##### *2005-2006 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 \_\_Charter

Name of Principal [Mr. George Whileyman]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Stephen F. Austin Elementary School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [1630 Pitts Road]{.underline}

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

[Richmond Texas 77469-1390]{.underline} City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits
total)

County [Fort Bend]{.underline} School Code Number[\*
79901114]{.underline}

Telephone [(832) 223-1000]{.underline} Fax ([832) 223-1001]{.underline}

Website/URL [http://www.lcisd.org](http://www.lcisd.org/) e-mail
[bwhileyman@lcisd.org]{.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. Thomas E. Randle, Ed.D]{.underline}

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

District Name [Lamar Consolidated Independent School
District]{.underline} Tel. [(832) 223-0110]{.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. Michael Richard]{.underline}

(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: [17]{.underline} Elementary
schools

[2]{.underline} Middle schools

[3]{.underline} Junior high schools

[3]{.underline} High schools

[6]{.underline} Other

[31]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$7,127]{.underline}
(actual-2003/2004)

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$7,358]{.underline} (budgeted)

**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\. [5]{.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**    0         0                      **0**        **7**       NA        NA          NA

  **K**       35        39                     **74**       **8**       NA        NA          NA

  **1**       38        29                     **67**       **9**       NA        NA          NA

  **2**       49        49                     **98**       **10**      NA        NA          NA

  **3**       47        45                     **92**       **11**      NA        NA          NA

  **4**       42        37                     **79**       **12**      NA        NA          NA

  **5**       36        36                     **72**       **Other**   7         2           9(EE)

  **6**       NA        NA                     NA                                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   491
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [81 %]{.underline} White

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

[16 %]{.underline} Hispanic or Latino

[1 %]{.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:
[7%]{.underline}

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

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

  **(2)**                   Number of students who      17
                            transferred ***from*** the  
                            school after October 1      
                            until the end of the year.  

  **(3)**                   Subtotal of all transferred 35
                            students \[sum of rows (1)  
                            and (2)\]                   

  **(4)**                   Total number of students in 491
                            the school as of October 1  
                            (same as in #5 above)       

  **(5)**                   Subtotal in row (3) divided .07
                            by total in row (4)         

  **(6)**                   Amount in row (5)           7
                            multiplied by 100           
  ------------------------- --------------------------- ------------------

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

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

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

Specify languages:[     Spanish       ]{.underline}

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [8]{.underline} %

Total number students who qualify: [      40       ]{.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: [13]{.underline} %

[65]{.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.

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

Deafness [10]{.underline} Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [13]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

[5]{.underline} Emotional Disturbance [33]{.underline} Speech or
Language Impairment

[1]{.underline} Hearing Impaired Traumatic Brain Injury

[2]{.underline} Mental Retardation Visual Impairment Including Blindness

\_\_\_\_Multiple Disabilities

\*An additional 5 special education students enrolled after the October
28, 2005 snapshot date\*

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

Administrator(s) [       2        ]{.underline}  [0]{.underline}

Classroom teachers [      34         ]{.underline}   [0]{.underline}

Special resource teachers/specialists
[       0         ]{.underline}                [        0    
    ]{.underline} 

Paraprofessionals [       6         ]{.underline}                [      
0         ]{.underline}     

> Support staff
> [       5         ]{.underline}                [        0  
>       ]{.underline} 

Total number [     
47          ]{.underline}              [        0         ]{.underline}      

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio:
[        15       ]{.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  97%         98%         97%         98%         97%

  Daily teacher attendance  96%         91%         96%         96%         96%

  Teacher turnover rate     3%          6%          9%          9%          12%

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

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

**[PART III ‑ SUMMARY]{.underline}**

Stephen F. Austin Elementary is located in Pecan Grove, a beautiful
residential community 4 miles northeast of Richmond, Texas. Richmond,
the county seat of Fort Bend County, is on the Brazos River
approximately 20 miles southwest of Houston. The opening of Austin
Elementary in the fall of 1990 was the result of unprecedented expansion
in Fort Bend County and the need to accommodate growth and the
neighborhood school concept of Lamar Consolidated I.S.D. The school was
named after Stephen Fuller Austin, the Father of Texas and an American
leader of colonization in what would become the great State of Texas. In
1822, Austin selected this area to settle a group of the Old
Three-Hundred. This group of pioneers set forth a spirit of community,
leadership, and courage that has been the model for all future Texans.
Austin Elementary strives daily to continue the proud pioneer spirit of
our namesake and all those who followed his dream.

Our vision for Austin Elementary was to develop a child-centered
facility in which each student would be challenged to his or her
potential while being treated with dignity and respect. With all
segments of our school working together, that vision has become a
reality. The enthusiasm and commitment of all involved has contributed
to Austin's success. Austin Elementary faculty and staff have developed
a collaborative, integrated instructional program. This integration
strengthens the teaching and learning processes so students can develop
the vital skills necessary to locate, analyze, evaluate, interpret, and
communicate information and ideas. As a result, students acquire the
knowledge and skills they need to meet Austin's high academic standards.
At Austin we firmly believe success is measured by much more than test
scores. Our highly motivated, veteran staff can be seen utilizing best
practices innovatively to captivate and engage students in active
learning by addressing a variety of modalities through the use of novel
units, role playing, science inquiries and labs, math manipulatives,
centers, research, and much more. This same group of dedicated teachers
can also be seen after school and on weekends cheering on homeruns,
touchdowns, dance performances, and other student endeavors. In order to
ensure student success, we believe we must address each child's
emotional, social, and academic needs.

