Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assessments Attendance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lewisburg officials say state cut scores delayed; local assessments and attendance incentives show gains
Summary
District staff said statewide cut scores for the new test remain under review; local FastBridge and building‑level assessments show pockets of improvement and chronic absenteeism has improved to a 9.5% rate, with targeted MTSS and interventionist staffing cited as responses.
Get email alerts on the Assessments Attendance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the budget workshop, district staff reviewed the needs assessment and said state assessment cut scores for the new tests are still being set by the State Board and Kansas Department of Education; until that vetting is complete districts will not receive final state‑reported results.
Director (speaker 3) explained the four state score levels and said roughly 13–14% of students were scoring at level 1 (below basic) on the tests the district examined. Director and Presenter both emphasized that local FastBridge results and building walkthroughs provide actionable, interim data until the state issues vetted cut scores. Presenter said principals will add slides breaking down local assessment performance by grade for the board packet.
Presenters pointed to several highlights: Broadmoor and the middle school showed improvements in targeted areas, the high school posted its highest English score on record for the cited cohort, and the district plans to add an interventionist to support continued gains. Staff noted that FastBridge and other local assessments are not direct one‑to‑one comparisons with the new state test but are used to guide instruction and MTSS placement.
On attendance, Presenter said chronic absenteeism improved to 9.5%, explaining that this measures students who miss 10% or more of the school year (about 17 days). Staff credited a combination of clearer board policy on allowed absences (reduced to 7 per semester from 10), building‑level incentives and administrative follow‑through for the improvement. Presenter and Director described a process for documenting minutes of intervention use and monitoring at‑risk funding to show auditors how funds support instruction.

