Midyear FastBridge results prompt district discussion on literacy, math implementation and resource gaps

District assessment staff presented midyear FastBridge screening data and used the report to prompt conversation about curriculum alignment, the Read Act and where intervention resources are focused.

Director Zumbusch (presentation lead) explained FastBridge is a formative assessment suite designed to give teachers timely instructional feedback and cautioned against treating single-window results as summative. She said the tool uses national percentile cut points: students below the 15th percentile are labeled high risk, 15th–30th percentile as some risk, 40th percentile and above as "on track" (with a separate college-pathway threshold above the 70th percentile). She noted assessment content and cut points vary by grade and window and that some components are administered 1-on-1 (early grades) while others are iPad-based (grade 2 and up).

Reading and math trends: Presenters showed a kindergarten dip from fall to winter that the district attributed to a timing mismatch between the district’s Foundations scope and the mandated FastBridge winter window; staff said when they screened again after the subsequent unit, scores rose substantially. Zumbusch emphasized this is an implementation and timing issue, not necessarily a reflection of long-term decline.

Curriculum and resources: Board members and staff discussed gaps in the district’s curriculum package. Staff said Foundations covers many foundational skills but has gaps in phonemic awareness; vocabulary and knowledge-building (comprehension) content was identified as an area with fewer district materials. Director Zumbusch and others said the district is awaiting guidance under Minnesota’s Read Act before making major curriculum purchases because state guidance affects what will be reimbursable. Board members asked how quickly new curricular components could change outcomes and were reminded implementation typically takes about three years.

Intervention staffing: The presentation noted that targeted reading interventionists are assigned in K–2 but that the district lacks dedicated reading interventionists in grades 3–5 and has no district-wide math interventionists. Several board members raised this as a resource gap that limits the district’s ability to provide consistent tiered interventions beyond early elementary grades.

Data use and next steps: Presenters said FastBridge is one data point among many; the district will continue to use the screener to identify students who need tiered supports and to align professional development with observed gaps. Board members asked for deeper, school-level and year-over-year comparisons and for additional reports (CBM math and CBM reading/autoreader measures) that teachers use for progress monitoring; staff said those reports can be produced but would increase presentation length and noted they are more targeted instructional measures rather than universal screeners.

The board received the report as informational; no formal board action was taken.