[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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",[32,75,87],{"_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":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6158664,"mediaKeyId","5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95","parentId",5457763,"title","District proposes new four-part gifted-screening matrix, adds universal 2nd-grade screener","audioSeconds",1737,"startMs",5391000,"endMs",7128000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95&start=5391&end=7128","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95/thumbnail_5391000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6158664/Missouri/District-proposes-new-four-part-gifted-screening-matrix-adds-universal-2nd-grade-screener","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6158664-d0780058e1ec9279294313ee0546a998/orig.mp4?Expires=1771079485&Signature=FfyF9OF9V2vbMKw8GQQdVAmwuilZAgz3Rgs9PtmzpwM-9MDcDpBhXCb6rvccmBDeCM91l-VXPwtoMRPuXoNS5YVX80GyYFZ1UTWNZtvvzs1hh3s2y3698uJSGIUB2O2N3Xwt9Lukn5kfXKFKzHQOGwGb9SSvhvZ219-~eC0YpTyu2PNC-TLvDaHDKybM4S19yQ6KEpPaGrM4C3O7EHMIGvoF6mZNr5lWkdlyyGovey7F4gtwpiWL3gvLi41GIVjuG8ztVZdZxgdGl49s~vdddYI-1WEgAg9poHjUrNJmbtRUCYJ5gUikigYQLt6ssF3wFtkpKaZ7I7jRAjza9-10~w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-07-24T04:03:11.14Z","article","At the July 29 board workshop, Dr. Tracy Binera Humes presented proposed revisions to Lindbergh’s gifted-identification procedures to align with new Missouri DESE guidance. The proposal would require four assessment components and a matrix-based decision rule: students would be considered for gifted qualification only after meeting standards in three of four areas: academic ability (district reading/math measures), general mental ability (a short, computer-scored test), creativity/reasoning/problem solving (a Naglieri-type screener), and a standardized teacher-rated gifted-characteristics scale.

Key elements of the proposed procedure
- Universal and targeted screening: the district will universally screen second graders with a Naglieri-type general-ability nonverbal assessment in January. For most grades (1 and 3–8), the initial entry point will be academic performance (reading and math data); students meeting threshold criteria will be advanced to teacher rating and the reasoning screener.
- Scoring matrix and thresholds: the district proposed a matrix in which students need a minimum of 20 screener points (10 points from each of two qualifying categories) to proceed to the full general-ability assessment. Final qualification requires a matrix total of 40 points; DESE requires a general-ability cut-score at the 90th percentile for gifted program qualification. The district would offer a targeted pathway for multilingual learners, students with 504 plans or IEPs, and free/reduced students using a lowered average-threshold (80th percentile) for initial consideration.
- Assessment instruments: staff proposed moving to a revised KBIT-2 (computer scored) for general mental ability testing to obtain updated norms (2021) and reduce manual scoring burden; the Naglieri nonverbal reasoning tool and a commercially normed teacher rating scale will be used for other components.
- Referrals and timelines: parents and teachers may refer students in any grade; staff plan to centrally process referrals and schedule assessments within the semester. District leaders said they will provide a single coordinated notice to families and schools once eligibility decisions for a testing cycle are complete, rather than issuing letters to families piecemeal.
- Cost and staffing: projected recurring costs are roughly $5,000 annually for protocols and scoring, with a modest $300–$400 increase expected due to added assessments; a one-time cost will purchase assessment kits for schools so gifted specialists can test on-site.

Board questions and clarifications
Board members raised questions about the teacher rating scale’s subjectivity and whether creativity measures would be weighed separately. Staff said the teacher scale uses a Likert-format, will be normed and could be administered online to produce local norms; staff considered creativity instruments but found scoring burdens and sustainability issues and therefore will rely on the reasoning/nonverbal component plus teacher ratings to address creative problem-solving. Staff also explained that a short computer-scored general-ability battery produces an overall general-ability score (not a clinician-administered full IQ) and that DESE accepts such general-ability tests for identification.

Next steps and implementation
The policy/procedure changes were presented as a first reading; staff will provide board materials and digital forms (in EduCLIMBER/Infinite Campus) to help administrators manage referrals and scoring. Staff proposed public communications to parents and professional development for teachers and building gifted specialists to calibrate the teacher-rating component and explain the timeline and referral options. Staff also noted that some students who receive a formal general-ability assessment will have limited future reassessments (DESE and professional guidance limit repeated full assessments), and the district will counsel families about timing.

