The West Allis-West Milwaukee School District on Nov. 17 reviewed its newly released state report card and the district's academic progress, with administrators presenting gains and explaining adjustments to district goals.

Miss Brosh, leading the teaching-and-learning presentation, said the district's overall report-card score is 70.3, placing it in the "meets expectations" category under the state's updated rubric. She told the board the district has improved by 10.4 points over two years and that growth measures indicate the district outperformed roughly 82.9% of Wisconsin districts on the state's growth metric.

"Achievement is not yet where we want it to be, but we are seeing very promising growth," Brosh said, noting that eight schools increased their rating to "exceeds expectations" and that no schools in the district "fail to meet" state standards. She added the district will treat the current year as a baseline and align board goals and KPIs accordingly.

The presentation explained recent changes in state scoring and weighting. Brosh said priority-area weights on the report card are tied to data availability and the district’s student composition; she listed growth at 45% of the priority-area weight, target-group outcomes at 25%, on-track indicators at 25%, and achievement at 5%.

Administrators highlighted subgroup improvements, including gains among students with disabilities, economically disadvantaged students and English learners, each rising by 1–3 percentage points. "We met our district growth goal on our theory of action for literacy, and we met our district growth goal for math for 12 of our 15 subgroups," Brosh said.

The presentation also addressed data reporting issues. Brosh said the district discovered discrepancies in how the Department of Public Instruction received dual-enrollment, industry-recognized credentials and work-based-learning data because of a coding issue in the district's Skyward system. She said the district has contacted DPI and expects corrected December-snapshot reporting to reflect higher dual-enrollment and work-based-learning participation; she provided the district's local counts as the most current figures available.

Board members asked about the mechanics of goal-setting and whether early indicators (FastBridge, AIMSweb) predict future report-card performance. Brosh and the district's data staff said the district uses FastBridge and other interim assessments to monitor growth and to target supports via personal support plans and progress monitoring.

Board member Becker urged the district to study high-growth schools to identify replicable practices. Brosh responded that principals already participate in instructional rounds and collaborative walks to spread effective classroom strategies and that the district plans to continue facilitating cross-school visits and coaching.

The board did not take formal action on the report-card presentation; Brosh said next steps include aligning KPIs to the new baseline and sharing updated outreach and communications plans with the community.

The workshop concluded with board praise for instructional teams and a reminder that the report card is one of several measures the district will use to guide improvement.