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

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

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal [Mr. William T. Knapsack]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [Carl G. Renn Elementary School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address [P.O. Box 66 - 183 School Lane]{.underline}

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

[Lairdsville PA 17742-0066]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [( 570 ) 584-3070]{.underline} Fax [( 570 ) 584-5393]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.eastlycoming.net]{.underline} E-mail
[bknapsack@elsd.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\* [Mr. Edward W. Harrington]{.underline}

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

District Name [East Lycoming School District]{.underline} Tel. [( 570 )
584-2131]{.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 Mrs. Susan Bigger -- Coordinator, Curriculum and
Instruction

(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 2003-2004 school
    year.

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

4.  The school has been in existence for five full years, that is, from
    at least September 1998.

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

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

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

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

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: [3]{.underline} Elementary
schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Middle schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Junior high schools

\_\_\_\_\_ High schools

[1]{.underline} Other (Briefly explain)

One building serves grades 7-12, Jr/Sr High School

[4]{.underline} TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$7782]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [\$8295]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. [6]{.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 enrolled at each grade level or its equivalent in
applying school:

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

  **K**       12        8                      **20**       **7**                             

  **1**       10        8                      **18**       **8**                             

  **2**       20        20                     **40**       **9**                             

  **3**       23        7                      **30**       **10**                            

  **4**       22        15                     **37**       **11**                            

  **5**       13        19                     **32**       **12**                            

  **6**       19        16                     **35**       Other                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   212
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL →**                                                
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [100]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: % Black or African American

\% Hispanic or Latino

\% Asian/Pacific Islander

\% American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

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

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

  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------
  **(1)**     Number of students who transferred 7
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

  **(2)**     Number of students who transferred 11
              ***from*** the school after        
              October 1 until the end of the     
              year.                              

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        18
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    226
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .079646
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    7.96
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: [0.0]{.underline}
%

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

Number of languages represented: [N/A]{.underline}

Specify languages:

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: [40.57]{.underline}
%

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

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

10\. Students receiving special education services: [9.9]{.underline} %

[21]{.underline} Total Number of Students Served

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

\_\_\_\_Autism \_\_\_\_Orthopedic Impairment

\_\_\_\_Deafness \_\_\_\_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness [10]{.underline} Specific Learning Disability

\_\_\_\_Hearing Impairment [10]{.underline} Speech or Language
Impairment

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

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

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

    **Number of Staff**

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

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

Classroom teachers [12]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists [3]{.underline} [7]{.underline}

Paraprofessionals \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> Support staff [2]{.underline} [3]{.underline}
>
> Total number [17]{.underline} [11]{.underline}

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

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

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

  Daily student attendance 95.73%      95.78%      95.59%      95.98%      96.09%

  Daily teacher attendance 93.82%      92.67%      94.50%      94.11%      93.29%

  Teacher turnover rate    11.11%      5.56%       11.76%      18.75%      12.50%

  Student dropout rate     N/A                                             

  Student drop-off rate    N/A                                             
  ------------------------ ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**[Part III - Summary]{.underline}**

Carl G. Renn Elementary School is described as an extension of both home
and family by children, parents, and teachers who live by the school's
motto, "Where Children Come First." The mission of Renn centers on the
concept that school emulates a family environment with caring teachers
who are committed to supporting their students to achieve academic
excellence. High student expectations are reinforced daily by all
members of the school community who implement a standards-based
curriculum.

Carl G. Renn Elementary is located in the East Lycoming School District
in Lairdsville, Pennsylvania, a rural community. Renn is one of three
elementary schools in the district, and educates pre-kindergarten and
kindergarten through grade six students. The school serves 212 students
and is staffed by 12 classroom teachers, 1 Title I reading specialist, 1
Special Education teacher, and 4 part-time teacher specialists in
library, art, music, and physical education. Ninety-eight percent of the
Renn students are bussed from the surrounding area, which is primarily a
farming community. Recent demographic information indicates that 40.5%
of the student population qualifies for free and/or reduced lunch, and
in years prior to entering kindergarten, children have the least amount
of formal pre-school development in the district. In the 2003-2004
school year, the district implemented an all-year, half-day
pre-kindergarten program for entering kindergarten students. In
2001-2002, Pennsylvania State System of Assessment (PSSA) results ranked
Renn as the poorest performing school in the district. However,
dramatically, in the 2002-2003 school year, Renn demonstrated
significant improvement at grade 5 that propelled it to the highest
performing school within the district, boasting scaled scores of 1510 in
Mathematics and 1500 in Reading. Both scores are a full 200 points above
the PA state average reported as 1300 in Mathematics and 1300 in
Reading. In Mathematics, 85.3% of students scored At or Above Proficient
and 88.2% At or Above Proficient in Reading.

