District staff presented a comprehensive update on assessment and accountability, telling the Norris School District Board that local averages remain above state means in ELA, math and science and that the district will emphasize literacy and data review going forward.

Speaker 10, who led the presentation, said the district uses a mix of federal, state and local assessments — MAP growth windows, AMIRA in kindergarten, ELPA for English learners, NSCAS for 3rd–8th grades and the ACT for juniors — to monitor students. He said this spring the district will participate in a field test of a short constructed‑response writing item for fourth, seventh and eighth graders; the field test will ask students to write a one‑ or two‑sentence response to a prompt and is not expected to be lengthy or heavily weighted this year.

The presentation included an overview of alternative assessment rules for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Speaker 8 reported the district has 13 students currently identified for alternate assessment (life‑skills programming) and noted that alternate assessment participation is an IEP‑team decision and reported the district is at about 1% of assessed grades, consistent with federal guidance for alternate assessment eligibility.

Speaker 10 said the district will continue quarterly data dives at the building level to monitor growth and to guide interventions, and highlighted a literacy grant that funds district‑wide professional development in the science of reading. He also noted Norris was randomly selected for NAEP participation at the eighth‑grade level this year; NAEP draws a small sample per grade and returns results to states on a delayed timeline.

Board members asked how constructed‑response scoring would be handled and whether AI would be used; Speaker 10 said human scorers will be used for the field test and that discussions about automated scoring are ongoing at the state level. The district plans follow‑up work with teachers to prepare for accommodations and scoring needs.

The presentation concluded with next steps: post‑assessment reviews with building administrators, continued focus on literacy K–12 and additional teacher preparation for the spring field test. The board was invited to ask questions or request further detail on specific grade‑level performance measures.