[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6218364,"mediaKeyId","3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0","parentId",3629322,"title","District coaches describe Elevate student‑voice program; subcommittee hears privacy, fatigue and implementation questions","audioSeconds",872,"startMs",539000,"endMs",1411000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0&start=539&end=1411","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0/thumbnail_539000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6218364/Wisconsin/District-coaches-describe-Elevate-studentvoice-program-subcommittee-hears-privacy-fatigue-and-implementation-questions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6218364-19d019af39521368592224835dba05e3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770707430&Signature=nloEoW5bS3JLnOW-yn0onFaX~G~5Jy4QlEXstsLR~sjQUCxChj-ivIkeHf4ypZy~7wB2OOr3xpYO0exZTvUwHd7J8e~iuGJNYULFvkIxwWdJabu4ctOg9Fb3Kgo9p8BvEPYRJHz3OWLUvSyLo8krem1zmrO2Sq8Lhku8vfp3sjf9fX1VZRU6Zx9FAqmPcaqcPZMZF30I2Sdh08dbZMbXCA21yHoeZlOLB53bC8QLSpfHOhgxr9tX6nCW8~cTLe4c-Ir4r5ZJqD~my2hTKgFp7DfMiTZ0WKwvpm9HuKq7aUA0~-7ot9-aRdmHTnDzqegfCvEsNGc8ghH68y7y~hrI7Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Waunakee Community School District, WI","date","2025-06-03T14:00:22Z","article","Waunakee instructional coaches presented the Elevate student‑voice program and told the curriculum subcommittee how the district has used it in classrooms to gather student perception data and co‑construct improvement plans.

District staff said Elevate is meant to be formative and “non‑evaluative” and described a cycle of surveying students, reviewing de‑identified results, co‑constructing classroom action plans with students, implementing changes and re‑surveying to measure growth. Coaches said the district has run Elevate for several years at different grade levels: the intermediate school (piloted for grades 3–5 this year), the middle school and the high school, where implementation varies because of semester scheduling.

Why it matters: staff described Elevate as a tool to standardize language about classroom learning conditions (for example, “meaningful work” or “feedback for growth”), to surface perception gaps between teachers and students and to create jointly owned action plans. Coaches said that when teachers intentionally use the follow‑up conversations and resources, student survey fidelity and classroom changes follow.

Program details: coaches said the survey takes 5–10 minutes; results are available the Monday after administration. Students log in with district email but responses are reported only in aggregate to teachers and coaches; administration and district coaches see only aggregated or focal‑group views and cannot see individual student responses, the presenters said. The packet shown to the subcommittee includes separate question sets and agreement scales for grades 6–12 and for grades 3–5; the intermediate school pilot will use the 3–5 language for grades 5–6 next year to match the building’s configuration.

Rollout and participation: staff described a mixed implementation model. At the intermediate school and middle school, participation has been voluntary and expanded gradually; coaches said participation grew from initial pilot cohorts to larger voluntary groups. At the high school, staff described a planned phased rollout by department and semester so that all teachers would ultimately experience the cycle without subjecting students to repeated survey fatigue. Coaches said the district has reached a fidelity rate above 80% this year when teachers explicitly connect survey results to classroom action.

Concerns raised: subcommittee members asked about survey fatigue, how anonymity is preserved when teachers later debrief students and whether Elevate can support evaluation. Presenters said Elevate is meant to be non‑evaluative and is framed as action research; they acknowledged teachers sometimes need coaching on how to handle critical feedback and described coaching and facilitator networks provided by Elevate for support. Coaches also noted a tradeoff between voluntary participation (high teacher buy‑in) and a more mandated model (broader reach but more rollout risk).

Evidence and next steps: staff said many classes have completed at least one cycle and said the district can use the program’s reporting (and tools such as NextPath for other data) to compare engagement signals with achievement measures. Several subcommittee members asked whether Elevate participation could be studied against local or state achievement measures; coaches said the analytics could be combined with course rosters to run comparative analyses (subject to privacy rules and permissible data use).

