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

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

**Cover Sheet**

Name of Principal Mrs. Cathy Koukal

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

Official School Name Tuftonboro Central School

(As it should appear in the official records)

School Mailing Address PO Box 118 205 Middle Rd

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

[Tuftonboro NH]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_[03816-0118]{.underline}

City State Zip Code+4 (9 digits total)

Tel. [( 603 ) 569-3689]{.underline} Fax [( 603 ) 569-8276]{.underline}

Website/URL [www.govwentworth.k12.us]{.underline} E-mail
[tcschool@worldpath.net]{.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. John Robertson

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

District Name Governor Wentworth Regional School District
[Tel.]{.underline} [( 603 )569-1658]{.underline}

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

Date\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(Superintendent's Signature)

Name of School Board

President/Chairperson Mr. Donald Meader

(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)

1

**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.

2

**PART II ‑ DEMOGRAPHIC DATA**

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

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

1\. Number of schools in the district: 6 Elementary schools

\_\_1\_\_\_ Middle schools

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

\_\_\_1\_\_ High schools

\_\_\_\_\_ Other (Briefly explain)

\_\_\_\_8\_ TOTAL

2\. District Per Pupil Expenditure: \_\_\$7,579.95\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Average State Per Pupil Expenditure:
\_\_\_\$7,233.49\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**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
>
> \[ 1 \] Rural

4\. [1]{.underline} Number of years the principal has been in her/his
position at this school.

14 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**       19        13                     **32**       **7**                             

  **1**       12        2                      **14**       **8**                             

  **2**       9         12                     **21**       **9**                             

  **3**       10        10                     **20**       **10**                            

  **4**       15        18                     **33**       **11**                            

  **5**       12        10                     **22**       **12**                            

  **6**       11        13                     24           Other                             

                                    **TOTAL                                                   166
                                    STUDENTS                                                  
                                    IN THE                                                    
                                    APPLYING                                                  
                                    SCHOOL**                                                  
  ----------- --------- ----------- ---------- --------- -- ----------- --------- ----------- ---------

3

6\. Racial/ethnic composition of [97]{.underline} % White

the students in the school: [1]{.underline} % Black or African American

\% Hispanic or Latino

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

\% American Indian/Alaskan Native

**100% Total**

7\. Student turnover, or mobility rate, during the past year:
\_\_11.9\_\_\_\_\_\_%

> (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 15
              ***to*** the school after October  
              1 until the end of the year.       

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

  **(3)**     Subtotal of all transferred        17
              students \[sum of rows (1) and     
              (2)\]                              

  **(4)**     Total number of students in the    143
              school as of October 1             

  **(5)**     Subtotal in row (3) divided by     .1188
              total in row (4)                   

  **(6)**     Amount in row (5) multiplied by    11.88
              100                                
  ----------- ---------------------------------- ------------------------

8\. Limited English Proficient students in the school: \_\_.6\_\_\_\_\_%

\_\_1\_\_\_Total Number Limited English Proficiency

Number of languages represented: \_\_1\_\_\_\_\_\_

Specify languages: Pilipino (Wauri-Wauri)

9\. Students eligible for free/reduced-priced meals: \_\_\_28\_\_\_\_\_%

\_\_\_46\_\_\_\_\_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: \_\_\_13\_\_\_\_\_%
4

\_\_\_\_21\_\_\_\_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 \_\_\_8_Other Health Impaired

\_\_\_\_Deaf-Blindness \_\_8\_\_Specific Learning Disability

\_\_1\_\_Hearing Impairment \_\_2\_\_Speech or Language Impairment

\_\_\_\_Mental Retardation \_\_\_\_Traumatic Brain Injury

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

3 EH

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 \_\_\_[8]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_

Special resource teachers/specialists \_\_\_[2]{.underline}\_\_\_\_
\_\_\_\_\_[5]{.underline}\_\_\_

Paraprofessionals [\_\_ 4]{.underline}\_\_\_\_ [\_\_\_\_
1]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

> Support staff \_\_\_[3]{.underline}\_\_\_ [\_\_\_\_
> 1]{.underline}\_\_\_
>
> Total number \_\_[18\_\_]{.underline} \_\_\_[10\_]{.underline}\_\_\_\_

12\. Average school student-"classroom teacher" ratio: \_\_19\_\_\_\_\_

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 96                  [97]{.underline}   [96]{.underline}   [NA]{.underline}   [96]{.underline}

