REVISED -- MARCH 28, 2005

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

*U.S. Department of Education*

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

Name of Principal [Ms. Kellie Latimer]{.underline}

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

Official School Name [C. F. Saigling Elementary School]{.underline}

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address 3600 Matterhorn Drive

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

Plano Texas 75075-1523

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

County Collin School Code Number\* 043-910-115

Telephone [( 469 ) 752-3000]{.underline} Fax ( 469 ) 752-3001

Website/URL [www.pisd.edu](http://www.pisd.edu/) E-mail
[Klatime@pisd.edu]{.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. Doug Otto]{.underline}

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

District Name [Plano Independent School District]{.underline} Tel. [(
469 ) 752-8122]{.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. Mary Beth King

(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)

**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: 40 Elementary schools

12 Middle schools

\_\_\_\_Junior high schools

8 High schools

5 Other (3 preschools, 2 special program centers)

65 TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: [8,511.00]{.underline}

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure: [8,838.00]{.underline}

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

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

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

4\. 1 Number of years the principal has been in her/his position at this
school.

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

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

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

  **PreK**                                                  **7**                             

  **K**       20        29                     **49**       **8**                             

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

  **2**       38        33                     **71**       **10**                            

  **3**       38        23                     **61**       **11**                            

  **4**       40        36                     **76**       **12**                            

  **5**       34        33                     **67**       **Other**                         

  **6**                                                                                       

                                    **TOTAL                                                   **391**
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

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

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of 75 % White

the students in the school: 5 % Black or African American

4 % Hispanic or Latino

16 % Asian/Pacific Islander

0 % 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: 16%

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

  --------- -------------------------------------------- ------------------
  **(1)**   Number of students who transferred ***to***  34
            the school after October 1 until the end of  
            the year.                                    

  **(2)**   Number of students who transferred           28
            ***from*** the school after October 1 until  
            the end of the year.                         

  **(3)**   Subtotal of all transferred students \[sum   62
            of rows (1) and (2)\]                        

  **(4)**   Total number of students in the school as of 391
            October 1                                    

  **(5)**   Subtotal in row (3) divided by total in row  0.159
            (4)                                          

  **(6)**   Amount in row (5) multiplied by 100          15.9
  --------- -------------------------------------------- ------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: 7%

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

Number of languages represented: 12

Specify languages: Korean, Farsi, Mandarin, Russian, Urdu, Hebrew,
Romanian, Spanish, Japanese, Arabic, Cantonese, and Ukrainian.

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: 6%

Total number students who qualify: [25]{.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}%

49 Total Number of Students Served

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

7 Autism Orthopedic Impairment

1 Deafness 4 Other Health Impaired

Deaf-Blindness 13 Specific Learning Disability

4 Emotional Disturbance 17 Speech or Language Impairment

Hearing Impairment Traumatic Brain Injury

> 1 Mental Retardation 2 Visual Impairment Including Blindness

Multiple Disabilities

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 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Classroom teachers 22 \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists 11 3

Paraprofessionals 9 1

> Support staff 7 2
>
> Total number 50 3

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio: 18:1

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  98 %        97 %        98 %        98 %        97 %

  Daily teacher attendance  97 %        95 %        96 %        95 %        95 %

  Teacher turnover rate     13 %        12 %        24 %        31 %        21 %

  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}**

"We care! We share! We shine!" are not just words painted on a mural in
the entry of Saigling Elementary, but this phrase symbolizes the feeling
of genuine warmth about which visitors often comment. This motto is
adopted and embraced by not only the teachers and students, but also by
the entire Saigling community. Open communication and shared
responsibilities between parents and educators develop a mutual respect
and strengthen the relationship between home and school. Teachers,
staff, parents, community volunteers, PTA leaders, administrators, and
business partners believe in our mission: to develop the skills,
knowledge, and desire for students to become life-long learners and
respectful, responsible citizens.

Saigling is a hidden treasure nestled in an older, established
neighborhood in Plano, Texas. It is not uncommon to find a teacher who
has graced these halls for more than two decades warmly greeting a
former student who is now a parent. Why do former students, parents, and
staff return enthusiastically as teachers, substitutes, volunteers,
mentors, and tutors? Time and time again, they answer, "Because Saigling
is home." Although people flourish outside the walls of Saigling, the
memories of a safe and caring learning environment keep drawing them
back. Teachers become an integral part of the students' lives, because
teaching is a passion, not a job. At Saigling, the teachers'
responsibilities do not begin in August and end in May, and students'
successes are not merely grades on a report card. Students are valued,
supported, and respected as individuals, and they are nurtured and
encouraged to discover their full potential.

