[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-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],{"_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",6146613,"mediaKeyId","5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f","parentId",5525482,"title","La Jolla ISD lays out board monitoring calendar tying data cadence to student outcome reporting","audioSeconds",601,"startMs",8641000,"endMs",9242000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f&start=8641&end=9242","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f/thumbnail_8641000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6146613/Texas/La-Jolla-ISD-lays-out-board-monitoring-calendar-tying-data-cadence-to-student-outcome-reporting","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6146613-76bdc826ea597151d41818b2eadff8bb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770394230&Signature=RgBcR6OI7j-PApxf6ldAbl~rN1VshRod8zSndfxF~UcnoKkxbNmcuquUyCXOAElNHNoTSpXLoX5HYRT3IfWj-0OeJFBlvyYkQ7HiNvqcoXFVytg1n1mPj~AMY0uCM3ahMOYjJowVYiAkxt1-SHBTHTgGJNb87ObJtacI8rNiwUVo5o5mvTnojzSeXwtJmVor9gYHZGJTmOfERt44dLD~8yYwTi4a~NvsOY2CBYCk31Fe5tGcCZExl0cbuow6ouwwBNcQYTHSRyMqr9nbvbkFiNwWDhxlNzuY--0Bsd3KSXyGeYMtqv59vdQRsZjtoyAiv~2PbXgLByspwMt1CLVE9w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","LA JOYA ISD, Texas","date","2025-08-02T16:35:57Z","article","District staff presented a proposed board monitoring calendar for the 2025–26 year that aligns board meetings, data releases and statutory trainings with the district’s assessment calendar and governance constraints.

The monitoring calendar is designed to ensure the board meets Lone Star Governance and district constraints: monitor goal progress measures (GPMs) at least four times per year; complete quarterly board self-evaluations; hold the superintendent annual evaluation within 45 days of the board self-evaluation; and ensure at least 50 percent of quarterly board meeting time is devoted to student outcomes. The calendar aligns reporting with the timing of MAP, unit assessments and STAR/STAAR results.

Nut graf: The monitoring calendar creates a consistent public schedule for when the board will see interim and final results for district goals and when the board will review constraint-related topics such as special education implementation and campuses requiring targeted interventions.

Key elements shown to the board include: an August presentation of prior-year accountability (STAR) results and the district’s planned response; two unit-assessment reporting points (early fall and midyear); twice-annual MAP/GPM reports and end-of-year MAP and early childhood (CIRCLE) reporting; and constraint progress updates (for example, conditions affecting students with disabilities and MTSS/IEP quality). The calendar also schedules discussion of targeted interventions for campuses rated D or F for two consecutive years, consistent with the superintendent’s constraints.

Staff said the calendar will present GPMs and related campus plans repeatedly during the year rather than as a single end‑of‑year report; item examples include a midyear review of the annual school plan, a fall look at beginning-of-year unit assessments, and a spring and summer reporting sequence timed to assessment availability.

Board members asked for clarity on which campuses will be considered “strategic intervention” and staff said that would include ACE campuses and any campus that has two consecutive D or F ratings and therefore receives additional district interventions. Staff also said the calendar will incorporate presentations on budget, staffing and other operational topics in a year-at-a-glance approach so the board and community can see when operational items will be brought for review.

Ending: Staff will finalize the calendar and present it as an actionable monitoring schedule tied to assessment release dates and policy monitoring obligations; the calendar will guide when the board expects data, constraint reports and superintendent evaluations.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","La Joya ISD Board Meeting 08-02-2025 Live!","oneSentenceSummary","The district proposed a 2025–26 board monitoring calendar aligning GPM reporting, constraint progress measures, leader evaluations, and required trainings with the district assessment timetable.","taxTitle","LA JOYA ISD, School Districts, Texas","taxId",14173,"location","Texas","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},6146618,"Board workshop advances 'managed instruction' theory of action to pair district coherence with school autonomy",219,7155000,7374000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f&start=7155&end=7374","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f/thumbnail_7155000.jpg","/articles/6146618/Texas/Board-workshop-advances-managed-instruction-theory-of-action-to-pair-district-coherence-with-school-autonomy","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6146618-024161e1067775db5e14741c0cc3ea63/orig.mp4?Expires=1770394230&Signature=HPAMIHNNLF9wDzmGMl0t832q6wGK6AwMksAXiO7kCKGR-09764023opc79FJdYX-Ywi4LnM30hkFq0zzyz06qzr~6ecdgCoxmMwAMt7ZVF5t4GLDDQjxu0pJaFTaa3LI8zefnV8OFkozPdumxBJ~8kK0R7SLsj62qnuTSInXLmUsNRHmsI-1L7CHMmMzIBwBv~RF4MLYFNsGTuEdNCqtnXa35JjOT3NTVfxM3IpTbSyIS5ROr0UEC1FiZV0SNV2Ul8fVDdBfCLQOSw5KuSEtoPHPAK2cw949PcACTEwoBHFklBat1KMWyWabn7en7yzb3fYxhAoite7VxMHZKhnWFA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","La Jolla ISD leaders and a Lone Star Governance facilitator outlined a proposed addition to the district’s AE(Local) policy that would codify a “managed instruction” foundation and a pathway for schools to earn performance-based autonomy.