  Daily teacher attendance [94]{.underline}    [97]{.underline}   [93]{.underline}   [97]{.underline}   [94]{.underline}

  Teacher turnover rate    [4%                 [8%                [0%]{.underline}   [0%]{.underline}   [9%
                           (.5)]{.underline}   (1)]{.underline}                                         (1)]{.underline}

  Student dropout rate                                                                                  

  Student drop-off rate                                                                                 
  ------------------------ ------------------- ------------------ ------------------ ------------------ ------------------

5

**Tuftonboro Central School**

Tuftonboro Central School (TCS) is a small, rural elementary school that
includes grades K -- 6 with a total student population of 166.
Tuftonboro is one of six elementary schools in the Governor Wentworth
Regional School District (GWRSD); the district is comprised of seven
towns in the Lakes Region of New Hampshire. The district's seventh and
eighth grade students attend Kingswood Regional Middle in Wolfeboro and
then move on to Kingswood Regional High School for grades 9 -- 12.

We believe "that it is our mission to ensure that all students acquire
the knowledge and develop the skills and work habits to enable them to
become contributing members of society. This is accomplished when we
recognize and address the individual abilities and needs of all
students, maintain challenging expectations for those students, create a
positive school climate, ensure a safe and orderly school environment,
monitor students' progress on a frequent basis, and promote effective
school-community involvement."

Every year, the entire staff analyzes assessment results and other
indicators of success and develops goals for the school year that not
only address our results but our mission. The goals for this current
school year are: To refine and clarify our understanding of
differentiation and expand the application with practical and
imaginative teaching strategies; to consider individual students'
strengths and needs while differentiating curriculum; to expand
character and citizenship learning opportunities for all students and
staff; and to improve sharing of information regarding differentiation
with parents and community.

Currently, Tuftonboro Central School has one class for each grade level
except for two kindergarten and two fourth grade classes. In addition to
the classroom teachers, TCS has a full-time special education teacher, a
full-time reading specialist for the primary classes of which 50% of her
time is devoted to Reading Recovery, a 50% reading teacher for the
intermediate classes, part-time ESOL, school counselor, occupational
therapist and speech and language therapist. TCS shares a music, art and
physical education teacher with another elementary school in the GWRSD.
The full-time library-media paraprofessional's responsibilities include
teaching information skills, technology skills, in-service training for
staff and managing the library-media center and computer lab.

Tuftonboro Central School's facility is the centerpiece of the
Tuftonboro community, incorporating the old schoolhouse built in 1938
with two modern additions including a gym, media center and full
cafeteria. Even though it is used constantly by the school and
community, it is extremely well maintained and inviting. TCS is not only
an open, warm and friendly environment; it is also a safe one. It is
evident upon entering the building that students are cared for, happy,
secure and productive.

Success can be measured in many ways. At Tuftonboro Central School and
in the Tuftonboro community, our children are our barometer for success.
This community demonstrates pride in its school and children through
active involvement and commitment to always doing what is best for
students. In the Tuftonboro community the "whole village" truly unites
to educate our children. TCS exemplifies public education at its best.
The foundation of this community begins with the staff, from the
custodian and the instructional assistants to the most highly accredited
professionals. Everyone is dedicated to helping each child reach her/his
potential as an independent learner, while valuing and treasuring
individual differences.

6

**Language Arts and Mathematics Assessment Results**

Tuftonboro Central School administers the New Hampshire Educational
Improvement Assessments in the spring of each year to grades three and
six. The assessment includes a writing sample, language arts and math
for grade three with the addition of science and social studies for
grade six.

The NHEIAPs are a criterion referenced assessment and results are given
at one of four proficiency levels. The levels are (highest to lowest)
advanced, proficient, basic and novice. Along with the proficiency level
summary, a mean-scaled score summary is given. The scaled score ranges
are; Novice 200 -- 239, Basic 240 -- 259, Proficient 260 -- 279, and
Advanced 280 -- 300. The scores are reported for the school, district
and state and include number of students and percentages in each
category. Scores are also reported as a three-year cumulative average to
enable schools to see trends.