Saigling is committed to closing the achievement gap, which ensures that
no child will be left behind. Our campus's inclusive environment
embraces diversity to the point that the unimportant differences
disappear. Our special education programs include two resource rooms and
a classroom for students with significant autism. In January of 2004,
the Saigling staff welcomed the addition of a centralized special
education classroom designed to support students with significant
behavior needs. The unique strategies and instruction provided in this
classroom are yet another example of the staff's commitment to meet the
varied needs of all students. Each child is supported and celebrated for
his own unique gifts. This consistent, focused vision ensures that all
children have multiple opportunities to embrace effective learning.

The school community is committed to teaching the whole child. The
belief that the child must be strong, physically and emotionally, before
the mind can be nourished has led Saigling to deliberately integrate
individual character traits in daily expectations. Students willingly
contribute with a personal obligation for the public good with service
projects such as donating materials and money to relief funds, animal
shelters, children's hospitals, homeless shelters, and many other
philanthropic organizations.

Each day begins with a cheerful welcome from peers and hugs from
teachers as students say "goodbye" to their parents and enter the
building. Through the use of technology, a live television broadcast
showcases students wishing everyone a "good morning," leading the
pledges, and announcing events and activities. The academic day begins
with reviews that rely on higher level thinking skills, problem solving,
and strategies providing connections to real-life experiences. Students
are then engaged in active learning through multitasking, the use of
technology, and the use of manipulatives, while teachers model, guide,
and monitor for success. Teachers use flexible grouping strategies to
modify, reteach, and extend the curriculum to meet the needs of all
learners. Specials programs such as English as a Second Language (ESL),
physical education, dyslexia instruction, gifted programs, special
education, literacy links, speech, guidance, music, and art help to
support student learning. Author studies, guest presentations, cultural
awareness programs, field trips, and numerous reading incentives
increase opportunities to provide real-life connections and expand
horizons. Reflections, such as shared writing and community circles,
bring meaningful closure to the day. Even after the final bell rings,
students have the opportunity to participate in district-sponsored
after-school care or PTA-sponsored enrichment programs and clubs. Fellow
peers and faculty send children home with a warm farewell, until it is
time to return again to Saigling Elementary, a home away from home.

# [PART IV -- INDICATORS OF ACADEMIC SUCCESS -- Question 1]{.underline}

In accordance with state statutes, all public schools in Texas are
evaluated by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) according to the academic
performance of its students in grades 3-5. Each spring, students in
grades 3-5 take the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), a
battery of exams that measure student understanding of concepts and
skills in mathematics, reading, writing, and science. Special education
students who are unable to take TAKS are required to take an alternative
assessment, the State-Developed Alternative Assessment (SDAA) or
Locally-Developed Alternative Assessment (LDAA). Student results are
compared to state standards to determine the level of achievement that
may be credited to a campus. Both aggregate (for all students) and
disaggregate (among different ethnic groups, special education
populations, and low socio-economic populations) results are evaluated.
The state legislature determines the standard for passing each of the
subject exams, set at a scale score of 2100, or more than 70% correct
answers. Research has documented the Texas exams for elementary students
as among the most demanding exams in the nation.

In the ten-year history of the state accountability system, Saigling has
received the highest ratings for student academic performance. During
that time, over 95% of tested students have met the state's performance
standards in reading, mathematics, writing, and science, earning
Saigling the current rating of an "Exemplary" campus. Furthermore,
Saigling has received special recognition for its superior levels of
academic performance in all four subject areas of testing and for a high
attendance rate. A campus is awarded "Commended" for a minimum number of
students answering over 90% of the test items correctly. When compared
to the state's average during each of the past five years, Saigling has
had more students achieving "Commended" status than the state or region.
This level of performance indicates that students at Saigling receive an
exceptional education in the core academic areas. Our special education
population has met these same high standards on the SDAA. One hundred
percent of those students tested on the SDAA met their projected levels
of achievement as predicted by the Individual Education Plan (IEP)
committee. The two centralized classrooms significantly affect the
percentage of students receiving special education services and
alternative assessments as compared to district and state averages.

