in our community area.

Formal sharing occurs between schools at joint staff development
workshops and conferences. Liholiho Elementary teachers have been
speakers at these workshop sessions and at educational conferences.
Informal sharing between schools also occurs during meetings, workshops
and conferences. Teachers share successes at regularly scheduled Gifted
and Talented, Technology and CSSS Complex Area meetings. Monthly
Principal meetings provide opportunities to network, share and
articulate successes with other schools.

Partnerships have formed with other elementary schools. Visitations
between schools culminate in articulation and sharing sessions between
visiting staff and our teachers. Teachers utilize the DOE email system
after the visitations to continue to share ideas and materials.

Our school utilizes closed-circuit broadcasts and multi-media student
work to showcase our successes. A library of video and multi-media
projects has been developed. Interested individuals have

access to the student made tapes and CDs. Teachers have visited our
multi-media lab from other schools.

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

Liholiho Elementary School utilizes the Hawaii Content and Performance
Standards (state standards reflecting national content standards) and
the State Standards Toolkit as guides to address all curricular areas.
Teachers using school and state assessment data craft instructional
activities and materials. This data and results driven process is the
core of all our curriculum improvement efforts.

**Language Arts**

Liholiho Elementary School's Language Arts curriculum is based on
effective instructional practices and the Hawaii's Language Arts
Standards (reading, writing and oral communication). Teachers worked
with District and State Specialists to align our Liholiho Literacy Model
with state standards. Clear expectations of concepts and skills for
grade level clusters were shared. Performance standards, reflecting high
and challenging expectations and performance indicators were developed

"Every child will become a proficient reader and writer by the end of
third grade" is a goal of the Department of Education. Thus, the early
identification of students with reading needs was deemed essential.
Early intervention programs were strengthened. Part-time teachers and
tutors were assigned to help struggling readers. Effective reading
strategies to develop phonemic awareness, decoding, word recognition and
reading comprehension skills were identified. Funding was allocated to
purchase reading literature and material that were rich in text,
challenging and congruent with state standards.

# Science/Social Studies

Teachers worked diligently with the State Science Specialist to align
our spiraled Science curriculum with state and national standards.
Students engage in project-based learning. Funding was provided to
enable teachers to select kits and texts, which best met the Science
Standards.

Science and Social Studies concepts are integrated with the Language
Arts area of reading, writing and oral communication. An inquiry process
and the use of higher level thinking skills permeate our curriculum.

##### Math

Teachers analyzed data from the 2003 Hawaii State Assessment and
identified math as a focus area in our current SID. Although our
students met the Annual Yearly Progress benchmark, data indicated our
students had difficulty explaining how they solved math problems. To
address this issue, our teachers developed criteria and a process for
students to utilize in math. The process, **KWS-CHECK** (Know, Want to
Know, Strategy Used, Recheck) helps students to explain how solutions to
math problems are generated.

State standards are being used to refine our math curriculum. Currently,
teachers are evaluating Math materials, texts and programs, which align
with research based practices and Math Standards.

# Fine Arts/Physical Education

Hawaii Content and Performance Fine Arts and Physical Education
Standards are utilized as the basis of our Art, Music and P.E.
curriculum. Specific skills for grade level clusters are addressed in
these state standards. The Fine Arts are integrated with other content
areas. Programs are supported through an Artist in the Schools Grant.
Access to drama, poetry, writing, ceramics, weaving, batik and other
classes have been provided. Our Physical Education specialist inservices
teachers on Health and P.E.Standards.

# World Language

Our Kindergarten through Sixth Grade students learn two world languages,
Hawaiian and Japanese. World Language Standards are used as
instructional guides to develop activitiy-based learning Students learn
about the culture, the music and dance, as well as the language. Our
instructors attend workshops offered by World Language Specialists.

# Educational Technology

Educational Technology Standards are incorporated in our computer
teacher's instructional lessons. The technology teacher collaborates
with classroom teachers to incorporate standards-based units in our
students' technology projects. Students showcase their projects on class
websites.

**[Reading Curriculum]{.underline}**

The Liholiho Elementary School Literacy Model is based on a Hawaii
Literacy Model and is aligned with the state's Language Arts Standards.
The model uses research-based effective

instructional strategies as a foundation for concept and content
integration. It was refined with assistance from literacy specialists to
include a reading comprehension assessment, Liholiho Reading Assessment
(LRA).