The language arts assessment includes subtopics in reading and
literature, literary/narrative, content/informational, practical,
listening/viewing and writing. The math assessment includes eight
curriculum goals: problem solving and reasoning; communication and
connections; numbers and numeration/operations and number theory;
geometry/measurement/trigonometry; data analysis/statistics and
probability; discrete mathematics; functions/relations and algebra; and
the mathematics of change. Both assessments contain multiple choice and
open-ended questions.

\[The reported three-year cumulative average for the 2000 -- 2001
through 2002 -2003 school years will be utilized for this report\]

TCS's sixth grade assessment results for language arts show that 28
percent of the students scored at the advanced level, while 10 percent
of the district's students and five percent of the state's students
scored at this level. Ninety percent of the sixth grade students at TCS
scored at the basic or above level, 74 percent at the district level and
70 percent at the state level.

In mathematics, for this same period, 25 percent of the TCS students
scored at the advanced level, 7 percent for district and 6 percent for
the state. Ninety-four percent of the sixth grade students at TCS scored
basic or above, 78 percent at the district level and 71 percent at the
state level.

TCS's third grade assessment results for language arts show that 16
percent of the students scored at the advanced level, while 12 percent
of the district's students and 8 percent of the state's students scored
at this level. Eighty four percent of the third grade students at TCS
scored in the basic or above level, 76 percent at the district level and
75 percent at the state level.

In mathematics, for this same time period, 18 percent of the TCS
students scored at the advanced level, 12 percent for the district and
11 percent for the state. Ninety two percent of the third grade students
at TCS scored in the basic or above level, 76 percent at the district
level and 80 percent at the state level.

The cumulative average mean-scaled scores for sixth grade in mathematics
were: Tuftonboro Central School -- 265, District -- 252 and State --
250. For language arts the mean-scaled scores were: Tuftonboro Central
School -- 267, District -- 253 and State -- 250.

The cumulative average mean-scaled scores for third grade in mathematics
were: Tuftonboro Central School -- 261, District -- 255 and State --
253. For language arts the mean-scaled scores were: Tuftonboro Central
School -- 261, District -- 254 and State -- 256.

These results show that TCS consistently scores among the top schools in
both the state and within the district.

**Use of Assessment Data to Improve Performance**

Tuftonboro Central School continually utilizes a number of assessment
results to improve student performance. In the fall of each school year,
the faculty members analyze the results of the standardized assessments
administered the previous spring, Stanford Writing, Terra-Nova Multiple
Assessment, NHEIAPs and Gates-McGinitie Reading. We also look at trends
over a period of time. When we analyze assessment results, we look at
curriculum strengths and weaknesses and individual student achievement
by looking at individual test items and student responses. Upon
completion of our analysis with the aid of tools like iAnalyze, a
web-based data system, and supporting material from test publishers, we
set annual goals and develop an action plan.

Our annual goals for the 2003 -- 2004 school-year (See Part III) are
supported by the action plan. Included in this year's action plan are a
continued emphasis on non-fiction, content area higher-level reading
skills (connections, inferences, etc.) and the development of an
after-school homework club to meet the needs of at-risk students.

In addition to standardized assessments, staff members administer
teacher-made assessments, running records, reading inventories and
observations. We use a variety of assessments to measure individual
student progress and to improve performance. Individual running records
help us determine the specific reading skills to teach and to identify a
student's independent reading level. The Gates-McGinitie Reading
Assessment provides us with vocabulary and comprehension percentiles
that help us see how our students do compared to students nationally.
Looking at how our students perform on both timed and untimed writing
samples, paying special attention to scoring needs and commendations,
guide us in our teaching focus. All assessment results, along with
teacher recommendations, are used to identify students who need
additional support. Support may include a Plan For Success (a written
plan that addresses the needs of non-coded students), IEP, 504 Plan,
Title I support in math and/or reading, Homework Club and/or summer
school.

Teachers also use assessment results to differentiate their curriculum
for all students. They may differentiate for content, product or
instructional strategies. Differentiation benefits not only those
students who need extra support but, students who may be advanced and
need the challenge that high expectations for all will give them.

**Communicate Student Performance**

Tuftonboro Central School communicates assessment results to parents,
students and the community periodically throughout the year.

Parents: Annual parent/student/teacher conferences are held at the end
of the first quarter each fall. At this time, teachers share assessment
data, including the standardized assessment results, with the parents. A
monthly newsletter is sent home with each child that incorporates school
news with general information on achievement and academics including
assessments. Students in grades three and six present portfolios to
their parents and peers at the end of the year that highlight their
academic achievement. Parents of special education students are given
detailed assessment data regarding their child's performance at annual
meetings and three-year evaluations. A four to five page detailed
narrative is given to all parents of kindergarten students that detail
the results of a variety of assessments used throughout the year.