Our students learn at an early age the importance of developing
character and the role philanthropic endeavors play in becoming a
productive citizen. Each classroom develops a community service project.
Buddy classes are created in which older students are paired with
younger students to serve as tutors and role models. All students have a
sense of purpose and take ownership and pride in their role as
contributing members of the Austin family. Before and after school
activities such as choir, Writing Wonders, student council, chess, art,
and science clubs provide students enrichment and leadership
opportunities. We also provide a multitude of experiences that help
ensure that students will take control of their educational future and
become life-long learners. At Austin, we seek to educate the whole child
and provide maximum growth as we prepare our students to meet future
challenges.

Parental and community involvement help support our school's programs
and contribute significantly to the success and spirit at Austin. The
involvement of our Parent Teacher Organization enables our campus to
function at an exceptionally high level of efficiency. Austin has
tremendous support from a dedicated team of volunteers. Volunteer
involvement through our Terrific Austin Parents (TAPS) is a clear
reflection of our strong connection to and commitment between school and
community. Our parents are not the only volunteers on our campus.
Community members, civic leaders, and local businessmen and women can be
seen daily mentoring students in our highly successful, nationally
recognized HOSTS (Helping One Student To Succeed) program. In addition,
former Austin students gladly forego their high school off periods to
tutor and give back to the elementary school they love and still call
home.

Austin Elementary is much more than a building. For students, it is a
home away from home! All who enter our doors become part of an extended
family that thrives and flourishes on the success of all students. It is
also this same family that rallies when a crisis occurs. This sense of
love and commitment ensures, at Stephen F. Austin Elementary, that no
child, or family, will be left behind. As you continue through this
written narrative of our school, we welcome you to our Austin family. It
is our hope that this in-depth look into who and what we are will leave
you with the same sense of love, respect, devotion, and success that our
staff, students, and parents experience each and every day!

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

**[1. Assessment Results:]{.underline}**

As a public school in the state of Texas, Austin Elementary participates
in the state assessment system for students in the areas of reading and
math for grades 3-5, writing for grade 4, and science for grade 5. The
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) is a criterion
referenced assessment aligned with the state's mandated curriculum, the
Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), and the federal
requirements for the No Child Left Behind Act. The TAKS test, developed
in 2003, replaced the state's prior assessment, the Texas Assessment of
Academic Skills (TAAS). Data reported in this document represents both
TAAS and TAKS. On TAKS, students must receive a scale score of 2100 to
meet the state standard. This "Met Standard" category represents
satisfactory academic performance. Students passing at this level are
at, or above, the state passing standard. Enacted in 1999, the Student
Success Initiative (SSI) set goals to ensure that all students will
receive the instruction and support needed to be academically successful
in reading and mathematics. Based on increased accountability set by the
SSI, students in grade 3 must have "Met Standard" in reading in order to
pass to the next grade level, and grade 5 students must meet the same
standards for reading and math. Students may also earn "Commended
Performance," which represents high academic achievement at a level that
is considerably above the state passing standard. This translates to a
scale score of 2400.

Upon completion of the individual aggregated data, campus results are
then disaggregated into performance levels by ethnic and socioeconomic
subgroups. At Austin, the data for the years 2001-2004 include only one
subgroup. By 2005, two more subgroups, Hispanic and special education
became part of our accountability rating. We are very proud of the fact
our scores represent the vast majority of our students. Of the 244
students tested in 2005, 229 (94%) were administered the regular state
test. Fifteen students (6%) were administered the State-Developed
Alternative Assessment (SDAA II). Of those 15 students, 4 were part of
our Life Skills classroom. The SDAA II allows special education
students, who have identified disabilities, the option of taking an
alternative test based on their ability level. This ability level is
determined by the campus Admission Review and Dismissal (ARD) committee.
Based on the overall school performance, TEA gives a campus performance
rating of Exemplary, Recognized, Academically Acceptable, or
Academically Unacceptable. To achieve the coveted Exemplary rating, 90%
of all students must meet the state passing standard. More information
on the Texas Assessment System can be found at:
[http://www.TEA.state.tx.us](../www.TEA.state.tx.us).

Our overall school performance in this document reflects that for all
five years, 94%-100% of the students at Austin Elementary scored as
having met state standards or expectations. Specifically, for 2001-2002,
TAAS data reflects 97%-100% of the students tested passed the math
component, and 98%-100% of the students tested passed the reading
component on all grade levels. For 2003-2005, TAKS data reflects,
94%-100% of students tested in both math and reading "Met Standard" on
all grade levels. As required for promotion by the SSI, in 2004-2005,
100% of all 3^rd^and 5^th^ graders "Met Standard" in reading, and in
2005, 100% of all 5^th^ graders, "Met Standard" in math. In 2005,
97%-100% of our Hispanic population met, or exceeded, state standards in
all areas. For the years 2003-2005, Commended Performance percentages on
TAKS have improved as follows: 3^rd^ grade reading: 51%-66%; 3^rd^ grade
math: 39%-45%; 4^th^ grade reading: 41%-53%; 4^th^ grade math: 26%-54%;
4^th^ grade writing: 29%-50%; 5^th^ grade math: 27%-46%; and 5^th^ grade
science: 14%-70%. As a result of these outstanding scores, Austin has
received the state's highest accountability rating (Exemplary) for 10 of
the past 11 years.

