Fox C‑6 officials present MAP/NWEA results; board debates PLC time, intervention support and schedule changes

Assistant Superintendant Dustin Bain and Assistant Superintendant Tammy Cardona presented the district’s spring MAP (Missouri Assessment Program) and NWEA benchmark results to the Fox C‑6 Board of Education on Jan. 14, 2025, showing districtwide gains but also grade-level dips and unequal secondary outcomes.

The presentation, given during the board’s student achievement agenda item, summarized district performance by grade and subject and reviewed cohort trends that track the same students from year to year. Bain said the district is, on average, performing 12 percent higher than the statewide average across tested subjects and that cohort data show steady growth since the district resumed testing following COVID-era pauses. Bain also noted that MAP and NWEA serve different roles: “with NWEA we give a benchmark three times throughout the year, fall, winter, and spring,” allowing teachers to adjust instruction before the single annual MAP administration.

Why this matters: the data informed an extended board discussion about whether the district has the training, time and in‑building supports needed to turn assessment reports into day‑to‑day instructional change. Board members pressed district leaders about how PLCs (professional learning communities), intervention staffing and schedule structure (block vs. seven‑period models) will affect teachers’ capacity to use assessment reports effectively.

Key findings presented - Districtwide: Bain reported the district averages roughly 12 percentage points above the Missouri statewide average across tested subjects when aggregated. - Elementary (selected figures presented by Bain): third‑grade ELA proficient/advanced 47.5%; third‑grade math 54.7%. Fourth‑grade ELA proficient/advanced 58.3%; fourth‑grade math 59.5%. Fifth‑grade ELA proficient/advanced 55.1%; fifth‑grade math 51.8%. - Cohort gains and below‑basic reductions: Bain highlighted a cohort in which students scoring “below basic” dropped from 24% in third grade to 7.5% in fourth grade and 8.1% in fifth grade — a change district leaders attributed in part to interventionists and targeted reading supports. - Secondary: Cardona showed middle school cohorts generally rebound after an initial dip in sixth grade; eighth‑grade ELA cohorts showed up to a 14 percentage‑point increase over middle‑school years for some cohorts. Cardona noted eighth‑grade MAP math results understate performance because many advanced students take Algebra I EOC instead of the grade‑level MAP test; when algebra students’ scores are added back into the eighth‑grade pool the district’s math picture improves.

Discussion highlights and district responses - Intervention need at secondary: Cardona and Bain told the board the district provides one interventionist per elementary building but far fewer shared interventionists at the secondary level and said that limits the district’s capacity to provide targeted RTI (response to intervention) work outside the elementary buildings. Cardona said additional secondary supports would help students who miss priority standards on unit assessments. - PLCs and training: Board members asked for clarity on how PLCs are currently scheduled and how late‑start proposals would change use of PLC time. Cardona described current PLC norms: elementary PLCs typically meet once a week; secondary PLCs average about 60 minutes per week, leveraging block schedules where possible. The district said it is training principals and using regional specialists to build a more consistent PLC practice and that EduCLIMBER and other platforms will eventually surface NWEA, IXL and MAP data on shared “data walls.” - Assessment interpretation and item rigor: Several board members and administrators questioned whether unit and final assessments are asking sufficiently high‑level (DOK 3–4) questions rather than recall items; Tracy Haggerty and Robin Green described ongoing audits of assessments against DESE item specifications and work to align proficiency scales and priority standards. - NWEA rollout at secondary: Cardona said this is the first year NWEA is in use at the high school for ELA and math (to ninth and tenth grades) and described adjustments to reports (for example, isolating algebra strands) so teachers can pull actionable lists of students and standards. - AMI hours and legislative monitoring: Superintendent Paul Frigo clarified district AMI (alternative methods of instruction) accounting. “It’s 36 hours of AMI,” Frigo said. “We’ve used 16.5 hours, which leaves us 19.5 hours.” He also said bills had been introduced in Jefferson County and at the state to clarify forgiveness rules for instructional days and teacher‑salary incentives tied to days in the calendar; he said district leaders are monitoring and coordinating with regional superintendents.

Direct quote (public comment referenced in the presentation context): “This is the first year for NWEA at the high school. We are using it for ELA and math. We are in the middle of…we did fall. And now we’re doing winter testing,” Cardona said during the presentation when describing implementation.

Board follow‑up and next steps - The board and administration agreed to pursue: (1) additional secondary intervention capacity where feasible; (2) focused professional development for PLC facilitation and for pulling actionable student‑level reports; (3) an audit of high‑school assessment items and continued work to align assessments to priority standards; and (4) a continuation of the block‑schedule committee’s work so any schedule change anticipates possible future late‑start implementation. - The administration also agreed to provide comparative data against the district’s peer set and to survey teachers about implementation, uses and concerns related to NWEA and PLC time.

Ending: District leaders said the presentation and subsequent questions will guide summer and fall professional development, curricular audits and budgeting for interventionists; the board asked administration to return with implementation details and teacher survey results before approving any schedule changes.