Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Third Grade Literacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears disappointing preliminary third-grade ELA results; approves Goal 4 progress update and directs further data review
Summary
Creighton staff reported preliminary 2025 third‑grade ELA results below targets, described interim measures and screening tools, and presented next steps including EduCLIMBER filters and revised interim measures. The board approved the Goal 4 progress monitoring report.
Creighton School District staff on June 17 presented the Goal 4 progress monitoring report on third‑grade reading proficiency, showing preliminary results that fell short of the district’s 2025 target and prompting plans to revise predictive interim measures.
Staff said the district’s target under Goal 4 is to increase third‑grade proficiency on the state English‑language arts assessment from 18% (August 2023 baseline) to 41% by August 2028. For the 2024–25 interim, the district reported preliminary AASA results of 12% proficiency (target 22%). District presenters explained that 2025 was the first year the state counted an oral‑reading‑fluency component in the AASA result, which likely affected comparability to prior years.
District staff described interim measures and local screeners used to track progress: the DNA English‑language arts benchmark (district interim measure) and FastBridge reading screeners (used for K–3 and Move On When Reading monitoring). Staff reported improvement on some interim measures: the DNA benchmark increased in‑year (pre to post) and FastBridge kindergarten outcomes exceeded the targeted interim increase (20% achieved vs. 18% target). Presenters said DNA predicted different outcomes this year than prior years and that EduCLIMBER and additional interim measures will be examined by a working team on Thursday to identify more‑predictive measures.
Staff described targeted supports: intervention training, expansion of small‑group instruction, adoption of new intervention materials and a cohort model that provides consultant coaching, substitutes for teacher release, and classroom modeling. The district reported 16 students currently on the state list eligible for possible third‑grade retention; exemptions for EL students with fewer than three years of SEI instruction, students with IEP team decisions and summer‑school growth apply.
Board members pressed staff on predictiveness of screeners and the oral‑reading‑fluency scoring process; staff said the state assessment’s oral‑reading‑fluency portion is scored with speech‑to‑text/AI on the state platform and that Creighton has used digital practice tools with AI scoring in classrooms for practice but is still seeking clarity on scoring details from the state. Staff and board members discussed using student recordings (Seesaw) and coaching cycles so students hear and correct their own oral reading fluency as part of skill development.
Superintendent Mann and curriculum staff said the district will continue a cohort coaching model for literacy with four literacy coaches and a literacy coordinator (separate from language coaches), replicate consultant-supported cohorts (10 teachers next year) and maintain summer classes for students at risk of retention (two sections with eight students per teacher; 14 of 16 students are enrolled at time of report).
After discussion, President Carrillo moved and the board approved the Goal 4 progress monitoring report. Staff will reconvene work on interim measure selection and EduCLIMBER filters and return with refined predictive measures and disaggregated subgroup reporting.
