##### Revised 3/24/05

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

*U.S. Department of Education*

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

Name of Principal [Mr. Peter Hodne]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Highlands Elementary]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address\_\_\_[5505 Doncaster Way]{.underline}
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

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

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[Edina]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[MN]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_[55436-2017]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County
\_\_\_\_\_\_[Hennepin]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_School
Code Number\*\_\_\_[273]{.underline}
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Telephone [( 952 ) 848-4500]{.underline} Fax [( 952 )
848-4501]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.edina.k12.mn.us/highlands]{.underline} E-mail
[pethodne@edina.k12.mn.us]{.underline}

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

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

(Principal's Signature)

Name of Superintendent\* [Dr. Kenneth Dragseth]{.underline}

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

District Name [Edina Public Schools]{.underline} Tel. [( 952 )
848-3900]{.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. Tim Walsh

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

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

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

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

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

**PART I ‑ ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATION**

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: \_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_
Elementary schools

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

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

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

\_\_\_[0]{.underline} \_ Other

\_\_\_[9]{.underline}\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure:
\_\_\_\_\_[\$8381.00]{.underline}\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_\_\_[\$8111.00]{.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
>
> \[X \] Suburban
>
> \[ \] Small city or town in a rural area
>
> \[ \] Rural

4\. [12]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

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

5\. Number of students as of October 1 enrolled at each grade level or
its equivalent in applying school only:

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

  **PreK**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**       43        32                     **75**       **8**                             

  **1**       35        44                     **79**       **9**                             

  **2**       44        54                     **98**       **10**                            

  **3**       50        40                     **90**       **11**                            

  **4**       34        46                     **80**       **12**                            

  **5**       43        35                     **78**       **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   500
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [91]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [2]{.underline} % Black or African American

[1]{.underline} % Hispanic or Latino

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

[1]{.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:
\_\_\_\_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_%

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

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

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      16
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 39
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 500
                            the school as of October 1  

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided 1
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           8
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

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

\_\_\_\_[7]{.underline}\_\_Total Number Limited English Proficient

Number of languages represented: \_\_[4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_

Specify languages: /French, Japanese, Russian, Tibetan

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

Total number students who qualify: \_\_\_\_[14]{.underline}\_\_\_

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

10\. Students receiving special education services:
\_\_\_\_[11]{.underline}\_\_%

\_\_\_\_\_[54]{.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.

\_\_[7]{.underline}\_Autism \_\_[1]{.underline}\_Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_[3]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_\_[11]{.underline}Specific Learning Disability

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_Hearing Impairment \_\_[26]{.underline} Speech or
Language Impairment

\_\_[2]{.underline}\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

\_\_[1]{.underline}\_Multiple Disabilities \_\_\_\_Visual Impairment
Including Blindness

[2]{.underline} EBD

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) \_ \_[1]{.underline}\_\_ \_\_\_[0]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers \_\_[19]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_ \_[6\_]{.underline}\_\_
\_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals \_\_[12]{.underline}\_\_\_
\_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_ \_\_\_[6]{.underline}\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_[46]{.underline}\_\_\_ \_\_\_[24]{.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 rates and only high schools need to supply drop-off rates.)

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

  Daily student attendance   96 %        96 %        96 %        96 %        96 %

  Daily teacher attendance   96 %        97 %        97 %        98 %        93 %

  Teacher turnover rate      5 %         15 %        15 %        5 %         35 %

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

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

**PART III ‑ SUMMARY**

Highlands Elementary School is a school for kindergarten through 5^th^
grade students with an enrollment of 500 students. It is part of the
Edina Public Schools. Edina is a suburb of Minneapolis, Minnesota. There
are nine schools that make up the Edina Public Schools, including six
elementary schools, two middle schools and one high school.

Most students at Highlands begin in our kindergarten program. After
kindergarten students at Highlands continue in one of the two programs
offered at Highlands. The Discovery Program offers single grade classes
in a looping model. In our looping model, students stay with the same
teacher and class in first and second grade. In third grade they have a
different teacher and different classmates and they stay together for
third and fourth grade. Students have a different teacher and classmates
in fifth grade. The Continuous Progress Program is a district
alternative program. In the Continuous Progress Program students learn
in multi-age classrooms and they have two teachers over the five year
period.