Teachers model the use of these strategies during instruction and teach
students to utilize the strategies to read literature and texts across
content areas. Our intent is to "empower" students to be able to read
any text or material by utilizing decoding, word reading and reading
comprehension strategies. Students were taught strategies to increase
their understanding of main idea, cause and effect, comprehension,
prediction/validation, closure, mature reading strategies, divergent and
inferential thinking processes. Vocabulary building strategies were
utilized.

A variety of visual structures were presented to enable students to
organize and link ideas and concepts. Graphic organizers were posted on
bulletin boards as visual cues.

Funding and personnel resources were allocated to support our curriculum
improvement efforts. Our teachers attended reading and writing staff
development sessions. During the sessions, teachers shared student work
and collaborated in grade level clusters to identify effective reading
strategies and develop clear performance indicators and rubrics.

**[Curriculum Area-Science]{.underline}**

Liholiho Elementary School restructured our Science curriculum and
aligned it with the State and National Science Standards. Our school was
a forerunner in aligning our curriculum with the Hawaii Content and
Performance Standards.

The faculty worked in grade level clusters to adjust the content based
upon the Science Standards. Areas were strengthened and inappropriate
areas were eliminated. Information was shared to enable all students to
experience continuity in content and teaching methodology.

Standards-based Science lessons were developed. Our school developed
common expectations for quality student work, which met Standards.
Scientific inquiry was viewed as an essential process skill. Students
shared their projects with their parents through showcased events.
Criteria for student work meeting Science Standards were shared.

Analysis of SAT9 Science data led our teachers to conclude that critical
thinking is the key

factor in learning. Being more cognizant of what is important for
students to learn enables our school to continue to improve. Improvement
efforts in Science are congruent with our school's vision of being a
caring, competent and creative learner. Literacy and NCLB is definitely
being addressed in our varied, integrated curriculum.

A core team continues to serve as a resource for the State and recently
field-tested a new elementary science curriculum for them.

**[Instructional Methods]{.underline}**

We believe the teacher is the key to higher student achievement. Thus,
increasing teacher effectiveness is a school priority. Student learning
is optimal in a positive classroom environment. Our school adopted a
Character Education model (TRIBES), that builds community and inclusion
within the classroom.

Expanding our teachers' repertoire of effective instructional methods is
in our SID Action Plan. Teachers use reading and thinking strategies
across curricular content areas (Science and Social Studies). We
developed performance indicators and rubrics to make our standards-based
curriculum clear to students.

To improve student learning, research-based strategies are employed to
integrate reading and writing (Language Arts Standards) across
curricular areas. Direct instruction, vocabulary expansion, utilizing
prior knowledge, visualization, prediction/validation, KWL process
(Know, Want to know, Learn), Math-KWS check (Know, Want to Know,
Strategy, Check), divergent and inferential thinking strategies,
inquiry-based learning and self-questioning are key instructional
strategies used by our teachers.

Specific reading processes to construct meaning are taught. Language
Arts specialists worked with our teachers to embed effective reading
strategies in Liholiho's Literacy Model. A steady increase in our
reading achievement data is attributed to the use of the strategies
listed below:

Phonemic awareness, decoding skills, VRIMM (Visualize, Retell and
Paraphase, Integrate Learning), Mature Reader Process (Make the Thinking
Process Visible) for reading comprehension, cause and effect, main idea,
sequence and the use of context clues to gain meaning. Graphic
organizers (e.g. VENN diagrams) are taught to help students
understanding content concepts.

**[Professional Development]{.underline}**

Professional development is a vital part of our Standards Implementation
Design Action Plan. The content of our teacher and staff workshops are
aligned with our SID goals. Our school places a priority on the
professional growth of our teachers. Teachers are crucial to student
achievement and professional development is strongly supported by our
school community.