Renn also offers many extended-day opportunities that enhance students'
academic and social well-being, such as Reading is Fundamental, Family
Literacy Project, Homework Club, Intervention, Accelerated Reader,
Readers' Theater, McRead Project, Battle of the Books, and Bookmobile.
Extra-curricular activities available to all students include Primetime
Reading, Science Fair, Pioneer Club, Spring Fling, Chorus, Band,
Student-of-the-Month, Scouts, Book Bingo, Football, Wrestling, and
Basketball

The families, although socio-economically disadvantaged, have a
long-standing history of both support and respect for the teachers and
school in their small town. Their participation in school events,
parent-teacher conferences, PTO, and their overwhelming support of
school initiatives demonstrates this. With no other supportive agencies,
Renn truly is the town center, sponsoring many community events, thus
accomplishing its mission of emulating a family environment while
supporting students' academic excellence. We envision a new generation
in this community, one that, inspired by its academic success will break
the cycle of disadvantage.

**[Part IV -- Indicators of Academic Success]{.underline}**

1\. The state of Pennsylvania used the fifth grade school results of the
Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) to measure student and
school performance in regard to the No Child Left Behind Legislation
(NCLB). As specified in Pennsylvania Chapter 4 curriculum regulations,
the purposes of the PSSA include providing

-   An understanding of the school's achievement of the academic
    standards to students, parents, educators and community citizens

-   A measure of the degree to which school programs enable students to
    attain the

academic standards

-   Results to school districts for use in their strategic plans

-   Information to the general public and state policymakers regarding
    school

achievement of academic standards

-   Aggregated results for all students

School and student results for the PSSA are reported using scaled scores
and performance levels. Scaled scores allow for comparisons of a
school's results from year to year. The statewide average allows for
comparison of schools across the state. In 2002-2003, the fifth-grade
students of Carl G. Renn Elementary earned an impressive scaled score of
1510 in mathematics compared to 1250 in 2001-2002. The mathematics
results reflect an improvement of 260 scaled points. In 2002-2003 the
school had a scaled score of 1500 in reading compared to 1200 in the
2001-2002 school year. The reading results reflect a dramatic
improvement of 300 scaled points. The Pennsylvania Department of
Education considers a difference of 50 scaled points to be educationally
meaningful. The 2002-2003 school year marked the first year of PSSA
testing in third grade. Results were only reported as scaled scores. In
third grade, Renn earned an average scaled score of 1483 in mathematics
compared to a state average of 1306. In reading, the scaled score was
1470 compared to a state average of 1303.

Mathematics and reading results in fifth grade are also reported in
terms of four performance levels:

Advanced: The Advanced level reflects superior academic performance.

Proficient: The Proficient level reflects satisfactory academic
performance.

Basic: The Basic level reflects marginal academic performance.

Below Basic: The Below Basic level reflects inadequate academic
performance.

For the 2002-2003 school year, Renn had 85.3% of the students reach
either proficient or advanced in mathematics on the PSSA. The NCLB
benchmark for math was 35%. In reading, 88.2% of the students reached
proficient or advanced on the PSSA. The NCLB benchmark was 45%.
Amazingly, 64.7 % of the students achieved the performance level of
advanced in math, and 58.8% achieved advanced in reading. This data is
based on all fifth-grade students who were assessed with no exclusions.

The results from statewide assessments and nationally normed tests
provide indicators of student strength and weakness. The grade level
information is used to guide curriculum and instruction.

2\. Renn teachers use assessments to shape their teaching practices and
model self-evaluation skills to students. Teachers believe in and
practice data-driven decision making on a daily basis. Formal and
informal student assessment data is collected and reviewed at the
building and classroom levels in order to determine school performance,
student growth, student intervention services, classroom instructional
strategies, curriculum decisions, and professional development needs.

At the building level, standardized achievement and state assessments
are given in reading, writing, and mathematics in second through sixth
grades. Building-based assessments form a school-wide picture that
provide a focus on school assessment goals. Renn's strengths and
weaknesses are shared and actively discussed with the faculty to
determine professional development needs, curriculum and standards
alignment, and progress toward performance benchmarks.