The only disparity among our subgroups occurred with our special
education students in 2005. Of the 35 tests administered to this
subgroup, ARD expectations were met on 25 (71%). This was the result of
the increased level of difficulty on the SDAA II, and the fact our ARD
committees were determined to set high expectations for our
special-education students. As a result of this disparity, our
performance rating for 2005 was assigned as Recognized. After analyzing
the data available, we feel confident we will do a better job setting
expectations that are high, yet not unreasonable for our students. Our
staff recognizes the continued need to monitor students with learning
disabilities in order to accelerate learning.

These scores are indicative of the hard work and dedication of all
involved. At Austin, all children are ensured a quality education and
our test scores reflect that no child is ever left behind.

**[2. Using Assessment Results]{.underline}**

New education initiatives and increased accountability have inspired the
development of more effective, integrated methods for assessing student
achievement. Austin utilizes a variety of methods and assessments to
monitor and improve student achievement. Disaggregation of TAKS/SDAA
data in grades 3-5, Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI) for grades
K-2, and district-generated benchmark and proficiency tests for all
grade levels enables teachers to determine individual strengths and
weaknesses by subgroups and objectives. These item analyses are
available through a district computer-assisted program which provides us
with a record of standardized and criterion-referenced assessments. Data
also provides us with the information needed to determine the
effectiveness of our instructional program and support services. Using
assessment data, our teachers can track student progress, identify
student needs, provide focused instruction and interventions, and
ultimately improve student achievement.

Austin teachers use assessment data to help guide and enhance the
instructional program. Data analysis is a crucial tool used to create
lesson plans, develop tutorial programs, formulate objectives and goals
for Individualized Education Plans (IEP), plan for differentiation, and
ensure student mastery of state objectives. We also use a combination of
this data, formal and informal assessments, and classroom observations
to make informed decisions about best practices that lead to highly
effective instruction. Data is also used during our Student Study
Committee (SSC) meetings to plan accommodations for students and to
identify those who may be At-Risk, eligible for additional support
through ESL, special education, dyslexia instruction, HOSTS, or extended
day tutorials. Assessment data also drives professional development so
that it targets areas of need specific to our student population.

Assessment data helps ensure vertical alignment of campus and district
wide curriculum. Campus grade levels and special programs meet weekly to
celebrate success and identify areas of concern. Campus committees,
comprised of K-5^th^ grade teacher representatives in core discipline
areas, meet regularly to ensure vertical alignment of both TEKS and TAKS
objectives. District staff development days are set specifically to
discuss assessment data and vertical alignment across elementary,
intermediate, and secondary campuses.

Parents and students also play a key role in assessing student
performance. Take-home TAKS study guides and readers are disseminated to
those students in need of an extra level of remediation. This parent
directed course of study allows parents to become important contributors
to their child's success. In addition, teachers hold individual
conferences with parents and students to discuss assessment results and
set goals and expectations. Including parents and students directly in
the accountability process gives both a sense of ownership and control
over the child's academic future and success.

**[3. Communicating Assessment Results]{.underline}**

Our teachers recognize the difference active, attentive, informed
parents and community members can make in a child's life and academic
career. As a result, Austin teachers and staff utilize many methods to
communicate classroom expectations, campus information, and student
success.

Prior to the first day of school, teachers send personal notes to each
student welcoming him/her to their classroom. District and classroom
handbooks are disseminated during our annual grade level Curriculum
Nights. Each student has a Wednesday folder that includes campus
*Astronotes.* This communication provides a calendar of upcoming campus,
district, and community events, a personal note from our principal,
student club and organization information, and student awards and
achievements. Other school-wide communications include three-week
progress reports for all students, six-week report cards, PTO
communications, informational bulletin boards, six-week success
assemblies, a school marquee, local newspapers, and campus and district
websites.

Grade-level communications include weekly teacher newsletters, e-mail,
conferences, notes, student folders, and planners. Kindergarten-2^nd^
grade students and teachers utilize a daily take-home folder that
contains graded papers, homework, information regarding behavior and
work habits, and teacher communications. Second-5^th^ grade teachers and
students use district provided planners to record daily assignments,
upcoming events, and chart behavior.

Parents are personally contacted when individual interventions are
recommended through an ARD, SSC, HOSTS assessment, speech evaluation,
individual teacher recommendation, or other district programs. All
campus and district personnel work collaboratively to determine the best
course of action to ensure student success. Parents, teachers, and
community members are also part of the Site Based Management Team. This
dedicated group is the campus decision-making body and participates in
creating the Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) where assessment data is
disaggregated and campus goals are set. Progress on the CIP goals are
measured throughout the year and communicated in an annual summary to
staff, families, and district personnel.

Student Success Initiative brochures are sent home with all students.
The school report card with assessment data and accountability rating
from the state assessment (TAKS) is published in the local newspaper and
our neighborhood monthly publication. It is also sent home each spring
with every Austin student. This rating has led us to proudly communicate
such campus honors as: Texas Education Agency Exemplary Campus
1994-2004, Recognized Campus 2005, Gold Performance Rating: Reading,
Math, Writing, Science, and Attendance, Texas Business and Education
Coalition/Just For the Kids High Performing School, National Center for
Educational Accountability Consistently High Performing School, and
recognition in *Texas Monthly* magazine .

Improving channels of communication fosters understanding, caring, and
collaboration between classrooms, homes, and communities. Open, honest
communication is also our best hope for increasing support for our
educational institutions.