Our SCBM Council was the first elementary school in our state, to modify
the school calendar to include staff development waiver days to enable
teachers and staff to grow professionally. Currently, seven days are set
aside for professional development. Professional development days have
been utilized in the following ways:

1.  To analyze Hawaii State Assessment data and school level data.

2.  To develop and modify our SID Action Plan and to evaluate the plan.

3.  To align our curriculum with the Hawaii Performance and Content
    Standards.

4.  To learn research-based effective strategies to address our diverse
    student needs.

5.  To develop performance expectations and rubrics which address
    standards.

6.  To identify and select curricular materials aligned to the
    standards.

7.  To provide articulation and collaboration time between grade levels
    to develop coherent and challenging curricular units

Department of Education specialists assist our teachers. Nationally
recognized trainers are contracted to work with teachers in the areas of
reading, writing and integrated curriculum. The school provides funding
for teachers to visit other schools to view effective instructional
models. Collaboration and mutual respect permeate our staff development
training days.

**PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**[ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS:
Liholiho]{.underline}**

Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [9^th^ Ed./1997]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Co.]{.underline}

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

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 42%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 12%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">2002-2003****</td>
<td colspan="2">2001-2002****</td>
<td colspan="2">2000-2001***</td>
<td colspan="2">1999-2000**</td>
<td>1998-1999*</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2">Testing month</td>
<td colspan="2">March</td>
<td colspan="2">April</td>
<td colspan="2"><p>Teacher</p>
<p>Strike</p></td>
<td colspan="2">May</td>
<td>April</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2"><strong>SCHOOL SCORES</strong></td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">NONE</td>
<td colspan="2">Reading Comp.</td>
<td>Reading Comp.</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="2">Total Score</td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">NONE</td>
<td colspan="2">57.61</td>
<td>45.32</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="2">Number of students tested</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">0</td>
<td colspan="2">54</td>
<td>56</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Percent of total students tested</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">98.18</td>
<td colspan="2">91.80</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Number of students excluded</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">1</td>
<td colspan="2">5</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Percent of students excluded</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">1.82</td>
<td colspan="2">8.2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>SUBGROUP SCORES</td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">NONE</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>1.Asian/Pacific Islander</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">57.57</td>
<td colspan="2">43.28</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Number of students tested</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">49</td>
<td colspan="2">50</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>STATE SCORES</strong></td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">N/A HSA</td>
<td colspan="2">NONE</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>State Mean Score</td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td colspan="2">50.35</td>
<td colspan="2">44.49</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students.

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment ("HSA"), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the HSA cannot be used
psychometrically to equate to the norm -referenced Stanford Achievement
Test.

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

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------
                                 2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**        N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        50              50

  **NATIONAL STANDARD            N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        N/A             N/A
  DEVIATION**                                                                        
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------

**[ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS:
Liholiho]{.underline}**

Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [9^th^ Ed./1997]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Co.]{.underline}

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

  ----------------------------- ----- ------------------- ----- ------------------- ------ ----------------- ------- --------------- ------- -------------
                                      2002-2003\*\*\*\*         2001-2002\*\*\*\*          2000-2001\*\*\*           1999-2000\*\*           1998-1999\*

  Testing month                       March                     April                      Tchr Strike               May                     April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                   N/A HSA                   N/A HSA                    NONE                      Math                    Math

  Total Score                         N/A HSA                   N/A HSA                    NONE                      68.76                   56.80

  Number of students tested                                                                0                         54                      56

  Percent of total students                                                                                  98.18                   91.80   
  tested                                                                                                                                     

  Number of students excluded                                                                                1                       5       

  Percent of students excluded                                                                               1.82                    8.2     

  SUBGROUP SCORES               N/A                       N/A                       NONE                                                     
                                HSA                       HSA                                                                                

  1.Asian/Pacific Islander                                                                                   68.51                   55.88   

  Number of students tested                                                                                  49                      50      

                                                                                                                                             

  **STATE SCORES**              N/A                       N/A                       NONE                                                     
                                HSA                       HSA                                                                                

  State Mean Score                                                                                           54.72                   48.16   
  ----------------------------- ----- ------------------- ----- ------------------- ------ ----------------- ------- --------------- ------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment ("HSA"), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the HSA cannot be used
psychometrically to equate to the norm -referenced Stanford Achievement
Test.

