District presents Iowa School Performance Profile results; postsecondary readiness and chronic absenteeism highlighted

District staff presented Iowa’s school performance profiles Oct. 14, showing mixed results across buildings but notable gains in postsecondary readiness and a reduction in chronic absenteeism.

Lucas (district assessment staff) told the board the district recorded its largest gains in postsecondary readiness and in removing students from chronic absenteeism lists. “We dropped down 10%,” Lucas said, describing a nearly 10 percentage-point reduction in the share of students classified as chronically absent (students missing 10% or more of school days). He also said the district’s postsecondary-readiness score rose significantly after staff documented and expanded work-based learning opportunities.

District officials said the number of high-school courses classified as work-based learning rose from eight in 2023–24 to 37 in the current program-of-studies; staff also reported 20 Kirkwood courses that meet work-based-learning criteria. Those additions, along with expanded documentation of concurrent enrollment and AP participation, helped boost the district’s postsecondary-readiness metric.

Lucas told the board that nine buildings that were targeted in one or more subgroups in last year’s profile were no longer targeted this year. He noted that targeted status can drop a school’s overall category even if the school’s total index score is otherwise higher; several high schools that qualified as “high performing” on raw index scores were listed at a lower category because of targeted subgroup results.

Board members pressed staff for context. Director Houston asked, “I don't quite understand how all the kids that are in those elementary schools get to the middle schools and suddenly their performance is great,” pointing to differences between elementary and secondary-yearly change. Staff told the board that differences in tested grade spans, English-language-learner populations and the shift of sixth grade into middle school complicate direct comparisons. They also said the performance profile uses different measures—proficiency and growth—across grades and that growth indicators at the elementary level are based on smaller cohorts (growth is measured only when prior-year results exist).

Directors discussed resource allocation and class sizes. Director Lingo and others noted district resource-allocation (RAM) choices can influence elementary outcomes; staff said district leaders plan to review resource allocation and to pursue targeted supports where data show small gaps could be closed by a handful of students.

Staff also flagged timeline changes: because the state released profile data earlier in the year, required plans for targeted schools are now due in December, compressing the district’s timeline for reviews, resource-allocation checks and action planning.

On assessment logistics, staff said the statewide ISASP testing window opens in April (the district typically tests in the second week of the window and schedules make-up times to preserve a 95% participation rate). Officials noted the state’s change to an adaptive test and recent release of test-domain breakdowns will allow the district to align curriculum and formative assessment more closely with tested skills.

Ending: Board members asked staff to return with deeper analysis (universal screening and intervention alignment) in upcoming meetings; staff said follow-up presentations are scheduled for Oct. 28 and Nov. 11 to address core instruction and interventions.