Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Assessment Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board adopts Act 20 policy on third-grade promotion and retention; district staff flag implementation questions
Summary
Pulaski's board approved Policy 54.11, a new district policy implementing state requirements under Act 20 on third-grade promotion and retention, while administrators and board members discussed concerns about screening metrics, opt-outs and long-term effects of retention.
The Pulaski Community School District Board of Education approved a new policy, 54.11, addressing third-grade promotion and retention under Wisconsin's Act 20 on Tuesday.
District administrators told the board the policy follows a Department of Public Instruction sample and a vendor (Neola) model; the administration said it revised language to emphasize promotion, spell out who must participate in retention-review meetings and list the data sources to consider â universal screeners, diagnostic assessments, progress monitoring and classroom observations.
A district administrator told the board that the policy must be approved and on file by July 1 but will apply to the class that reaches fourth grade in 2027. "Basically this has to be approved and in place by July 1 in every district in the state of Wisconsin, but it doesn't go into effect until February with that class that is entering as grade 4 students," the presenter said.
Board members asked how the district would treat parent test opt-outs. The presenter said state law allows parents to opt out of tests in grades 4, 8 and 10, but the district had historically allowed additional opt-outs; under the new policy, third-grade assessment opt-outs would not be permitted when assessment results are used to make retention decisions beginning with the class of 2027. Board members also raised concerns about the role of oral reading fluency (a timed metric) and its potential to place students on intervention plans despite comprehension strengths.
Administrators noted that research compiled by education researcher John Hattie shows retention has a negative effect size and that state guidance emphasizes alternatives to retention. The policy spells out that retention decisions should consider multiple data points and that school and district representatives must communicate long-term risks to families.
After discussion the board voted to approve Policy 54.11 as presented.