At the classroom level, teachers collect curriculum-based assessments:
running records, constructed responses, open-ended math problems,
Harcourt Brace holistic assessments, Everyday Math tests, and aligned
test-prep materials. Annually and throughout each quarter, building and
classroom-based assessments are used to determine individual student
needs and classroom growth. In conjunction with the Primary Literacy
Coach and building principal, classroom teachers review data to tailor
classroom strategies, differentiate instruction, prescribe intervention
services, after school tutoring, and summer programming.

3\. Renn views communication of student performance as a vital part of
insuring student success. Formative and summative assessments are
communicated to students, parents, and the community through frequent
and personal contact.

Teachers communicate with students daily to increase their understanding
of concepts and monitor academic performance. Collaboratively, students
and teachers identify standards, develop rubrics, self-evaluate against
checklists, use anchor papers as guides, monitor portfolio development,
and work out sample problems to create divergent, critical thinkers.

Standards based rubric report cards are shared with parents every nine
weeks to show student growth and progress. Parent conferences, scheduled
twice a year, have an amazing participation rate of 98%. Teachers
personally contact parents unable to attend the conferences.
Individualized student achievement from standardized and state
assessments are promptly sent to parents. In addition, daily agenda
books, weekly folders containing daily work and e-mail correspondence
provide parents information to improve student performance.

The community is made aware of the school's performances by the
superintendent, staff, and student presentations to the Board of
Education, which receives local press. Results are updated to the
district web page, which also serves as a tool for effective
communication. It is this communication network that strengthens Renn's
collaborative environment.

4\. Renn staff members are proud of their students and the academic
growth and progress they have made. As honored recipients, we would
encourage and solicit educators within and outside of the district to
become mentors for aspiring Blue Ribbon Schools. We would relish the
opportunity to share and model our research-based best practices with
other educators and schools.

Through district-wide professional development, faculty meet in grade
level and cross-curricular teams to share teaching strategies aligned to
the improvement of curriculum, instruction, assessment, and student
achievement. Our collaborative efforts must not stop at our own school
doors. The district belongs to a multi-county consortium, a group of
businesses and educators, that exists to improve education through the
implementation of standards. As a Phase I instructional leader, staff
members have presented professional development seminars at local,
regional, state, and national levels. In the future, these experienced
presenters will share their successful teaching strategies about school
improvement. We have on-going relationships with department chairpersons
at local universities, who often send visitors and student teachers. We
would continue to welcome educators who would like to visit our school.

It would be hard to stop the Renn staff from sharing the successes of
our students!

**[Part V -- Curriculum and Instruction]{.underline}**

1\. Every student at Carl G. Renn Elementary is instructed through a
dynamic, rigorous curriculum, based on best practices and innovations in
the content areas. The curriculum is designed to meet or exceed national
and state standards. It is continually reviewed and adjusted to remain
abreast of current research as determined by the National Reading Panel
and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

A balanced literacy approach to learning is fundamental in the
development of readers and in building a comprehensive language arts
curriculum. The goal of this approach is to develop independent critical
readers. The curriculum takes the form of a supplemented four-block
literacy model: guided reading, independent reading, guided writing, and
independent writing. Our integrated curriculum includes reading,
writing, speaking, and listening skills as defined by the national and
state standards for Pennsylvania, authentic literature with the Harcourt
Series, and constructed responses to literature aligned to the PSSA. Our
developmentally appropriate language-rich environment, beginning with
four year-old students, is designed to create strategic readers.
Teachers make a concentrated effort to expand knowledge of vocabulary
and provide extensive language experiences, to meet our students' needs.

Our mathematics curriculum is based on a hands-on, constructivist
approach to learning. Students develop a wide range of skills, including
basic computation and problem-solving strategies. The research-based
Everyday Math series was selected as core curriculum due to its rigorous
approach to learning. Teachers use a variety of methods to engage
students in learning, such as cooperative learning, projects,
explorations, games, and competitions. These methods build conceptual
understanding of math principles and application to real-world
situations.

The science curriculum was developed using state science and technology
standards. Grade level modules are hands-on, inquiry-based studies in
the areas of Physical, Earth, Technological and Biological Sciences.
These teacher-developed materials incorporate challenging content and
essential processes: prediction, observation, collection and report of
data, analysis, inference, sequence, communication of conclusion, and
extensions of learning to new situations.

Our elementary social studies curriculum is integrated into the language
arts program and supported by technology. Topics are presented through
quality literature, both fiction and non-fiction, supported by
teacher-developed thematic units. These materials have been designed
using student interests, ranging in topic from local needs to global
issues. The program is tailored to strengthen student reading
comprehension skills through the use of student-response logs, class
discussion, hands-on projects, and critical reading of the various
media.