Although Saigling does not have significant subgroups in socioeconomic
or ethnic terms, we serve a large special education population, due to
the two centralized classrooms. The campus percentage of these students,
12.5% (which rose to 13% in January 2004 when the second centralized
class was added), is higher than the state's average, 11.4%. These
students have achieved 100% passing rate on the SDAA in the last two
years, as compared to like campuses in the state (90%).

Third and fifth grade students take the MAP (Measures of Academic
Progress) test, a computerized achievement test in mathematics, reading,
and language. This customized measure of assessment is designed to
continually adjust during administration, to accurately monitor growth
over time, and/or can be used as an indicator towards students' success
on state standards.

The COGAT (Cognitive Aptitude Test) is administered to all third and
fifth grade students. This standardized assessment gives teachers and
parents a snapshot of each student's potential for academic achievement.
These scores, along with district diagnostic instruments, provide the
necessary tools to place students in the appropriate programs and
instructional settings.

The RPTE (Reading Proficiency Tests in English) is administered to
Limited English Proficient (LEP) students in grades three through five
and provides a statewide, standardized measure of how well these
students are learning to read in English. One hundred percent of our
students demonstrated a high level of proficiency as measured on this
assessment instrument.

In addition to performing well above district and state standards,
Saigling has performed well above the standards set forth for meeting
the federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) as described in the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001. The attendance rate (97%) and the exam
participation rate (98%) are above the AYP standards of 90% and 95%,
respectively.

More information regarding the Texas assessment and accountability
systems can be found at:
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/index.html (assessment)
and http://www.tea.state.tx.us/accountability.html (accountability).

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

Saigling's teachers use assessment data to propel student learning and
school performance. Teachers track student growth through
district-developed diagnostic tests, which are administered at the
beginning, middle, and end of the year. With the additional data gained
from state-required Texas Assessment Knowledge and Skills (TAKS),
Cognitive Abilities Test, Texas Primary Reading Inventory, Measures of
Academic Progress (MAP), and Benchmarks, teachers identify each
student's strengths and weaknesses in reading, writing, science, and
math. In the past two years, the state has increased the difficulty of
its testing, raising the standards for all students. Our teachers were
involved in professional development for assistance in interpreting
these new expectations. Participants gained a deeper understanding of
complex state objectives (TEKS) and how to apply them in the classroom.

The data from diagnostic and state testing is entered into the district
software, EdSoft, which generates reports that track student progress,
identify academic needs, analyze campus achievement, and profile campus
demographics. Teachers use this data to direct instruction, write goals
for Individual Education Plans, devise individual and group lesson
plans, and target areas for growth. In addition, this data identifies
students who are candidates for KAR (Kindergarten Accelerated Reading),
PAR (Plano Accelerated Reading), and AIM (Accelerated Instruction in
Math), instructional programs designed to remediate and further close
the achievement gap for all students. This information is also used in
CARE (Campus Assessment, Review, and Evaluation) meetings to plan
accommodations for students or determine the need for referrals to ESL
(English as a Second Language), special education, dyslexia instruction,
language development, or other district programs.

Teachers continually meet in subject area groups to vertically align
curriculum and instruction based on current student performance. Team
meetings occur twice a week, allowing teachers to analyze data and
adjust goals. General and special education teams collaborate and
support each other in co-teaching and tutoring. Team meetings,
general-to-special education collaborations, co-teaching, and tutoring
are all methods used to analyze data, adjust goals, and support student
learning. As a result, Saigling has consistently increased its state
test scores and earned the "Exemplary" rating.

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

Saigling maintains a partnership with the parents and the
community-at-large through various forms of communication, including
publications, meetings, conferences, and technology. This communication
reinforces the need for active parental involvement and support for
student success.

The day before classes begin, teachers initiate the relationship by
inviting parents and students into their classrooms. Grade-level parent
nights follow, providing information about upcoming expectations and
school assessments. Teachers explain that daily planners will be used to
provide frequent feedback on the progress of each student. By
distributing business cards and refrigerator magnets, parents are
encouraged to contact teachers via telephone or e-mail. Staff members
also conference with parents several times per year.

Teachers use computerized reports to highlight areas of achievement and
concern. Parents are personally notified when targeted intervention will
be provided. Administrators, the school counselor, and teachers meet
with parents to review performance data and form remediation plans for
individual students.