**[4. Sharing Success]{.underline}**

With a cumulative 675 years of experience, the faculty at Austin
Elementary not only takes a leadership role on campus, they are also a
driving force in the Lamar Consolidated Independent School District. Our
highly respected staff is consistently called upon to analyze and
interpret test data, create assessments, and serve on grading,
attendance, technology, textbook, leadership, and special programs
committees. This level of commitment to our campus and the LCISD
educational community has resulted in four of the past five district
Teachers of the Year being Austin faculty members. Our principal was
also selected as the coveted district Administrator of the Year. This
incredible level of peer recognition drives each of us to meet and
exceed the level of exemplary performance that has come to be synonymous
with Stephen F. Austin Elementary.

Our faculty and staff feel a tremendous responsibility to help guide,
train, and mentor future educators. As a result, our campus consistently
welcomes classroom observers and student teachers from local
universities. We provide the same assistance to those seeking
alternative certification.

As Texas educators, we also feel a tremendous sense of responsibility to
our statewide colleagues. Not only is it our goal to contribute to our
campus and district success, we passionately believe, that by working
collaboratively, we can keep Texas in the forefront of educational
reform and thereby serve as leaders and role models on the national
stage. Our staff actively strives to attain this goal by serving on
state committees, participating in state and national organizations,
working through our Region IV Service Center as trainers for Reading
Academies and state assessment creators and evaluators, presenting best
practices on a campus, district, and state level, and publishing those
best practices in respected educational publications.

Austin faculty and staff work diligently to align curriculum across all
grade levels. Select staff members serve as district Gold Team members
who work with intermediate and secondary schools to assess data, discuss
curriculum and best practices, and set vertically aligned goals to help
meet the campus and district goal of "Exemplary and Beyond!"

At Austin, we believe in teaching by example. Our students are open to
new ideas and learning opportunities because they witness teachers who
openly share and support one another on a daily basis.

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

**[1. School Curriculum]{.underline}**

A well-rounded, diversified, and rigorous curriculum is one of the
driving forces behind a successful school. At Stephen F. Austin, we
strive to achieve academic excellence and to ensure that all students
succeed. Although our in-depth curriculum is driven by the TEKS, we do
not simply teach the state mandated curriculum. Our teachers go above
and beyond the minimum requirements to provide a rich learning
experience for children. In addition, we have a district adopted
curriculum that ensures vertical alignment through the grade levels.
Every teacher on our campus provides a challenging learning environment
by enriching and differentiating instruction based on the individual
needs of our students. This results in high student achievement and
meaningful learning. Through staff training, vertical and horizontal
teaming, and weekly team planning, our modes of delivering instruction
are often changing to meet the needs of every student at our school. We
monitor and adjust to make sure that all students are successful. We use
best practices to help them become responsible, life-long learners, and
productive citizens in our community. We pride ourselves in believing
that the students are our top priority.

Language Arts and reading skills are essential in aiding student
learning in all other subject areas. Drawing from a plethora of reading
approaches and programs we work to produce fluent readers who comprehend
texts in wide-ranging genres from fiction to expository. Students are
given an array of opportunities to participate in projects and student
publications on our campus. Our students utilize skills learned in the
classroom to participate in these activities. For Young Authors,
students K-5 participate in the complete process of writing and
publishing either a classroom (K-2) or an individual (3-5) hard-back
book. In the Rising Star Contests, we have consistently been published
in the *Rising Star, Young Texan Tales* as state level winning authors
and poets. We recently had a student selected to participate (1 of 8 in
the state) as a student author panelist at the Texas Book Festival. Our
students publish an award-winning school newspaper and contribute to our
local community newspaper. These activities allow students to use
higher-level thinking skills and creativity as they take ownership for
their writing. Our students become effective communicators through their
writing, speaking, and listening.

Our math curriculum provides a solid foundation to equip students with
the ability to solve multiple types of problems and apply them to
real-life situations. Our math program moves from active, hands-on
learning to complex and abstract problem-solving. Through the use of
manipulatives and real world applications, our students are engaged in
the process of learning mathematics. Our students consistently
participate, place, and earn medals in math-centered University
Interscholastic League (UIL) competitions. They also use their skills to
organize and operate a profitable school store.

The social studies curriculum educates students in the areas of history,
geography, government, culture, economics, and citizenship. We engage
students by providing a wide variety of activities to help students
grasp the concepts. School-wide programs such as Junior Achievement
allow our students to become involved in real-world citizenship. Using
models, experiments, research, and observation, our science curriculum
keeps the students continually engaged by allowing them different
opportunities to use the scientific method and investigate
science-related concepts. Please refer to page 11 for a more detailed
look at our science program.

Our fine arts and physical education teachers collaborate on integrating
the core curriculum into their programs. The ultimate goal is to enhance
the development of the whole child. Our annual Fine Arts Festival
showcases the artistic ability and musical talents of the students. Our
students actively participate in UIL Art and Music competitions. Every
year all students enter their work in the Houston Livestock Show and
Rodeo art competition. This year, one of our 5^th^ grade students
received Best-in-Show throughout our district in the elementary
category. Another student's outstanding artistic ability was proudly
showcased on a community billboard. At the center of our physical
education program, we encourage life-long learning and appreciation of
physical fitness concepts and health and wellness. Our teachers combine
physical fitness and health awareness by participating in such
philanthropic endeavors as Jump Rope for Heart and Turkey Trot for the
American Diabetes Foundation.

Our staff, students, parents, and community work together to create a
positive, challenging learning environment, allowing all students to
meet and exceed the expectations set for them.

