Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Goals Dip topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lewisville ISD lays out 2025–26 goals, proposes District Improvement Plan strategies
Summary
Superintendent Dr. Raab and district leaders presented proposed scorecard targets, draft District Improvement Plan strategies and a superintendent evaluation framework; several targets remain "TBD" pending a new assessment, and leaders flagged paperwork and capacity issues for follow-up.
Get email alerts on the District Goals Dip topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a Lewisville ISD Board of Trustees meeting, Superintendent Dr. Raab presented the district’s proposed goals and draft District Improvement Plan (DIP) strategies that will guide work for the 2025–26 school year. The presentation reviewed local readiness measures, proposed scorecard target changes and a timeline for adopting superintendent goals and finishing DIP revisions.
The presentation said the district has defined local college, career and military readiness (CCMR) standards drawing from Redefining Ready through the American Association of School Administrators (AASA). Dr. Fitzhugh described that work as research-based and said LISD adapted those national standards where state criteria from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) were “a little bit restrictive.” She summarized district high-school college-ready criteria as a weighted GPA of 2.7 or higher plus two additional indicators such as AP/dual-credit coursework, ACT/SAT/TSI, honors courses or Algebra II. For career readiness the district looks at discipline, attendance, 4-year plans, extracurricular engagement, CTE course completion and industry-based certifications (IBCs); the district allows exploration to count toward career readiness in some cases rather than requiring completion of a full certification pathway.
The superintendent noted the scorecard is a living document. Several targets are marked "TBD" because the district is preparing to administer a new local assessment; the board will set some targets after the first administration. The administration also asked the board to maintain 15 measures in Section 1 of the superintendent’s evaluation rather than change them. "We're recommending to maintain those 15 items in section 1 of my evaluation," Dr. Raab said. District leaders said they will return recommended final targets for board action in June.
Board members pressed on implementation details and operational burdens. Trustee Stacy Barker said about the DIP strategies on college, career and military readiness, "80% of those are in some way tied to CCMR," and praised the sustained emphasis on counselors and CTE. Multiple trustees asked about paperwork burden tied to MTSS, special education and ELL documentation; administrators said a small team led by Miss Clark is working to simplify forms and processes and that some prior attempts to migrate MTSS to SuccessEd increased, rather than reduced, workload.
The DIP draft highlights planned strategies including a districtwide "One Vision" instructional framework, expanded professional learning modules for teachers and leaders, targeted attendance campaigns (noting that even a half percentage-point change can affect funding), implementation of an "arm screener" program at secondary schools, work on succession planning and support for staff pursuing master's degrees, and a planned migration to a new enterprise resource planning student information system (Skyward upgrade) targeted for summer 2026.
Leaders also flagged communications and metrics changes: the district will report mass-communication performance using click rates rather than open rates (April's click rate reported at about 2.2–2.3%). Administrators outlined a timeline: board adoption of superintendent goals and minor measure adjustments in June; a July planning session at Inspire to finalize DIP strategies; campuses finalize campus improvement plans July–September; board approval of final items in September; and a reconvening of the long-range plan committee in January to recalibrate the multi-year plan.
Why this matters: the DIP and scorecard guide instructional priorities, staffing and budget decisions across the district. Changes to assessment instruments, TEA reporting and state legislation could change which measures are meaningful, and trustees emphasized the need both to sustain CCMR gains and to reduce administrative burden so campus staff can focus on instruction.
The board did not take formal votes on DIP adoption at this meeting; administrators will return with refined targets and the DIP for future action.
