OCPS midyear review shows early-reading gains, board presses for detail on middle-school math and cohorts

Orange County School Board members on Thursday, Jan. 16, 2025, heard a midpoint update on the OCPS 2025 strategic plan that showed modest gains in early reading and mixed performance across other grades, and they pressed district staff for more detailed, cohort-level breakdowns.

The presentation, led by Superintendent Dr. Vasquez and the district research team, used vendor files because the official state file was not yet available. Dr. Vasquez opened the briefing by saying, “We, are delighted, this afternoon to be able to present to you a midpoint, a midpoint review of our of our strategic plan.” District staff then reviewed STAR early-literacy and STAR reading progress-monitoring results, Florida Assessment of Student Thinking (FAST) ELA data, and interim algebra/geometry measures.

Why it matters: board members said the midyear figures will shape spring interventions and the district’s final-year push toward OCPS 2025 targets. Several trustees emphasized that apparent drops between grade levels can reflect differences in which students take which tests (for example, students who take algebra in 7th grade are not counted in regular 7th-grade math results), so staff must provide cohort and course-level detail before the public and the board interpret year-to-year movement.

Most-cited data and district clarifications - STAR early literacy (Progress Monitoring 2): 32% of kindergarten students scored Level 3 or higher, up from 30% at the same point last year. First graders were reported at 25% 3-and-above, unchanged year over year for the tested subset of 1st graders. - STAR Reading (reported examples): the district said 71% of kindergarten students were on grade level in STAR Reading at PM2, compared with 70% at the same point last year. - FAST ELA: 45% of 3rd graders scored Level 3 and above, up from 41% a year earlier; district staff reported 52% of 6th graders at Level 3+ on PM2 and compared that to 46% a year earlier (staff cautioned that the state and district comparison bands differ by grade). - Algebra/Geometry interim checks (PMA1): algebra 1 PMA1 at 53% (same as last year), geometry PMA1 at 54%; PMA2 for these courses was not yet available at the time of the presentation.

Board questions and staff responses Board members repeatedly asked staff to provide cohort-tracking — not just cross-sectional snapshots — so the board can follow the same group of students from one year to the next. In response, Dr. Vasquez and the research team said they will: provide a breakdown showing how many 7th graders are taking regular 7th-grade math versus algebra and geometry; send PMA2 results for algebra and geometry when finalized; and supply school- and student-level views through an upcoming interactive accountability report.

Board members also raised two technical concerns: whether the new FAST/PM system is valid as a predictive tool and how to interpret grade-to-grade changes given different assessment scales and testing populations. District staff noted that the state is conducting a validity study of PM1–PM3 comparisons and that the district used vendor files for this midyear report because the official state files were not yet available.

Responses on instruction and interventions District leaders described several actions intended to raise performance: expanded curriculum adjustments targeting strands where students underperformed, increased supports from cadre leaders and corrective programs, classroom walkthroughs to measure standards-aligned instruction, targeted tutoring and summer remediation, and an “interactive accountability denominator report” that will let principals and teachers drill down to student-level data. As one board member summed up, the district must identify which students can be remediated quickly (for example, students close to Level 3) and which require longer-term work.

Quotes from the meeting include Superintendent Dr. Vasquez’s admission to the board after members asked for more time to review the materials: “I blew it. I didn't send it to you ahead of time,” and a board member’s observation of progress: “I saw several categories that were, higher than where we were last year.”

What the board directed (nonbinding) Staff agreed to provide: cohort-tracking data to compare the same group of students across years; a school-by-school breakdown of how many 7th graders are taking algebra and geometry; PMA2 algebra/geometry results when available; and the interactive accountability report to the full board at a planned presentation (board members requested a visual, school-by-school view).

Ending: next steps District staff said they will provide the requested disaggregations and PMA2 results and preview the accountability tool at an upcoming board presentation. Trustees asked the superintendent and chiefs to return with the school-level visuals and cohort analyses before the spring assessment cycle.