Joseph Nigella, presenting the proposed language, framed the approach as an \"if–then\" theory of action designed to align district expectations with campus innovation. He said the theory of action \"connects our intentions to our expected outcomes\" and that it should be written so the district and schools can act on it. The proposal appeared as a new Section K in the district’s AE(Local) policy packet.

Nut graf: The theory of action would make the school the primary unit of change while requiring all campuses to operate within a consistent, research-based foundation. Schools that meet district performance expectations could earn greater autonomy in staffing, scheduling or program models, provided they remain legally compliant.

Under the proposed language, the district’s role would be to set performance expectations, provide research-based supports and scale best practices; campuses would be empowered to implement locally appropriate strategies within district constraints. The presentation listed components of the managed foundation that campuses must follow (examples given in the workshop: curriculum materials, scheduling, professional development, budgeting processes and reporting). The “then” clause said that if those conditions are met and the district provides differentiated support, then the district will create a performance-driven system that balances coherence with school-level innovation.

Superintendent Dr. Sorensen emphasized clarity, consistency and communication: “It is incredibly important … that it is communicated to everybody, to all stakeholders so that all of our stakeholders understand when we say managed foundation, what that means,” she said.

Board members and staff described the proposed theory of action as practical and cross-functional, aiming to create a stable governance structure that survives board and leadership transitions. Board members asked how common such policy language is; presenters replied that many districts include a theory of action in AE(Local) language, and that Lone Star Governance and Systems of Great Schools work encourage an actionable, short set of expectations rather than “flowering” aspirational language.

The proposal will be placed on an upcoming agenda for formal board action; presenters said the wording is intended to be operational (clear roles, monitoring points and consequences) and to be accessible for campus and central-office staff.

Ending: District staff said the theory of action will be circulated as proposed policy language and returned for board consideration; they described it as a tool to guide the district’s strategic plan and the board’s monitoring calendar.","District and Lone Star Governance trainers proposed adding a theory of action to AE(Local) that centers a managed instructional foundation and earned, performance-based autonomy for schools.",{"_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},6146623,"La Jolla ISD presents new goal progress measures and targeted supports for low-performing schools",2341,170000,2511000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f&start=170&end=2511","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5525482-8df09a0662711d8f08b0c5237481f99f/thumbnail_170000.jpg","/articles/6146623/Texas/La-Jolla-ISD-presents-new-goal-progress-measures-and-targeted-supports-for-low-performing-schools","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6146623-02a412607df3ebe1ad89182bf82dcb8a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770394230&Signature=HF001JT4zYzueE6ziV~6blQ9MJhFD0Zr2BzglsOKNYvT~8PMfjknqY1ARg0rmaCutstMl71H~hKTAQnxPcgt2S7HYsq9zyGG-apXq7K5cMKDKWxGeL2Gj3bWcXh4Slvfyhg3dKjgggHvOMvLR5da2HHCEGX8veQw2HScTPOYKLhuCkvzWYQheLPGWTRPmWBWpC2bTogmsIIc9OJR0n8uvNU5-68v1OoOzeOiIxF0V4L7mOWxWgDkLLCmLvqgkz7NXmQC7TlcOdGWNEPxldfg9z4B6C0BWl4AA7OPzKFlK3mx0ptREx91XvnKqAVd9KLe6ZTeJquGDERSjX30iahM2g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","La Jolla Independent School District officials used a board workshop to present revised goal progress measures and a package of campus supports aimed at lifting student achievement in early grades, middle school reading and math, and college- and career-readiness.