Ending: The subcommittee had no formal action on Elevate at the meeting; staff said they will share the full presentation with the broader board and continue discussions about scaling and measures of academic impact.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","WCSD BOE June 2, 2025 Curriculum Committee","oneSentenceSummary","Instructional coaches briefed the Waunakee subcommittee on Elevate, a student‑voice survey and classroom action‑research cycle the district uses to collect anonymized perception data and co‑create improvement plans with students.","taxTitle","Waunakee Community School District, School Districts, Wisconsin","taxId",58058,"location","Wisconsin","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6218358,"District outlines reading screening changes and interventions; NextPath used to track Personal Reading Plans",1487,4010000,5497000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0&start=4010&end=5497","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0/thumbnail_4010000.jpg","/articles/6218358/Wisconsin/District-outlines-reading-screening-changes-and-interventions-NextPath-used-to-track-Personal-Reading-Plans","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6218358-efff925221771ee20d8d60bc81e57f1e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770707430&Signature=dZrGMxGWtDdPMdFcUQWbl0ELDJn9eqW6N4I8MwlWivIwASNfSw89DTAPy4bRGrmEg7uf1yQeDFe~2J4kLi61uZZXv~TSFnd0tyKkTtTUhVEbFTiFqHH6NQYkV0hszemIzc~zoO82YqEG09WCk3wP7jAhmigSmHDolmdEssIf5aOmOWEp8dOdvTnAZuverY0DdbxRJPdk8IZ9jUHBZYT40LcqSst82DcpnPMqzN49uIU4ie7azlzEGGppZ9gI5lkXpUmcoWua--XHmS2nKy4h8E5l5Cfn~IUr133iROLtvFn4GgI0cUnOgu4OqLtYn5CV6lpKSwyZmKfl~GwUICDZuA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","District staff told the curriculum subcommittee the elementary schools implemented new mandated screeners under state reading legislation (Act 20), used AIMSweb Plus for benchmarking, and created Personal Reading Plans (PRPs) for students below benchmark. Staff also described NextPath as a district tool to aggregate assessment data and track the effectiveness of interventions.

Elementary screening and PRPs: staff said Act 20 required adoption of a specific early literacy screener; Waunakee used AIMSweb Plus for 4K through third grade. The screener includes measures such as initial sounds and letter‑word sound fluency in early grades and oral reading fluency (ORF) in grades 1–3. Staff reported the district set a benchmark (described in the meeting as near the 20th–25th percentile) that triggers a PRP. When students fall below the threshold, teams administer diagnostic assessments, convene universal data meetings and design a PRP with identified interventions and weekly progress monitoring via AIMSweb Plus.

Tools and findings: staff said the district used NextPath this year to automatically pull scores from AIMSweb and help populate PRP documents. That system allows filtering by school, intervention and staff member to identify which interventions are correlated with stronger progress. Staff noted that many students who fell below benchmark were accurate in decoding but did not meet fluency or speed criteria, which led the district to prioritize fluency within tier‑1 instruction and targeted interventions.

Middle and high school interventions: Tim (district staff member) said the middle‑school model places students into scheduled workshop courses; sections were small (about 15 students per grade/content area) and staff plan to expand capacity for 2025–26. Middle school I‑Ready local assessment results showed that, for example, seventh‑grade reading workshop students met their I‑Ready growth targets at a rate of 69% (above the national midpoint); a smaller share increased state (Forward) proficiency, and some students’ Forward performance declined. Staff explained that I‑Ready and the Forward exam are related but not identical; local assessments were broadly predictive but did not exactly mirror state outcomes.

Attendance and reach: staff said chronic absenteeism is prevalent in the intervention population—about 40% of middle‑school workshop students were chronically absent (in school less than 90% of days)—which reduces the effectiveness of targeted supports. To reach more students next year, staff plan to adjust scheduling and benchmark criteria so sections can serve larger groups where appropriate.

