Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council Bluffs district reports mixed gains in spring MAP results; math shows largest growth
Summary
District leaders told the board the NWEA MAP spring administration showed gains in math proficiency and growth measures, smaller gains in reading and a modest decline in science proficiency; presenters and trustees discussed next steps including targeted literacy audits and updated science curriculum maps.
Superintendent Dr. Merlo introduced a detailed presentation on the district’s spring 2025 NWEA MAP assessment results and invited Dr. Matthews to present the findings to the Board of Education.
Dr. Matthews told the board the district uses MAP three times per year in math, reading and science to measure growth and guide instruction. “This provides a road map for teachers and administrators,” she said, explaining the assessment’s role in setting individual student targets and informing curriculum decisions.
The district reported the percent of students scoring in the top three MAP bands (the district’s stretch goal is 65%): 61.99% in math, 57.62% in reading and 59.91% in science. For students meeting their individual growth targets the district recorded 64.14% in math (above the 60% goal), 50.16% in reading and 48.45% in science. For the “any growth” metric the district reported 88.47% in math, 79% in reading and 65.16% in science.
Dr. Matthews highlighted grade-level trends: kindergarten continues to be the highest-performing grade in math at nearly 78%, and kindergarten, third and fourth grades met or exceeded the district’s 65% proficiency goal in math. She also noted double-digit gains in several elementary grades and that most elementary grade levels exceeded the national expectation of 50% of students meeting growth targets.
On reading, the district saw a 1.59 percentage-point gain from fall to spring — slightly higher than last year’s 1.21-point gain — with notable increases in some grade-level domains (vocabulary, writing, language), but continued concerns about stamina on extended reading passages and drop-offs in higher grades such as 10th grade.
Science declined 2.2 percentage points from fall to spring. Dr. Matthews said science instruction’s unit-based sequencing (introduce, move on) contributes to smaller year-to-year shifts and to gaps when students do not revisit concepts. She also flagged that this was the first year fifth grade was tested at all three MAP windows and that science remains an implementation priority.
Board members asked procedural and policy questions during the presentation. A trustee asked whether English learners can use translated test supports; Dr. Matthews replied that MAP and other district screening windows have defined requirements and that some supports are available within established testing windows. Other trustees sought context for the math gains and whether changes in NWEA score algorithms contributed; Dr. Matthews explained national norming and the year-to-year redistribution of students across percentile bands.
The district identified next steps: align professional learning and instruction to target gaps, pursue a two‑phase comprehensive literacy state development grant (phase 1 would fund an external audit of literacy instruction and resources), update science curriculum maps to reflect revised Iowa Board of Education standards and pilot K–5 science resources, and provide differentiated coaching and consulting to buildings and grade levels based on their data.
The presentation concluded with board discussion of scheduling windows (MAP and ISASP) and follow-up work to monitor implementation of curriculum and supports in targeted grades and student groups.
Dr. Matthews and the superintendent provided copies of the district’s MAP summary and detailed grade- and subgroup-level data to the board for planning ahead of the 2025–26 school year.