The presentation, led by Dr. Little (presenter) and framed by Superintendent Dr. Sorensen, used the district’s first full year of MAP (Measure of Academic Progress) data to set new annual and 2029 targets for multiple measures tied to the district’s board goals: third-grade reading and math, eighth-grade reading, and college-, career- and military-readiness (CCR). Dr. Little said, “This will be the first year that we have a new tier 1 on grade level core reading curriculum, k 8 in the district.”

The new goal progress measures (GPMs) include specific numeric targets for grade bands and assessment measures. Examples shown to the board include: first-grade MAP results moving from 36 percent (most recent year) to a 45 percent target by June 2029; second-grade MAP from 33 percent toward 45 percent by 2029; an early reading fluency measure rising from 40 percent to 65 percent (k–2 combined); and kindergarten math (Texas Kindergarten Entry Assessment composite) adjusted from 83 percent to an 88 percent target. For middle grades, the district proposed moving sixth-grade MAP reading from 39 percent to 50 percent by 2029, and raising eighth-grade projections into the mid- to upper-50s over the same period.

Nut graf: The board-level GPMs are districtwide measures intended to be translated into campus-by-campus targets and monitored through the district’s assessment calendar. The district said it will allocate more time, resources and coaching to its lowest-performing campuses to accelerate growth, and will require participation in specified supports for those campuses.

District staff described how the GPMs will be individualized at the campus level. Dr. Little showed examples in which an A-rated campus that posted 51 percent in a first-grade measure might be asked to grow two points, while an F-rated campus at 24 percent would be set a more aggressive target (example: to 30 percent) and receive intensified supports. Dr. Little said schools “will get much more support from us both in time, attention, resources, and personnel capacity on their campus.”

Board members pressed for specifics on supports and accountability. Staff described a differentiated support model that includes:
- campus-specific targets tied to each school’s starting point;
- increased partner time and coaching at highest-need campuses;
- clarified instructional framework and lesson structure for middle grades;
- a leadership academy and principal supports to build capacity; and
- a district-wide coaching model and new central-office evaluations for leaders and coaches.

On pacing and expected growth, staff explained the district is often “back‑loading” growth because teachers and campus leaders are adopting new high-quality instructional materials (HQIMs), a new assessment cadence and a revised instructional framework. Dr. Little described the process as structural change that can initially depress scores while adults learn new practices: “If I'm a right hand hitter and I got a 300 batting average, and I tell you you can only hit left handed now ... your left hand batting average is gonna drop.”

Board members and staff discussed middle school declines in reading performance. Staff and the superintendent said middle schools showed the largest declines in MAP and STAR/STAAR data, and the district plans to focus on middle-school instruction, adding classroom engagement strategies, writing practice to support STAR performance, and more frequent interim assessments. Dr. Sorensen said the district will make those supports explicit in lesson structures and campus monitoring.

The presentation also covered targeted interventions for vulnerable students, including MTSS protocols and improved special-education services; staff noted a pending special-education audit and said the district will report progress on implementation. On advising and postsecondary planning, the district said it will strengthen counselor capacity and central coordination of college- and career-planning so families get clearer information about pathways (dual credit, early college, P‑TECH and CTE).

The board did not take formal votes on the GPMs at the workshop; staff said they will return with a formal adoption proposal in a subsequent meeting after gathering feedback and finalizing campus targets. Dr. Little described interim criteria for “statusing” targets during the school year: interim updates within 2 percentage points of a target will be considered “on track,” 3–5 points “slightly off track,” and 6+ points “off track.” For final status, meeting or exceeding a target equals green; within 3 points is yellow; 4+ points below is red.

Ending: Staff said they will supply campus-level targets and continued updates tied to the district assessment calendar. The board scheduled a later meeting for formal consideration of revised GPMs and the district’s recommended campus assignments and support allocations.","District staff presented revised goal progress measures using one year of MAP data, proposed campus-by-campus targets for reading and math through 2029, and described differentiated supports and coaching for lower-performing campuses.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

La Jolla ISD lays out board monitoring calendar tying data cadence to student outcome reporting

Board workshop advances 'managed instruction' theory of action to pair district coherence with school autonomy

La Jolla ISD presents new goal progress measures and targeted supports for low-performing schools