District 100 presents district-improvement plan with math, literacy targets and new assessments

District 100 education leaders on July 23 presented a district improvement plan that sets district-wide academic targets for pre-K through eighth grade and summarized assessment results from preschool through eighth grade. Assistant Superintendent B. Maldonado told the board the plan sets two results goals: by 2026, 40% of students in pre-K–8 will meet or exceed standards in math on the Illinois Assessment of Readiness (IAR), and 45% will meet or exceed standards in literacy on IAR. The presentation included assessment data, subgroup breakdowns and implementation steps for curriculum resources.

Why this matters: the IAR results determine public accountability on the Illinois report card, and the district’s improvement plan ties early-grade benchmarks to the long-term IAR goals. Speakers said the plan focuses on both proficiency and growth and on aligning instruction and resources across schools.

Presenters walked the board through multiple local and vendor assessments used to set and monitor the goals. Dr. Amanda Thompson, director of early learning, described preschool and kindergarten observational data gathered with Teaching Strategies GOLD and noted “nice growth across the board,” especially in early math for preschool and strong dual-language kindergarten gains. Allison Aparicio, assistant director of special education, reviewed FastBridge benchmarks for kindergarten and first grade, saying students “show an understanding of the skills assessed, but struggle with the timed piece” of the assessments; benchmark increases were reported at each testing window. Lindsay Cindy, director of learning management and assessment, summarized NWEA MAP Growth data for grades 2–8 and warned the board that NWEA norms are changing next year — “the 2025 norms are starting,” she said — meaning year-to-year comparisons will need contextual notes.

The plan identifies instructional priorities by grade band. For K–2 the district will emphasize number sense and automaticity; for grades 2–8 it will target constructed responses and specific standards (operations and algebraic thinking, numbers and base-ten ideas, fractions) with middle-school emphasis on ratios and probability and expressions and equations. For literacy the district will focus on informational-text comprehension and constructed-response skills for grades 2–8, while K–2 indicators will emphasize fluency and automaticity, staff said. Assistant Director Theresa Delphia described a “tree diagram” that links indicators (local assessments and classroom measures) to the district IAR goals and said school improvement teams will align school plans to the district plan.

Presenters discussed subgroup performance. Sarah Fies, director of special education, reported that 59% of students were above the 50th growth percentile in math districtwide; students with IEPs were at 45% and English learners at 54% (dual-language students about 59%). For reading, 43% of students were at or above the 50th growth percentile districtwide; students with IEPs were about 31%. Samantha Schumann, director of instructional innovation, described accelerated programming (AIMS) at the middle schools and earlier enrichment opportunities that identify high performers via the CogAT assessment; students scoring in the top tier (nines on CogAT or top MAP percentiles) receive gifted plans and differentiated goals.

Staff emphasized implementation fidelity and monitoring. Planned next steps include continued use of professional learning communities, classroom walkthroughs tied to resource implementation matrices, curriculum feedback forms by unit, mid-year and end-of-year teacher reflections, targeted professional development and continued monitoring of implementation for students with IEPs and experiential-learning observations. Maldonado said the district will monitor both local measures (FastBridge, Teaching Strategies GOLD, classroom common assessments) and vendor benchmarks (NWEA) and will compare scores using both old and new norms during the transition.

Staff also flagged financial and federal factors that could affect programming. The superintendent and presenters noted state prorations on reimbursements (special education tuition at 77% reimbursement, regular transportation at 79%, special education transportation at 69%) and said the district is tracking several federal grants not yet released (Title I, II, III and IV) and estimating roughly $325,000 in held funds that could be released. They reminded the board the district qualifies for the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), which currently provides universal school meals but could change with federal policy shifts. Presenters said staffing decisions were not funded by the unreleased federal grants; those funds primarily support professional development, EL services and enrichment.

Board members asked for clarifications and parent-facing explanations. Board member Butler asked that future school-year presentations model this information for parents so families better understand what measures like NWEA and IAR mean. Board member Caballero asked whether the district improvement plan includes K–2 goals (staff said yes; K–2 goals and indicators feed the longer-term IAR targets) and whether the board is part of the district improvement team (staff said the team is composed of directors, school administrators and teacher leaders; board members are not on that implementation team). Staff said official IAR results and the Illinois report card will be publicly posted in late October and that the district will present the formal IAR data to the board after release.

The presentation was descriptive; no board vote or formal adoption of the plan was recorded during the meeting. Staff said they will bring periodic school-level reports through the academic year and present a formal IAR-related report after the state posts final, public scores.