Highlands offers many opportunities for parents to be involved. Parents
can be involved directly in classrooms and they can also work on
activities of the Highlands PTA and the Highlands Site Council. The PTA
helps with enriching the school in many ways. They also assist in our
communication efforts by publishing a weekly newsletter that is sent to
parents. The research on parent involvement and achievement is well
documented

The Highlands Site Council helps govern Highlands Elementary School. The
Site Council is made up of parents and staff. The Site Council has
worked with the school community to develop a mission statement. The
statement is:

The mission of the Highlands Elementary School Community is to educate
and nurture each child in a safe, cooperative, and innovative
environment.

The Highlands Site Council has developed a strategic plan for Highlands.
It focuses on continuing to infuse technology in the curriculum,
promoting and maintaining a respectful environment and for teachers to
continue to learn about differentiation so that the needs of each child
can be met.

In order to achieve our mission we have designed a learning environment
that is based on education research. Our goal is an environment that is
safe and nurturing and academically challenging for our students. We
have combined a number of different programs, research and ideas to
develop our practice. Research on the learning and the brain is central
to our educational program. We use the Integrated Thematic Instruction
model developed by Susan Kovalik to help develop our learning
environment and teaching practices. Eric Jensen's work on applying brain
research in the classroom has also been valuable in the design of our
learning environment.

Students at Highlands have many opportunities to learn at nature centers
and environmental camps. Nature centers and environmental camps offer
students experiential learning that we can not provide in a classroom
setting.

Cooperative learning is well researched and is documented as an
effective educational strategy. We have worked extensively with David
and Roger Johnson from the University of Minnesota. The Johnsons use
Highlands as a model school to demonstrate how cooperative learning
should be implemented in a school. Cooperative learning helps students
to learn to work together and to know that they are valued at Highlands.
Cooperative learning is the foundation for the learning environment at
Highlands.

At Highlands Elementary students study a rich curriculum which includes
reading/language arts, math, science, social studies, Spanish, physical
education, art and music. We use a variety of approaches to meet the
individual needs of students. Differentiation in the classrooms is an
important first step. We also have gifted education, special education
and intervention programs to help meet the needs of students. We are
continuously working to improve the learning environment at Highlands.

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

**1.** **Assessment Results in Reading**

Assessment provides the staff at Highlands with information about the
progress of our students. The State of Minnesota sets performance levels
for schools and students in Minnesota. Students are assessed with the
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments. Information about the assessment
program in Minnesota can be found on the Minnesota Department of
Education website at:

<http://education.state.mn.us/html/mde_home.htm>

The students at Highlands take the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments
in grades three and five. In grade 3 students take a reading test and a
math test. In grade 5 students take a reading, math and writing test.
The tests are scored and students are placed in one of five levels.
Levels 1 and 2 are not passing levels. Levels 3, 4 and 5 are considered
to be passing levels.

The State of Minnesota combines the scores of students in levels 3, 4
and 5 to show the percent of students that achieve a passing score.
Comparing the percent of students in Minnesota who pass and the percent
of students at Highlands who pass is a good indication of the
achievement of students at Highlands Elementary. The results from the
2004 Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments are as follows:

Grade 3 Reading Percent passing in Minnesota: 70 Percent Passing at
Highlands: 95

Grade 3 Math Percent passing in Minnesota: 73 Percent Passing at
Highlands: 93

Grade 5 Reading Percent passing in Minnesota: 74 Percent Passing at
Highlands: 95

Grade 5 Math Percent passing in Minnesota: 77 Percent Passing at
Highlands: 96

Grade 5 Writing Percent passing in Minnesota: 78 Percent Passing at
Highlands: 94

Looking at the information shows that the percent of students passing in
the various tests in Minnesota is between 70% and 78%. The percent of
Highlands students passing the tests is between 93% and 96%.

The Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments have seven different strands in
reading. The Highlands percentages on these strands are as follows:
Grade 3 reading: Literary Passages - 90; Information/Practical
Passages - 86; Main Idea - 92; Information Processing - 90; Inference
-83; Compare/Contrast -- 77 and Analysis -- 87. The Compare/Contrast
strand is the lowest, but is jumps to 86% in 5^th^ grade reading so
students are making progress.

The grade 5 reading scores are: Literary Passages - 91;
Information/Practical Passages - 90; Main Idea - 92; Information
Processing - 91; Inference - 90; Compare/Contrast 86 and Analysis - 93.
The 5^th^ grade reading scores show improvement in every strand when
compared to the 3^rd^ grade scores. The only strand not showing
improvement is Main Idea which is at 92 in each year.

Math assessments are also analyzed by strands on the Minnesota
Comprehensive Assessments. The 3rd grade math strand scores at Highlands
are: Shape, Space & Measurement -- 85; Problem Solving -- 83; Procedures
& Concepts -- 86; Number Sense -- 85; and Data Categorization -- 82.

The 5th grade math strand scores at Highlands are: Shape, Space &
Measurement -85; Problem Solving -- 85; Procedures & Concepts -- 87;
Number Sense -- 85; and Data Categorization -- 88. The 5^th^ grade math
scores show improvement in three of the five strands with the scores in
the other two strands being the same.

The No Child Left Behind legislation identifies categories of students
in schools and assessment results are shown for each of these groups.
The groups include: American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian/Pacific
Islander, Hispanic, Black, White, Limited English Proficient, Special
Education, Free and Reduced Priced Meals and a category of all students.

Each year when the results of the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments
are released, the Highlands Site Council examines the results to see
what we can learn about our school. We always examine the different
subgroups to see if we can identify disparities among subgroups. We did
not find discrepancies when we examined the results this year. The only
groups that have enough students to be considered valid are the group of
All Students and White Students.

**2**. **How the School Uses Assessment Data**

At Highlands assessment data is an important tool for school
improvement. We use assessment data on the classroom and school level.

In the classroom we use assessments regularly to gauge the progress of
students. We use a variety of classroom reading assessments to help us
understand the reading skills and vocabulary development of our
students. In math we also use assessments to measure student learning on
math facts skills and concepts. Teachers use the information they gain
from assessments to flexibly group students for instruction. Last August
the Edina Public Schools did an in-service for teachers on how to use
assessment information to identify student needs and how to use
instruction effectively to address the needs of students.

On the school level the Highlands Site Council creates a School
Improvement Plan each year. The Highlands Site Council is made up of
parents and staff. Every August the Highlands Site Council meets to
review recent data that we have collected on Highlands. Our data sources
include state tests like the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments as well
as district tests like the Achievement Level Tests and the Cognitive
Ability Tests.

We also review survey data from students, parents and staff. The survey
data is collected each year. The data provides us with school
satisfaction levels for each group. The information on the survey
includes a variety of topics, but generally they fall into either
satisfaction with student learning or school climate at Highlands
Elementary.

We combine all of this data to get a picture of where we are as a school
and to develop a School Improvement Plan. The School Improvement Plan
consists of measurable objectives that become our goals for the school
year.

This process is a cycle that happens each year. We collect assessment
data and survey information, analyze the information, create a plan,
review our results by looking at the new data collected and continue the
process. The result is improved school performance.

**3**. **How the School Communicates Student Performance**

At Highlands Elementary we believe that communicating our school
performance is important. Each year we develop a School Information
Report. The report contains assessment data and survey information. The
assessment information includes state tests like the Minnesota
Comprehensive Assessments and district tests like the Achievement Level
Tests and the Cognitive Ability Tests. The report also contains survey
results from yearly school satisfaction surveys which collect
information from students, parents and staff at Highlands. We publish
this report on our website so that it is available for anyone who is
interested in reading about Highlands Elementary.

The Edina Public Schools communicates information about school
performance to the community of Edina in using a variety of methods. The
Sun, a community newspaper, is a good vehicle for communication to the
community. The school district maintains a website for communication and
also uses direct mailings to residents of Edina to communicate
information about school and district performance and student
activities.