No formal action was taken at the workshop; the procedures will return to the board for adoption after the first reading and any edits.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Education Workshop No. 1619","oneSentenceSummary","Dr. Tracy Binera Humes presented a first-read proposal to revise Lindbergh’s gifted-identification procedures to meet Missouri DESE guidance, moving the district to a four-component screener and a matrix-based qualification rule.","taxTitle","LINDBERGH SCHOOLS, School Districts, Missouri","taxId",38789,"location","Missouri","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6158668,"State law bars student device use 'bell to bell'; district plans procedures, communications",417,4133000,4550000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95&start=4133&end=4550","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95/thumbnail_4133000.jpg","/articles/6158668/Missouri/State-law-bars-student-device-use-bell-to-bell-district-plans-procedures-communications","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6158668-02c55e58ecdfb5d78436041bc6de583a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771079485&Signature=WXs3q4Gds84sjuhCxt2HRBcQNW4MO2~SOpCyyxFYzbzIPBCZfFycLBgHNnLdBRBpxq9a~pXFJ9TGq2cSKqULwdjWxwhVtL2DyyXhATQOer4W1G90qw68WzGlyISqyuVVI7MDMQcl9h~~8Nlwt2FlgsLrdF795MShzHazT8CIEJ7Vu3us3rRBuNRC1laOLLXWqJCWAa~DTXpl0d2evxH3u-FTtxgimhRFHV00xpSjdlJ9uW2waNCj21ToVFI4Q3v6YK03MEbHe0FcmE5OKX8T8lQYJ8mD~UnQvLANMkW7bgRwU32l6SThhveu3obGx6-wCrlyAxg5wmRp7BHeQXm-1w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At the July 29 board workshop, the district’s legislative update highlighted Senate Bill 68’s classroom-safety and school-security provisions and explained likely local effects beginning in the 2026–27 school year. The most consequential operational change is a statewide requirement that students not use personal electronic communication devices during the school day (a “bell-to-bell” ban), subject to defined exceptions for instructional purposes and bona fide emergencies.

Tara (district legislative lead) told the board the law’s intent is to create a safer, less-distracted learning environment; the district has already limited cell-phone classroom use for several years. The practical impact will focus on hallway and lunch supervision, particularly “power lunch” at the high school. The district is drafting local procedures and a first-reading policy appears on the evening Board meeting agenda.

How implementation might work
- Exceptions: staff said devices used for instructional purposes (district-issued Chromebooks or tablets) will remain allowed under instructional-exception rules; emergency and documented 504/IEP accommodations can also create exceptions. Staff said a teacher or administrator could permit a personal device for a specific instructional reason but that such exceptions should be limited.
- Logistics: students may keep devices in backpacks; schools are not uniformly planning to lock devices. The district will not assume privacy of medical accommodations and will plan to manage exception documentation discreetly.
- Enforcement and tone: staff emphasized the intent is not to create power struggles between adults and students; principals will be provided with procedural guidance on polite, relationship-preserving enforcement. Legal counsel advised that enforcement becomes escalated primarily if device use results in other policy infractions (bullying, harassment, academic integrity violations).

Communication and next steps
District staff scheduled a July 30 meeting to finalize procedures and planned a focused community communication before school starts. Staff warned that parents and students may react strongly and that the district will frame the policy as a state mandate (not a district-only choice) while outlining how families can request accommodations. Staff said they will provide guidance to principals, training for staff on consistent expectations and establish follow-up check-ins to monitor implementation.

Other bill provisions and related items
Staff also summarized safety-and-security provisions: changes to MAP reporting bands (adding a mid-range grade-level equivalence), Project ADAM cardiac-response planning and the Stop the Bleed requirements; some security items are contingent on state allocations and implementation timelines begin in 2026–27. Staff said Lindbergh already has many elements (AEDs in buildings, Stop the Bleed training completed, emergency plans and active-shooter training templates) and is positioned to comply.

No formal action was taken at the workshop; the board will see a first reading of the new device policy in the evening board meeting and staff will return with final procedural guidance, community messaging and training plans.","Board staff summarized Senate Bill 68 provisions—most notably a ban on student use of personal electronic devices during the school day—and outlined draft procedures, exemptions and a July 30 meeting to finalize building-level implementation and messaging.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6158672,"District reports mixed gains in reading, flags math cohort inconsistencies",2942,39000,2981000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95&start=39&end=2981","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5457763-ff7ab610f52855781a20c1d8e1738e95/thumbnail_39000.jpg","/articles/6158672/Missouri/District-reports-mixed-gains-in-reading-flags-math-cohort-inconsistencies","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6158672-b62d8f6d64ab23ad89c77ca0a1d2a8da/orig.mp4?Expires=1771079485&Signature=EslIKhsRIpxM8ooyKox7j4VwKk3ByJQso8-i1qqvH9Jc39Xgi0ZirJIyClMWfiqFkugdkunosw5JSOUd4qqmVHDjIZVUBKEYa8f4Qj4GLeofIWpH8HtfZ2OdxCAnUCP9ecI6I7sHzahMHCEDq-VTG8qAtZE4EywQ0TbYc5ZNeZPnAtk2KU9fY3wjxKB6YseydkrhIye28Ydu4yaFJEYiZ0oKwaAbRYUuZTgwciABYFXxDTW9tgYG8oR6GtUvEaBSsbjOkDQ01ouxH3LrhVBnW9FU0ycvSvSlJzjINaadppryVjbEkvHWk8F-JxmCHCp8rXxiWuc75nELbXB438V7yg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At a July 29 Lindbergh School District board workshop, staff presented the district’s annual growth and achievement review, reporting that reading performance met the district’s Compass target while growth targets and math results showed shortfalls and uneven cohort trends. The presentation covered early literacy (FastBridge), I-Ready math diagnostics, NWEA (third grade through high school), CBM/passage reading, and high-school measures including ACT and Algebra 1 results.

