Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Midyear NWEA MAP results show steady growth; board hears calls to review K–4 report cards and incentives
Summary
Mr. Barrios presented winter NWEA MAP results showing district growth roughly at the 50th percentile in math and around the 60th in reading and science; a board member asked for a formal agenda item to review grading policy IKA and discussion followed on student incentives and report cards.
Mr. Barrios (identified in the meeting transcript as the presenter) gave a detailed midyear briefing on the district's use of the NWEA MAP assessment, which the district administers three times annually in math, reading and science.
Barrios described the MAP test as adaptive, untimed and aligned to South Dakota standards, and showed district‑level growth from the fall to the winter testing windows. He reported the district sits roughly in the 50th percentile for math growth and around the 60th percentile for reading and science growth, and walked trustees through family and classroom reports that teachers use to target instruction. "So this assessment definitely does more for us than... the state assessment," Barrios said, noting MAP provides midyear checkpoints that let teachers intervene earlier.
Board members asked about summer regression and how the district uses MAP data in RTI and data retreats. Barrios said the district reviews MAP after each testing window, holds a fall districtwide data retreat to align instruction, and uses reports at the classroom and building level to guide interventions. He described incentives some buildings have used (rewards when a building meets growth goals) and said family reports include projected state assessment levels.
An unnamed board member (Speaker 3) raised concerns about the district's K–4 standards‑based report card and argued it provides little incentive for top achievement. "I am asking for a formal agenda item to review and discuss grading policy IKA," the board member said; the request was entered into the minutes and the chair agreed to forward it to staff for scheduling. Another board member noted outreach to teachers had found mostly positive feedback about the 1–3 proficiency scoring from the staff contacted.
Trustees did not take any vote on grading policy at this meeting; the board requested that the topic be scheduled for formal review at a future meeting.