**[2a. Reading Curriculum]{.underline}**

Austin Elementary believes that a strong reading curriculum is the
foundation for every child's academic success. We use an eclectic,
multi-sensory approach to reading that addresses our state TEKS through
an integrated curriculum that focuses on phonemic awareness, fluency,
vocabulary, and comprehension strategies. Our curriculum is
differentiated through whole group, small group, and individualized
instruction. Varied levels of teacher support and facilitation are
demonstrated through shared, guided, and independent reading practices.
Cross-curricular strategies are also evident at all grade levels.
Student reading levels are determined through initial diagnostic
assessments and progress is monitored throughout the year using such
measures as informal reading inventories, Developmental Reading
Assessment (DRA) levels, district benchmarks, TPRI state assessments,
Accelerated Reader, and individual running records.

Austin has a nationally-recognized reading tutorial program called HOSTS
(Helping One Student to Succeed). This research-based curriculum allows
qualifying students to have four, thirty-minute, one-on-one tutorial
sessions each week with volunteer mentors, based on students' needs. The
HOSTS program services grades 1^st^-4^th^, and averages 60 to 80
students per year. As a result of this intervention, each HOSTS student
achieves a year to a year-and-a-half gain in reading. Extensive
community support is evident in these mentor positions with a volunteer
base that includes parents, retirees, high school and college students,
plus local business partners. Staff members also mentor during
conference periods! Of the 1300 HOSTS sites across the nation, Austin's
program has ranked in the top ten percent and has earned National
Exemplary status for the past five years. In addition, our HOSTS teacher
and paraprofessional have been honored by the HOSTS Corporation with
national teaching awards.

Austin also incorporates a wealth of alternative strategies to enhance
our students' reading skills and foster a love of reading. First-5th
grade students have six-week goals for our Accelerated Reader (AR)
program. Students accumulate AR points and redeem them for dog tag
necklaces which they proudly wear each Friday. Third-5^th^ grade
students participate in the Bluebonnet Reading Program. Those students
who read a required number of books and pass the corresponding AR tests
are invited to a special sleepover in the library. The Big 6 Research
Method helps guide our 3^rd^-5^th^ graders through research projects to
prevent frustration and promote success. The reading program at Austin
also includes Book It, book parades, author visits, Six Flags 600 Minute
Reading Club, 3^rd^ Grade Kids' College, Dyslexia Intervention Programs,
classroom and CCC Lab computer programs, and a variety of home-reading
programs. With the implementation of these programs, and strong, core
classroom instruction, every Austin student has the opportunity to
become a strong, independent reader.

**[3. Science]{.underline}**

Our school motto is "Austin Astronauts -- Pioneers of the Future." Our
K-5 science curriculum strongly parallels and compliments that motto. We
strive daily to give our students the highest quality education
possible. It is our goal to expose them to many different experiences
that will broaden their knowledge base. Through our PTO-funded Science
Lab and educational grants awarded to our staff, we have created an
environment where students feel comfortable and secure enough to take
risks. This has led to active learning in real-world situations. We are
using experiments to inspire, motivate, and engage students, which
heightens their curiosity. Our school-wide, TEKS-driven curriculum is
focused on enrichment, problem-solving, and differentiation.

Our K-5 teachers use modern-day technology, such as microscopes, optical
data, video equipment, and laptops equipped with Internet access, to
encourage higher-level thinking. We explore many areas of science
through the use of models and other hands-on, learner-centered
manipulatives. Our school has constructed a butterfly garden to give
real-world examples of various life cycles that are studied on our
campus. We have developed an after school Science Club and conduct an
annual Science Fair. These opportunities help our students stretch their
imaginations and enable them to reach their fullest potential. Guest
speakers from the professional community provide enriching, real-world
experiences. There is great pride in our NASA-originated shuttle
simulation. Through the use of a 25' by 12' model space shuttle, our
students use a computer simulation program to launch, orbit, and land
the shuttle. The "on-board crew" consists of students who conduct
experiments and "space walks." The whole school gets involved to create
a wonderful and exciting learning environment. These experiences have
played a major role in our outstanding success rate on the TAKS science
test. From 2003-2005 our scores improved from 89% to 96% passing, and
our Commended Performance increased from 17% to 70%.

Through vertical-teaming and a collaborative effort from our teachers
and support personnel, we work hard to build on our students' prior
learning each year. We believe these efforts will help launch our
students to great success now and in the future.

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

The instructional methods and strategies utilized at Austin Elementary
focus on curriculum, prior experiences and knowledge, student learning
styles, and student developmental levels. Our teachers have created a
risk-free environment where all students are challenged to reach their
fullest potential. Austin faculty and staff work collaboratively to
analyze data and identify areas of academic need. Once these areas of
need are identified, our teachers seek out instructional methods and
strategies that will ensure student success.

Through direct instruction our teachers develop the students' deductive
reasoning skills by utilizing such practices as didactic questioning,
lectures, drill and practice, modeling, and guided practice. Here our
teachers introduce, review, model, and provide practice for basic
skills. Our students' success rate in reading is a reflection of the
innovative instructional methods of our outstanding HOSTS program and
other intervention programs in place for dyslexia (DIP), spelling (SIP),
writing (WIP), and multi-sensory instruction. Through indirect
instruction, our teachers focus on student-centered strategies such as
problem solving, concept attainment, guided inquiry and discovery, and
reflective discussions. We take advantage of our students' interests and
curiosity by involving them in activities they can observe, investigate,
infer, and use to formulate ideas.

