Colton SD 53 reviews winter assessments and flags attendance, conduct as priorities

Colton School District 53 Board of Directors · February 24, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Board members reviewed winter data across Colton School District 53 and heard presenters report improved reading growth in some grades, persistent attendance gaps and a small group of students driving most referrals; staff will return with follow-up analysis, vendor bids and intervention plans.

Colton School District 53 board members heard winter assessment and attendance reports from school leaders on Thursday, with principals and presenters laying out gains in reading and course performance alongside continuing concerns about attendance and student conduct.

The high school presenter told the board the school has about "62 of the kids that are attending regularly," with most students in a ‘green’ attendance band (90%+), a sizeable yellow band (80–90%), and a smaller red group of chronically absent students. The presenter said the school assigned Friday‑school and enforced sports‑attendance rules to address chronic absences; some families, she added, chose online instruction after enforcement began. "We started assigning Friday school... Some students responded really well to that. Other families just decided, actually, we're just gonna go online," the presenter said.

The presenter reported progress in course performance: the share of students with all C's or better rose from roughly 53% at quarter one to about 60% at the end of semester one. To support students, the school expanded before‑school tutoring, created TA assignments that provide a 'double dose' of math instruction, added targeted eighth‑period interventions for freshmen and ran a semester‑end focused study hall.

Student conduct was a separate concern. The presenter said the district recorded 302 referrals year‑to‑date. That caseload breaks down to about 35% for cell‑phone use, roughly 25% for minor disruption or noncompliance, about 10% for minor inappropriate language and five referrals connected to AI use. She said 12 students were responsible for more than half the referrals and five students had behavior classified from the outset as major incidents.

At the middle school, the CMS principal described a small winter dip in the 'green' attendance tier (from 77% to 72% in the principal's report) and reiterated tiered approaches that pair early intervention with restorative practices. The principal said check‑in/check‑out systems and MTSS‑aligned small groups are in use for students in the yellow tier and that counseling referrals and community supports are being considered when mental‑health concerns appear.

Elementary leaders reported notable reading gains on DIBELS in several grades and highlighted progress on MAP/reading measures; the elementary presenter said some grade bands are approaching expected benchmarks while comprehension remains a consistent need in upper elementary grades. On early literacy, school staff raised a data‑gap concern: MAP assessments do not include kindergarten, so the district relies on teacher assessments and DIBELS for K data. "98% of our students in kindergarten are right where we're supposed to be," the elementary presenter said when summarizing current K indicators, while also cautioning that the range (11 to 26 letters/sounds) remains broad for some children.

Board members pressed for follow‑up: they asked staff to return with longitudinal, grade‑level breakdowns and to clarify which cohorts are being tracked. The high‑school presenter confirmed cohort tracking methodology and offered to present a more detailed plan at a future meeting or via email.

No formal policy votes were taken during the data presentations; board members directed staff to gather additional disaggregated data, bring a plan for targeted interventions, and present the results at the next scheduled meeting.

What happens next: staff will refine cohort and grade‑level reports, provide a written follow‑up on the interventions and attendance analyses, and return with recommendations at the next board session.