Meekerley led Executive Director session to discuss the MCAS data- to identify strengths and gaps, where we have room for improvement. And understanding what the data really tells us. She discussed also where the school mascot of came from. We are looking at the data as an opportunity for us to rise.

High level, we want to acknowledge that achievement remains lower than we would like it. But there continues to be progress in terms of student growth percentile. We did engage in curriculum changes in science and civics and these were the highest areas of achievements for 8th graders. Another area that we were proud of, our oldest students saw the most growth of our students. It was promising and reassuring to see our 10th graders have the highest SGP in the school. What we are doing in the school to address learning loss appears to be working. We are aware also that there are gaps particularly in student sub groups. Students with disabilities had a SGP of 41% and Multi Language Learners had an SGP of 39%. 29.7% of our students had an IEP or 504, we currently have 208 students with IEP or 504. Our MLL are 16-17%, it is around 100 students. These numbers are much higher after covid. 

Our biggest takeaway is that we need to create long term coherent systems to specifically target student growth. And make sure all teams are aligned to address the student needs. We need to make sure that all targets are aligned. We have a lot of initiatives and they are well founded and now we are making that the initiatives are aligned and amplifying their impact. 

Proficiency is behind charter peers, ahead of BPS non-exam schools, but consistently low. Clarified the schools that we use to compare to charter peers. When we look at overall student performance, growth is often an earlier indicator. When we look more deeply at growth we see that students with longest enrollment show strongest gains. We are now in our third year of i-ready and we are using this a tool to measure success. It helps us lead how we determine how students are showing student growth. 

Question posed: does the i-ready data align with the MCAS data? We have found that it is highly aligned and if anything we find that i-ready data is slightly lower which allows us to better prepare for MCAS. We are currently in our second round of i-ready, which will allow us to use this data to implement some new structures. They will sit for a third round of i-ready at the end of the school year. 

Key Takeaways: MLL and SWD need attention and additional targeted supports. Additionally, students struggle with open responses and multi-step tasks. We found that students were leaving open response blank. This gap really aligns with the focus on literacy. We also need to increase our students stamina, in terms of independent work production. 

Question: Does i-ready model the open response lay out? I-ready doesn't have the same layout, so we use additional assessments. When it comes to math we are finding us to supplement our conceptual math curriculum with fluency math. 

Question: How did the team react to the data? Sharon Noraky and Caitie O'Dell introduced themselves as the MS and HS Principals. It gives us opportunity to react--- focusing on literacy, make sure we are fully staffed, we have strong instructional coaches that are focused on closing the gaps, we are also focused on executive functioning such as organizational gaps. Looking at it as an opportunity to address systems that are working and not working. For example, we have adjusted to have Drop Everything and Read to give students opportunity focus on sustained reading. We also are making sure that all pacing of the years aligns with the standards of the test. We have a strong leadership-- we can sit with it and think of ways to grow the data and address the needs. And bringing that mindset to the staff to address the needs of students. 

We were not thrilled with the data, but we used it to make sure the interim assessments and make sure that the content is setting the students for the best possible way. Additionally, staff commitment to literacy has increased. We look at data all the time and it is a part of how we assess ourselves. Staff has weekly data meetings with their coaches, and then they work to have a re-teach plan. This week to week targeted approach is how we are going to close the gaps. We know that there will always be growth opportunities. There are always gaps in education.

School Response is an implementation of two systems. Tier 1 are Multi Tiered Support systems, which will be all the things in place for all learners and making sure they all have access to very good curriculum. Tier 2 is Crescendo, is the approach of targeted intervention for students who need to the extra targeted support. Tier 3 are interventions that are mapped for specific student SWD and MLL, this is a conversation that we will come back to in future meetings. 

We say urgency, and we aligned that we see the data and we address the needs of the data in a systemic. System we were operating within we need repair. Our teachers are working extremely hard to close gaps, but there is much work that needs to be done. 

Tier 2-- we have reinvested staff in data, and now we have the bandwidth to respond to that data. 

Today's ask-- selecting SY26 academic goals, outcomes committee ask-- monitoring SGP trajectory, OER completion & stamina, crescendo fidelity. We ask that finance committee ask how our budgets align with the systems in place to target student needs. 

For timing, we needed to skip and will discuss in governance next steps.