We communicate individual student performance on these tests to parents.
The scores we communicate include the Minnesota Comprehensive
Assessment, the Achievement Level Tests, and the Cognitive Ability
Tests. These scores are mailed directly to the parents of each child.

Communicating assessment information to parents is important. We use a
variety of tools to keep parents informed about the performance of our
school. Our school website: [www.edina.k12..mn.us/highlands]() and our
weekly newsletter are two important methods. Parent-teacher conferences
are also an effective way to communicate our school performance.

Communicating assessment information to students is also important. We
want students to be proud that they attend Highlands Elementary and that
Highlands is a successful school. It is also important for students to
know that they are learning. Challenge and feedback are critical
elements in student learning. We provide feedback to students in many
different ways. Teachers give students feedback on their learning and
their work. Peers are also a valuable source of feedback for students.
We teach students how to give constructive feedback to other students.
We also want students to develop self assessment skills. One way we
accomplish this is by providing students with rubrics that clearly
outline expectations for the quality of work.

**4.** **How the School Has Shared and Will Continue to Share its
Successes with Other Schools**

At Highlands Elementary we believe that it is important for us to share
our successes and expertise with others. We share with other schools in
a variety of ways. We share our successes with people studying to become
teachers and administrators. We also share our successes with teachers
and parents and in other school districts around the state and the
world.

We have a great partnership with the University of Minnesota. We have
student teachers and practicum students from the University of Minnesota
every year. We have had this partnership for the past 15 years. We have
also had two administrative interns do internships at Highlands as part
of the work needed to be licensed as a principal in Minnesota. Our
teachers and administrators are active in training teachers. Every year
we conduct cooperative learning training sessions for new teachers in
our school district.

We are known in Minnesota as a school that has expertise in multi-age
learning and in the use of looping. Each year we have several visits
from teachers, administrators and parents from other schools who want to
learn more about our educational programs. We always accommodate these
requests and we feel it is our obligation to give back to the
educational community.

David and Roger Johnson are professors at the University of Minnesota.
They are known internationally for their work on Cooperative learning.
They use Highlands Elementary as a model school and they often conduct
research on cooperative learning at Highlands Elementary. We often have
visitors from other countries. We recently had two educators from New
Zealand visit our school.

We have formed a partnership with Edina High School. The staff at Edina
High School wants to work with us so that our Professional Learning
Community model can be shared with the teachers at Edina High School.
The Professional Learning Community model is a way for teachers to work
together to improve their skills. It is an effective model for school
improvement. We are committed to sharing our successes with other
schools and we are happy to be able to work with the staff at Edina High
School.

We have always been committed to sharing our successes and expertise
with others and this is a belief that will not change.

**PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION**

**1.** **The School's Curriculum**

At Highlands Elementary, students study a rich and rigorous curriculum
which is based on the high standards set by the State of Minnesota and
by the Edina Public Schools which are even more rigorous. The standards
of the Edina Public Schools are based on their mission which is: The
mission of the Edina Public Schools, working in partnership with the
family and the community, is to educate individuals to be responsible,
lifelong learners who possess the skills, knowledge, creativity, sense
of self-worth, and ethical values necessary to survive and flourish in a
rapidly changing, culturally diverse, global society.

Reading -- At Highlands Elementary School we use an integrated language
arts model. Our integrated language arts program enables students to
communicate effectively. Speaking, listening, thinking, reading and
writing are interrelated processes that are taught in an integrated
manner, however the uniqueness of each is addressed. The language arts
program fosters the ability to express thoughts and feelings in written
and oral form as well as the ability to comprehend what is read and
heard.

Math -- The mission of the mathematics curriculum is to instill in each
student the skills, reasoning and appreciation of mathematics as an
integral part of our everyday life by providing a wide variety of
opportunities that require creative problem solving, the use of
mathematical tools and communication.

Science -- Our science program is designed to help students learn
scientific information as well as concepts and processes that apply to
science. Students learn about physical science, earth science, life
science, earth/space science and the scientific process. Topics of study
include: plants, animals, motion, weather, insects, liquids & solids,
the human body, sound, food & nutrition, magnetism and electricity,
environments and microorganisms.