Primary students receive portfolio assessment reports, and formal report
cards are sent home with third, fourth, and fifth graders every nine
weeks. Parents are notified with progress reports when their students'
achievement has significantly dropped or is in danger of falling below
passing standards. In addition to this individual feedback, parents also
receive a weekly school-wide bulletin and an in-depth newsletter each
six weeks.

Individual standardized test results are sent to parents, and the school
counselor assists with score interpretation through individual and group
parent meetings. School-wide results are posted on a campus report card
and on school and classroom websites. Assessment information is also
shared at PTA meetings and with our School-Based Improvement Committee.
These meetings provide an opportunity for parents, the community, and
staff members to analyze test data and set academic goals for the school
year. This on-going collaboration with our community has greatly
contributed to our continued success.

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

The dissemination of ideas, philosophies, and best practices is vital to
the success of all students and teachers. Saigling teachers and staff
participate in meetings with faculty from other campuses and
district-sponsored activities to share ideas and programs. The Plano
Independent School District offers avenues for campus-to-campus
communication through bi-annual curriculum meetings of grade level team
leaders, "Train the Trainer" sessions, and vertical team meetings.
Saigling often hosts these events, allowing others to absorb new
concepts in our warm, welcoming environment.

Our staff members not only train new teachers, but also train and
supervise teachers for summer programs. Saigling teachers have aided in
writing district curriculum, diagnostic assessments and documents for
ESL (English as a Second Language). Staff members work with students and
teachers from other campuses in after-school clinics. One staff member's
philosophy of teaching is published in textbooks used by future
teachers. Saigling has an open-door policy for observers to see our
successful strategies in action, sharing best practices to ensure
student success throughout our district.

New teachers at Saigling participate in a mentoring program, which
provides them the opportunity to observe an experienced teacher in
action. Wisdom and effective teaching methods are shared with other
campuses through the use of technology such as PowerPoint presentations,
classroom videos, websites and e-mail.

Our teachers have received many honors, including the Down Syndrome
Guild of Dallas Teacher of the Year, Plano ISD Teacher of the Year, and
Who's Who in America's Schools. A Saigling teacher recently debated the
use of technology in early childhood classrooms at the Consortium of
School Networking Conference. These honors and activities have offered
the opportunity to share our successes with a wide and varied audience
of educators throughout the state and nation. The staff at Saigling is
committed to helping students succeed by sharing our best practices
whenever and wherever possible.

**[PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION -- Question 1]{.underline}**

The commitment to develop high levels of achievement and create
life-long learning is the driving force behind Saigling's coherent,
comprehensive curriculum and interactive instruction. The core of the
curriculum is aligned with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills
(TEKS) objectives and designed to go beyond minimal achievement for all
students. Plano ISD promotes horizontal and vertical collaboration
within campuses, team leaders and administrators to ensure continuity in
materials, instructional strategies, and professional development.
Vertical teaming allows the targeting of necessary skills in all areas
and clearly articulates curriculum expectations, establishing a visual
roadmap that guarantees the students' success.

Saigling's language arts program provides a balanced approach to
literacy instruction with a framework that gives reading and writing
equal status and combines the best theory and learning strategies to
match the learning styles of individual students. Student growth is
achieved in a program designed to promote reading through balance, where
phonics, spelling, and language skills naturally connect texts in
reading and writing in all content areas. The scope and sequence of
instruction is driven by the commitment and goal to enable all students
to successfully reach their potential in reading and writing. Teachers
provide varying levels of support through shared, guided, and
independent instruction. The use of multitasking activities, such as
peer and teacher conferencing, student and teacher-led groups, computer
projects, and independent tasks, provide the environment to meet the
needs of all students. Students learn to share the responsibility for
learning, thus transferring mastery to independent application.

Our mathematics program provides daily instruction in an environment
that actively engages students in the learning process. Opportunities
are provided for students to value mathematics, become confident in
their abilities, and experience effective connections to the real world.
Within each classroom, flexible grouping and multitasking allow teachers
the freedom to address students with a wide range of needs. A vast
number of mathematical tools and manipulatives are readily available to
support students' development of conceptual understanding, problem
solving, and critical thinking skills. These tools include computer
programs that support the curriculum and prepare students to use
mathematics in an increasingly technological world. Varied assessment
strategies allow continual monitoring to ensure mastery of math concepts
by all students.

