Bettendorf staff outline sweeping changes to Iowa School Performance Profile and how local schools were affected

Jamie Olsen, the district’s executive director of curriculum, instruction and assessment, told the Bettendorf Community School District board on Feb. 29 that the Iowa Department of Education substantially revised the Iowa School Performance Profile (ISPP) scoring rules and that the changes affected local school ratings.

Olsen described several new components and scoring rules that were applied this year, including a larger role for growth metrics, the addition of science proficiency at elementary and middle grades, a postsecondary-readiness measure for high schools and a new chronic-absenteeism metric. She said participation rate no longer carries a direct numeric score but can “drop a rating category” when participation for all students or a student subgroup falls below 95 percent. Olsen also explained that English-language-growth is now measured using ELPA21, and that students in their first U.S. year are excluded from EL growth accountability because they lack a baseline.

The changes produced shifts in building-level ratings when participation and targeted-group rules were applied. Olsen told the board that Bettendorf High School moved from “commendable” to “acceptable” on the point scale, and Bettendorf Middle School moved from “acceptable” to “needs improvement.” She said Hoover Elementary’s rating dropped after two student groups’ participation fell below 95 percent: “They had 18 out of 20 students test in one group,” she said, producing a 90 percent rate for that subgroup; special-education participation was 28 of 30 (93.33 percent) for another subgroup. Olsen said the targeted groups that lowered some buildings’ ratings included students with IEPs, Black/African American students and students qualifying for free or reduced-price lunch.

Olsen walked the board through how growth is calculated using student growth percentiles (a student percentile compares a student’s year‑to‑year growth with peers) and said the state’s norming means the statewide growth metric centers at the 50th percentile. She also warned that the new postsecondary-readiness measure (college credit, AP scores, industry credentials and work‑based learning) will take multiple years to align with local data, and the district will likely not have accurate, comparable postsecondary-readiness measures until the spring of 2026 because the state pulls data across students’ four‑year spans.

Chronic absenteeism is now scored as well, Olsen said, and the state treats a student who misses 10 percent or more of enrolled days as chronically absent; the state converts chronic-absence into a “credit” metric by using 100 minus the chronic-absence rate and also measures improvement year to year. Olsen noted new attendance coding under state law and said some of the early year-to-year changes may be driven by coding differences; she cautioned that testing‑window logistics and accommodation needs affect make‑up testing and participation rates.

Olsen said the district has been working with building leadership teams on action plans and that Mark Twain Elementary, which is identified as a Title I school, has additional ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) reporting obligations. She said the targeted schools completed a resource-allocation review with Alicia Christiansen from the area education agency and that Mark Twain’s ESSA plan was being finalized for the state’s February 3 submission deadline.

The presentation included operational details that affect accountability: students must be enrolled at least 10 days to be included; the “partial academic year” window for inclusion is 154 calendar days before the first day of testing; and accountability measures for some student groups require a minimum group size (20 students) or the points are redistributed across other measures. Olsen said the district will present a deeper data analysis on Feb. 12.

Board members asked for clarification about how specific student groups and late enrollments are counted; Olsen and other staff acknowledged ongoing state guidance gaps on certain postsecondary and industry‑credential counting rules and said district staff (including a staff member named Haley) and the state are still determining precise reporting conventions. The board did not take formal action on the ISPP presentation; staff said they will continue building‑level analysis and follow-up reporting.

For parents and community members, Olsen recommended reviewing the Iowa School Performance Profile online and said the district will continue to communicate building‑level plans and supports.

Ending: The district scheduled a deeper data session for Feb. 12 to show the underlying ISASP/ISAS scores and local action plans and said buildings will continue work on attendance, participation and targeted supports to address identified gaps.