Austin staff also relies on interactive instruction between peers and
teachers to help students learn. This is accomplished through classroom
group interaction, small group interaction, co-operative groups, and
student pairs or triads. Our younger students build on a solid
foundation by using hands-on manipulatives for math and science and
utilizing learning centers for all disciplines. Austin teachers strive
to integrate science, social studies, language arts, math, and writing
within the curriculum. Our computer lab is utilized by our students
before, during, and after school to reinforce and enrich the classroom
curriculum. Students work with innovative reading, math, and writing
software, research, create Power Point presentations, and practice basic
computer, word-processing, and keyboarding skills. To emphasize the
actual learning process, our teachers use experiential instruction
whereby students can actually participate in the experience, or the
teacher can simulate the situation.

To foster the development of individual student initiative,
self-reliance, and self-improvement, our teachers encourage students to
analyze problems, reflect, make decisions, and take action through
independent study. To meet the needs, pace, and interests of all
students, Austin teachers utilize curriculum compacting techniques and
differentiate the curriculum. Our Gifted and Talented students are
challenged with Socratic Questioning, Principles of Depth and
Complexity, and Multiple Intelligences.

Through vertical and grade level alignment, our students experience a
cohesive instructional program. As teachers, we believe it is our job to
educate children through instructional strategies and methods that will
enable them take pride in their ability to learn from others, teach
themselves, and share their new learning with others.

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

At Austin Elementary we believe the success of any instructional program
is dependent upon the expertise of the teacher. Effective staff
development is a high priority at Austin and ensures our teachers
utilize the best methods available to meet the needs of the whole child.
In order to meet these needs, our teachers have participated in
extensive training in Structure of the Intellect (SOI) which has enabled
us to identify the varying learning styles of our students. We believe
before we can look for "ways" to teach, we must first identify "how" our
students learn. Assessment data also drives our professional
development. Our teachers have been trained by Dr. Shirley Crook and Dr.
Margaret Kilgo in ways to interpret and analyze testing data as it
applies to our campus and district. The results of these analyses have
allowed us to seek out professional development specific to the needs of
our campus population.

Our instructional program has been strengthened through method training
in areas of concept attainment, cooperative learning, interactive
learning centers, portfolio assessment, and many others. Austin teachers
also take advantage of training opportunities through local community
organizations and corporations such as the Fort Bend Museum, George
Ranch, the Houston Chronicle, and NASA. These trainings allow our
teachers to incorporate real-world and life experiences into the
classroom. To meet the needs of our special populations, teachers at
each grade level are certified in ESL and Gifted and Talented education
and attend annual training to maintain these certifications. Many of our
teachers also have dyslexia and multi-sensory training. These trainings
are crucial to the success of our students with special needs. Our
teachers also attend workshops that offer information and strategies for
our ADHD, ED, LD, and 504 students.

Austin faculty and staff receive content-specific training to stay
abreast of the current best practices for delivering instruction in each
subject area. To help students in Language Arts, our staff is trained in
TPRI, DRA, and AR. Reading Academy training (K-4) has been instrumental
in the improvement of reading scores for all our student groups.
Workshops such as New Jersey Writing Project, Six-Trait Writing, and
Writing Across the Curriculum enhance our K-5 writing program. To aid in
Math, Science, and Technology, our staff is trained in TEXTEAMS, AIMS,
Kidspiration, and Inspiration. These hands-on, cross-curricular methods
and strategies are highly motivational and produce high levels of
student participation and success.

Teachers at Austin are recognized throughout LCISD as leaders in
professional development. The knowledgeable members of our staff
routinely present their educational expertise at campus and district
in-services. Austin staff was instrumental in writing the curriculum
that is followed district-wide. Additionally, the district Region IV
Reading Academy trainer is a member of our staff. As a result of our
varied professional development, our instructional program is strong and
successful, our teachers are some of the best in our profession, and our
students are among the highest achieving in our district.

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

***No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon School***

**Grade 3 -- Reading (Language Arts or English)**

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test: [Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2004/2005]{.underline} Publisher: [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              | TAKS | TAKS  | TAKS  | TAAS | TAAS  |
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
|                              | 2    | 2003  | 2002  | 2    | 2000  |
|                              | 004- | -2004 | -2003 | 001- | -2001 |
|                              | 2005 |       |       | 2002 |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Testing Month                | A    | April | April | A    | April |
|                              | pril |       |       | pril |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**            |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 100%  | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 66%  | 51%   | 51%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 99%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students tested    | 92   | 81    | 73    | 101  | 95    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of total students    | 97%  | 94%   | 99%   | 91%  | 92%   |
| tested                       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students           | 3    | 5     | 1     | 9    | 8     |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of students          | 3%   | 6%    | 1%    | 9%   | 8%    |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**          |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 1\. Economically             |      |       |       |      |       |
| Disadvantaged                |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | 100%  | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* |       | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | 20%   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* |       | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 2    | 5     | 1     | 5    | 5     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 2\. African American         |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 0    | 0     | 1     | 2    | 2     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 3\. White                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 100%  | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 68%  | 54%   | 54%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 99%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 76   | 64    | 65    | 80   | 74    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 4\. Hispanic                 |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 100%  | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 54%  | 42%   | 29%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 13   | 11    | 7     | 10   | 8     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+

**\*\*\*\* No data reported for fewer than 10 students.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB), Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003
changed in significant ways from the calculations in prior years. First,
the test changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to
the much more rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Second, some students with disabilities who were previously exempted
from the accountability calculations were all included in all
proficiency calculations. Third, students were required to be enrolled
in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be included in the
calculations for that school. These changes may cause the data from the
2002-2003 school year to appear different from the data from previous
years. In addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in
Spanish, Limited English Proficient (RPTE), and Special Education (SDAA
and SDAA II). Grade 3 scores are cumulative, given over the course of
the year to facilitate promotion. By law, if students do not pass the
3^rd^ grade reading test, they are not promoted to the next grade.

