Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fairfield district reports broad assessment gains, flags 11th-grade dip for review
Summary
District staff presented ISASP and formative-assessment results showing widespread year-over-year growth and high attendance; presenters noted strong K–8 improvements and rising middle-school science proficiency but flagged a decline in 11th-grade proficiency for targeted review.
District staff presented a detailed review of 2023–24 assessment and attendance data at the June 16 board meeting, highlighting overall gains while noting a particular decline among juniors that requires further analysis.
The presentation, led by a district presenter, began with attendance figures: high-school attendance averaged about 92.7% and elementary/middle averages were roughly 95%, representing multi-point improvements over recent years. Staff tied higher attendance to district goals of increased academic growth.
On assessments, staff explained the district uses adaptive formative systems (FastBridge/FAST) and ISASP (state summative assessment) data. The presenter reported that the current kindergarten cohort "showed growth" across the district and specifically stated that 100% of the kindergarten students showed growth on the measures the district tracks. Several grade slides used a combined "proficient and/or growth" metric that produced 100% for some grades when measuring students who were either proficient or showed expected growth from fall to spring.
Middle-school results included substantial gains in ELA and science; the eighth-grade cohort's ELA proficiency was reported to have risen from the mid-70s to the high 80s and science proficiency improved about 13 percentage points from earlier grade measurements. At the high-school level, many cohorts showed strong ELA proficiency (freshman cohort ~89% proficient), but board members raised concern about a decline in performance between 10th and 11th grade and asked staff to investigate whether the cause is curriculum sequencing, teacher assignment, student engagement or other factors.
Presenters cautioned that metric differences (annual cut-score changes; adaptive testing mechanics) complicate direct year-to-year proficiency comparisons; staff said some longitudinal growth measures must be compiled manually and are not yet automated in district reports. Board members requested further analysis comparing students' assessment results to course grades and college-readiness metrics once state reports are published.
What comes next: staff will return with deeper analysis of the 10th-to-11th grade decline and pursue clearer, consistent reporting formats across buildings so progress and proficiency are comparable across grade levels.
