Maple Heights board hears end-of-year data showing small decline, staff outline eight-part 'roadmap to success'

The Maple Heights City Board of Education (committee of the whole) on June 8 heard an end-of-year academic report showing a modest districtwide decline and a staff-developed plan to shore up instruction and student supports.

Director of enrollment data and assessment John Scalla told the board the district’s overall performance index fell from 628 to about 617 this year, noting the PI’s direct role in achievement and progress star ratings. “This year is the first time we’ve seen a dip in performance going from 628 to 617,” Scalla said, describing the PI calculation and how percent‑proficient and performance-level shifts drove the change.

Why it matters: Scalla emphasized that the drop is driven by increases in the share of students scoring in the limited range and by uneven subject- and grade-level results. He highlighted that students with disabilities make up roughly one in five district students and that proficiency rates for that group remain low, stressing the equity implications for district improvement work.

Dr. Sha Price, director of curriculum and instruction, framed the response around Ohio’s MTSS (multi-tiered system of supports) and argued the district must raise tier‑one instruction for all students rather than rely solely on interventions. “From my lens, it’s a tier one for all,” Dr. Price said, adding that the district will hire a new special‑programs staff person to coordinate supports and that instructional coaches and professional development will be central to the work.

Levers and near-term steps: Presenters said recent curriculum changes explain some short‑term declines—math is in year one of a new curriculum and ELA is in year two—and that teachers need time and targeted professional development to implement new programs. Early‑literacy data showed gains in kindergarten through second grade but notable fluctuations in grades three through five; staff cited tutor turnover (two tutors left abruptly in January) that inflated small‑group sizes and likely contributed to dips.

Attendance and behavior: Attendance remains an urgent focus: the districtwide attendance rate fell to about 88% and chronic absenteeism is roughly 44.5%, presenters said. Staff proposed more personal outreach (live phone calls instead of robo-calls), building-level campaigns and systemwide non‑negotiables. On behavior, district leaders pointed to high early‑year referral rates and a small subset of students accounting for a large share of office referrals; they reiterated their emphasis on restorative practices and alternatives to suspension.

The roadmap: District leadership presented an eight‑part "roadmap to success" developed with building leadership teams that centers on a clear local definition of tier one instruction, a coaching culture, aligned professional development, and implementation supports for teachers. Price said the roadmap came from staff and will be refined at a cabinet retreat; she asked the board for time to implement and measure the changes.

Board response and next steps: Board members pressed staff about concrete interventions for students with disabilities, how the district will set or revise one‑plan goals before the June 30 state deadline and what implementation support (coaching, PD, staffing) will be provided. Staff said they will return with updated goals after the administrative retreat and begin phased implementation of the roadmap, with continued reporting to the board. No formal vote was taken on the roadmap at the June 8 meeting.

What’s next: Staff will finalize revised goals (if any) by the state deadline and bring implementation milestones and progress reports back to the board; the district also plans to report final state-verified numbers once available.