Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Academic Performance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cedar Hill ISD midyear tests show mixed results; writing and some math grades lag
Summary
District staff presented DCCA and interim MAP results, noting gains in some grades but widespread weaknesses in writing and concern over third and fifth grade math and special‑education achievement gaps.
District curriculum staff told trustees Thursday that midyear district common course assessments (DCCA 3) and preliminary MAP results show improvements in specific grades but also systemic weaknesses — notably in writing and in particular math grades — and persistent achievement gaps for special education and emergent bilingual students.
The presenter said third‑grade reading performance was roughly on par with last spring’s STAR results but that the district still needs growth to reach the board’s target (the administration noted a target of 46 percent meets for third‑grade reading). Fifth‑grade reading and eighth‑grade reading showed positive middle‑year trends compared with the prior year. The presenter emphasized the need to convert midyear progress into end‑of‑year gains and to narrow equity gaps.
Staff flagged writing as a districtwide concern. The presentation said “roughly 48 percent” of students received a 0 or 1 on the writing rubric during recent scoring of writing samples; staff said a large share of those low scores represented students who either did not place an answer in the response box or failed to address the prompt. To address the issue, the district is emphasizing a short‑response rubric and an instructional routine (RACE — restate, answer, cite, explain), exemplar posters and teacher modeling, shared writing, and peer review to improve students’ ability to write to the prompt.
Math performance was mixed. Staff reported concerns at third and fifth grade and called seventh grade a persistent challenge, while sixth and eighth grade results were closer to or ahead of prior performance in some measures. The presentation said algebra‑course retesters showed low December pass rates in some cohorts; district staff said targeted algebra boot camps, dedicated re‑teaching cycles and external tutoring partners will work with those students ahead of the spring testing window.
Administrators described multiple operational steps: weekly PLC data reviews, use of intervention software (including Exact Path and other adaptive tools), increased in‑school intervention time (including Saturday sessions at some campuses), targeted co‑teaching and coaching in inclusion classrooms, and practice STAR administrations leading to a February 18 professional‑development day focused on data analysis ahead of the April state assessment window.
Trustees asked for the district’s calculated component scores that feed the state A–F model so the board can see how current results map to a district‑level rating; staff said they have calculated component scores internally and will provide those tables to trustees in a follow‑up matrix.
District leaders said they will continue monitoring MAP and DCCA practice tests, refine intervention groupings and update the board as the spring assessment season approaches.
