Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Performance Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District presents scorecard, board approves superintendent evaluation instrument and plans performance-management rollout
Summary
Consultant Dr. Gibson presented a performance-management framework and district staff reviewed a multi-priority scorecard. The board approved the superintendent evaluation process and instrument and set a March 17 deadline for trustees to return individual evaluations.
Judson ISD leadership presented a district scorecard and a proposed superintendent-evaluation instrument on Thursday, and trustees approved the evaluation process after the presentation.
Consultant Richard Gibson of OKC LLC led a training-style briefing on performance management and scorecards, urging the board and administrators to create internal accountability systems that align strategic, tactical and operational teams. Gibson described "strategic roundtables," cascaded scorecards and community advisory committees as mechanisms to keep strategy aligned with campus practice and public understanding. "No amount of external accountability will matter in the absence of internal accountability," Gibson said during his presentation.
District staff then summarized the scorecard's priority areas and long-term targets, including student academic outcomes (reading and math across Grades 3—), career, college and military readiness (CCMR), student participation in extracurricular and co-curricular programs, staff recruitment and retention, stakeholder engagement and facilities planning. Administrative highlights included:
- Staff-reported reduction in teacher turnover from 21.3% to 17.9% (per the district's internal calculation after the 2023-24 TEA report). - A CCMR target pathway and a current senior-year CCMR participation figure cited at roughly 13% (the district noted changes in state reporting and a multi-year lag for some military reporting). - A district facilities assessment under way with two architecture firms, due in June; staff said a long-range facility/bond plan will follow. - Several tactical items tied to priorities: monthly CCMR meetings at each high school, targeted student supports, mental-health and counseling investments, and programmatic investments such as STEM at Kirby Middle School.
After the presentations, the board voted to adopt the superintendent evaluation process and instrument that match the scorecard: the motion, moved by Board President Conoyer and seconded by Trustee Faulkner, passed 5-1. Trustees were given an evaluation form aligned to the scorecard and asked to return completed forms to staff by close of business on March 17 so that results can be collated and discussed at the next board meeting. Staff said Alex will collate trustee inputs and return a compiled report for discussion.
Trustees asked for clarifications about data baselines and timing: several members emphasized the need to monitor BOY/MOY/EOY progress, to cascade district measures to campuses, and to reserve strategic roundtable time to dig into campus-level tactics. The superintendent and cabinet said the scorecard will be a living document, updated as official TEA accountability figures and interim measures become available.
Board members and staff also discussed legislation and state-level changes (House Bill 3, teacher incentive allotments and TEA reporting processes) that could affect how some measures are counted and reported over the next one to two years.
The board requested staff to return with more granular campus-level reporting at future strategic roundtables, and the superintendent directed staff to circulate the evaluation instrument and the scorecard materials electronically.