Social Studies - The purpose of social studies is to prepare youth for
their role as informed citizens committed to democratic values in an
increasingly diverse nation. Students in the Edina Public Schools study
a variety of topic in social studies including: Citizenship, Current
Events, Map Skills, Cultural Traditions, Land and People, Transportation
and Communication, Communities, Families and Neighborhoods.

Art -- The art program at Highlands provides students with experience in
a variety of art mediums. Students work in painting, drawing, clay
sculpture and weaving. Students also learn about art history and the
importance of art in cultures.

Music -- The goals of the music program at Highlands include
understanding, performance and appreciation of music. Students learn to
sing in tune, sing with mood, tone and tempo, to match tones and play
instruments. In addition students learn to move to music, work
cooperatively and participate.

Health -- The Health program in the Edina Public Schools is based on the
belief that: Physical and mental well being are essential for a healthy
community. Our prevention-based program begins with establishing healthy
behaviors and a positive life style. The curriculum includes units of
study on: Social/Emotional Health, Growth & Development, Personal
Health, Nutrition, Safety, Disease Prevention, Chemical Health and
Family Life.

Physical Education -- The physical education program at Highlands
focuses on lifelong physical activities and the importance of fitness
throughout life.

Spanish -- The Spanish program at Highlands Elementary is exploratory in
nature. Students learn to speak, read and write Spanish and they also
learn about Spanish culture.

Although the Edina Public Schools establishes a curriculum for each of
these areas of study, teachers and administrators at Highlands
Elementary can determine the instructional delivery systems and
strategies used to help students learn. We have chosen strategies which
help us achieve our mission which is: The mission of the Highlands
Elementary School Community is to educate and nurture each child in a
safe, cooperative, and innovative environment. The two most important
instructional delivery models for us are cooperative learning and
Integrated Thematic Instruction.

**2**. **The School's Reading Curriculum**

At Highlands we use the Harcourt reading series as the core of what we
teach. We also use a variety of other materials to help students learn
to read. Highlands Elementary is part of the Edina Public Schools. The
Harcourt reading series is used throughout the Edina Public Schools and
was chosen by a district committee. The committee studied best practices
in reading instruction and visited other schools with successful reading
programs. After considering different approaches to reading the
committee chose the Harcourt series. Harcourt was chosen because it fits
in well with the language arts program that the Edina Public Schools
uses.

At Highlands Elementary School we use an integrated language arts model.
Our integrated language arts program enables students to communicate
effectively. Speaking, listening, thinking, reading and writing are
interrelated processes that are taught in an integrated manner, however
the uniqueness of each is addressed. The language arts program fosters
the ability to express thoughts and feelings in written and oral form as
well as the ability to comprehend what is read and heard.

Although Harcourt is the base of the reading program for the Edina
Public Schools, we use a variety of other reading materials to
supplement the Harcourt Brace reading series. We have a library of
leveled reading books. We assess students with various reading
assessments and then we use books at their level to help students learn
to read. The research is clear that reading instruction must be done
with the students reading level in mind. Students will not effectively
learn if the books they are reading are too easy or too hard.

Our cooperative learning model allows students to work together to read
and build reading skills. Because we teach thematically, the materials
the students read are often related to science and social studies units
they are studying. This allows students to apply their reading skills in
a meaningful way. Since the reading is meaningful, comprehension is
improved.

**3.** **Description of One Other Curriculum Area of the School's
Choice**

Highlands Elementary is part of the Edina Public Schools. The Edina
Public Schools has used standards set by the State of Minnesota to
develop a rigorous math curriculum. Our district math department has
developed a mission statement for the math program.

The mission of the mathematics curriculum is to instill in each student
the skills, reasoning and appreciation of mathematics as an integral
part of our everyday life by providing a wide variety of opportunities
that require creative problem solving, the use of mathematical tools and
communication.

