Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cedar Hill ISD presents 2025 TEA results: district rises to 74 but remains a C
Summary
Superintendent Dr. Camille Gamel told trustees the districtaccountability score rose from 71 to 74 for 2025, keeping Cedar Hill ISD at a C; she highlighted growth strategies focused on raising 'meets' and 'masters' in key grades and campus distinctions earned this year.
Dr. Camille Gamel told the Cedar Hill ISD Board of Trustees on Thursday that the districtimproved its official TEA accountability score from 71 in 2024 to 74 in 2025, but the districtstill carries a C rating.
"We went from a 71 to a 74, maintaining a C as before," Dr. Gamel said, and walked trustees through how domain scoring and growth metrics combine to produce the overall accountability number.
Gamel explained that Domain 1 (student achievement, including STAR/STAAR scores and CCMR indicators) can account for as much as 70% of a campusscore. She outlined how the district aggregates "approaches, meets and masters" (combined then divided by three and multiplied by 100) to reach domain-level totals, and how growth points are added when students move from one performance band to the next.
The superintendent highlighted several areas of focus: third-grade reading and the transitions around sixth and ninth grades, middle-school math masters-level performance, and eighth-grade social studies. She also reviewed campus-level outcomes, noting that five campuses and the district held steady in letter grade, four campuses improved, two declined, and the district earned 12 campus distinctions across specified subjects.
Trustees asked for and received campus-by-campus breakdowns and for staff to share a calendar of key TEA appeal and reporting dates so board members can track deadlines and follow-ups. Dr. Gamel said staff had reviewed writing samples in any contested cases and judged appeals unlikely to change the districtoutcome.
The board did not take a vote on the presentation; staff said follow-up materials and a calendar of guardrails will be provided at upcoming meetings.