Students: TCS students reflect on their learning in journals in all
subject areas. They receive written feedback from staff on their
progress. The students set goals based on standardized and teacher
assessments. Teachers confer with students quarterly regarding their
report card assessments.

Community: The district reports on all assessment data at two school
board meetings in the fall of each year. This detailed description of
assessment results is reported in the local newspaper and aired on the
local cable TV. The district also produces a document entitled, The
District Report Card that contains assessment date, dropout rate, daily
average attendance. Newspapers, both local and statewide, report on the
NHEIAP assessment results. 8

**Sharing Our Successes**

Tuftonboro Central School will continue to share its success with other
schools in many ways. Visitors are always welcome to meet directly with
the principal and teachers, observe in classrooms and attend staff
meetings or professional development sessions. Staff members at TCS are
also willing to tape "model" lessons and activities and share them upon
request with other schools.

In the recent past, teachers at TCS have presented workshops in the
evening, taped the sessions and made the tapes available for use
throughout the district. These sessions have also been taped and edited
for airing for the local cable channel. We will continue to share our
successes in this manner especially in language arts and math.

The TCS faculty is willing to present workshops and mini-sessions at
other schools that are located in our region. Consideration would need
to be given to balancing the amount of time a teacher may be out of the
classroom and away from her/his students and the benefits for another
school district.

There are a number of valuable and worthwhile conferences and workshops
in the Northern New England Region that would benefit from a
presentation by TCS faculty members. These conferences would enable us
to reach a broader range of schools and teachers while minimizing the
time out of the classroom.

Because we are used to sharing instructional strategies and "things that
work" with the other five schools in our district, sharing outside the
district will not be a problem.

**9**

**Curriculum**

The Governor Wentworth Regional School District's Curriculum Guide
Notebooks are all aligned to the New Hampshire State Frameworks. The NH
State Frameworks are based on nationally accepted standards. Grade-level
Curriculum Guides for each subject area contain district commencement
goals, grade level performance tasks, topical outlines K -- 12, grade
level benchmarks, a detailed curriculum (referenced to NH State
Frameworks, NH performance tasks and GWRSD performance tasks) and
appendixes.

[Language Arts]{.underline}: The LA curriculum is broken down into four
threads; reading/literature, writing, speaking/listening/viewing and
English language uses. All students will be able to select
developmentally appropriate reading material, automatically apply
reading strategies, extend and elaborate on the materials and make
critical judgments in reading. TCS teachers use a balanced approach to
literacy instruction comprised of reading, writing and word study and
provide explicit instruction in the strategies and skills necessary to
create independent readers, writers and thinkers. Our students
experience a variety of reading materials, both fiction and nonfiction.
They are the expected to understand, manipulate, and correctly use both
the written and spoken word, and in order to do that, they practice
reading, writing, speaking, listening, and working with words in
authentic situations as often as possible. In order to insure that our
students become independent readers, writers and thinkers we monitor and
assess the progress of each student using the results to guide our
instructional practices.

[Math:]{.underline} The math curriculum is divided into 17 threads;
problem solving, reasoning, communication, connections, number
sense/numeration, operations, computation, mental math, geometry,
spatial sense, measurement, trigonometry, data analysis,
probability/statistics, algebra, mathematics of change and discrete
mathematics. All students are expected to formulate, investigate and
solve a variety of problems while using mathematical concepts. Students
are also expected to communicate their understanding of mathematics both
verbally and in writing. The math curriculum expects students to use
mental computation and estimation skills and strategies and know when it
is appropriate to do so.

[Science]{.underline}: The science curriculum is divided into three
threads; life science, earth science and physical science. The central
topics for every grade include content from all three threads. All
students, using scientific thinking, are expected to display a deepening
appreciation of the order and complexity of the universe in the
understanding of relationships among natural phenomena.

[Social Studies]{.underline}: The social studies curriculum is divided
into six threads; introduction, citizenship/government, geography,
history, economics and current events. In every grade, the central theme
is developed around the six threads. Each thread is content rich at each
grade level. The curriculum builds an "ever widening" universe for the
students, integrating content with concepts and themes.

[Arts]{.underline}: The arts in GWRSD consist of music and visual arts.
Music is divided into six threads; singing, instruments, improvisation,
composition, notation and listening. The focus for the visual arts for
the primary grades (K -- 3) is exploring procedures, for intermediate
grades (4 -- 6) it is experimenting with surroundings. All students will
understand the relationship among music, the other arts and disciplines
outside the arts.