The presentation said the district met its reading performance goal (82% of students scoring in “average to high” on spring measures) but did not meet its growth goal: 65% of students showed average-to-high growth versus a district target of 70%. Staff emphasized that some subgroups and grades showed improvement (for example, third-grade CBM spring results were above target) while middle-school and some math cohorts showed concerning dips.

Why it matters: district targets matter for instructional priorities, staffing and curriculum decisions. Reading results were cited as evidence that sustained investments in literacy professional learning and the science-of-reading work are producing measurable gains. District leaders said math will be a priority for curriculum revision, teacher professional learning and deeper analysis of cohort-level trends.

Key facts and figures presented
- District Compass goals: 82% performance target; 70% growth target. Spring results: reading performance 82% (met) and growth 65% (below target).
- Early literacy: FastBridge and early reading measures showed many students demonstrating “typical to aggressive” growth; kindergarten–1st combined typical/aggressive growth ~58%; presenters highlighted many students who moved from low to near-target scores between fall and spring.
- K–2 math (I-Ready): district reported 64% typical-to-stretch growth for K–2; kindergarten reported ~81% at target level, first grade ~77% and second grade ~72% on grade-level placement measures aligned to Missouri Learning Standards.
- NWEA (3–high school): third–fifth grade reading results met the 80% target for average-to-high performance (third grade spring ~83%; fourth 83%; fifth 84%). District growth on NWEA reading was ~65% (district target 70%). Fourth- and fifth-grade NWEA math met targets (82% and 81% average-to-high performance), third grade fell just under the 80% target (79%). Middle school math averages were lower (sixth ~71%, seventh ~75%, eighth higher) and cohort patterns were inconsistent year to year.
- High school: English I cohort showed a strong trajectory (spring composite improvement noted). Algebra I spring composite rose slightly (61% to 62%) but Algebra I includes students across grades and cohort comparisons are complicated when advanced students are tested in middle school.
- College and career measures: ACT was offered to juniors (about 409 participants; composite 22 for first-time takers; five perfect section scores reported); Advanced Placement participation and pass rates rose (625 students, 803 exams, 89% exam pass rate in 2025, up from prior years).

Concerns and follow-up directions discussed
Board members pressed for more targeted math analysis. Staff agreed to run cohort-level trend reports (for example, longitudinal sixth-grade comparisons across the last three years) and to examine whether assessment differences (NWEA vs. MAP/state tests vs. district measures) reflect testing artifacts or instructional issues. Staff also flagged planned actions: a math curriculum rewrite, targeted professional learning for math teachers, and continued focus on MTSS (multi-tiered systems of support) to close subgroup gaps.

Subgroup and equity notes
Staff reviewed subgroup trajectories (special education, multilingual learners, free/reduced-price meal students, Black and Hispanic students). Presenters noted positive trajectory for some groups (e.g., free/reduced gap narrowing in reading) but said gaps for Black and Hispanic students and for students with IEPs remain sizable and will require targeted work.

Staff emphasized that some metrics double-count students in multiple categories (a student can appear in special-education, FRL and ML categories simultaneously), and that results reflect point-in-time status rather than only long-term enrollment.

What the board asked staff to do
Board members requested cohort-level trend reports for specific grades and years, breakdowns for tiered intervention groups (tier 2 vs tier 3), and further analysis reconciling NWEA and state MAP results. Staff committed to produce those analyses and to summarize planned curriculum and professional-development steps in upcoming packets.

Ending note
Presenters said district staff will transition to the I-Ready platform k–8 next year to produce a more seamless set of district diagnostics, while also working to align prior FastBridge/NWEA trend lines to new baselines. Staff asked the board to view current results as part of a multi-year trajectory and noted reading gains as evidence the district’s literacy investments are yielding returns, while also calling for intensified action in mathematics.
","At a July 29 Lindbergh School District workshop, staff presented spring assessment results showing reading targets largely met districtwide while growth targets fell short and math results showed uneven cohort performance, prompting requests for further cohort and curriculum analysis.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

District proposes new four-part gifted-screening matrix, adds universal 2nd-grade screener

State law bars student device use 'bell to bell'; district plans procedures, communications

District reports mixed gains in reading, flags math cohort inconsistencies