Why it matters: staff presented these changes as part of a baseline year after adopting AIMSweb Plus and NextPath. The district plans to use those tools to analyze which interventions produce the largest gains and to track exits and entries from PRPs year‑to‑year to show longitudinal impact.

Decisions and follow‑ups: no policy changes were adopted at the subcommittee level. Staff said they will continue to analyze intervention effectiveness across schools using NextPath filters and to report follow‑up findings to the district leadership and board.

Ending: The subcommittee heard the intervention update and asked staff to report back with comparative, longitudinal views (exits, entries and year‑to‑year cohorts) and intervention‑level effectiveness.","District staff described new elementary screening under Act 20 (AIMSweb Plus), the Personal Reading Plan process and use of NextPath to track interventions; middle‑school workshop courses showed mixed gains with attendance a limiting factor.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6218354,"District seeks board approval to set 2029 target: all schools ‘significantly exceed’ state accountability expectations",468,5523000,5991000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0&start=5523&end=5991","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0/thumbnail_5523000.jpg","/articles/6218354/Wisconsin/District-seeks-board-approval-to-set-2029-target-all-schools-significantly-exceed-state-accountability-expectations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6218354-f0f7aba1ae35b2c0c3cf63b7e48d7bd0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770707430&Signature=VCMRIahP6kwJRyXFnzm2bN7iEhN-tuTjt7xZlmgatGpMT3imuLEiSRVhlnscYychDMwoWK7tjZFsARBdezZfeJT3FEQRX4TgVppjrKBKljF-PCyuHblN2uxQ7~L6ixbgBohs0C3qNi5rM9yNQZErUVYy82VLR0fPWrwu4b0J~Y1MxnpgLcjVIcpUmdcUU8CCERIVCkmm4heQT0p1RqylIfsArzxm5yEwQp1NEtfiWQhxsK6~H9ah0fsE6NRW8rj60NVN7OJjI3Ie~nBYJmKbb4Y8qNHJWJ8x0C~u5TQtIMZXlHjft3Oubcz3FLvbVxv6oGPaYLrK8mP3gmwUHLQesQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","District administrators proposed an updated district priority for discussion and forwarding to the full board: replace the standing short‑term target with a long‑range aim that “by June 2029, all schools in the Waunakee Community School District will significantly exceed expectations on the Wisconsin state accountability report card.”

Why it matters: administrators framed the revision as a multi‑year, systemwide goal that accounts for changes in state accountability reporting and ties district improvement work to a consistent measure (the state accountability report card). Staff said the proposal aligns with ongoing continuous improvement work—professional learning communities, attendance initiatives and targeted instructional strategies—and that using the state report card mitigates apples‑to‑oranges comparisons if the state changes assessment or reporting methods.

Discussion and context: Monica (district leader) presented the draft language and explained redlined items in the draft showing strategies already in use (for example, PLC work and interventions described earlier in the meeting). Subcommittee members asked whether the target is realistic and whether it overextends the district; administrators responded that the target is meant to be ambitious but buildable through sustained PLC work, attendance interventions and evidence‑driven instruction implemented across buildings. They noted the district has earmarked funding for PLCs over multiple years and cited recent implementation steps (continuous improvement training and principal PLCs) as groundwork.

Action taken: a motion to forward the proposed 2025–27/longer‑term goals (including the revised priority 1 language framed around the state accountability report card and the 2029 target) to the full board passed on the record.

