# [2004-2005 *No* *Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon Schools Program*]{.underline}

## U. S. Department of Education

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

Name of Principal [Dr. Elizabeth Tharp
Jones\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [P.O. Box 87]{.underline}\_\_\_[(1390 Highway 250
Rising Sun, Indiana
47040)]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

[East Enterprise\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Indiana\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
47019\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

City State Zip Code + 4 (9 digits total)

Telephone [(812) 534-3128\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}Fax
[(812) 534-2042\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.switzerland.k12.in.us\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline} E-mail
[ejones@switzerland.k12.in.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.

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

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\*\_[Mr. Tracy
Caddell]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

District Name[\_Switzerland County School Corporation]{.underline}
Telephone [812-427-2611\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.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\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[\_\_]{.underline}\_

(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson [Mr. Jack
Ranz\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

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

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

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

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

[\*Private Schools: If the information requested is not applicable,
write N/A in the
space\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

[PART I -- ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION]{.underline}

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

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]{.underline}**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: \_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_
Elementary schools

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

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

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_ High schools

\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_ Other (Briefly explain)

\_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_[\$ 8,600]{.underline}\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_[\$ 9,100]{.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\. \_\_[1]{.underline}\_\_ Number of years the principal has been in
her/his position at this school.

\_\_[5]{.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: 11%" />
<col style="width: 11%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 4%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 3%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 12%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 12%" />
</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><p><strong>Grade</strong></p>
<p><strong>Total</strong></p></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>Pre K</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>6</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>K</strong></td>
<td>56</td>
<td colspan="2">33</td>
<td>89</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>7</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>1</strong></td>
<td>47</td>
<td colspan="2">38</td>
<td>85</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>8</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>2</strong></td>
<td>46</td>
<td colspan="2">35</td>
<td>81</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>9</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>3</strong></td>
<td>46</td>
<td colspan="2">23</td>
<td>69</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>10</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>4</strong></td>
<td>53</td>
<td colspan="2">30</td>
<td>83</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>11</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>5</strong></td>
<td>33</td>
<td colspan="2">27</td>
<td>60</td>
<td></td>
<td><strong>12</strong></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="6"><blockquote>
<p><strong>TOTAL STUDENTS IN THE APPLYING SCHOOL</strong></p>
</blockquote></td>
<td>467</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [98\_]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [\_0\_]{.underline} % Black or African
American

[\_2\_]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

[\_0\_]{.underline} % Asian/Pacific Islander

[\_0]{.underline} \_ % American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

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

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

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

  ---------------- ---------------------------------- -------------------
  **(1)**          Number of students who transferred 48
                   ***to*** the school after October  
                   1 until the end of the year        

  **(2)**          Number of students who transferred 57
                   ***from*** the school after        
                   October 1 until the end of the     
                   year.                              

  **(3)**          Subtotal of all transferred        105
                   students \[sum of rows (1) and     
                   (2)\]                              

  **(4)**          Total number of students in the    467
                   school as of October 1             

  **(5)**          Subtotal in row (3) divided by     0.224
                   total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**          Amount in row (5) multiplied by    22%
                   100                                
  ---------------- ---------------------------------- -------------------

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

1.  Total Number Limited English Proficient

> Number of languages represented: [0]{.underline}
>
> Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [49]{.underline} %

[197]{.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: [19]{.underline} %

> [88]{.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.
>
> [3]{.underline} Autism [0]{.underline} Orthopedic Impairment
>
> [0]{.underline} Deafness [1]{.underline} Other Health Impaired
>
> [0]{.underline} Deaf-Blindness [27]{.underline} Specific Learning
> Disability
>
> [0]{.underline} Hearing Impairment [42]{.underline} Speech or Language
> Impairment
>
> [5]{.underline} Mental Retardation [0]{.underline} Traumatic Brain
> Injury
>
> [0]{.underline} Multiple Disabilities [0]{.underline} Visual
> Impairment Including Blindness
>
> [10]{.underline} Emotional Disturbances

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 [20]{.underline}\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Special resource teachers/specialists [4]{.underline}\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_
>
> Paraprofessionals [12]{.underline}\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Support staff [10]{.underline}\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Total Number [47]{.underline}\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio: [23 :
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 rate and only
    high schools need to supply drop-off rates.)

