Board hears strategic plan objectives; administration proposes measurable metrics and 'Give to All, Gains for All' motto

Superintendent Chuck Hughes presented draft objectives that flesh out the board-adopted vision, mission and goals and proposed measurable metrics for each goal area. Trustees spent extensive time discussing how the objectives will be measured, how individual student growth will be reflected and how some measures may be multi-year "stretch" goals.

Hughes told the board the administration has produced classroom- and building-level materials and that once objectives are finalized each goal will have supporting evidence of effort posted online. "What we will add underneath each metric section is evidence of effort," Hughes said, describing a plan to provide periodic updates to the board "every month or every 2 months, every quarter" so "there's no surprises" at year end.

Hughes and administrators proposed specific metrics in the packet, including an example of an M-STEP proficiency target of a 3% improvement in grades 3–11. The draft also includes staff-targeted measures (for example, a fill-rate target for staff positions) and a finance metric tied to fund balance. A repeated theme in administration remarks was that some objectives are multi-year and intended as "stretch goals."

Board members pressed for measures that show student-level growth rather than district averages. Mr. Keller asked how the scorecard would account for individual student improvement versus district averages: "Is there a way to somehow combine or update this scorecard... so that we're looking at literally across the board and kind of trying to understand how many of our students actually improved and met that target?" Mr. Scott asked for clearer baselines and stronger emphasis on CTE (career and technical education) and highly capable offerings.

The administration explained examples of how growth and proficiency can tell different stories: a high-proficiency student may not show year-over-year growth but remains proficient, while a student below proficiency may show a year's worth of growth. Hughes said Heartland tracks individual reading plans for K–4 students and uses building-level processes to follow growth.

Trustees also discussed operational metrics, including work-order turnaround for technology and facilities, and suggested adding time-based expectations or baselines. Administration committed to pulling ticket and completion data and to reporting it regularly.

The board did not take a final vote on the objectives at the Aug. 11 meeting; trustees made comments and requested refinements. Administration said it would incorporate the board's feedback on individual growth measures, CTE emphasis, baselines for community partnerships and time frames for workload completion and return a revised document for board consideration.