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

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------
                                 2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**        N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        50              50

  **NATIONAL STANDARD            N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        N/A             N/A
  DEVIATION**                                                                        
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------

**[ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS:
Liholiho]{.underline}**

Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [9^th^ Ed./1997]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Co.]{.underline}

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

  ----------------------------- ----- ------------------- ----- ------------------- ------ ----------------- ------- --------------- ------- -------------
                                      2002-2003\*\*\*\*         2001-2002\*\*\*\*          2000-2001\*\*\*           1999-2000\*\*           1998-1999\*

  Testing month                       March                     April                      Tchr Strike               May                     April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                   N/A HSA                   N/A HSA                    NONE                      Reading Comp.           Reading Comp.

  Total Score                         N/A HSA                   N/A HSA                    NONE                      55.08                   58.84

  Number of students tested                                                                0                         53                      56

  Percent of total students                                                                                  100                     91.80   
  tested                                                                                                                                     

  Number of students excluded                                                                                0                       5       

  Percent of students excluded                                                                               0                       8.2     

  SUBGROUP SCORES               N/A                       N/A                       NONE                                                     
                                HSA                       HSA                                                                                

  1.Asian/Pacific Islander                                                                                   53.30                   57.30   

  Number of students tested                                                                                  47                      53      

                                                                                                                                             

  **STATE SCORES**              N/A                       N/A                       NONE                                                     
                                HSA                       HSA                                                                                

  State Mean Score                                                                                           49.50                   46.74   
  ----------------------------- ----- ------------------- ----- ------------------- ------ ----------------- ------- --------------- ------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment ("HSA"), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the HSA cannot be used
psychometrically to equate to the norm -referenced Stanford Achievement
Test.

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

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------
                                 2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**        N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        50              50

  **NATIONAL STANDARD            N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        N/A             N/A
  DEVIATION**                                                                        
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------

**[ASSESSMENTS REFERENCED AGAINST NATIONAL NORMS:
Liholiho]{.underline}**

Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Stanford Achievement Test]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [9^th^ Ed./1997]{.underline} Publisher
[Harcourt Brace & Co.]{.underline}

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

  ----------------------------- ----- ------------------- ----- ------------------- ------ ----------------- ------- --------------- ------- -------------
                                      2002-2003\*\*\*\*         2001-2002\*\*\*\*          2000-2001\*\*\*           1999-2000\*\*           1998-1999\*

  Testing month                       March                     April                      Tchr Strike               May                     April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                   N/A HSA                   N/A HSA                    NONE                      Math                    Math

  Total Score                         N/A HSA                   N/A HSA                    NONE                      69.17                   70.43

  Number of students tested                                                                0                         53                      56

  Percent of total students                                                                                  100                     91.80   
  tested                                                                                                                                     

  Number of students excluded                                                                                0                       5       

  Percent of students excluded                                                                               0                       8.2     

  SUBGROUP SCORES               N/A                       N/A                       NONE                                                     
                                HSA                       HSA                                                                                

  1.Asian/Pacific Islander                                                                                   70.70                   69.60   

  Number of students tested                                                                                  47                      53      

                                                                                                                                             

  **STATE SCORES**              N/A                       N/A                       NONE                                                     
                                HSA                       HSA                                                                                

  State Mean Score                                                                                           55.53                   50.83   
  ----------------------------- ----- ------------------- ----- ------------------- ------ ----------------- ------- --------------- ------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment ("HSA"), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the HSA cannot be used
psychometrically to equate to the norm -referenced Stanford Achievement
Test.

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

  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------
                                 2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**        N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        50              50

  **NATIONAL STANDARD            N/A HSA     N/A HSA     NONE        N.A             N.A.
  DEVIATION**                                                                        
  ------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- --------------- -------------

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS: Liholiho**

> Grade [3]{.underline}
>
> Test [Hawaii State Assessment]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [1^st^/2001]{.underline} Publisher [Hawaii
> Department of Education]{.underline}

  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------
                                     2002-2003\*\*\*\*   2001-2002\*\*\*\*   2000-2001\*\*\*   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  Testing month                      March               April               Tchr Strike       May             April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                  Reading             Reading             NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          98.2                85.1                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   53.6                37.3                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 0.0                 1.5                                                   

  Number of students tested          56                  67                  0                                 

  Percent of total students tested   100                 100                                                   

  Number of students excluded        0                   0                                                     

  Percent of students excluded       0                   0                                                     

                                                                                                               

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                              

  1.[Asian/Pacific                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A
  Islander]{.underline} (specify                                                                               
  subgroup)                                                                                                    

