Pewaukee School District stays among top districts statewide, report cards show growth gaps to address

Candace, the district’s assessment presenter, told the board Tuesday that Pewaukee School District and Asa Clark Middle School were rated in the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction category "significantly exceeds expectations," while Horizon and Pewaukee High School were categorized as "exceeds expectations." She said the district sits in the top 7% of K–12 districts statewide, a small drop from the top 4% in the prior report card year.

"We work in the top 7% across the state for K–12 school districts," Candace said, describing how the overall ratings combine measures of student achievement, growth, performance of target groups and high‑school metrics such as ACT and graduation rate.

Candace explained growth is measured with a value‑added model that compares each student’s progress to demographically similar peers across Wisconsin. Under that model, a score of 3 is "average" growth; the district seeks scores above 3 where possible. She said the district has very strong achievement but acknowledged growth for some groups lags behind achievement.

Board discussion focused on where to target next efforts. A recently identified cohort — now in fifth grade after being fourth grade on the prior assessment — was noted as a group the district is monitoring for continued lower growth. Candace and other staff described the district’s MTSS (multi‑tiered system of supports) process, which uses multiple data sources across the year and assigns students meeting benchmarks for Tier 2 (20th percentile) and Tier 3 (10th percentile) small‑group instruction.

"I just want to commend everybody on this campus and their professionalism," said Board Member Stacy, reflecting support for staff while urging closer attention to growth metrics.

The presentation also flagged work‑based learning and youth apprenticeship as opportunity areas. Staff reported the district’s DPI‑defined work‑based learning participation on the report card as 0.2% of students compared with an 8% state average; they added many local practicum and program experiences do not meet DPI’s six criteria to qualify as work‑based learning. Youth apprenticeship participation rose from zero three years ago to eight students this year, but staff said growth is constrained by the availability of business partners who can train and pay students.

Attendance and chronic absenteeism drew sustained questions. Staff explained DPI’s attendance and absenteeism data typically lags one year because the agency collects that data in December, so the 2024‑25 absenteeism information will appear on next year’s report card. Board members asked for deeper breakdowns in spring reporting and discussion of drivers such as family travel, athletics and reduced county truancy supports.

Board members asked for follow‑up details on cohort monitoring and proposed focusing part of the district’s next strategic‑plan cycle more directly on growth measures. Candace said curriculum renewal schedules were adjusted this year (ELA renewal deferred one year) to align with building rollout and staffing considerations.

The board did not take an action item on the report card at the meeting; staff said they will return with additional analyses and spring updates.