Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Graduation Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District reports large improvement in graduation rate after data corrections; principals and assessment teams outline interventions
Summary
District staff told the board the validated four-year graduation rate rose from 70.6% to 80.1% after exit-code corrections and data verification. Principals presented site-level cohort updates and the assessment office reviewed midyear test results and follow-up interventions.
District staff presented a detailed review showing a marked improvement in reported graduation outcomes after a focused data verification effort.
Presentation and data verification: The district's presenter said staff corrected more than 90 exit-code errors after reviewing source evidence, calls to principals and parent contacts. As a result of data validation the district reported its four-year graduation rate increased from 70.6% (2023-24) to 80.1% for the most recent cohort; the presenter noted the state rate is 80.6% and said the district is now within a half percentage point of the statewide figure. "In 23-24 our graduation rate was 70.6 percent. A year later, we are at 80.1," the presenter stated.
Why the numbers changed: Staff explained graduation rates are calculated on a four-year cohort using a series of 16 snapshots and are driven by exit codes (withdrawals, GED, transfers, etc.). The presenter emphasized that corrections do not create new graduates but ensure exit codes and records accurately reflect students' outcomes for reporting.
Site-level reports and interventions: Secondary principals presented adjustments to cohort sizes and current on-track percentages for their schools. One site reported moving from a cohort of 61 to 59 students; another early-college program reported a high percentage (over 90%) but cautioned that small cohort sizes can create large percentage swings. Principals described interventions including early identification (starting in freshman year), family meetings in senior year, credit recovery offerings, online supports and targeted outreach by student success advisors.
Assessment midyear snapshot: Miss Priego reviewed the district's interim assessment system (Amira for K'2 reading benchmarks, iWASA for grades 3— and STAR for secondary). She presented disaggregated data by grade, gender, ethnicity and tribal affiliation and highlighted a "no score" issue at one high school (about 200 missing scores) that the district is investigating through site test coordinators. Priego said interim data helps target interventions and is not the state-mandated summative test.
Math curriculum adoption: Staff noted this is the district's math adoption year and described a six-year adoption cycle governed by state administrative code. The local review committee of teachers will vet vendor materials; vendor demonstrations are scheduled and teachers will recommend a preferred curriculum before the board considers adoption.
Next steps: Administration will continue to validate data, monitor cohorts across sites, pursue targeted interventions over the next six weeks before graduation and bring curriculum recommendations to the board per the adoption timeline.