10

**Reading Curriculum**

Tuftonboro's reading program is part of a comprehensive literacy program
comprised of reading, writing and word study modeled after the Literacy
Collaborative out of Lesley College in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Texts
by Irene Fountas and Gay Su Pinnell, [Guiding Readers and Writers K --
3]{.underline} and [Guiding Readers and Writers 3 -- 6]{.underline}, are
utilized by the faculty to "guide" their reading and writing program.
The faculty also utilizes the research and writing of Harvey Daniels and
Stephanie Harvey to define the program.

The teachers at TCS, following current research on best practices, use a
combination of ongoing assessment and proven instructional strategies to
systematically teach the five key components of early reading
instruction starting in kindergarten. The five areas are: phonemic
awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.

Teachers also model strategies that "good" readers use including,
visualizing, making connections, asking questions and making inferences.
Students use reading journals to write about their reading addressing
the strategies that are continually modeled for them. Literature
Circles, guided reading and shared reading are aspects of our reading
program. Reading Recovery is provided for the most at-risk first grade
students. All teachers use running records and other reading assessments
to help identify strengths and needs of students at every grade level.

Tuftonboro Central School's decision to use this approach to the
teaching of reading was based on research and the subsequent training
received in the Literacy Collaborative model, which is made up of both a
reading workshop and a writing workshop daily. Teachers have noted
increased amounts of independent reading by the students at their
independent reading level, an increase in the level and amount of
conversations students are having with their peers and adults and an
increase in the enthusiasm for and the enjoyment of reading.

Currently, there are several teachers undertaking action research
projects studying the longitudinal effects of our approach to reading.
Our excellent standardized assessment results are showing us the success
of this program.

**Math Curriculum**

Tuftonboro's math program is based on the Governor Wentworth Regional
School District's Curriculum Guide, which is based on the New Hampshire
State Frameworks. The frameworks were developed using NCTM standards and
identify essential skills at each grade level and at benchmark years.
The K -- 6^th^ grade teachers use a constructivist approach to math. The
main resource that is used is [MathLand]{.underline} by Creative
Publications. MathLand is a comprehensive mathematics program that
balances the "classic basics" with the "new basics." It also moves
beyond the basics and includes the development of conceptual
understanding with a greater emphasis on problem solving and critical
thinking. Manipulatives are used to bridge the conceptual to the
abstract.

The program does not stand alone. We work closely with the Plymouth
State University Impact Center for teacher training through model
lessons taught by the center staff. TCS teachers are given the
opportunity to observe lessons and then meet for follow-up discussions.
Mahesh Sharma from Cambridge College has also provided support and
workshops for staff.

The ability to problem-solve and think critically is essential to
becoming "a successful, contributing member of society." Our math
program enables students to be involved in rich and challenging
real-world investigations together with skill exercises. Students are
able to deepen and broaden their mathematical understanding as they
progress through the curriculum. All of our students are challenged with
high standards and have proven themselves to be critical thinkers and
problem solvers.

11

**Instructional Methods for Improving Student Learning**

Tuftonboro Central School students are assessed both formally and
informally to determine learning styles. Communication by teachers about
students is continual and efficient due to our small size and the
opportunities the staff have to interact during common planning time or
duty free lunches. Vital and pertinent information regarding student
learning styles and progress is shared and discussed. Learning
inventories, observations and formal testing are used to help identify
learning styles of each student. Teachers incorporate a multi-modal
approach to teaching (oral, visual and kinesthetic), range of products
(multiple intelligences), manipulatives (concrete to abstract), a
constructivist approach to math (MathLand and workshops with Mahesh
Sharma from Cambridge College and Tom Sherston) and flexible grouping in
all subject areas (based on ability, interest and/or learning styles).
Teachers have received training in cooperative learning (Johnson and
Johnson) and utilize it along with small and large group instruction.

Paraprofessionals support students for individual, small and large group
instruction. The reading specialists and special educator use both an
inclusionary and pull-out model to support students. The curriculum is
enhanced through the use of meaningful field trips and assemblies
throughout the school year. Students are given numerous opportunities to
experience hands-on, real-world investigations in all subject areas.

TCS teachers continue to differentiate the curriculum based on content,
product and instructional strategies. Differentiation, the variety of
instructional methods utilized and the assessment techniques that are
used enable us to meet the academic needs of all of our students.