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

  Daily student        96 %       97 %       96 %       95 %       94 %
  attendance                                                       

  Daily classroom      95 %       96 %       95 %       92 %       94 %
  teacher attendance                                               

  Classroom Teacher    9%         0%         5%         5%         0%
  turnover rate                                                    

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

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

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

Situated in the rural area of southeast Indiana, somewhat isolated from
the county seat, Vevay, Indiana, as well as the rest of the state,
stands Switzerland County Elementary School. A very dedicated, motivated
and qualified staff recognizes that every child is important and
deserves the opportunity to learn. This belief is reflected in the
mission of the school which states: "**All entities involved in
educating our students cooperatively work in a safe, harmonious, and
healthy environment as lifelong learners and responsible citizens in our
changing world.**" Concentrating our effort to ensure that all children
succeed, jointly the community and staff developed and implemented a
school improvement plan that focuses on three areas: (1) Reading
Comprehension, (2) Vocabulary, and (3) Attendance.

Switzerland County Elementary serves 467 students. Nineteen percent of
our students have identified disabilities, and forty-nine percent are
from disadvantaged backgrounds with a school mobility rate of twenty-two
percent. In order to ensure the support all children need to succeed the
staff and administration are involved in continually realigning
curriculum to meet state and national standards. Programs are constantly
being updated and evaluated for their effectiveness in order to better
serve the needs of the children.

Currently a large percentage of the staff has been trained in and
implemented the Four Blocks teaching method. This style of teaching
exposes a child to more individual attention and instruction as well as
provides activities for meeting the learning modality needs of a wide
range of students. A researched-based professional development plan
correlated to the school improvement plan, supports teachers' needs as
they monitor student progress. Funded by the Indiana Department of
Education, Switzerland County Elementary faculty members are privileged
to be a part of the Top Hat Consortium, which is supported by
Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McRel) in Colorado.
McRel has been invaluable in providing research and practical guidance
in Robert Marzano's *Classroom Instruction That Works*, early literacy,
and research-based vocabulary in elementary schools. The Indiana Writing
Initiative, designed after the National Writing Project, has provided
valuable support in establishing training for writing centers for our
students. Training for technology integration is an on-going process.

Attendance is a concern that is necessary to address in the improvement
plan. The use of incentive plans and field trips that expose them to
outside resources provide students with added excitement to be in school
everyday. As a unified entity, Switzerland County Elementary, staff with
family and community work together to meet the needs of all children.
This is evident in attendance and financial support.

Assessing the academic success of the children is an on-going process.
Scores on the State ISTEP+ have consistently risen, thus providing us
the honor to be named an Indiana Four Star School. Utilizing standards
and mastery checklists, together with supplementary programs is key to
our success.

Switzerland County Elementary, in conjunction with its community, is
proud of the school's success and accomplishments. We welcome visits
from other schools, and are excited when invited to assist in training
other Indiana colleagues. As professional educators we understand it is
imperative that we must all work together to ensure that no child is
left behind.

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

1.  **Assessment Results**

Switzerland County Elementary uses data from various kinds of
assessments in order to understand and improve student and school
performance. The Indiana State Education Progress Test (ISTEP+) is
mandated by law to assist in the determination of progress in language
arts and math. All children in grade three are tested. All scores are
reported, including children with Individualized Education Plan (IEP's)
and other academic restrictions.

For the past eight years, we have assessed the academic success of our
children. Scores on the ISTEP+ have consistently risen and have
progressed from 62 % to 90 % passing in language arts. Math scores have
improved from 51 % to 96 % passing. As indicated, in the table from Part
VII, there are no major disparities among subgroups.

