Superintendent tells senators large high schools rely on advisory, house systems and surveys to 'know' students

Superintendent Adam Bunting told members of the state education committee that large high schools can still "know" students by building systems to surface relationships and needs, not by relying on a single adult to remember every detail.

Bunting, speaking to Senators Seth Longart and Acacia Ram Hinsdale during a school visit, said he had two goals for the presentation: answer a senator's question about "what is education like in a high school where the principal can't know every student's name?" and to describe a core guiding principle the district uses — identity, connection, proficiency and direction. He illustrated the approach with a story about a former student, Kevin, whom staff helped transition to adult community engagement and small-business activity after high-school programs such as Unified Basketball and theater supports.

The district, Bunting said, triangulates student data rather than relying on a single metric. He described a confidential (but not anonymous) perception survey that asks students to name a "trusted adult," classroom assessment data, and other indicators such as attendance to build individual profiles. Bunting described heat maps produced from the surveys that highlight small absolute numbers of students who report isolation or lack of a trusted adult; he said staff treat those small counts as urgent human cases rather than acceptable percentages. "If you look at 8 as the number of human beings, no. We gotta know who those kids are," he said.

Bunting shared several district data points from the visit: the school enrolls roughly 3,600 students; the district reported 906 families currently experiencing economic disadvantage (up from 740 the prior year); and he cited a spring assessment in which about 87% of third-graders tested at or above grade‑level on the district's iReady screen. He cautioned that statewide headlines based on NAEP or other aggregated measures can mask district‑level variation and that NAEP cannot be disaggregated to districts.

Staff and principals described operational systems that create smaller, relationship-based units inside a large school. The school is organized into four "houses," each with advisory groups of about 10–14 students per adult. A ninth-grade program provides tighter cohorts with six educators who "wrap" around 75–90 ninth graders to build community and track student progress. The school also runs a 10‑day RISE program at the end of the year for deeper, interest‑based learning and community service.

On special education, presenters acknowledged a noted proficiency gap for students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and explained that qualification for services requires evidence of academic struggle; staff said the district is working with NPSS systems (an internal support framework) to address those disparities.

The superintendent framed the district's work as system-building rather than celebrating anecdotal success. He cited advice from the board chair to avoid "telling stories of the unicorn" and instead design repeatable structures so more students benefit. The visit included several student announcements and club notices read to visitors and concluded with leaders checking timing and planning the tour's next steps.

The school and district names are used as presented during the visit; the audio transcript uses multiple abbreviations for the site. The statistics above are drawn from the presentation and were not independently verified by the committee during the visit. The delegation did not take formal action during the session.