At Highlands Elementary we use the Every Day Math series which was
developed at the University of Chicago as our math series. The Every Day
Math series is used throughout the Edina Public Schools and was chosen
by a district committee. The committee studied best practices in math
instruction and visited other schools with successful math programs.
After considering different approaches to math the committee chose the
Every Day Math series because it helps us achieve our mission, it is
effective and it provides students with essential math skills.

We use a variety of other math materials and manipulatives to supplement
the Every Day Math series. As a district we feel that the series does a
great job of teaching students how to think flexibly about math. We have
developed a series of assessments for computation skills that include
benchmarks of what facts students should master in each grade.

Topics of study in our mathematics curriculum include essential skills
like: Number Sense and Numeration; Data Investigation; Shape, Space and
Measurement; Discrete Mathematics; Patterns, Relationships, and
Functions; Randomness and Uncertainty and Computation Skills and
Estimation Skills.

The math scores of students at Highlands Elementary and in the Edina
Public Schools are consistently higher than state averages.

**4.** **Different Instructional Methods the School Uses to Improve
Student Learning**

We use a variety of different instructional methods at Highlands
Elementary. Two of the most important are cooperative learning and the
Integrated Thematic Instruction model.

Cooperative learning helps us establish a learning environment where
students work together and are involved. Students learn to work together
and to help other students. There is over 100 years of research on the
effectiveness of cooperative learning. At Highlands Elementary we have
worked closely with David and Roger Johnson. The Johnsons are professors
at the University of Minnesota and the cooperative learning model they
have developed is used in many different countries. The Johnsons use
Highlands Elementary as a model school to show people how their
cooperative learning model should be implemented in an elementary
school. We have also had training on Dr. Spencer Kagan's model of
cooperative learning.

Another important instructional method is Integrated Thematic
Instruction. Integrated Thematic Instruction model is a comprehensive
model for implementing brain research in the school setting. Every year
scientists are learning more about the biology of the brain and how it
learns. We have gained a great deal of information about the brain and
how it learns in the last 15 years. It is important for educators to
understand how the brain is designed to take in and retain information.
It is our job as educators to use this information to help students
master and retain information and concepts.

At Highlands Elementary we use these two programs, because in
combination they allow us to achieve our mission. Our mission is: The
mission of the Highlands Elementary School Community is to educate and
nurture each child in a safe, cooperative, and innovative environment.
Both cooperative learning and Integrated Thematic Instruction address
the education of children in a nurturing, safe, cooperative and
innovative environment.

**5**. **The School's Professional Development Program**

Professional Development is an important part of any successful school.
Professional development is a partnership between the Edina Public
Schools and Highlands. The Edina Public Schools sets aside five staff
development days a year. Professional development activities are shared
by the school district and Highlands. Activities are determined by the
district strategic plan and the Highlands School Improvement Plan. This
year the training by the Edina Public Schools has included training in
how to use reading assessments to determine student needs, using
effective reading interventions based on student needs and using
formative assessments to determine student progress.

At Highlands Elementary we feel that professional development requires
more time and an ongoing nature. To meet these needs we have staff
development at Highlands on three Wednesday mornings a month before
school. In addition we schedule summer training sessions for our staff.
These are generally 2 or 3 day sessions. In the last few years these
sessions have been on Integrated Thematic Instruction, Spencer Kagan's
cooperative learning structures and the Six Traits of Writing.

In a professional learning community it is important for teachers to
work together and learn together. It is important for teachers to
develop common understandings and language about learning.

Our staff has also identified a number of books that we have all agreed
to read so that we will have some common understandings about
cooperative learning, brain research, thematic teaching, the development
of a school community, conflict resolution and restitution.

In addition Highlands teachers often attend week long training sessions
on various topics. Last summer we sent 9 staff members to a five day
training on Integrated Thematic Instruction. In previous summers
Highlands teachers have attended sessions on Orton-Gillingham reading
strategies and Cooperative Learning training by David and Roger Johnson.

Professional development is critical to an effective school. All of the
professional development we do at Highlands has an impact on student
achievement.

