Committee hears benchmark update on underperforming and Elevate schools; final data due in September

District staff told the Committee of the Whole that preliminary benchmark (predictive) results show mixed projections for the schools currently designated as underperforming and for those in the Elevate program.

Dr. Royster opened the presentation and turned it over to Dr. Stevens, who said the quarterly update is required under the Education Accountability Act but is based on benchmark projections rather than final SC Ready and end-of-course (EOC) results. "We will not get back the final validated test data until the beginning of the school year, and sometimes that can be as late as October," Dr. Royster said; staff later projected July 17 as the date when validated results should be available to the district and said the board will receive the full, validated report at its September turnaround update.

Dr. Stevens reviewed elementary, middle and high school projections drawn from the district's third benchmark of the year. He listed four elementary turnaround schools — Alexander, Armstrong, Duncan Chapel and Hollis Academy — and said charts show projected increases in ELA and math for most of the named schools. For middle schools, Berea Middle and Lakeview (an Elevate school) showed projected gains in some areas while Tanglewood Middle's ELA and math projections were slightly lower. At the high-school level, staff projected mixed subject-specific changes: Berea High is projected to decline in algebra I and biology but increase in English II and U.S. history; Carolina High is projected to increase across several subjects; South Side High shows a slight decline in algebra I with increases in biology, English II and U.S. history.

Committee members pressed for clarity on timelines and cutoffs. Miss Middleton asked whether final testing results would arrive in October; staff said spring assessments were administered in May, the district projects July 17 as the date they will have results from the office of data and accountability, and that validated SC Ready and EOC numbers will be provided in the September update. On cutoffs for 'below average' and 'unsatisfactory' designations, staff said the percentages differ by school level and pledged to provide the exact cutoffs used for elementary, middle and high schools.

Members also discussed graduation rates' impact on accountability. Mr. Cochran asked whether improved graduation rates would remove the three high schools from the underperforming list; staff explained that the accountability matrix combines multiple indicators and that graduation rate and college-and-career-readiness categories are among those that can produce the greatest gains. Mr. Foster said high schools need at least 51 total points to reach the 'average' category and predicted the three high schools are "extremely close" to that threshold, adding the district expects the designation issue to be resolved by the 2026–27 school year if current trends hold.

Staff described instructional interventions for low-performing subjects such as U.S. history — curriculum map revisions, targeted teacher resources and pacing adjustments — and said full past EOCs are not publicly released because test items are expensive to publish, although sample items and blueprints are shared for standards analysis.

The committee did not take action on Item 3; staff will present final validated results and a revised accountability analysis at the September turnaround update.