Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Literacy Core Instruction topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pasco district attributes mixed third-grade literacy results to data and implementation issues, not student regression

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Superintendent Whitney presented the Board Progress Monitoring Report on Mastery of Reading, saying implementation and data‑entry problems — not student regression — largely explain why several AIM targets were not met for 2023–24.

Superintendent Whitney presented the Board Progress Monitoring Report on Mastery of Reading, opening with the district’s 100% goal that third graders read at grade level in their language of instruction and reporting on implementation of core instruction materials (American Reading Company, “ARC”).

The nut graf: Whitney said final 2023–24 IRLA (English) and ENEAL (Spanish) results did not meet all AIM targets and were rated mostly “yellow” (work in progress). She told the board the shortfall appears to stem from implementation and data-collection problems — inconsistent timing of assessments, misunderstandings about the proficiency threshold, and uneven entry into the SchoolPace data system — rather than a decline in student reading ability. Whitney cited STAR benchmark data showing cohort growth as evidence students were not regressing academically.

Whitney summarized the district’s approach: use the Balanced Governance Model and District Policy 1260 (Board Progress Monitoring Reports) to align progress monitoring with the strategic plan and the board’s “outrageous outcomes.” She described core instruction as the universal, research‑based curriculum every student receives and said ARC materials guide teachers’ daily work. Final data from June 2024 showed some gains on IRLA cohorts (kindergarten→1st, 1st→2nd, 2nd→3rd) but not all AIM targets were reached; one area showed a decrease in proficiency because teachers had stopped assessments before reaching the end‑of‑year proficiency cut point, Whitney said.

Whitney provided numeric examples during the discussion: 874 students left kindergarten in the “emergency” reading level in the cohort examined, and 214 of those were later recorded as proficient on the end‑of‑year IRLA measure (as reported by Whitney to the board). She told directors the district has trained teachers to correct the earlier misunderstanding about which level equals end‑of‑year proficiency.

Board members probed third‑grade results and dual‑language reporting. Director Norberg asked whether the lower third‑grade proficiency could reflect an actual reading problem or a data issue. Whitney said mixed administration and entry practices — including missing entries for both English and Spanish assessments for some dual‑language students — still need cleanup before concluding a true proficiency decline. She added that substitutes and newly hired teachers have sometimes missed training on ARC implementation and SchoolPace entry, contributing to inconsistent data.

Whitney described corrective steps and next actions: expand ARC coaching for administrators and teachers, calibrate assessment and SchoolPace entry protocols, provide targeted professional development (including for long‑term substitutes), strengthen principal and supervisor collaboration around SchoolPace data, and continue using STAR data to cross‑check progress. She said 94% of schools were between partial and full implementation of ARC and said the district would continue working with ARC consultants and follow practices from Leading With Focus to narrow priorities and increase fidelity.

During public comment and in a short video, district bilingual teachers and students demonstrated how ARC guides instruction, how teachers set individualized weekly or monthly “power goals,” and how students progress through leveled texts. Whitney concluded by inviting questions and asking managers Carla Lobos, Leanne Nunemaker and Wendy LP to help respond to board inquiries.

Board direction and outcomes: directors did not take formal action; they directed staff to continue the implementation and data‑quality work Whitney described, including additional professional development, SchoolPace protocol clarifications, and continued use of STAR as a secondary progress check. No policy changes were adopted at the meeting.

Ending: Whitney emphasized that the district interprets the IRLA/ENEAL shortfalls as implementation issues to fix rather than evidence of student learning loss, and she said district staff will return with updated interim and final data as implementation improvements take effect.