***No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon School***

**Grade 4 -- Reading (Language Arts or English)**

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [4]{.underline} Test: [Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2004/2005]{.underline} Publisher: [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              | TAKS | TAKS  | TAKS  | TAAS | TAAS  |
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
|                              | 2    | 2003  | 2002  | 2    | 2000  |
|                              | 004- | -2004 | -2003 | 001- | -2001 |
|                              | 2005 |       |       | 2002 |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Testing Month                | A    | April | April | A    | April |
|                              | pril |       |       | pril |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**            |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 99%  | 99%   | 99%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 43%  | 53%   | 41%   | 98%  | 99%   |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       |      |       |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students tested    | 77   | 73    | 97    | 95   | 95    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of total students    | 90%  | 96%   | 94%   | 92%  | 90%   |
| tested                       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students           | 8    | 3     | 6     | 8    | 9     |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of students          | 10%  | 4%    | 6%    | 8%   | 10%   |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**          |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 1\. Economically             |      |       |       |      |       |
| Disadvantaged                |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 0%   | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 6    | 0     | 3     | 1    | 4     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 2\. African American         |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 0    | 1     | 1     | 3    | 1     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 3\. White                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 98%  | 98%   | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 41%  | 53%   | 43%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 97%  | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 58   | 62    | 80    | 73   | 77    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 4\. Hispanic                 |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 100%  | 90%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 60%  | 57%   | 20%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 86%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 10   | 7     | 10    | 9    | 7     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+

**\*\*\*\* No data reported for fewer than 10 students.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB), Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003
changed in significant ways from the calculations in prior years. First,
the test changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to
the much more rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Second, some students with disabilities who were previously exempted
from the accountability calculations were all included in all
proficiency calculations. Third, students were required to be enrolled
in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be included in the
calculations for that school. These changes may cause the data from the
2002-2003 school year to appear different from the data from previous
years. In addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in
Spanish, Limited English Proficient (RPTE), and Special Education (SDAA
and SDAA II).

***No Child Left Behind -- Blue Ribbon School***

**Grade 5 - Reading (Language Arts or English)**

Subject: [Reading]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2004/2005]{.underline} Publisher: [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              | TAKS | TAKS  | TAKS  | TAAS | TAAS  |
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
|                              | 2    | 2003  | 2002  | 2    | 2000  |
|                              | 004- | -2004 | -2003 | 001- | -2001 |
|                              | 2005 |       |       | 2002 |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Testing Month                | A    | April | April | A    | April |
|                              | pril |       |       | pril |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**            |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 95%   | 94%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 46%  | 43%   | 49%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 97%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students tested    | 72   | 96    | 94    | 100  | 91    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of total students    | 95%  | 96%   | 94%   | 93%  | 94%   |
| tested                       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students           | 4    | 4     | 6     | 7    | 5     |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of students          | 5%   | 4%    | 6%    | 7%   | 6%    |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**          |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 1\. Economically             |      |       |       |      |       |
| Disadvantaged                |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 2    | 4     | 3     | 4    | 6     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 2\. African American         |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 1    | 1     | 2     | 3    | 2     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 3\. White                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 96%   | 93%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 48%  | 48%   | 53%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 96%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 58   | 79    | 76    | 82   | 76    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 4\. Hispanic                 |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 83%   | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 33%  | 8%    | 38%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 9    | 12    | 8     | 7    | 8     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+

**\*\*\*\* No data reported for fewer than 10 students.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB), Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003
changed in significant ways from the calculations in prior years. First,
the test changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to
the much more rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Second, some students with disabilities who were previously exempted
from the accountability calculations were all included in all
proficiency calculations. Third, students were required to be enrolled
in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be included in the
calculations for that school. These changes may cause the data from the
2002-2003 school year to appear different from the data from previous
years. In addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in
Spanish, Limited English Proficient (RPTE), and Special Education (SDAA
and SDAA II). Grade 5 scores are cumulative, given over the course of
the year to facilitate promotion. By law, in 2005, if students do not
pass the 5^th^ grade reading and math test, they are not promoted to the
next grade.

***No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon School***

**Grade 3 - Mathematics**

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [3]{.underline} Test: [Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2004/2005]{.underline} Publisher: [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              | TAKS | TAKS  | TAKS  | TAAS | TAAS  |
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
|                              | 2    | 2003  | 2002  | 2    | 2000  |
|                              | 004- | -2004 | -2003 | 001- | -2001 |
|                              | 2005 |       |       | 2002 |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Testing Month                | A    | April | April | A    | April |
|                              | pril |       |       | pril |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**            |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 98%  | 99%   | 99%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 45%  | 39%   | 41%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 97%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students tested    | 93   | 81    | 73    | 101  | 93    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of total students    | 96%  | 94%   | 100%  | 91%  | 92%   |
| tested                       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students           | 4    | 5     | 0     | 9    | 7     |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of students          | 4%   | 6%    | 0%    | 9%   | 8%    |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**          |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 1\. Economically             |      |       |       |      |       |
| Disadvantaged                |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 80%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 2    | 5     | 1     | 5    | 5     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 2\. African American         |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 0    | 0     | 1     | 2    | 2     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 3\. White                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 99%  | 100%  | 98%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 47%  | 41%   | 40%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 96%   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 76   | 64    | 65    | 80   | 73    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 4\. Hispanic                 |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 92%  | 91%   | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 31%  | 36%   | 57%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 13   | 11    | 7     | 10   | 8     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+

**\*\*\*\* No data reported for fewer than 10 students.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB), Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003
changed in significant ways from the calculations in prior years. First,
the test changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to
the much more rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Second, some students with disabilities who were previously exempted
from the accountability calculations were all included in all
proficiency calculations. Third, students were required to be enrolled
in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be included in the
calculations for that school. These changes may cause the data from the
2002-2003 school year to appear different from the data from previous
years. In addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in
Spanish, Limited English Proficient (RPTE), and Special Education (SDAA
and SDAA II). Grade 3 scores are cumulative, given over the course of
the year to facilitate promotion. By law, if students do not pass the
3^rd^ grade reading test, they are not promoted to the next grade.

