Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Achievement Gap Reduction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District reports midyear AGR results; math improvements outpace reading, staff plan schedule changes
Summary
District staff reported midyear Achievement Gap Reduction (AGR) results, showing math risk rates exceeded a 10% improvement target while reading improvements lagged, and outlined schedule and coaching changes to strengthen interventions.
District instructional leaders on Feb. 24 presented midyear results for the Achievement Gap Reduction (AGR) grant and outlined immediate and longer‑term steps to reduce early‑grade learning gaps.
Midyear AGR results and targets Administrators reported AGR funding provides roughly $2,500 per qualifying pupil for targeted k–3 strategies that the district leverages for instructional coaching, smaller class-size allocations in some classrooms and one‑to‑one tutoring. Midyear fast‑bridge screening data showed districtwide math risk categories decreased beyond the district’s 10% reduction target; reading risk categories had decreased modestly and remained short of the 10% target at midyear. Leaders said spring assessments will indicate final grant-year outcomes.
Planned changes to instruction and schedule Leadership described next steps: continued coach training (including participation in the Impactful Coaching Academy), expanded use of a new HMH (textbook/curriculum) implementation plan with embedded digital tools, and a focus on structured "win" blocks in elementary schedules. Staff said future master schedules will embed daily collaboration time for grade‑level teams, protected windows for intervention or extension (win blocks), and deliberate use of reading specialists and coaches to push into classrooms. The district also plans a leadership institute in June to calibrate principals and coaches around intervention and response‑to‑intervention (RTI) work.
Equity and implementation concerns Board members asked about disparities across schools, higher Tier 3 (intensive) intervention counts at several schools and whether special‑education caseloads or support‑staff shortages limit intervention effectiveness. Leaders acknowledged uneven capacity across schools and emphasized the district will work to systematize interventions, better align schedules and ensure coaching and principal feedback target instructional moves that help Tier 2 and Tier 3 students.
What comes next Administrators said they will report final AGR outcomes after spring screening, refine professional development and present proposed master schedules for the 2025–26 school year that embed win blocks and collaborative planning time, and continue to use AGR funds for coaching and targeted support.