Social studies, science, and health are taught through an integrated
curriculum that encompasses an active, challenging, and student-centered
approach to learning. The TEKS-based model is divided into six units of
overarching concepts housed in an electronic curriculum planner. Website
links, video clips, PowerPoint presentations, field trips, materials,
and handouts support each specific curriculum objective. Basic, as well
as higher-order concepts, are achieved through hands-on science
laboratory experiments, themed projects, and activities. Students
regularly apply their knowledge to real-life situations and relevant
experiences aided by classroom computers, wireless laptops, CD-ROMs,
laserdisc players, VCRs, digital and regular cameras, and large-screen
monitors.

The entire student body participates in physical education, music, and
art. Supporting the state's initiative for increased nutritional and
physical standards, the physical education department emphasizes fitness
for life through entertaining exercise and activities, while role
modeling a healthy lifestyle. Our music curriculum is based on the
teachings of Zoltan Kodaly. Through singing folk music and playing
singing games, the students learn musical concepts and elements that are
developmentally appropriate for their age level. Each year, the students
build on prior knowledge and leave fifth grade with a strong musical
foundation that can be applied in middle school choir or instrumental
ensembles. Our visual arts program was developed and based on Discipline
Based Art Education (DBAE), which offers each student a unique and
meaningful experience by combining art production, art history, art
criticism, and art aesthetics. This risk-free approach promotes a love
of art and understanding of its value while creating one-of-a-kind works
of the highest quality. Saigling's students are successfully represented
each year in the PTA Reflections program with some students' work
advancing to council, district, and state levels. Throughout the year,
students are given the opportunity to share their talents with peers,
teachers, parents, and the community, enabling them to continue along a
pathway of "high quality" education.

**[PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION -- Question 2a]{.underline}**

Saigling's philosophy of reading can be simply stated, "All students can
learn to be successful readers." This philosophy is embraced and
nurtured by staff members, parents, community members and students. The
core of our reading curriculum is based on the Texas Essential Knowledge
and Skills objectives required by the state of Texas as minimal
standards of proficiency for public school children. At Saigling, you
will find a literacy-rich program balanced to give reading and writing
equal status, combining the very best theory and learning strategies to
match the learning styles of all students. Each classroom is a united
community where teachers and students read and write for various
purposes throughout the day. Our integrated language arts curriculum
connects all aspects of phonics/word study, vocabulary, reading
comprehension, grammar, spelling, and writing in meaningful context.
Saigling's reading curriculum supports the district's language arts
program by including the following components:

-   Print-rich environment, where words, charts related to current
    learning, written directions for classroom procedures, schedules,
    calendars, and word walls are proudly displayed

-   Oral language development, which facilitates meaningful discussions
    and conversations through interactive teacher-student and peer-peer
    dialogue

-   Organized workstations that provide for individual and group
    activities

-   Guided reading to enable the students to get meaning from the text
    while using problem-solving strategies

-   Shared reading activities for modeling convention of print, teaching
    new vocabulary, experiencing rich book language, all of which
    encourage a risk-free environment

-   Multiple resources that provide the opportunity to read books,
    periodicals, labels, letters, and print in all forms, an integral
    part of a great reading program

-   Writers' Workshop, supplying experiences for students in the
    five-step writing process while developing the six traits of writing

-   Daily integration of technological resources to provide support to
    the reading program

**[PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION -- Question 3]{.underline}**

Saigling's mathematics program employs an experiential approach focusing
real-world connections and providing the encouragement and interest
vital to develop life-long learners. Based on the Texas Essential
Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), the curriculum fosters understanding in all
mathematical areas, including numbers, operations, and quantitative
reasoning; patterns, relationships, and algebraic thinking; geometry and
spatial reasoning; measurement; probability and statistics. Problem
solving, logical reasoning, and communication skills are foundations in
the program.

The math classroom is an engaging environment designed to capture
students in the learning process. Learners discuss and write about
mathematics, create products, solve meaningful problems, use technology,
ask questions, and find solutions. Classroom arrangement facilitates
flexible grouping, encourages multitasking, and provides learner
autonomy, enabling the teacher to address a wide range of abilities.
Students complete tasks independently, as well as in cooperative
groups. 

