Laredo ISD presents 2024–25 STAR performance results; elementary strong, middle-school math lags

Laredo ISD officials presented an overview of the district's 2024–25 STAR (STAAR-equivalent) performance at the Curriculum & Instruction Committee meeting on Sept. 3 in the Amber Urie Boardroom.

The presentation showed elementary campuses earned 16 A ratings and four B ratings; districtwide, 61% of elementary students scored at the "meets" level (meets + masters), roughly in line with the state's 60% target. Middle-school results fell short in math, and district leaders flagged seventh-grade math and changes in course placements as major drivers of the decline.

Why this matters: STAR results guide district interventions, staffing and curriculum priorities. Committee members and staff described prescriptive supports for underperforming campuses and changes to planning and enrichment intended to raise student outcomes.

Elementary: Executive director for elementary Mercado Ramirez told trustees that elementary students performed above 80% at approaches across tested subjects and that, overall, 61% reached the meets level. Ramirez identified target campuses that will receive increased dean visits and support: Dovalina, Ligale, Bruni, Santa Maria and Sanchez Daltron. She said 10 elementary campuses met or exceeded the state's 60% meets target and 10 met the 30% master target. Ramirez and colleagues noted distinctions: eight elementary campuses earned six out of six possible distinctions.

Special education (elementary): A district staff presenter said 1,491 special-education tests were administered at the elementary level; 875 were at approaches, 488 at meets and 129 at masters, with 616 students scoring below the assessment standard. The presenter said students who score in the lowest band receive an Intensive Plan of Instruction (IPI) and that ARD committees and both general- and special-education teachers share responsibility for prescriptive plans.

Emergent bilinguals (elementary): Dr. Carmen Pompa reported emergent bilingual elementary students scored 79% at approaches, 55% at meets and 24% at masters (5,946 students tested). She said 19 of 20 elementary campuses met the emergent‑bilingual proficiency target (49%) and 19 met the long‑term 55% target; one campus missed the long‑term target by a single point.

Middle schools: Executive director for middle schools Miss Mendoza emphasized the committee was reviewing "all tests, all students" rather than TEA accountability numbers, which exclude certain student groups. Mendoza said 10,464 middle‑school tests were administered districtwide; districtwide performance was 62% approaches, 37% meets and 15% mastery. She reported math declines across all middle schools, concentrated in seventh grade, and explained that advanced math placements (students taking higher‑grade tests with calculators) affect comparability. Mendoza described a revamped enrichment model that rotates students (not teachers) and provides additional instruction time — an estimated 45 extra hours for sixth and seventh graders — plus in‑day common planning for teachers.

Middle-school special education: A presenter said 1,328 special‑education middle‑school tests produced a high share of below‑standard scores (964 tests, about 73% below). Math and reading special‑education results were characterized as areas needing sustained intervention.

High schools: Jose Serda, director for secondary education, reported that without the College, Career and Military Readiness (CCMR) component some high schools' letter grades would fall; Sierra High School would be a C, while Martin and Nixon would be A/B campuses at the reported scores. Serda and trustees noted English I and II remain areas of districtwide concern while U.S. History and Biology scores were strong. Serda described local interventions and staffing changes at specific campuses.

District response and next steps: Trustees and staff agreed on targeted visits, dean support for low‑performing campuses, expanded common planning and tweaks to the enrichment/tutorial model to increase direct instruction on persistently low reporting categories (SCs). Staff said they will return with updated progress, and committee members requested campus‑level follow-ups and copies of distinction and campus breakdowns.

At the meeting several trustees praised staff work and asked for additional details on distinctions, enrichment scheduling and diagnostic data to support campus action plans. No formal vote or board action was recorded on STAR results during the committee meeting.