Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assessment Methods topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates how to measure student citizenship; mixed methods proposed for R3.6
Summary
Board members questioned whether the R3.6 citizenship indicator (awareness of systems of oppression) is best measured by a curriculum-based snapshot, surveys or a student showcase; administration presented combined grade‑level rubric results from 360 students and plans further indicator review before voting on reasonable progress.
Administrators presented R3.6 of the district results policy, which assesses students’ awareness of historical and current systems of oppression and their ability to identify strategies for addressing injustice. Miss Carrie Huth described spring data for grade‑level assessments: of 360 students assessed, 12% were rated Advanced, 40% (143 students) Proficient/Approaching, 20% Not Yet (133 students) and 15% showed no evidence or were not submitted on time.
Board members pressed on measurement choices. Dr Garcia and others said the current curriculum‑based, rubric snapshot can feel "in the weeds" and not fully reflect qualitative learning in classrooms; some suggested supplementing the rubric with student showcases or state civics exam data. "There is nothing on our state standards or our state tests that will get to this type of question," one administrator said, arguing the district is balancing the need for evidence with the limits of available tools.
The board discussed a mixed‑methods approach — combining quantitative rubric data with curated qualitative evidence such as student showcases or work samples — and asked administration to refine indicators. The R3 package (consolidated results) will be brought back for a vote at the next meeting to determine whether the district has made reasonable progress, made reasonable progress with exceptions noted, or failed to make reasonable progress.
