District staff presented a multi-meeting plan to use data more deliberately to support the “whole child,” emphasizing equity and timely interventions.

The presentation, delivered under agenda item 5.01, framed the work through a Multi‑Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) and the district’s “portrait of a graduate.” Speaker 4 said the series is part of a three-meeting sequence and will crosswalk local work with New York State materials on MTSS and RTI. A presenter summarized the goal: “We want all students to get those supports they need when they need them.”

Administrators described a layered assessment strategy. They listed state assessments and Regents exams as end-of-year measures for trend and gap analysis, and said the district will combine those with common unit assessments, benchmark screeners, diagnostic tools and ongoing informal teacher observations. Presenters emphasized performance tasks (cornerstone assessments) to measure transfer and deeper learning and said teachers will grade performance tasks with rubrics so teams can identify where to intervene or extend learning.

Presenters noted the work is in early pilot stages: school psychologists and student services staff are piloting some diagnostic tools and the district plans to refine common assessment definitions and scoring across grade levels. Kelly Squire was cited as overseeing student services work connected to pilot efforts.

Board members asked several practical questions: how the district will respond when RTI/MTSS interventions fail for a student, whether students can be moved between programs or courses, and how staffing and budget priorities (for example, hiring certified reading instructors versus relying on paraprofessionals) will affect implementation. Administrators responded that staffing needs will be factored into the upcoming budget process and that January meetings will include student case studies to show how the system works in practice.

The district will present additional case studies at the board’s January meeting and continue the discussion in subsequent sessions to refine assessment tools, common definitions of proficiency, and staff training.

The board did not take formal action on the presentation; it referred next steps to administration and scheduled deeper implementation discussion for January.