Due to the alignment of state standards to the test, standards-based
tests were implemented in 2002-2003. Therefore, due to the modification
in the test, it is difficult to compare testing in previous years with
current testing. The specific results for each year are as follows:

+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| S     |          |                    |       |                    |
| witze |          |                    |       |                    |
| rland |          |                    |       |                    |
| C     |          |                    |       |                    |
| ounty |          |                    |       |                    |
| Eleme |          |                    |       |                    |
| ntary |          |                    |       |                    |
|       |          |                    |       |                    |
| ISTEP |          |                    |       |                    |
| and   |          |                    |       |                    |
| I     |          |                    |       |                    |
| STEP+ |          |                    |       |                    |
| R     |          |                    |       |                    |
| esult |          |                    |       |                    |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| Year  | Language | State Ranking      | ###   | State Ranking      |
|       | Arts     |                    |  Math |                    |
|       |          | (Approximately     |       | (Approximately     |
|       | \% Pass  | 1,444 School)      | \%    | 1,444 School)      |
|       |          |                    | Pass  |                    |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 1996  | 62%      | N/A                | 51%   | N/A                |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 1997  | 65%      | N/A                | 75%   | N/A                |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 1998  | 85%      | 432                | 86%   | 735                |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 1999  | 79%      | 360                | 81%   | 443                |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 2000  | 72%      | 458                | 82%   | 326                |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 2001  | 80%      | 265                | 94%   | 46                 |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| I     |          |                    |       |                    |
| STEP+ |          |                    |       |                    |
| S     |          |                    |       |                    |
| cores |          |                    |       |                    |
| (Stan |          |                    |       |                    |
| dard- |          |                    |       |                    |
| based |          |                    |       |                    |
| tes   |          |                    |       |                    |
| ting) |          |                    |       |                    |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 2002  | 88%      | 185                | 96%   | 17                 |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+
| 2003  | 90%      | 174                | 94%   | 23                 |
+-------+----------+--------------------+-------+--------------------+

Information found on the Indiana Department of Education web page.

Multiple assessments allow Switzerland County Elementary teachers to
immediately identify children

at-risk and in need of additional support in specific areas of learning.
Some of these include:

-   One assessment we utilize is the Observation Survey by Marie Clay.
    This assessment is administered to kindergarten and first grade for
    placement in literacy groups.

-   The Waterford Early Reading Program by Electronic Education is
    utilized by kindergarten. This program provides individualized
    reports on mastery and progress in reading for each student in
    kindergarten.

-   The entire school participates in Scholastic Reading Counts to
    assess basic comprehension understanding. Students are evaluated
    weekly and many students progress at a faster pace.

-   Curriculum Frameworks from Indiana's Academic Standards Resource
    Guide is the assessment tool for both reading and math at the upper
    levels to assess each child's mastery of the Indiana standards as
    each cluster of skills is taught.

-   We are currently implementing the Plato Reading and Math program
    that is a standard-based diagnostic computer-learning tool. This
    program is in the process of being implemented at all grade levels
    to provide individualized instruction.

The Switzerland County Elementary staff makes a concentrated effort to
diagnose each student's skill level. Student progress is assessed
regularly through the utilization of such tools as pre-testing and
post-testing, observation checklists, teacher conferencing, and rubrics.

1.  **Use of Assessment Data**

Evaluation of pertinent statistical data is essential to the improvement
of teaching and student learning. Switzerland County Elementary utilizes
meticulous ISTEP+ data analysis reports that disaggregate scores and
trends from 1996 to present. In addition, the implementation of No Child
Left Behind further assists in identifying particular subgroup areas
needing attention, resulting in specific instructional modifications.
The use of this data is critical when working with designated children.