**Professional Development**

The district's professional development master plan was designed by a
representative group of teachers, administrators and board and community
members. Included in the master plan are standards for effective teacher
performance including self-assessment tools. Charlotte Danielson's four
domains of teacher responsibility are a basis for objective criteria for
evaluating teachers. The district professional development committee,
with a representative from TCS, is an on-going committee that reviews,
revises and refines the master plan. The first objective for every
professional is, "To improve student achievement in..." Each
professional's plan is developed individually based on student
achievement and their own needs. Action research is embedded in every
teacher's plan and is continually utilized to drive decisions regarding
instructional strategies and practices.

Examples of current action research projects include measuring students'
growth in reading comprehension through open-ended responses,
differentiation of instruction, improving reading comprehension through
journaling and the most effective assessments for tracking student
progress in reading. The district offers research-based graduate level
courses through Plymouth State University that are taught by local staff
for professionals and paraprofessionals. A two-part brain course was
translated into practical applications for teachers to use in their
classroom. Another professional course focused on current and proven
reading strategies for teachers in grades K -- 8. As a result, teachers
have expanded classroom libraries and daily model behaviors to help
children become life-long readers. The school and district offers
"professional conversations" that focus on current research.

Professionals reflect on the progress of their goals and objectives
towards the improvement of student achievement three times a year and at
the end of their three year professional development cycle they present
a "portfolio" of evidence of growth to the principal and invited peers.

12

**CRITERION-REFERENCE TESTS**

GRADE [6 Math and Language Arts]{.underline}

TEST [New Hampshire State Educational Improvement And
Assessment]{.underline}

EDITION/PUBLICATION YEAR [Published Each Year]{.underline}

PUBLISHER [Measured Progress]{.underline}

NUMBER OF STUDENTS IN GRADE IN WHICH TEST WAS ADMINISTERED [See data
tables]{.underline}

NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO TOOK THE TEST [See data tables]{.underline}

WHAT GROUPS WERE EXCLUDED FROM TESTING? WHY? [Two sixth grade students
in 1999-2000 and 1998-1999 were excluded. They were special education,
non-reading students. The WIAT was administered in place of the
NHEIAP.]{.underline}

NUMBER EXCLUDED, PERCENT EXCLUDED [See data tables]{.underline}

13

**CRITERION-REFERENCE TESTS**

GRADE [3 Math and Language Arts]{.underline}

TEST [New Hampshire State Educational Improvement And
Assessment]{.underline}

EDITION/PUBLICATION YEAR [Published Each Year]{.underline}

PUBLISHER [Measured Progress]{.underline}

NUMBER OF STUDENTS IN GRADE IN WHICH TEST WAS ADMINISTERED [See data
tables]{.underline}

NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO TOOK THE TEST [See data tables]{.underline}

WHAT GROUPS WERE EXCLUDED FROM TESTING? WHY? [None]{.underline}

NUMBER EXCLUDED, PERCENT EXCLUDED [See data tables]{.underline}

14

**DATA DISPLAY TABLE**

**GRADE 3 LANGUAGE ARTS**

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

  Testing Month - May                                                                         

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                           

  \% At or Above Basic      84          100         89          92          88                

  \% At or Above Proficient 39          80          58          67          36                

  \% At Advanced            10          27          16          29          4                 

  Number of Students Tested 31          15          19          24          25                

  Percent of Total Students 100         100         100         100         100               
  Tested                                                                                      

  Number of Students        0           0           0           0           0                 
  Excluded                                                                                    

  Percent of Students       0           0           0           0           0                 
  Excluded                                                                                    

                                                                                              

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                             

  Socioeconomic                                                                               

  \% At or Above Basic      76          NA          NA          NA          NA                

  \% At or Above Proficient 44          NA          NA          NA          NA                

  \% At Advanced            NA          NA          NA          NA          NA                

  Number of Students Tested 6           5           NA          NA          NA                

                                                                                              

  Data not disaggregated                                                                      
  for other subgroups                                                                         

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                            

  \% At or Above Basic      77          76          78          78          78                

  \% At or Above Proficient 37          41          38          38          39                

  \% At Advanced            6           8           9           9           8                 

                                                                                              

  Mean Scaled Scores (not                                                                     
  available at each                                                                           

  level)                                                                                      

  School                    255         272         261         268         255               

  State                     253         253         252         254         254               

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

                                                                                              

