Midyear AROI report: Rockford PDW reviews secondary math implementation and next steps

District instructional leaders presented a midyear report on the Academic Return on Investment (AROI) study for secondary math, describing implementation progress, student assessment results and planned next steps for coaching and fidelity monitoring.

The AROI work, led by district curriculum staff and supported by Superintendent Jared Gallagher and academic leads, focuses on two core questions: which programs drive student achievement, and what works for whom under what conditions. The midyear presentation centered on grades 6 and 9 as focal points for measuring fidelity and student outcomes.

Heidi (presenter) and Dr. Jared Gallagher reviewed four implementation strategies for the year: building a monitoring system for fidelity (classroom look‑fors and observations), creating feedback mechanisms that include teacher and student voice, partnering with external districts and vendors for learning, and examining environmental/staffing factors that affect learning (for example, teacher overloads and use of long‑term substitutes).

Key findings presented: - Teacher training: The district delivered a multi‑session foundational training for the integrated math program (CPM foundations). Presenters reported that 46 of 50 integrated math teachers had completed the foundational training as of the presentation; plans are in place to complete training for the remaining teachers in school or in‑house sessions. - Implementation fidelity: Observational rubrics list 11 “look‑fors” tied to the standards of practice; district staff used the rubric in classroom visits. The district reported roughly 25% of observed classrooms met the high‑fidelity threshold (observations showing 9 or more of the 11 items). That figure was described as “marginal gains” from prior reporting (around 31–33% in other focal grades). - Student outcomes: Middle school (sixth grade) and high school (integrated math 1) data show mixed results. Kennedy Middle School was singled out as having the lowest proficiency on standardized measures (Kennedy sixth graders’ proficiency near 21 percent on referenced test) while showing comparatively higher growth percentiles. Presenters said some Kennedy sixth graders enter with lower math equivalency levels and that about 30 percent of their sixth grade cohort has an IEP; those students require targeted acceleration and supports. - Correlation issues: Presenters showed scatterplots comparing course grades and standardized proficiency measures; district staff noted mismatches where some students were performing below proficiency on assessments but receiving high classroom grades, and vice versa. The district emphasized the need for stronger alignment between instruction, assessments and grading practices.

Next steps and supports: - Observations and coaching: district curriculum instructional leads (CILs) were directed to average three classroom observations per day and building administrators three observations per week to scale monitoring. District staff are piloting embedded coaching cycles and working with learning partners and vendors in targeted schools. - Administrator calibration: training sessions and calibration visits for principals and other leaders are underway to ensure consistent use of the standards of practice rubric. - Continued data monitoring: staff will continue collecting winter and spring assessment data and will follow up with root‑cause analyses for schools showing declines.

Board members asked for clarification on drop‑off from one year to the next in some metrics; presenters said that differing cohort characteristics and changes in teacher training timing can affect year‑to‑year comparisons and offered to provide more detailed breakdowns. Board members also asked when end‑of‑year assessment data will be available; presenters said the district will wrap up student testing in May and report outcomes thereafter.

No formal action was taken during the committee meeting; staff described implementation milestones and requested continued board support for observation, coaching and potential investments to expand school‑based learning partners and embedded coaching.