The Cleveland City Schools Board of Education on a unanimous vote approved the district's TISA plan, a state-required strategy that lays out multi-year proficiency targets for third-grade reading, English language arts and math and the district's action steps to pursue them.

Board members approved the plan after a presentation from district academic leaders and a question-and-answer period that covered benchmarks, the role of instructional coaching and supports for English-learners and students with disabilities.

Why it matters: The TISA plan is the district's required submission to the Tennessee Department of Education that sets measurable targets the district must report on annually. Board members and staff said the plan focuses the district on specific instructional strategies they consider most effective — consistent use of approved instructional materials, intensive coaching for teachers with low growth ratings and common formative assessments to guide instruction.

Dr. Lang, the district's secondary academic lead, opened the presentation by describing the item as a voting requirement. "This is the Tennessee investment in student achievement plan. It is something we are required to do every year," Lang said. He and Miss Bender, who led elementary academic remarks, outlined the three statewide goals the district adopted: raise third-grade TCAP proficiency, increase district ELA proficiency by 3% annually, and increase district math proficiency by 3% annually.

Superintendent Dr. Elliott summarized recent performance and how the plan changed after reviewing results. "Our goal last year was 42.5%, and we did not meet our goal. We did see a decrease, unfortunately, from 36.1 percent to 34.5%," he said, then described how staff dug into data to refine action steps. For district math, Elliott said the district saw growth but fell short of the target: "We saw growth, but we didn't hit the target. Okay? And so we went back again, as Dr. Lang said, and looked at what we were doing."

Board members pressed for specifics on monitoring and supports. Board member Renee Diamond asked for clarification about the plan's time frame: "Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is year 3. Correct?" Dr. Lang and Dr. Elliott confirmed the district has completed two years and that this submission covers the third year of the plan. Diamond and other members asked how the district would accelerate improvement in years four and five if current approaches fall short. Dr. Elliott said the district used school-level results to focus and sharpen action steps and intends to increase oversight and supports where schools are not making gains.

On assessment and monitoring: Board members asked how the district is measuring progress during the year. Staff said common formative assessments and benchmark tests are used; a December benchmark will provide a midyear view. When a board member asked, "So where are we at this year already since we're past the fall break?" staff responded that teachers had administered one or two common formative assessments and that the next benchmark in December would allow the district to evaluate trajectory toward the May TCAP tests.

Support for teachers was a recurring theme. Staff described an intensive coaching model targeted at teachers rated as level 1 or 2 for growth. Dr. Lang and Miss Bender said those coaching cycles produced positive results in earlier cohorts and remain a central action step. On PLCs (professional learning communities), Miss Pesterfield asked whether the district follows a specific structure. Staff described district-level coordination, agendas, and the use of released TCAP items to build local common formative assessments.

Equity and subgroup monitoring: Parents' concerns submitted during public feedback included requests for smaller class sizes, more after-school tutoring and specific supports for students with disabilities. Staff said they had forwarded parent concerns about standardized testing to the district disabilities office for review. The board also discussed the impact of English-learner students on proficiency rates; staff said ESL students' performance is tracked separately and that state rules allow certain allowances in the first years after arrival in the U.S.

The board vote: Matthew Coleman moved and Jody Riggins seconded approval of the TISA plan as presented. The board clerk recorded unanimous support; the chair directed staff to upload the approved plan to the state department.

Looking ahead: Staff agreed to provide a midyear update to the board, including benchmark and i-Ready data, at the February meeting to show whether interventions and coaching cycles are changing student trajectories.