A variety of quality resources extend and enrich the learning
experience. Teachers access the district's on-line curriculum guide,
linking them to resources and lessons with the click of a button.
Textbooks, manipulatives, and calculators facilitate hands-on learning,
while computer programs support the development of conceptual
understanding, problem solving, and critical thinking skills.

The math teachers collaborate in a vertical team to ensure a consistent
learning environment throughout the building. These teachers establish a
continuous strand of strategies and vocabulary that is developed from
kindergarten through grade five. The students work through this
spiraling curriculum and move through grade level concepts using
Cognitively Guided Instruction. As the children progress, they develop
into confident problem solvers who are willing to take risks. This
student growth is tracked continuously through on-going classroom
monitoring, assessment, and district diagnostic evaluations.
Administrators and teachers disaggregate test data to identify students
who have not yet mastered math objectives and offer appropriate
after-school tutoring tailored to those needs. Teachers offer targeted
instructional interventions designed to meet the needs of each learner.

**[PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION -- Question 4]{.underline}**

Vertical alignment and continuous collaboration within our building are
the foundation for student success. In order to improve student
learning, teachers use consistent instructional methods and vocabulary
to provide continuity between the grade levels. The curriculum is
layered to build upon prior knowledge, enabling students to confidently
approach new concepts. Teachers and students have a shared vision for
high expectations.

This vertical alignment results in consistent classroom environments in
which students effectively move from teacher-directed instruction to
flexible grouping, multitasking, cooperative groups, and independent
applications. Setting procedures is a priority at the beginning of the
year to establish a safe, risk-free environment.

In all content areas, instruction begins with a focused objective that
is obtained through modeling with emphasis on practical applications. To
ensure all students' potential is challenged, teachers conference weekly
with each student, providing immediate feedback, and developing a
trusted partnership in learning. Through hands-on exploration and
discovery in math, students become confident and independent thinkers.
Students improve critical thinking skills through daily problem solving,
journal writing, and performance tasks.

Teachers use a wide variety of quality resources to customize learning
and motivate students. These include novels, basal texts, non-fiction
selections, leveled readers, newspapers, games, and graphic organizers.
Instruction becomes multi-dimensional through student use of
technological resources such as video streaming, approved Internet
access, instructional software, and digital video cameras. To facilitate
the effective use of these resources, the school librarian instructs
students on research skills, supporting curriculum objectives. Students
experience real-world connections through field trips, out-door learning
camp, local authors and artists, fine arts performances, and simulations
of historical events. General education teachers, special education
teachers and paraprofessionals interact cohesively to reach the common
goal of high student performance. Our instructional methods are as
varied as our students and designed to meet the needs of each learner.

**[PART V -- CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION -- Question 5]{.underline}**

Saigling is a community of life-long learners, in which each student and
staff member works to reach his or her highest potential. Faculty
members share the responsibility of bringing their personal best to each
student through their continued education.

All teachers are required to take a minimum of thirty hours of
professional development provided by the district, which aligns with
student performance, district, state, and campus goals. Saigling
consistently exceeds this requirement by participating in additional
formal and informal training, which includes emotional development and
social skills for students, as well as academics.

Professional development is presented by outside consultants, district
curriculum coordinators, teachers, counselors, specialists from other
campuses, and the building administrator. The "Train the Trainer" model
has proven to be an effective practice by not only bringing effective
strategies to our teachers, but also by fostering leadership. The campus
Literacy Specialist attends monthly trainings in effective reading and
writing instruction, which she shares with the faculty through modeling
and informal trainings. Vertical teams in each academic area meet to
discuss the effectiveness of our programs and make recommendations to
the Site-Based Improvement Committee. This pulse on students' current
performance plays a key role in maintaining effective training.

The success of specialized training in Cognitively Guided Instruction,
Math Investigation, AIM (Advanced Instructional Math) and Connected Math
are reflected in continual growth and high performance of all students.
Teachers' training in PAR (Plano's Accelerated Reading Program) has been
instrumental in the improvement of reading scores for all student
groups. Training has been provided in Six Trait Writing, Story Mapping,
Writing Across the Curriculum, and the use of writing centers to develop
fluent writers. Teachers attend local, state and national conferences to
learn and implement strategies to meet the needs of ESL, Gifted and
Talented, Autism, Special Education, and general education students.