All children receive instruction weekly from certified specialists in
the areas of art, vocal music, physical education, library, and for
interested students, instrumental and choral music. Each child also has
daily individual practice of math and reading skills through the use of
a computerized integrated learning system.

2\. Renn utilizes Balanced Literacy for teaching reading, writing,
speaking, and listening across the curriculum to Pre-K through sixth
grade students. Components of the reading curriculum are based upon the
findings of the National Reading Panel and the research of Fountas and
Pinnell, Harvey, Clay, Cunningham and others. The theoretical
foundation, coupled with the PA curriculum standards, provides an
instructional framework to insure students are meeting or exceeding
grade-level benchmarks. Students are immersed in authentic literature
using Harcourt Language Arts Signatures. To develop comprehension,
students learn to activate prior knowledge, interact with text, and
construct meaning. Guided Reading provides students individualized
reading instruction while working in flexible student groups. To improve
accuracy and fluency, students are engaged in phonemic awareness,
phonics instruction, and repeated readings. Writing instruction occurs
formally and informally throughout the day and is integrated into
content areas. Students are exposed to various writing modes and learn
to incorporate the domains of focus, content, style, organization, and
conventions as defined by the PA standards.

Renn teachers are strongly committed to providing all students with a
highly successful language arts program that promotes academic growth
and success across the curriculum while developing critical independent
readers who find joy in books.

3\. In our effort to "develop lifelong learners and contributing
citizens to the community," Renn adopted [Everyday Mathematics
(EM)]{.underline}. This research-based program focuses on the philosophy
that students can, and must, learn more mathematics than had been
previously expected from using the traditional program. Math is
meaningful to children when it is varied, rich, and rooted in real-world
problems and applications. One of EM strengths is the spiral approach to
learning in the various mathematical strands: operations, patterns,
functions, and sequences. Students learn a variety of algorithms to
apply in the practice of various math concepts and problem solving.

Our students develop additional problem solving strategies for
open-ended problems. Students practice a variety of techniques when
writing in the area of mathematics, using common mathematical vocabulary
instituted building wide.

All teachers, K-6, have fine-tuned their instruction to develop higher
level thinking skills necessary for success in this rigorous math
curriculum. In addition to several intensive math trainings, teachers
have the benefit of an onsite Math Coach and several EM consultants as
resources. Based on the philosophy that math is everywhere, we teach our
students essential skills and strategies, preparing them for life.

4\. At Renn, we know that the best curriculum in the world will not be
meaningful if instructional methods are not sound. Students are placed
in heterogeneous classrooms, and instructional grouping decisions are
based on student strengths, needs, and learning styles. Through an
inclusion model, intervention is delivered to students needing support.
Instruction, performance, and content are differentiated for students
needing acceleration or support. Teachers understand the social nature
of learning and provide opportunities for cross-grade tutoring and
cooperative learning.

Integration of reading, writing, math, technology, and content allows
students to make connections and deepen their understanding. Direct,
explicit instruction, hands-on activities, and embedded problem solving
are core instructional methods.

Technology is a strength at Renn. A computer-based curriculum
reinforcing independent level math and reading concepts is enjoyed daily
by all students. Accelerated Reader motivates students to read. The
intermediate grades have iBook carts; each cart is equipped with a
classroom set of laptops used to enhance instruction in math, reading,
writing, and research. Each sixth-grade student is assigned an iBook,
which can be taken home to aid in research or assignments.

On-staff instructional coaches model content-specific instructional
strategies that help teachers deliver standards-based instruction to
improve student learning at Renn.

5\. Renn teachers have engaged in professional development opportunities
with a heavy emphasis on standards-driven instruction. Training on
differentiated instruction and its relationship to standards, in
addition to best practices teaching mathematics and language arts, has
been delivered to teachers.

Given Renn's unique needs, site-specific professional development has
focused on the National Reading Panel's findings. The goal of this
professional development is to deepen our understanding about how
children learn to read and to articulate how assessments drive our
instruction and how to explicitly deliver reading instruction.

Teachers collaborate daily and receive on-site professional support from
reading, writing, and math coaches. Every teacher has a
district-provided laptop computer; the use of this technology to network
with other professionals has led to learning opportunities for teachers
and students. Moreover, teachers are provided with opportunities to
attend conferences and return to share what they have learned with their
Renn colleagues.

Graduate-level reading courses are offered periodically in our district
and enable staff to develop common teaching practices that improve
student achievement. With the support of our district administration,
our faculty pursues professional education; 50% of Renn's classroom
teachers have Master's degrees. This highly qualified staff has a
positive impact on improving student achievement.