Individual performance indicator graphs and item analysis data target
ISTEP+ skills that are used to differentiate instruction of students.
Various enhancement programs may include Jumpstart (summer program),
Title 1, or after-school enhancement. Targeted areas are communicated to
parents for additional support.

Switzerland County Elementary works closely with the middle school and
its assessment results. Preparing a reading and math gap analysis sheet
for diagnostic purposes enables us to determine learning gaps between
grade three and grade six. This data is also analyzed corporation wide
ensuring that targeted areas are identified.

Tracking standards mastery is an integral part of monitoring student
progress. Standard checklists for each student provide continuity for
student progress and identify historical perspectives for the
mastery/non-mastery of the Indiana standards. Formal and informal
assessments are a component of student mastery of these standards.

Finally, assessment data is the main focus when updating our
professional development plan. Planning for the school and/or
corporation needs of our teachers and staff is based on the individual
learning needs of our students. Data drives instruction and also guides
the foundation of the adult learning community.

3\. Communication of Student Performance

Switzerland County Elementary communicates student assessment data,
student performance, and student progress on a regular and consistent
basis. Progress reports and report cards are sent home every four and
nine weeks respectively. Identified students receive daily, and/or
weekly communication through written reports, phone calls, and e-mail. A
learning contract, signed by all entities involved is a mandatory
component of any student having ISTEP+ difficulties. A variety of
incentives are provided to reward student progress and success on a
weekly and/or monthly basis. Parents are an integral part of celebrating
student success.

Switzerland County Elementary sends home a handbook that explains
expectations for the pupils. Parent conferences are conducted providing
hours that accommodates all parents. Parents and teachers are also
encouraged to schedule appointments throughout the year, as they deem
necessary.

Finally, Switzerland County Elementary sends the assessment data from
ISTEP+ directly to the homes. We invite and encourage parents to contact
the school if there are questions concerning the results. The principal
prepares presentations for teachers' meetings, PTA meetings,
administrative meetings, and school board meetings to share student
results on ISTEP+ testing and goals for the future. The community and
regional newspapers publish assessment results.

Results are shared with community groups who provide resources for
programs that enhance school improvement. Funds and personal
participation from community organizations are invaluable to our pupils
and facilitate student success in the classroom.

4\. Sharing Success

Switzerland County Elementary is proud of its accomplishments and shares
it successes with other schools. The teachers are committed
professionals that work as leaders and collaborators to improve programs
throughout the community so that all children have the opportunity to
learn and so that no child is left behind. Because of this commitment
the scores have consistently risen in language arts and math since 1996.
Our school was honored as an Indiana Four Star School.

Switzerland County Elementary in conjunction with its community is proud
of the school's success and accomplishments. We welcome visits from
other schools, and are excited when invited to assist in training other
Indiana colleagues. Plus, our teachers have been invited to present
research-based teaching strategies at local, state and national
conferences such as:

-   Showcase of the Best in Indiana sponsor by the Indiana Small and
    Rural Schools Conference

-   Indiana Block -- Four Block Conference sponsor by the Southern
    Indiana Educator Center

-   Through the distant learning program, Vision Athena

-   National Rural Education Conference

-   Staff from Switzerland County Elementary traveled to school
    corporations within Indiana to highlight the programs used by our
    school for school improvement. Several of these corporations sent
    administrative and teaching staff to observe our teachers at work.

In the event Switzerland County Elementary wins this prestigious award,
we will continue to share our success with other schools and educators.
We will update the information on our school website highlighting the
Blue Ribbon award with specific details to allow other schools to model
our success. Examples would include informal assessments to include
mastery standard checklist examples, gap analysis forms, methods of
teaching research based vocabulary and examples of best teaching
practices from the specific programs put in place like Four Blocks, and
Math Their Way. We will continue to participate in distance learning
opportunities and present at local, state and national conferences. The
focus of these presentations has been highlighting our programs,
instructional techniques, intervention strategies, and assessment
strategies.

