Fox C‑6 board approves 2024–25 district assessment plan, keeps “right test, right kid” approach

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Fox C‑6 Board of Education approved the district assessment plan for the 2024–25 school year at its Feb. 4 meeting after a presentation by the district’s director of data and accountability.

The Fox C‑6 Board of Education approved the district assessment plan for the 2024–25 school year at its Feb. 4 meeting after a presentation by the district’s director of data and accountability.

The plan outlines platform changes and testing schedules the district says are required by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) and intended to better align tests with students’ postsecondary pathways. The district will use i‑Ready diagnostics and dyslexia screeners for Reading Success Plans (RSPs); NWEA MAP benchmarking three times per year; WIDA for English learners; IXL diagnostic snapshots and monitoring in middle school; and continued use of EoC and MAP-A where applicable.

Director of Data and Accountability (Ms. Bielak) told the board the district adopted i‑Ready this year to satisfy DESE requirements for RSPs and to consolidate progress monitoring tools: "We do have a new platform for our reading success plan assessments this year. So it was the first year that we rolled out I Ready diagnostic and dyslexia screeners," she said. She described efforts to provide professional development so teachers and students understand new testing interfaces, and to reduce instructional time lost to unnecessary or duplicative testing.

The plan also notes a statewide change to end‑of‑course testing: students who take Geometry earlier in middle school will have an associated Geometry EoC as required in the new statewide sequence. Bielak explained that the state change is why the district now reports geometry scores in grades where it previously did not.

A notable district policy change remains the ICAP junior‑year choice program, referenced in the plan as "Right Test, Right Kid." Under that approach, juniors choose one assessment that best matches their post‑high‑school plans: the ACT (for students pursuing 2‑ or 4‑year colleges), ACT WorkKeys (for career/technical pathways and many local employers), ACCUPLACER (community college placement), or ASVAB (military pathway). In presenting participation data, Bielak said the district’s overall ACT composite rose to about 20.1 while participation patterns shifted as more juniors took WorkKeys and ACCUPLACER instead of a universal ACT administration.

Bielak cited specific participation and performance figures from recent years: 126 students obtained a passing score on ACT WorkKeys last year and 73 students earned passing scores on ACCUPLACER. She told the board the district has seen the number of students entering trades and technical programs rise to more than 5 percent of graduates.

Board members asked questions during the presentation. One board member asked why ACT participation fell; Bielak replied that the district intentionally reduced universal ACT testing and instead expanded alternatives that better prepare students for their individual postsecondary goals: "So we were doing what was best for the kids instead of just throwing them all in one box and not helping them be successful," she said. Superintendent Paul Frigo and other board members praised staff work on the plan and the "Right Test, Right Kid" approach.

The assessment committee schedule also changed: the committee now meets once per semester rather than four times per year, which the director said allowed the group to wait for DESE updates before finalizing recommendations. The district’s next assessment committee meeting was announced for March 6.

The board approved the plan by motion (moved by Travis Littner; second not specified). The motion passed on a voice vote with no recorded opposition.

The plan itself includes implementation details on required screeners, benchmark windows, EoC administration changes and professional development expectations; the board packet included a testing calendar the director said is updated whenever DESE alters testing windows or requirements.