Midyear STAR data shows within-year gains but flat year‑to‑year growth; district doubles down on targeted PD, coaching and Panorama student supports

Colorado Springs School District No. 11 district staff presented midyear STAR assessment results and an expanded professional-development and coaching plan intended to accelerate student learning where district-wide year-to-year gains have stalled.

District staff reported that students showed solid within-year growth but that year-to-year systemic progress is flat compared with the same point last year. Staff said district goals for median growth percentile (MGP) are to reach 54 or higher for gap-closing growth; they reported current median values such as MGP in the low 50s for some measures and cited schools that met district growth and performance goals as well as a set of “watch-list” schools requiring additional support.

District presenters identified several areas of concern. Staff said elementary reading performance (STAR ELA) was reported at about 44.7% meeting or exceeding grade-level expectations and math at roughly 32.6% (district staff figure), and that some schools—Adams, Galileo and Mitchell—remain on the watch list. Staff reported Adams’ ELA MGP at about 33 and noted Mitchell showed gains in ELA percent passing (up about 13 percentage points) but lagged in math. Presenters also highlighted student subpopulations with low passing rates, including special education students and some free- and reduced‑price-lunch (FRL) cohorts; staff said the FRL gap is roughly 7–11 percentage points below district averages in different measures.

Board members asked whether cohort effects, staffing changes, or ESSER-fund transitions contributed to the flat year-to-year results. District leaders said within-year growth is strong where schools implemented district instructional strategies with fidelity, but systemic (year-to-year) progress requires deeper and longer investments. Staff said the district intentionally took central budget actions last year to avoid cutting school positions and that shifts in ESSER funding had a smaller effect locally than in some neighboring districts, though they acknowledged staffing and resource pressures can affect classroom supports.

To accelerate improvement, district staff described an expanded professional-development (PD) strategy and a strengthened coaching system. The district said it has nearly doubled course-completion events this year and completed eight dedicated PD days so far, with additional full and half PD days planned. The PD approach includes content-focused training (ELA, math, text-first planning), small-group, differentiated sessions for teachers needing targeted supports, and follow-up coaching in classrooms to ensure PD translates into changed instructional practice. Staff said instructional coaching networks (area instructional coaches, school-based TLCs and embedded high‑school coaches) are intentionally “coaching the coaches” to improve on-site support and fidelity of implementation.

District presenters also briefed the board on Panorama student-survey results measuring self-efficacy, learning strategies and student engagement. Staff said participation rates remain high and that question revisions by Panorama affected direct comparability in some measures; nevertheless, they noted bright spots in student belonging and engagement at specific schools (Fremont, Sabin) and reported that programs such as a revised cell-phone policy were associated with improved belonging and classroom interactions in some secondary sites.

Board members asked for more disaggregated data, including side-by-side comparisons of ethnicity and FRL to better understand overlap between socioeconomic status and racial/ethnic outcome gaps. Staff said they will provide that analysis and additional cohort modeling to show how students move between performance bands. Board members also pressed for examples showing PD and curriculum uptake (for example, Eureka Math usage) correlating with assessment gains; district staff said they track module assessment data, STAR measures and classroom walkthroughs and have observed correlations between curriculum implementation with fidelity and stronger assessment results.

District officials emphasized that choices about accelerating progress—such as mandatory summer programming for students not meeting grade-level expectations—are policy decisions for the board to consider; staff said they will return with concrete timelines, data slices, and recommendations to help the board weigh options.

No formal vote on policy changes occurred during the meeting. Staff said they will include the requested cohort and disaggregated analyses in future board materials and will continue to report on PD implementation, coaching outcomes and Panorama results.