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

Switzerland County Elementary has revised the curriculum in language
arts, math, science, and social studies to implement a comprehensive
approach to improve student leaning. In addition to an independent
professional study, Switzerland County Elementary joined forces with the
Top Hat consultants to design our approach. The consultants assisted in
reviewing our standards and benchmarks for clarity, coherence, and
content; helped translate curriculum into grade-level standards and
benchmarks; designed developmentally appropriate, challenging,
standards-based activities; and advised us on how we could collect,
study, and effectively use assessment data.

The school's curriculum, instruction, and assessment are totally
aligned. Each teacher has standards checklists that are rigorously
adhered to and monitored by the building principal. The curriculum
framework assures all staff that they are following the same guidelines.

Switzerland County Elementary subject areas include language arts,
mathematics, health and science, and social studies. Special needs
pupils are accommodated with standards-based and individualized
programs. Students also receive instructions in art, music, physical
education, and technology. When applicable, instructional activities in
these areas are integrated with state language arts and math standards.

Language arts is an area that one could see many diverse activities in
this school. Due to the specific at- risk population, Switzerland County
researched its options on early-based interventions. To make up for the
3000+ hours of pre-literacy exposure many of our students lack, the
Waterford Early Reading Program and a literacy-reading program were
implemented in the primary grades. Switzerland County Elementary
implements a literacy curriculum framework that involves the skill areas
of vocabulary development, phonemic awareness, systematic word analysis,
reading comprehension, literacy response and analysis, writing process,
writing applications, spoken and written English, and listening and
speaking skills through the Four-Blocks teaching model and the Indiana
Writing Initiative. Mountain language, a standards-based program, was
piloted by the fifth grade two years ago and is in the process of being
implemented throughout the entire school. As a typical part of each
child's school day, embedded in these instructional strategies are
meaningful activities that push for literate students.

The math curriculum focuses on problem solving, measurement,
computation, algebra and functions, geometry, number sense and
computation. Students are presented with numerous "hands-on" experiences
in both math and science. Manipulatives are used at all grade levels as
appropriate.

The social studies curriculum includes a wide range of study areas.
These areas include state history, United States history, cultural
areas, current events, communities, and family connections. Many
project-based learning activities, guest speakers for History Day,
projects for our school wide Pioneer Day, field trips such as Story Fest
(where history comes alive), help to make history something the students
can experience.

Science focuses on physical, life, and earth sciences. Our Outdoor Lab
allows for close-up observations of plant and animal life. The
scientific process is practiced at all grade levels in the spring at the
annual Science Fair. Primary grades do class projects while the
intermediate students complete partner or individual science
experiments. Our Gifted/Talented program uses critical thinking and a
"hands-on" technological approach to expand on the regular curriculum.
The Title I program is designed to provide support for those children in
the classroom that are immediately at risk and help them become
successful at grade level as quickly as possible. Switzerland County
Elementary continually expands its extra curricular activities that are
offered during and after school to include activities in math, spelling,
art, Spanish, drama and strategies.

According to data analysis, curriculum is reviewed each year and
adjustments are made to meet the needs of students. We are continually
striving to meet the needs of each individual student. The school
monitors carefully what research-based practices are working and
modifications are made accordingly.