**PART VII - ASSESSMENT RESULTS**

**HIGHLANDS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**

**Report of Results on State Criterion-Referenced Assessments**

**Subject[: Reading]{.underline} Grade[: 3]{.underline} [Test: Minnesota
Comprehensive Assessment]{.underline}**

**Edition/Publication Year: [I]{.underline} Publisher: [Minnesota
Department of Education]{.underline}**

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

  Testing month                        March       April       March       March       March

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                    

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               100.00      97.50       97.67       89.13       98.83

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  95.00       88.75       86.04       73.91       89.53

  \% At or Above Level 4               88.75       80.00       67.44       60.87       67.44

  \% At or Above Level 5               45.00       36.25       20.93       14.13       27.91

  Number of students tested            80          80          86          92          86

  Percent of total students tested     96.4%       97.6%       96.7%       95.8%       98.9%

  Number of students alternatively     2           N/A         1           N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    .025%       N/A         .012%       N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               88.24       87.52       83.88       84.04       82.18

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  73.25       72.56       66.76       67.14       61.55

  \% At or Above Level 4               60.36       55.85       48.77       49.01       44.61

  \% At or Above Level 5               23.45       17.31       16.17       16.15       11.52
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

No AYP subgroup (race/ethnicity, special education, ELL or SES) data are
reported due to state requirements for minimum group size to provide
statistical stability and student confidentiality

**Subject[: Reading]{.underline} Grade[: 5]{.underline} [Test: Minnesota
Comprehensive Assessment]{.underline}**

**Edition/Publication Year: [I]{.underline} Publisher: [Minnesota
Department of Education]{.underline}**

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

  Testing month                        March       April       March       March       March

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                    

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               100.00      94.25       97.70       96.97       98.92

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  95.45       81.61       91.95       92.42       90.22

  \% At or Above Level 4               89.77       70.12       81.61       89.39       77.18

  \% At or Above Level 5               64.77       43.68       42.53       39.39       40.22

  Number of students tested            88          87          87          66          92

  Percent of total students tested     97.8%       97.8%       92.6%       98.7%       97.9%

  Number of students alternatively     1           1           N/A         N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    .011%       .011%       N/A         N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               90.77       90.40       89.52       88.87       85.51

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  75.51       76.80       74.77       73.75       66.86

  \% At or Above Level 4               64.33       63.92       64.01       62.86       51.77

  \% At or Above Level 5               30.19       25.18       25.38       24.08       15.93
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

No AYP subgroup (race/ethnicity, special education, ELL or SES) data are
reported due to state requirements for minimum group size to provide
statistical stability and student confidentiality

**Subject[: Mathematics]{.underline} Grade[: 3]{.underline} [Test:
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment]{.underline}**

**Edition/Publication Year: [I]{.underline} Publisher: [Minnesota
Department of Education]{.underline}**

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

  Testing month                        March       April       March       March       March

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                    

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               98.75       98.75       97.69       95.35       98.79

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  92.50       87.50       81.60       80.23       92.77

  \% At or Above Level 4               81.25       72.50       65.51       62.79       69.88

  \% At or Above Level 5               28.75       21.25       13.79       20.93       15.66

  Number of students tested            80          80          87          86          83

  Percent of total students tested     97.6%       97.6%       96.7%       97.9%       95.5%

  Number of students alternatively     3           N/A         1           N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    .038%       N/A         .011%       N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               92.38       92.40       90.41       90.47       89.51

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  70.48       71.51       65.08       65.51       64.66

  \% At or Above Level 4               55.31       56.32       47.94       52.66       46.39

  \% At or Above Level 5               14.92       13.81       11.02       13.62       8.96
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

No AYP subgroup (race/ethnicity, special education, ELL or SES) data are
reported due to state requirements for minimum group size to provide
statistical stability and student confidentiality

**Subject[: Mathematics]{.underline} Grade[: 5]{.underline} [Test:
Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment ]{.underline}**

**Edition/Publication Year: [I]{.underline} Publisher: [Minnesota
Department of Education]{.underline}**

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

  Testing month                        March       April       March       March       March

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                    

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               100.00      97.73       97.73       98.56       100.00

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  96.43       84.09       88.64       91.31       86.37

  \% At or Above Level 4               91.67       75.00       71.59       73.92       76.14