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

**Texas Third-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 41%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 0%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 1%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 10%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>TAKS</p>
<p>2003-2004</p></td>
<td colspan="3"><p>TAKS</p>
<p>2002-2003</p></td>
<td><p>TAAS</p>
<p>2001-2002</p></td>
<td><p>TAAS</p>
<p>2000-2001</p></td>
<td><p>TAAS</p>
<p>1999-2000</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Testing month</td>
<td colspan="3">Mar/Apr</td>
<td colspan="3">Mar/Apr</td>
<td>April</td>
<td>April</td>
<td>April</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>SCHOOL SCORES</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>(TAKS) % Commended Performance</td>
<td colspan="2">33%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td colspan="2">0%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>(TAKS) % Met Standard</td>
<td colspan="2">100%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td colspan="2">100%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>(TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards</td>
<td colspan="3">NA</td>
<td colspan="3">NA</td>
<td>97%</td>
<td>96%</td>
<td>99%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Number of students tested</td>
<td>55</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td colspan="2">63</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>66</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>67</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Percent of total students tested</td>
<td>90%</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td colspan="2">86%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>93%</td>
<td>91%</td>
<td>84%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Number of students alternatively assessed</td>
<td colspan="3">5</td>
<td colspan="3">10</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Percent of students alternatively assessed</td>
<td colspan="3">8%</td>
<td colspan="3">14%</td>
<td>0%</td>
<td>9%</td>
<td>3%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>SUBGROUP SCORES*</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><em><strong>4. White</strong></em></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>(TAKS) % Commended Performance</td>
<td colspan="2">54%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td colspan="2">57%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>(TAKS) % Met Standard</td>
<td colspan="2">95%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td colspan="2">98%</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>(TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards</td>
<td colspan="3">NA</td>
<td colspan="3">NA</td>
<td>96%</td>
<td>94%</td>
<td>98%</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Number of students tested</td>
<td>37</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td colspan="2">47</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>49</td>
<td>53</td>
<td>58</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><em><strong>5. Asian</strong></em></td>
<td colspan="9"></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>(TAKS) % Commended Performance</td>
<td>73</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>83</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>(TAKS) % Met Standard</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>100</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>(TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>NA</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>100</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Number of students tested</td>
<td>11</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>12</td>
<td colspan="2">NA</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>NA</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>STATE SCORES</strong></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td colspan="3"></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>(TAKS) % At or above Commended Performance</td>
<td colspan="3">35%</td>
<td colspan="3">26%</td>
<td>N/A</td>
<td>N/A</td>
<td>N/A</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>(TAKS) % At or Above Met Standard</td>
<td colspan="3">91%</td>
<td colspan="3">89%</td>
<td>N/A</td>
<td>N/A</td>
<td>N/A</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>(TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards</td>
<td colspan="3">N/A</td>
<td colspan="3">N/A</td>
<td>87%</td>
<td>86%</td>
<td>87%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

**\*No disaggregated data reported for sub-groups with insufficient
numbers.**

**Texas Third-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [3]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 45%  | 41%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 97%  | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 92%  | 88%  | 93%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 58   | 68   | 66   | 68   | 69   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 95%  | 93%  | 92%  | 91%  | 86%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 3    | 4    | 0    | 4    | 0    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 5%   | 5%   | 0    | 5%   | 0    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES\***           |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***4. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 40%  | 38%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 95%  | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 96%  | 87%  | 95%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 40   | 52   | 49   | 54   | 61   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***5. Asian***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 55%  | 58%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 90%  | 100% | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 11   | 12   | 11   | 10   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 25%  | 18%  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 90%  | 90%  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | N/A  | N/A  | 87%  | 82%  | 80%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

**\*No disaggregated data reported for sub-groups with insufficient
numbers.**

**Texas Fourth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [4]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 43%  | 36%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 96%  | 97%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 92%  | 99%  | 99%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 68   | 70   | 66   | 81   | 83   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 89%  | 95%  | 93%  | 91%  | 97%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 6    | 2    | 4    | 7    | 3    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 8%   | 3%   | 6%   | 8%   | 3%   |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES\***           |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***4. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 40%  | 34%  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 96%  | 98%  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | N/A  | N/A  | 94%  | 98%  | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 53   | 50   | 49   | 66   | 63   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***5. Asian***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 73%  | 64%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 91%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 11   | 11   | 9    | 9    | 12   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 25%  | 17%  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 85%  | 85%  | N/A  | N/A  | N/A  |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | N/A  | N/A  | 92%  | 90%  | 89%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