Ending: The revised goals will appear in the full board packet for final consideration; the district said it will continue aligning implementation steps, monitoring progress and reporting interim measures back to the board.","District leaders proposed a revised top priority: that by June 2029 all schools in the Waunakee Community School District will significantly exceed expectations on the Wisconsin state accountability report card.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6218369,"Waunakee subcommittee approves testing schedule changes; adds fall preACT for grades 9–11",429,67000,496000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0&start=67&end=496","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3629322-bce42d3c9eaaad52d04bc03c922721b0/thumbnail_67000.jpg","/articles/6218369/Wisconsin/Waunakee-subcommittee-approves-testing-schedule-changes-adds-fall-preACT-for-grades-911","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6218369-e9f19da3562903628ae33ab412364619/orig.mp4?Expires=1770707430&Signature=frOyvEUZ6cnZV0eHs93N2i6Zp0UJTgBh075tFOvZGODZIiLwN31maeME~z0IqT0TxE0iAy0EAd8o-Lk6KJvKlqk2y8kH6ksK1i-4dM4NQGuevTSQLNqFchZcvSkzdG7SufgXTbwIe-Zq2KPWHie2uxyjX-vv4GdTNyQx6Sftf1eKx7AMfMZnb2MZBYe2VeYFJj3MiXgnFwusv6-8PepXljpuWD2H4-NuAI92CmJOpbiWesPFL5asF2Mbpct-Wm3EJcbn~u6rlDv0V9bQfkV~SUcKrG~xlu2o3D~mhfQGjXxG76spmskemSpj1oscQAr33Su3DX4kh7Lr38qe~-0Znw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Waunakee Community School District curriculum subcommittee voted to send the district’s 2025–26 testing and assessment schedule to the full board, including a new fall local preACT for ninth, 10th and 11th graders.

The new fall assessment is a “non secure version” of the preACT that district staff said will return item-analysis data so teachers can see strengths and growth areas for students as they prepare for the spring ACT, Tim (district staff member) said. The district is planning the assessment for early October; staff said they prefer to administer all three grades on the same day if information technology can support it, but they may spread testing over a week if needed.

The change is the only substantive addition to a schedule staff said is otherwise unchanged from the prior year. The subcommittee motion to forward the schedule to the full school board passed on the record.

Why it matters: district staff told the subcommittee the fall preACT will give teachers more timely, item-level diagnostic information to guide instruction during the school year, rather than relying only on spring results.

Key context and supporting details: staff said the fall preACT will be given to ninth through 11th graders and, unlike the spring preACT, the fall version will be a non‑secure administration that produces item analysis. District staff said they are still finalizing the exact day with IT and may need a multi‑day window if simultaneous testing across three grades is not feasible. The district will continue to use other local and state screeners and assessments in 2025–26 as before.

Assessment names and student groups: subcommittee members asked how the district’s QRI (Qualitative Reading Inventory) differs from AIMSweb. Staff explained QRI is an individual reading inventory—teachers listen to oral reading, ask for retell and comprehension questions and score accuracy, rate and comprehension—whereas AIMSweb’s oral reading fluency measure reports correct words per minute in a one‑minute probe. Staff also explained the DLM (Dynamic Learning Maps), formerly referenced locally as the WAA (Wisconsin Alternate Assessment), is the alternate state assessment used only for students with significant cognitive disabilities who are designated by their IEP teams (approximately 1% of the district’s students), and that participation in the DLM is an IEP team decision.

Discussion versus formal action: the subcommittee discussed the schedule and clarifying questions about assessments. A motion to forward the testing and assessment schedule to the full board was made and seconded; the recorded outcome was “aye.” No new policy was adopted at the subcommittee meeting; the item will next appear on the full board agenda.

Ending: The subcommittee advanced the schedule with a recommendation to the full board and moved on to an in‑depth presentation on the Elevate student‑voice program.

","The Waunakee Community School District curriculum subcommittee voted to forward the district’s 2025–26 testing and assessment schedule to the full school board. The schedule adds a new local fall preACT for grades 9–11 to provide item-level data for teachers; other state and local assessments continue largely unchanged.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

District coaches describe Elevate student‑voice program; subcommittee hears privacy, fatigue and implementation questions

District outlines reading screening changes and interventions; NextPath used to track Personal Reading Plans

District seeks board approval to set 2029 target: all schools ‘significantly exceed’ state accountability expectations

Waunakee subcommittee approves testing schedule changes; adds fall preACT for grades 9–11