RSU 06 presents academic data: graduation rate up, persistent math and science gaps

Laurie (presenter) told the RSU 06/MSAD 06 school board on Jan. 23 that the district’s graduation rate rose sharply to nearly 88% for the class of 2024 and described mixed academic results on state and norm-referenced tests.

The presentation emphasized that literacy measures show overall recovery since the pandemic but that math and science remain concerns. Laurie said the district is watching middle-school performance in particular and noted implementation of a new Reveal Math curriculum that is still in its second year.

The district’s curriculum director, Erin McGuire, has produced the detailed comparative charts staff shared with the board. Laurie summarized assessment types and the district’s focus on growth as well as achievement: norm-referenced tests such as NWEA (MAP Growth) compare students to national peers, while the state science assessment is criterion-referenced and sets its own proficiency line.

“we are required to... test 95% of the students in each grade,” Laurie said, describing the state reporting threshold the district must meet for Department of Education accountability.

On literacy, Laurie described the district’s elementary “flex literacy” model, which groups students by need and reassigns groups after periodic assessments. She noted measures used across grades, including Fountas & Pinnell, high‑frequency word counts, Words Their Way and NWEA reading measures. For a cohort of fifth-graders, she said proficiency dipped during the pandemic and has slowly recovered; about 78% met expected typical growth in a recent year-to-year snapshot for that cohort.

On math, Laurie said the district is in year two of implementing Reveal Math and that principals and instructional coaches expect more definitive results after additional teacher experience and spring benchmark data. District charts presented by Erin show Bonny Eagle students generally slightly below state averages in several grades, with a notable middle‑school dip that recovers in high school.

A student who identified herself as a high‑school senior described test‑taking behavior at the secondary level: “a lot of kids skip that day... they don’t take it seriously,” she said, explaining that some students treat the exam as low‑stakes because it does not affect college applications.

Laurie and others discussed the state assessment procurement process: she said Maine’s statewide assessment has been sent back out for proposal multiple times and the state had not settled on which vendor or test will be used for 2026, a factor that complicates longitudinal comparisons.

On science, Laurie explained that the state’s new criterion‑referenced science assessment tests fifth, eighth and eleventh graders and that results are low statewide; district averages were close to the state but still below the proficiency cut score in several grades. Laurie noted the district improved by roughly 3.5 percentage points in one year on the science measure, which she said equates to about 26 more students meeting the benchmark.

Staff described intervention systems: the district uses MTSS (Multi‑Tiered Systems of Support) to target instruction and behavior supports and has expanded a state‑endorsed Building Assets, Reducing Risks (BAR) program in almost every school. Laurie described the BAR model as an asset-based structure that integrates with MTSS and aims to make teacher planning meetings more focused and actionable.

Board and community members pressed on causes for the middle‑school dip, program stability and whether curriculum changes are producing results. One board member said the district’s size and student needs (including a growing English‑learner population) affect comparisons to other towns and the state.

Laurie also outlined staffing and attendance data: roughly one in five teachers in the district has less than three years’ teaching experience, and about 25% of students meet the district’s chronic absenteeism threshold (missing more than 10% of school days). She linked those indicators to implementation capacity and student outcomes.

The presentation closed with a reminder that a single snapshot of test data does not reflect the full range of student supports; Laurie pointed to the graduation increase and expanded alternative‑diploma and social‑work supports as evidence of the district’s broader work to keep students on track.

Ending: Board members thanked staff for the detailed packet and were told further budget and staffing implications would be discussed at upcoming meetings.