***No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon School***

**Grade 4 - Mathematics**

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [4]{.underline} Test: [Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2004/2005]{.underline} Publisher: [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              | TAKS | TAKS  | TAKS  | TAAS | TAAS  |
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
|                              | 2    | 2003  | 2002  | 2    | 2000  |
|                              | 004- | -2004 | -2003 | 001- | -2001 |
|                              | 2005 |       |       | 2002 |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Testing Month                | A    | April | April | A    | April |
|                              | pril |       |       | pril |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**            |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 97%   | 99%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 54%  | 38%   | 26%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 98%  | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students tested    | 77   | 74    | 94    | 95   | 97    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of total students    | 90%  | 96%   | 95%   | 92%  | 90%   |
| tested                       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students           | 8    | 3     | 5     | 8    | 10    |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of students          | 10%  | 4%    | 5%    | 8%   | 10%   |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**          |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 1\. Economically             |      |       |       |      |       |
| Disadvantaged                |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 33%  | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 6    | 0     | 3     | 0    | 4     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 2\. African American         |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 0    | 1     | 1     | 3    | 1     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 3\. White                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 97%   | 99%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 55%  | 38%   | 27%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 97%  | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 58   | 65    | 78    | 73   | 78    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 4\. Hispanic                 |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 100%  | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 40%  | 43%   | 20%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 10   | 7     | 10    | 9    | 7     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+

**\*\*\*\* No data reported for fewer than 10 students.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB), Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003
changed in significant ways from the calculations in prior years. First,
the test changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to
the much more rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Second, some students with disabilities who were previously exempted
from the accountability calculations were all included in all
proficiency calculations. Third, students were required to be enrolled
in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be included in the
calculations for that school. These changes may cause the data from the
2002-2003 school year to appear different from the data from previous
years. In addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in
Spanish, Limited English Proficient (RPTE), and Special Education (SDAA
and SDAA II).

***No Child Left Behind - Blue Ribbon School***

**Grade 5 - Mathematics**

Subject: [Mathematics]{.underline} Grade: [5]{.underline} Test: [Texas
Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)]{.underline}

Edition/Publication Year: [2004/2005]{.underline} Publisher: [Texas
Education Agency (TEA)]{.underline}

+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              | TAKS | TAKS  | TAKS  | TAAS | TAAS  |
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
|                              | 2    | 2003  | 2002  | 2    | 2000  |
|                              | 004- | -2004 | -2003 | 001- | -2001 |
|                              | 2005 |       |       | 2002 |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Testing Month                | A    | April | April | A    | April |
|                              | pril |       |       | pril |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**            |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 99%  | 98%   | 94%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 46%  | 44%   | 27%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
|                              |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students tested    | 74   | 96    | 94    | 100  | 90    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of total students    | 96%  | 95%   | 91%   | 93%  | 94%   |
| tested                       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of students           | 3    | 5     | 8     | 7    | 5     |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Percent of students          | 4%   | 5%    | 9%    | 7%   | 6%    |
| alternatively assessed       |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES**          |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 1\. Economically             |      |       |       |      |       |
| Disadvantaged                |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 2    | 4     | 2     | 0    | 6     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 2\. African American         |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Standard                     | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | \*\* | \*\   | \*\   |      |       |
| Performance                  | \*\* | *\*\* | *\*\* |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | \*\* | \*\   |
| Standards                    |      |       |       | \*\* | *\*\* |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 1    | 1     | 2     | 3    | 2     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 3\. White                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 98%  | 99%   | 95%   |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 49%  | 45%   | 28%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 61   | 78    | 74    | 82   | 75    |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| 4\. Hispanic                 |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met     | 100% | 92%   | 100%  |      |       |
| Standard                     |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAKS) % At Commended        | 33%  | 33%   | 25%   |      |       |
| Performance                  |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum         |      |       |       | 100% | 100%  |
| Standards                    |      |       |       |      |       |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+
| Number of Students Tested    | 9    | 12    | 8     | 7    | 8     |
+------------------------------+------+-------+-------+------+-------+

**\*\*\*\* No data reported for fewer than 10 students.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB), Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003
changed in significant ways from the calculations in prior years. First,
the test changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) to
the much more rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).
Second, some students with disabilities who were previously exempted
from the accountability calculations were all included in all
proficiency calculations. Third, students were required to be enrolled
in a school for 120 consecutive days in order to be included in the
calculations for that school. These changes may cause the data from the
2002-2003 school year to appear different from the data from previous
years. In addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in
Spanish, Limited English Proficient (RPTE), and Special Education (SDAA
and SDAA II). Grade 5 scores are cumulative, given over the course of
the year to facilitate promotion. By law, in 2005, if students do not
pass the 5^th^ grade reading and math test, they are not promoted to the
next grade.