Northbrook SD 28 presents strong assessment baseline; board asks for growth-focused reporting
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
District leaders presented state assessment benchmark changes, MAP and IAR results and school-level strategies showing high proficiency in ELA and math. Board members pressed for more growth-oriented data and clearer cohort tracking; presenters said this year is a baseline because of recent changes to benchmarks and MAP norms.
District leaders and principals presented an annual student achievement update during the Dec. 2 board meeting that reviewed state benchmark changes, proficiency outcomes and growth-monitoring plans.
Presenters said the Illinois State Board of Education updated proficiency cut scores this past summer; district staff cautioned that benchmark adjustments alter year-over-year comparisons of statewide proficiency rates but do not change the standards or what students are learning. The presentation described strong ELA results (district-level proficiency examples were cited), substantial proportions of students scoring in the top MAP quintiles (district fall MAP showed roughly 69–79% of students in the top two quintiles for reading and similar patterns in math), and junior-high science proficiency results described as high at Meadowbrook (around 80–85% proficient in spring targets cited for different grades). The district characterized MAP as a benchmark (administered three times per year) and IAR as a summative state assessment; staff also explained student-growth percentiles (SGPs) and why a district-level SGP often sits in the middle fifties.
Principals from Greenbrier, Meadowbrook and Westmore described targeted school interventions: new structured literacy (HMH Into Reading), Project Lead The Way at elementary grades, MTSS-driven interventions, expanded co-teaching models at the junior high, and school-based SEL programs including Wayfinder and CHAMPS. Meadowbrook reported 27 students had missed 10% of the first trimester and outlined family outreach and targeted in-school interventions to address chronic absenteeism. Principals described new clubs and programming to build belonging and to provide engagement incentives.
Board members asked several questions about measurement and emphasis, expressing interest in seeing more growth-focused reporting rather than only achievement snapshots. Presenters acknowledged the concern and said ISBE benchmark changes and new MAP norms make this a baseline year; nonetheless they described multiple district- and building-level growth-monitoring practices (MAP fall-to-winter comparisons, pre/post unit assessments, formative exit slips, teacher observation, and MTSS progress monitoring) that inform instruction and interventions. On science, presenters said the state assessment is a minimal federal requirement and not always well aligned to curriculum; the district prefers unit assessments for science accountability.
The board thanked principals for the presentations and asked staff to return with cohort-tracking and growth-oriented data that can help the board evaluate program effectiveness and support needs for disaggregated student groups.