2.Reading

Switzerland County Elementary data indicated that teachers needed to go
beyond the traditional approach of teaching reading. Along with the
basal, Four Blocks was selected as the best research-based approach for
delivery to meet students' needs. The components of the Four Blocks are
Guided Reading, Self-Selected Reading, Writing, and Working with Words.
Daily instruction in all Four Blocks provides numerous opportunities for
students to grow, explore and develop in reading and writing. The
multilevel format of each block provides substantial instructional
support for all learners. In the Guided Reading Block, children are
exposed to a wide range of literature, taught comprehension strategies,
and taught difficult text. Children read from mini libraries housed in
the classroom during the Self-Selected Reading Block. Teachers help
children develop a love of reading and a wide range of reading abilities
and interest are addressed. Each student holds an individual book
conference with the teacher. The Working with Words Block is the
phonetic component of Four Blocks. Students learn to spell and decode
difficult words as well as read and spell high frequency words. All
classrooms have word walls. In addition to the research-based vocabulary
provided by McRel on which the school concentrates, the fourth grade
showcases a word of the day while the fifth grade teaches Latin roots.
The Writing Block provides a model for children of what real writers do.
Children engage in writing that progresses through all of the steps in
the writing process, including a finish work with illustrations.
Throughout this process children meet with their teacher as well as
other students to review their writing. Children celebrate writing by
sharing their work with the class and supporting each other. Various
kinds of writings are posted on the walls inside and outside the
classrooms.

The Indiana Writing Initiative, modeled after the National Writing
Project, has provided research-based ways to teach writing with the use
of excellent children's literature. Good literature serves as examples
for children of how to include voice, tension, develop characters, time
and place in a story.

The Waterford Early Reading Program provides kindergarten students with
a strong multi-media technological approach to reading in an
individualized program with a strong home to school connection. Literacy
groups are used for all students in first grade while second and third
graders use Literacy Circles. The intermediate grades supplement the
basal with the use of trade books. Scholastic Reading Counts is used
school wide to motivate extensive reading beyond regular reading
instruction. These wide range approaches encourage all students to be
independent readers.

3\. Math

Special attention was given when choosing the math series to the
correlation of State standards and cross-grade collaboration of school
curriculum. This series provides direct instruction, practice materials,
mastery assessment, and use of "hands-on" manipulatives. In addition to
this it provides such daily activities as the (problem of the day) and
problem solving for various concepts.

Numerous Switzerland County Elementary teachers have been trained in the
"Math Their Way" and "Math Their Way of Thinking" programs. Mountain
Math is available school-wide. This program offers practice for a number
of standards that students are required to master at their particular
grade level. Daily calendar math is used by all grades. Several classes
in grades K-3 use the Mini-Economy Model to promote "hands-on"
experience in managing "school money". AIMS education is used to focus
in on the connection between science and math. Our ISTEP+ Mathematics
success is a reflection of the effectiveness of these programs.

Math is an integral part of learning and a necessary life skill.
Therefore, it is of utmost importance that children succeed in this area
of their curriculum. Switzerland County Elementary has made a
conscientious effort to provide vertical articulation to ensure that all
students are provided with the skills needed to succeed. Higher-level
thinking skills are imperative for success on the ISTEP+ and other
academic endeavors. Review is necessary for students to grasp these
concepts. Daily review in the classroom, summer programs, Title I
instruction, after school tutoring and enhancement programs are all key
in the area of Switzerland County Elementary success in the area of
math.

4\. Instructional Methods

Switzerland County Elementary recognizes the need for differentiating
instruction and is continually researching to find updated ideas for
reaching all students. All teachers were instructed and have implemented
the nine strategies of Robert Marzano in his book *Classroom Instruction
That Works:* identifying similarities and differences, summarizing and
note taking, reinforcing effort and providing recognition, homework and
practice, nonlinguistic representations, cooperative learning, setting
objectives, and providing feedback, generating and testing hypotheses,
and cues questions and advance organizers. Research shows that students
show a higher level of success because these strategies address
modalities that children relate to better than the more traditional
style of teaching.

In an attempt to update teaching styles to better meet the needs of the
students, teachers began to look for more updated styles for teaching
language arts skills. Children needed to become more proficient in
reading, writing, and vocabulary. These skills are all closely related,
and Switzerland County educators felt that there should be more
continuity in their instruction. After researching many programs being
made available today, the staff of Switzerland County Elementary felt
that the Four Blocks style of teaching best fit its needs and had been
proven successful in similar socio-economic areas. Most of the staff has
received formal training for this teaching style and it is used
throughout the building as the primary style for teaching language arts.