                                                                                              
  ------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -- -- ------

15

**DATA DISPLAY TABLE**

**GRADE 3 MATHEMATICS**

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

  Testing Month - May                                                                       

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                         

  \% At or Above Basic         84          100         100         96          72           

  \% At or Above Proficient    39          60          53          63          44           

  \% At Advanced               16          20          21          21          12           

  Number of Students Tested    31          15          19          24          25           

  Percent of Total Students    100         100         100         100         100          
  Tested                                                                                    

  Number of Students Excluded  0           0           0           0           0            

  Percent of Students Excluded 0           0           0           0           0            

                                                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                           

  Socioeconomic                                                                             

  \% At or Above Basic         84          NA          NA          NA          NA           

  \% At or Above Proficient    40          NA          NA          NA          NA           

  \% At Advanced               NA          NA          NA          NA          NA           

  Number of Students Tested    6           5           NA          NA          NA           

                                                                                            

  Data not disaggregated for                                                                
  other subgroups                                                                           

                                                                                            

                                                                                            

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                          

  \% At or Above Basic         80          81          79          78          77           

  \% At or Above Proficient    42          39          39          40          38           

  \% At Advanced               15          10          8           9           9            

                                                                                            

  Mean Scaled Scores (not                                                                   
  available at each                                                                         

  level)                                                                                    

  School                       255         266         266         265         254          

  State                        257         255         255         255         254          

                                                                                            

                                                                                            
  ---------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ --

16

**DATA DISPLAY TABLE**

**GRADE 6 LANGUAGE ARTS**

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

  Testing Month - May                                                                       

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                         

  \% At or Above Basic         96          83          93          95          89           

  \% At or Above Proficient    66          49          56          73          42           

  \% At Advanced               31          21          33          18          21           

  Number of Students Tested    26          29          30          20          17           

  Percent of Total Students    100         100         100         90          88           
  Tested                                                                                    

  Number of Students Excluded  0           0           0           2           2            

  Percent of Students Excluded 0           0           0           10          12           

                                                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                           

  Socioeconomic                                                                             

  \% At or Above Basic         95          86          NA          NA          NA           

  \% At or Above Proficient    67          59          NA          NA          NA           

  \% At Advanced               NA          NA          NA          NA          NA           

  Number of Students Tested    5           7           NA          NA          NA           

                                                                                            

  Data not disaggregated for                                                                
  other subgroups                                                                           

                                                                                            

                                                                                            

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                          

  \% At or Above Basic         72          69          69          70          72           

  \% At or Above Proficient    30          28          27          29          26           

  \% At Advanced               5           5           5           6           4            

                                                                                            

  Mean Scaled Scores (not                                                                   
  available at each                                                                         

  level)                                                                                    

  School                       269         259         266         270         261          

  State                        251         249         249         249         248          

                                                                                            

                                                                                            

                                                                                            
  ---------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ --

17

**DATA DISPLAY TABLE**

**GRADE 6 MATHEMATICS**

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

  Testing Month - May                                                                       

  **SCHOOL SCORES**                                                                         

  \% At or Above Basic         96          93          93          95          95           

  \% At or Above Proficient    84          55          60          73          58           

  \% At Advanced               38          14          23          14          11           

  Number of Students Tested    26          29          30          20          17           

  Percent of Total Students    100         100         100         90          88           
  Tested                                                                                    

  Number of Students Excluded  0           0           0           2           2            

  Percent of Students Excluded 0           0           0           10          12           

                                                                                            

  SUBGROUP SCORES                                                                           

  Socioeconomic                                                                             

  \% At or Above Basic         95          95          NA          NA          NA           

  \% At or Above Proficient    86          59          NA          NA          NA           

  \% At Advanced               NA          NA          NA          NA          NA           

  Number of Students Tested    5           7           NA          NA          NA           

                                                                                            

  Data not disaggregated for                                                                
  other subgroups                                                                           

                                                                                            

                                                                                            

  **STATE SCORES**                                                                          

  \% At or Above Basic         74          72          68          68          70           

  \% At or Above Proficient    29          28          26          27          25           

  \% At Advanced               7           6           4           4           4            

                                                                                            

  Mean Scaled Scores (not                                                                   
  available at each                                                                         

  level)                                                                                    

  School                       275         262         266         267         265          

  State                        252         250         248         248         249          

                                                                                            

                                                                                            

                                                                                            
  ---------------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ --

18