**[STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

> **PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT**
>
> Provide the following information for all tests in reading (language
> arts or English) and mathematics. Complete a separate form for reading
> (language arts or English) and mathematics at each grade level.
>
> Grade [5 Reading and Math]{.underline}
>
> Test [Pennsylvania System of School Assessment]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [2001 -- 2003]{.underline} Publisher
> [Commonwealth of Pennsylvania]{.underline}
>
> Number of students in the grade in which the test was administered:
> [37 -- 02/03]{.underline}
>
> [31 -- 01/02]{.underline}
>
> [36 -- 00/01]{.underline}
>
> Number of students who took the test: [37 -- 02/03]{.underline}
>
> [30 -- 01/02]{.underline}
>
> [36 -- 00/01]{.underline}
>
> What groups were excluded from testing? Why, and how were they
> assessed?
>
> [No students were excluded in the 2002-2003 and 2000-2001 school
> years. In the 2001-2002 school]{.underline}
>
> [year, 1 student or 3.2% was excluded due to Parental Request for
> Religious Reasons.]{.underline}
>
> Number excluded [1 -- 01/02]{.underline} Percent excluded [3.2% -
> 01/02]{.underline}
>
> Explain the standards for basic, proficient, and advanced (or the
> relevant state categories), and make clear what the test results mean
> in a way that someone unfamiliar with the test can interpret the
> results.
>
> *Basic -* The Basic Level reflects marginal academic performance.
> Basic work indicates a partial understanding and limited display of
> the skills included in the Pennsylvania Academic Content Standards.
> This work is approaching satisfactory performance but has not yet
> reached it. There is a need for additional instructional opportunities
> and/or increased student academic commitment to achieve the Proficient
> Level.
>
> *Proficient -* The Proficient Level reflects satisfactory academic
> performance. Proficient work indicates a solid understanding and
> adequate display of the skills included in the Pennsylvania Academic
> Content Standards.
>
> *Advanced -* The Advanced Level reflects superior academic
> performance. Advanced work indicates an in-depth understanding and
> exemplary display of the skills included in the Pennsylvania Academic
> Content Standards.
>
> **[STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

**PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT**

**FIFTH GRADE READING**

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

  Testing month                               April       April       April

  **CARL G. RENN SCHOOL SCORES**              1500        1200        1310

  \% At or Above Basic                        91.1%       63.3%       75%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   88.2%       33.3%       58.3%

  \% At Advanced                              58.8%       3.3%        13.9%

  Number of students tested                   37          30          36

  Percent of total students tested            100%        96.8%       100%

  Number of students excluded                 0           1           0

  Percent of students excluded                0%          3.2%        0%

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                 

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                      

  \% At or Above Basic                        85.8%       58.3%       68.7%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   85.8%       16.7%       56.3%

  \% At Advanced                              42.9%       0%          18.8%

  Number of students tested                   14          12          16

  **STATE SCALED SCORES**                     1300        1320        1310

  \% At or Above Basic                                                

  State Mean Score                            78.4%       79.7%       76%

  \% At or Above Proficient                                           

  State Mean Score                            58%         57%         55.1%

  \% At Advanced                                                      

  State Mean Score                            27.1%       18.2%       19.8%
  ------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------

**[STATE CRITERION-REFERENCED TESTS]{.underline}**

**PENNSYLVANIA SYSTEM OF SCHOOL ASSESSMENT**

**FIFTH GRADE MATH**

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

  Testing month                               April       April       April

  **CARL G. RENN SCHOOL SCORES**              1510        1250        1360

  \% At or Above Basic                        100%        73.3%       89%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   85.3%       30%         64%

  \% At Advanced                              64.7%       6.7%        27.8%

  Number of students tested                   37          30          36

  Percent of total students tested            100%        96.8%       100%

  Number of students excluded                 0           1           0

  Percent of students excluded                0%          3.2%        0%

  **SUBGROUP SCORES**                                                 

  1\. Economically Disadvantaged                                      

  \% At or Above Basic                        100%        66.7%       81.3%

  \% At or Above Proficient                   78.6%       33.3%       56.3%

  \% At Advanced                              42.9%       8.3%        31.3%

  Number of students tested                   14          12          16

  **STATE SCALED SCORES**                     1300        1320        1310

  \% At or Above Basic                                                

  State Mean Score                            77.6%       74.8%       74.6%

  \% At or Above Proficient                                           

  State Mean Score                            56.3%       53.1%       53%

  \% At Advanced                                                      

  State Mean Score                            27.7%       25.8%       22.5%
  ------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------- -----------