Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Achievement Math topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves progress reports on elementary and middle‑school math goals; district highlights coaching and intervention plans
Summary
Trustees approved progress monitoring reports for Board Goal 2 (elementary math) and Board Goal 5 (middle‑years math). District leaders described early gains at focus schools, expanded instructional coaching, revised intervention strategies and plans for targeted professional development to raise students' on‑grade percentages.
The Phoenix Elementary School District No. 1 governing board on Monday approved progress monitoring reports for math goals aimed at increasing on‑grade proficiency in early elementary and middle grades.
Superintendent Dr. Gonzalez introduced the reports and said the district is tracking interim benchmarks and deploying targeted supports. For Board Goal 2 (K‑3 mathematics), district staff said the board set a stretch goal of moving third‑grade students' pass rate on the AASA from 29% (August 2023) toward 54% by 2028; current diagnostic trends show incremental gains with district staff focusing on math vocabulary, scaffolding and purposeful Tier‑2 interventions.
Assistant/academic leaders said they are concentrating support on two focus elementaries, Emerson and Lowell. Dr. Lloyd told the board that these schools are small and that even modest changes in a handful of students will materially change the percentage. "On average, over the last 3 years, it did some averaging. We had about 13% increase across the entire district over the last 3 years," Lloyd said when describing fall‑to‑winter movement and why a 10–15 percentage‑point interim target is feasible for focused sites.
District instructional leaders described curricular alignment work and a revamp of the coaching model. Dr. Galletti said instructional coaches now work directly in classrooms, in planning cycles and with principal leadership to support consistent use of adopted curricular resources and to plan scaffolded vocabulary and discussion routines. "We're really having them work with the teachers directly and with the leaders at the sites and with one another as well," Galletti said.
For Board Goal 5 (middle‑years math), staff reported a more mixed pattern and said targets set two years ago are unlikely to be met this cycle without accelerated gains. District presenters highlighted progress in some cohorts where percent on grade doubled from one year to the next but cautioned the overall trend has been uneven. Staff cited professional learning (lesson study, coaching), targeted interventions, and efforts to recruit teachers with stronger math preparation as priorities for the coming year.
Board action: Trustees moved and seconded approval of the progress monitoring reports for Board Goal 2 and Board Goal 5; both motions passed by voice vote.
Ending: Trustees asked for examples of what parents would see in classrooms as the work continues. Staff said parents should notice more student discourse around math, scaffolding and small‑group instruction designed to move students from dependence to independent problem solving, and continued emphasis on coaching and data‑driven intervention.