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          96.2                85.7                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   52.8                39.7                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 0                   1.6                                                   

  Number of students tested          53                  63                                                    

                                                                                                               

  **STATE SCORES**                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            172.35              171.09                                                

  \% At or above Approaches          90.3                91                                                    
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            256.16              254.29                                                

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   42.8                43.4                                                  

  State scaled mean score            340.27              337.82                                                

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 1.2                 2.1                                                   

  State scaled mean score            448.92              436.62                                                
  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment. The SAT9 is
not a criterion referenced test and we cannot psychometrically compare
the SAT9 to the current Hawaii State Assessment (HSA).

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment. The abbreviated SAT9 is not a criterion referenced test and
we cannot psychometrically compare the abbreviated SAT9 to the current
HSA.

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment (2001), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the criterion
referenced HSA cannot be used psychometrically to equate to the
norm-referenced Stanford Achievement Tests.

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS: Liholiho**

> Grade [3]{.underline}
>
> Test [Hawaii State Assessment]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [1^st^/2001]{.underline} Publisher [Hawaii
> Department of Education .]{.underline}

  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------
                                     2002-2003\*\*\*\*   2001-2002\*\*\*\*   2000-2001\*\*\*   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  Testing month                      March               April               Tchr Strike       May             April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                  Math                Math                NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          91.4                75.4                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   32.8                12.3                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 5.2                 3.1                                                   

  Number of students tested          56                  65                                                    

  Percent of total students tested   100                 97.01                                                 

  Number of students excluded        0                   2                                                     

  Percent of students excluded       0                   2.99                                                  

                                                                                                               

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                              

  1.[Asian/Pacific                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A
  Islander]{.underline} (specify                                                                               
  subgroup)                                                                                                    

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          94.4                74.6                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   34                  12.7                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 5.7                 3.2                                                   

  Number of students tested          53                  63                                                    

                                                                                                               

  **STATE SCORES**                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            159.43              159.99                                                

  \% At or above Approaches          81.1                77.9                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            252.78              249.67                                                

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   24.4                20.4                                                  

  State scaled mean score            326.77              323.07                                                

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 2.2                 1.6                                                   

  State scaled mean score            395.29              387.38                                                
  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment. The SAT9 is
not a criterion referenced test and we cannot psychometrically compare
the SAT9 to the current Hawaii State Assessment (HSA).

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment. The abbreviated SAT9 is not a criterion referenced test and
we cannot psychometrically compare the abbreviated SAT9 to the current
HSA.

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment (2001), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the criterion
referenced HSA cannot be used psychometrically to equate to the
norm-referenced Stanford Achievement Tests.

> **STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS: Liholiho**
>
> Grade [5]{.underline}
>
> Test [Hawaii State Assessment]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [1^st^/2001]{.underline} Publisher [Hawaii
> Department of Education]{.underline}

  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------
                                     2002-2003\*\*\*\*   2001-2002\*\*\*\*   2000-2001\*\*\*   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  Testing month                      March               April               Tchr Strike       May             April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                  Reading             Reading             NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          96.1                86                                                    
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   76.9                68                                                    

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 0                   2                                                     

  Number of students tested          52                  50                                                    

  Percent of total students tested   96.30               98.04                                                 

  Number of students excluded        2                   1                                                     

  Percent of students excluded       3.70                1.96                                                  

                                                                                                               

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                              

  1.[Asian/Pacific                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A
  Islander]{.underline} (specify                                                                               
  subgroup)                                                                                                    

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          95.7                87                                                    
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   76.6                69.6                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 0                   2.2                                                   

  Number of students tested          47                  46                                                    

                                                                                                               

  **STATE SCORES**                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            179.61              168.36                                                

  \% At or above Approaches          84.8                87.6                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            257.72              253.60                                                

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   41.6                42.3                                                  

  State scaled mean score            343.80              337.97                                                

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 1.1                 1.3                                                   

  State scaled mean score            455.91              448.35                                                
  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment. The SAT9 is
not a criterion referenced test and we cannot psychometrically compare
the SAT9 to the current Hawaii State Assessment (HSA).

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment. The abbreviated SAT9 is not a criterion referenced test and
we cannot psychometrically compare the abbreviated SAT9 to the current
HSA.