**\*No disaggregated data reported for sub-groups with insufficient
numbers.**

**Texas Fourth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [4]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}

Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
Agency]{.underline}

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 39%  | 31%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 97%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 97   | 96   | 96   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 71   | 70   | 63   | 81   | 85   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 93%  | 95%  | 89%  | 91%  | 99%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 4    | 1    | 5    | 7    | 0    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 5%   | 1%   | 7%   | 8%   | 0    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES\***           |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***4. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 34%  | 30%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 96%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 96%  | 98%  | 95%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 56   | 50   | 48   | 66   | 65   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***5. Asian***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 82%  | 55%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 11   | 11   | 9    | 9    | 12   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 21%  | 15%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 86%  | 87%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 94%  | 91%  | 87%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

**\*No disaggregated data reported for sub-groups with insufficient
numbers.**

**Texas Fifth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Reading Test**

> Subject [Reading]{.underline} Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline} Edition/publication
> year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education Agency]{.underline}

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 60%  | 47%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 98%  | 97%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 99%  | 99%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 65   | 58   | 83   | 87   | 107  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 96%  | 85%  | 90%  | 95%  | 91%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 3    | 8    | 6    | 4    | 6    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 4%   | 12%  | 7%   | 4%   | 5%   |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES\***           |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***4. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 70%  | 37%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 98%  | 95%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 99%  | 99%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 47   | 41   | 70   | 69   | 88   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***5. Asian***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 50%  | 91%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 10   | 11   | 8    | 12   | 14   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 25%  | 17%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 79%  | 79%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 92%  | 90%  | 87%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

**\*No disaggregated data reported for sub-groups with insufficient
numbers.**

**Texas Fifth-Grade Criterion-Referenced Math Test**

> Subject [Math]{.underline} Grade [5]{.underline} Test [Texas
> Assessment of Knowledge and Skills]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Edition/publication year [2004]{.underline} Publisher [Texas Education
> Agency]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                                 | TAKS | TAKS | TAAS | TAAS | TAAS |
|                                 |      |      |      |      |      |
|                                 | 2    | 2    | 2    | 2    | 1    |
|                                 | 003- | 002- | 001- | 000- | 999- |
|                                 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Testing month                   | A    | A    | A    | A    | A    |
|                                 | pril | pril | pril | pril | pril |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SCHOOL SCORES**               |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 66%  | 47%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 99%  | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 65   | 60   | 83   | 89   | 110  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of total students       | 96%  | 88%  | 90%  | 97%  | 93%  |
| tested                          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students              | 2    | 8    | 6    | 1    | 0    |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Percent of students             | 3%   | 12%  | 7%   | 1%   | 0%   |
| alternatively assessed          |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **SUBGROUP SCORES\***           |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***4. White***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 70%  | 35%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 99%  | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 47   | 43   | 70   | 71   | 90   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ***5. Asian***                  |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Commended Performance  | 80%  | 91%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % Met Standard           | 100% | 100% | NA   | NA   | NA   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 100% | 100% | 100% |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Number of students tested       | 10   | 11   | 8    | 12   | 14   |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| **STATE SCORES**                |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or above Commended  | 26%  | 17%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Performance                     |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAKS) % At or Above Met        | 82%  | 86%  | NA   | NA   | NA   |
| Standard                        |      |      |      |      |      |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+
| (TAAS) % Met Minimum Standards  | NA   | NA   | 96%  | 94%  | 92%  |
+---------------------------------+------+------+------+------+------+

**\*No disaggregated data reported for sub-groups with insufficient
numbers.**

In accordance with the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind
Act, Texas calculation of passing percentages in 2002-2003 changed in
significant ways from calculations in prior years. First, the test
changed from the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills to the much more
rigorous Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills. Second, some students
with disabilities who were previously exempted from the accountability
calculations were 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 and beyond to
appear different from the data from previous years for some schools. In
addition to the TAKS in English, state scores include tests in Spanish,
Limited English Proficient, and Special Education. Grade 3 scores are
cumulative, given over the course of the year to facilitate promotion.
By law, if students don't pass the 3^rd^ grade reading test, they are
not promoted to the next grade.