An extensive professional library is made available for support
materials. Schedules have been modified to create common planning time,
and in-service days have been set aside for cross-grade collaboration.
This creates time for educators to discuss what is working and not
working in their classrooms and to share ideas with their peers.

Connection between families of struggling students and the school is
invaluable. In order for students and parents to share the
responsibility in learning skill deficiencies, teachers notify the
parents. All parties then share in the creation of a contract in an
attempt to ensure the success of the student based upon their needs and
the modalities in which they seem to learn best.

Since Switzerland County has a higher poverty rate than most surrounding
areas and is a somewhat secluded area, most educators feel that it is
important to expose their students to outside resource that are
available. When possible, field trips are carefully planned to allow
students to receive instruction and exposure to the rich historical area
in which they live, as well as the available resources in the
surrounding area. Also, whenever possible outside people are brought in
to make presentations, which disseminates a wealth of information that
the students might not otherwise be exposed.

**5. Professional Development**

The staff of Switzerland County Elementary understands that professional
development is a primary component to improved student learning. The
school's professional development plan is consistent with our school
improvement plan. The goal of the professional development plan is to
enhance student achievement in writing, reading and problem solving.

In 2000, Switzerland County Elementary, as a part of the Switzerland
County School Corporation, was chosen to be a member of the Top Hat
Consortium. The State Department of Indiana selected seven high- poverty
corporations to participate in a four-year professional development
consortium. Mid-continent Research of Education and Learning (McRel)
staff trained representative teachers and administrators in best
practices, instructional approaches and the acquisition and utilization
of data. Teacher members of the Top Hat consortium became mentors within
our school. The teachers led staff in-services and worked with
designated teachers on successful strategies. The mentor teachers, who
had been trained by McRel, transferred the information learned at Top
Hat to the entire staff. As the staff implemented these strategies
learned via Top Hat, weekly grade level meetings became a primary part
of the professional development. Collaboration and study groups are also
important facets of the professional developments at the school.

The Switzerland County School Corporation was fortunate to receive a
million dollar technology grant from the Eli Lily Foundation. As part of
the grant, staff members received training in the integration of
technology into the curriculum. New software and distance learning
opportunities are continually being presented for use in the classroom
as well as professional development.

Teachers are encouraged to observe their colleagues in other schools and
within the building. The faculty is encouraged to attend professional
development workshops and then share the information. Teachers give
presentations within the school and conduct after-school workshops for
colleagues in other district schools. The Indiana Writing Initiative was
one of the expanded workshops; it taught teachers how to teach the craft
of writing using good children's literature. Teachers attended writing
rubric workshops in order to coordinate with the state writing rubric.
Professional development is an ongoing process. Educators continually
seek ways to better reach their students so that no child is left
behind.

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

**STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS**

Grade: [3]{.underline} Test: [Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational
Progress (ISTEP+)]{.underline}

Edition/publication year: [Same year as administration]{.underline}
Publisher: [CTB/McGraw-Hill]{.underline}

Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered:
[62]{.underline}

Number of students who took the test: [62]{.underline}

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

Number excluded: [0]{.underline} Percent excluded: [0%]{.underline}

ISTEP+ stands for Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational
Progress-Plus. ISTEP+ is Indiana's statewide assessment administered to
students at Grades 3, 6, 8, and 10. At the Grade 10 level, ISTEP+
includes the High School Graduation Qualifying Exam.

ISTEP+ measures student achievement in English/language arts and
mathematics. Grade 3 ISTEP+ assesses Indiana Proficiency Content
Standards, testing students on the skills that they have built from
Kindergarten through Grade 2.

The test was written to reflect the Indiana Proficiency Content
Standards in English/language arts and mathematics in order to ensure a
match between what is taught and what is tested.

The student population of Switzerland County Elementary is
overwhelmingly white. We have a 39% (24 pupils) free/reduced lunch
statistic for grade three. For the first time in 2003 we added special
education, 21% (13 pupils), to our subgroups.