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment (2001), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the criterion
referenced HSA cannot be used psychometrically to equate to the
norm-referenced Stanford Achievement Tests.

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST: Liholiho**

> Grade [5]{.underline}
>
> Test [Hawaii State Assessment]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [1^st^/2001]{.underline} Publisher [Hawaii
> Department of Education]{.underline}

  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------
                                     2002-2003\*\*\*\*   2001-2002\*\*\*\*   2000-2001\*\*\*   1999-2000\*\*   1998-1999\*

  Testing month                      March               April               Tchr Strike       May             April

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                  Math                Math                NONE              N/A             N/A

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          92.3                90.3                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   42.3                33.4                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 0                   2                                                     

  Number of students tested          52                  51                                                    

  Percent of total students tested   96.30               100                                                   

  Number of students excluded        2                   0                                                     

  Percent of students excluded       3.70                0                                                     

                                                                                                               

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                                              

  1.[Asian/Pacific                                                           NONE              N/A             N/A
  Islander]{.underline} (specify                                                                               
  subgroup)                                                                                                    

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Approaches          93.6                93.5                                                  
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   40.4                30.5                                                  

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 0                   2.2                                                   

  Number of students tested          47                  46                                                    

                                                                                                               

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                                             

  \% At or above Well Below          100                 100                                                   
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            168.24              160.36                                                

  \% At or above Approaches          76.3                75                                                    
  Proficiency                                                                                                  

  State scaled mean score            251.77              248.79                                                

  \% At or above Meets Proficiency   19.8                21.1                                                  

  State scaled mean score            329.37              325.90                                                

  \% At or above Exceeds Proficiency 1.4                 1.8                                                   

  State scaled mean score            414.60              403.43                                                
  ---------------------------------- ------------------- ------------------- ----------------- --------------- -------------

\* The State used the Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^ Edition (1997)
during school year 1998-1999 for the large scale assessment. The SAT9 is
not a criterion referenced test and we cannot psychometrically compare
the SAT9 to the current Hawaii State Assessment (HSA).

\*\* The State used the abbreviated Stanford Achievement Test 9^th^
Edition (1997) during school year 1999-2000 for the large scale
assessment. The abbreviated SAT9 is not a criterion referenced test and
we cannot psychometrically compare the abbreviated SAT9 to the current
HSA.

\*\*\* There was a state wide teacher strike during the school year
2000-2001 which precluded any administration of the state large scale
assessment to our students

\*\*\*\*The Hawaii State Assessment (2001), a standards based
assessment, was given as the large scale assessment during the 2001-2002
and the 2002-2003 school years. This standards based assessment has no
applicable norm-referenced scores and portions of the criterion
referenced HSA cannot be used psychometrically to equate to the
norm-referenced Stanford Achievement Tests.

In 2000, the decision was made to move our statewide assessment from a
norm referenced test (SAT9) to a standards based criterion referenced
assessment to measure student performance in the content areas of
Language Arts and Mathematics. This was based on the premise that a norm
referenced exam did not reflect the uniqueness, nor the breadth and
depth of the Hawaii content and performance expectations for Language
Arts and Mathematics. The Hawaii State Assessment (2001) has four
proficiency levels.

Level 1: **Well Below Proficiency** means that the assessment results
indicate that this student has demonstrated little or no knowledge and
skills for the content standard for this grade.

Level 2: **Approaches Proficiency** means that the student has
demonstrated some knowledge and skills in the content standards for this
grade. With more support and effort, the student should be able to reach
the proficient level.

Level 3: **Meets Proficiency** means that the assessment results
indicate that the student has demonstrated knowledge and skills required
standards for this grade. The student is ready to work on higher levels
of this content area.

Level 4: **Exceeds Proficiency** means that the assessment results
indicate that the student has demonstrated knowledge and skills that
exceed the content standards for this grade. The student is ready for
more advanced work in the content area.

**Scaled Scores** based on the initial administration of the Hawaii
State Assessment were developed during Spring 2002. The scale scores
have been derived from the raw scores in order to create a score scale
with meaningful interpretations. For instance, a 300 means that the
student has met the standard. Scale Scores can be used to compare
student performance across different administrations of the assessment
sessions within a particular content area.