Craven County schools’ overall accountability score edges down; 10 schools on low-performing list

Dr. Donna Boutwell, Craven County Schools’ chief of academics, told the school board on Sept. 16 that preliminary state accountability data for 2024–25 shows a modest decline in the district’s overall performance and mixed results across grades and subjects.

Dr. Boutwell said the district’s composite score for 2024–25 was 52.9 and described the change from the prior year as “right at exactly a 1 percent decrease.” She told the board the district includes 26 schools and serves roughly 12,000 students.

The presentation flagged several specific results: district elementary English language arts proficiency rose 1.2 points to 52.6, while English II proficiency at the high school level fell from 58.8 to 56.3. District math proficiency in grades 3–8 improved from 53.5 to 54.9, and NC Math 3 (a high school end-of-course exam) rose from 48.6 to 53.7. Science proficiency declined districtwide, with a drop in the composite from about 71 to 61.8; biology scores fell from 53.7 to 45.7, a trend Dr. Boutwell attributed in part to new state science standards.

Dr. Boutwell said 10 schools appear on the state’s low-performing list for 2024–25, up from seven the prior year, and that eight schools are “continually low performing” under the state’s three-year averaging rule. She noted two schools—HJ McDonald and Havelock Middle—were removed from this year’s low-performing list but remain “continually low performing” because of their three‑year trend: “the state is looking for a 3 year average,” she said.

At the high school level, the district presented mixed indicator results. Dr. Boutwell highlighted graduation-rate changes and other indicators: Craven Early College’s graduation rate rose from 95.8% to 97.7%, Havelock High increased from about 85% to 88%, and Craven Virtual Academy’s graduation rate rose from 78.3% to 94.4%. She emphasized that Craven Virtual’s enrollment is very small, so small changes in student counts can swing percentages.

Board members asked about the state accountability model, which Dr. Boutwell summarized as 80% proficiency and 20% growth. A board member noted critics have called the weighting problematic; Dr. Boutwell said the model gives a large weight to a single-day assessment and that “for that to be worth 80% is very high.” She explained growth captures a student’s year‑to‑year movement and can tell a different story than proficiency alone.

Dr. Boutwell also pointed to local school-level efforts tied to the results: principals and leadership teams examined the data over the summer, adjusted staffing and instructional plans, and assigned school improvement coaches and vetted curriculum pacing to address weaknesses. She told the board the district has already made some personnel and program adjustments for 2025–26 based on the data.

No board action was taken at the meeting; the data presentation was informational and labeled preliminary and embargoed by the state. Dr. Boutwell said the state data correction window is open and final figures will be certified at the October State Board of Education meeting.

Local context: the presentation covered six years of data, compared the district to the state, and noted that concerns about particular subjects (for example, NC Math 1 and biology) are shared across multiple districts.

Questions from the board focused on interpretation of the scores, equity of the grading model, and what supports schools will receive in the current year. Dr. Boutwell said the district needs continued board support for attendance and other systemic priorities that affect academic performance.