Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Data topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District unveils in‑house data dashboard after years of vendor setbacks; CAASPP scores rise in ELA, math and science
Summary
Superintendent Nicholas and the district data team demonstrated a new in‑house data matrix and EL dashboard that allow principals and teachers to drill into standards- and subgroup-level performance. CAASPP results showed districtwide increases: ELA +1.37%, math +2.25% and science +5.15% (district-level figures presented).
Superintendent Nicholas presented a three‑part demonstration of a new district-built data matrix and dashboard on Aug. 6, saying the tool lets principals and teachers access actionable, near‑real‑time assessment information to guide instruction.
“Test scores went up,” Nicholas said, noting the district’s CAASPP results and stressing that the dashboard is intended to support the district’s three goals: build learning communities through impact teams, provide strong first‑time instruction, and concentrate supports on the district’s most challenged students. He described the district’s approach as focusing on the “red, orange and yellow” bands of students rather than only shifting students just below the state standard.
Director of IT Sean Johanan walked trustees through demonstration reports built in Google Looker Studio and Microsoft Power BI, saying repeated vendor failures — including a platform called Elevate that the district had been using — led the team to develop the tool internally. “We had to learn that this is something we’re just gonna have to do on our own,” Johanan said. He showed how the dashboard blends assessment results with demographic data and can surface standard‑level gaps for classroom instruction.
Assistant Superintendent Sharp described how the dashboards present CAASPP and ELPAC-derived measures for English learners and reclassified students. Sharp highlighted subgroup numbers and cohort trends, reporting districtwide figures included in the presentation: ELA 75.71% proficient/advanced (district), ELA +1.37% year over year, math +2.25% and science +5.15%. She emphasized the effect of student mobility: students in the district 1–2 years scored below the district average (example: ELA for new students 64.80%), while students in their 3rd and 4th years in the district rose to higher proficiency levels.
Trustees pressed on privacy and public publishing. Johanan and Nicholas said student‑level data will not be public; initial use will prioritize principals and teachers and later yield public‑facing infographics. Trustee Samik Modi asked whether the district worked with systems integrators; Johanan described prior work uploading data to vendors’ S3 buckets and eventual platform failures. Trustee David Pambo warned the board to be cautious how the district presents its internal data to the public to avoid perceptions of “tweaking” data; trustees and staff pointed to the state’s CAASPP as the authoritative public measure.