  \% At or Above Level 5               52.38       38.64       26.14       26.09       35.23

  Number of students tested            84          88          88          69          88

  Percent of total students tested     96.7%       98.9%       92.6%       94.7%       97.9%

  Number of students alternatively     2           1           N/A         N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

  Percent of students alternatively    .024%       .011%       N/A         N/A         N/A
  assessed                                                                             

                                                                                       

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                     

  \% At or Above Level 1               100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00      100.00

  \% At or Above Level 2               95.06       91.65       89.78       88.84       86.49

  \% At or Above Level 3 (Proficient)  74.29       74.85       70.24       67.33       61.68

  \% At or Above Level 4               58.99       60.13       52.72       50.56       45.60

  \% At or Above Level 5               18.48       17.56       14.02       13.14       12.34
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

No AYP subgroup (race/ethnicity, special education, ELL or SES) data are
reported due to state requirements for minimum group size to provide
statistical stability and student confidentiality

**HIGHLANDS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL**

**Report of Results Referenced Against National Norms**

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [2]{.underline} Test: [Northwest
Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                  | 200    | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                  | 3-2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                  | Fe     | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                  | bruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**              |        |       |       |       |
+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                    | 196    | 198   | 195   | 196   |
+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested      | 88     | 80    | 75    | 89    |
+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students      | 98%    | 93%   | 96%   | 97%   |
| > tested                         |        |       |       |       |
+----------------------------------+--------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**            186.6       186.6       186.6       186.6

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**    16.24       16.24       16.24       16.24
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [2]{.underline} Test:
[Northwest Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 196   | 198   | 195   | 194   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 88    | 80    | 74    | 89    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 98%   | 93%   | 95%   | 97%   |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**            188.2       188.2       188.2       188.2

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**    12.52       12.52       12.52       12.52
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test: [Northwest
Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 211   | 208   | 209   | 203   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 82    | 64    | 90    | 94    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 100%  | 76%   | 99%   | 99%   |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**            197.2       197.2       197.2       197.2

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**    15.73       15.73       15.73       15.73
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test:
[Northwest Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 211   | 210   | 210   | 208   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 82    | 80    | 88    | 94    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 100%  | 95%   | 97%   | 99%   |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**            199.7       199.7       199.7       199.7

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**    13.09       13.09       13.09       13.09
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [4]{.underline} Test: [Northwest
Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 216   | 216   | 212   | 217   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 75    | 81    | 86    | 88    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 99%   | 83%   | 99%   | 99%   |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**              204.3       204.3       204.3       204.3

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**      15.52       15.52       15.52       15.52
  ------------------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [4]{.underline} Test:
[Northwest Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 222   | 222   | 217   | 220   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 75    | 82    | 86    | 89    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 99%   | 84%   | 99%   | 100%  |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**             208.6       208.6       208.6       208.6

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**     14.23       14.23       14.23       14.23
  ----------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Northwest
Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 223   | 218   | 223   | 223   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 88    | 86    | 92    | 74    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 98%   | 97%   | 100%  | 100%  |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**            210.3       210.3       210.3       210.3

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**    15.37       15.37       15.37       15.37
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test:
[Northwest Achievement Levels Test]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2002]{.underline} Publisher: [Northwest
Evaluation Association]{.underline}

Scores are reported here as (check one): NCEs\_\_\_\_ Scaled scores
\_\_X\_\_ Percentiles\_\_\_\_

+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|                                   | 2003  | 2002  | 2001  | 2000  |
|                                   | -2004 | -2003 | -2002 | -2001 |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Testing month                   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   | Feb   |
|                                   | ruary | ruary | ruary | ruary |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > **SCHOOL SCORES**               |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Total Score                     | 234   | 230   | 230   | 227   |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Number of students tested       | 88    | 85    | 92    | 74    |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| > Percent of total students       | 98%   | 96%   | 100%  | 100%  |
| > tested                          |       |       |       |       |
+-----------------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

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

  **NATIONAL MEAN SCORE**            216.4       216.4       216.4       216.4

  **NATIONAL STANDARD DEVIATION**    15.57       15.57       15.57       15.57
  ---------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------