Our school ranks well above the state averages when analyzing the
following chart:

+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **School Year** | **Language Arts | **Language      | **Percentage    |
|                 | Indiana State   | Arts**          | Difference**    |
|                 | Average**       |                 |                 |
|                 |                 | **SCES          |                 |
|                 |                 | Average**       |                 |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **1999**        | 69%             | 79%             | +10%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2000**        | 65%             | 72%             | +7%             |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2001**        | 67%             | 80%             | +13%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2002**        | 73%             | 88%             | +15%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2003**        | 75%             | 90%             | +15%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+

+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **School Year** | **Mathematics** | **Mathematics** | **Percentage    |
|                 |                 |                 | Difference**    |
|                 | **Indiana State | **SCES          |                 |
|                 | Average**       | Average**       |                 |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **1999**        | 73%             | 81%             | +8%             |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2000**        | 71%             | 82%             | +11%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2001**        | 71%             | 94%             | +23%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2002**        | 67%             | 96%             | +29%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+
| **2003**        | 72%             | 94%             | +22%            |
+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+-----------------+

The true picture of these scores appears to be stability. There are
[no]{.underline} extremes from year to year. Switzerland County
Elementary attempts to maintain their status as a consistently high
scoring school.

**Percentage of Students Passing English/Language Arts**

  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Year**                **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  Testing Month           Sept.           Sept.           Sept.           Sept.           Sept.

  **School Scores**                                                                       

  \% At or above standard 90%             88%             80%             72%             79%
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            16%             14%             N/A             N/A             N/A

  Number of students      62              57              66              70              68
  tested                                                                                  

  Percent of total        100%            100%            98%             99%             100%
  students tested                                                                         

  Number of students      0               0               1               1               0
  alternatively assessed                                                                  

  Percent of students     0               0               2%              1%              0
  alternatively assessed                                                                  

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                                     

  1\. Economically                                                                        
  Disadvantaged                                                                           

  \% At or above standard 88%             87%             N/A             N/A             N/A
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            21%             10%             N/A             N/A             N/A

  Number of students      24              31              N/A             N/A             N/A
  tested                                                                                  

  2\. Special Education                                                                   

  \% At or above standard 77%             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            8%              N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A

  Number of students      13              \*6             N/A             N/A             N/A
  tested                                                                                  

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                        

  \% At or above standard 75%             73%             67              65              69
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            13%             10%             N/A             N/A             N/A
  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

\*Not enough students to be considered a subgroup.

**Percentage of Students Passing Mathematics**

  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  **Year**                **2003-2004**   **2002-2003**   **2001-2002**   **2000-2001**   **1999-2000**

  Testing Month           Sept.           Sept.           Sept.           Sept.           Sept.

  **School Scores**                                                                       

  \% At or above standard 94%             96%             94%             82%             81%
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            45%             12%             N/A             N/A             N/A

  Number of students      62              57              66              70              68
  tested                                                                                  

  Percent of total        100%            100%            98%             99%             100%
  students tested                                                                         

  Number of students      0               0               1               1               0
  alternatively assessed                                                                  

  Percent of students     0%              0%              2%              1%              0%
  alternatively assessed                                                                  

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                                     

  1\. Economically                                                                        
  Disadvantaged                                                                           

  \% At or above standard 92%             100%            N/A             N/A             N/A
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            46%             10%             N/A             N/A             N/A

  Number of students      24              31              N/A             N/A             N/A
  tested                                                                                  

  2\. Special Education                                                                   

  \% At or above standard 100%            N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            31%             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A

  Number of students      13              \*6                                             
  tested                                                                                  

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                        

  \% At or above standard 72%             67%             71              71              73
  (proficient)                                                                            

  \% Pass Plus            13%             9%              N/A             N/A             N/A
  ----------------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

\*Not enough students to be considered a subgroup.