ings by electronic means in accordance with BBSD policy BMEA and state law. Laura, can you please call the role? >> Chavez >> here. >> Medler >> here. >> Nisnik >> here. Quinn Linua
>> here. >> Raj Paul >> here. >> Sergeant >> here. >> Anger. Thank you. If everybody can turn their attention to the screen, we will
observe our land acknowledgement this morning. [Music] The Boulder Valley School District resides and operates on land that is the ancestral homeland and unjustly and illegally taken territory of the Ude,
Pueblin, Arapjo, Cheyenne, Apache, Navajo, and 48 other tribal nations historically tied to this land who have called this land home since time and memorial. [Music]
We acknowledge the atrocities committed here, including the painful history of genocide, forced assimilation, and efforts to alienate the indigenous inhabitants from their homeland, supported by the policies of the United States government. BBSD is aware of the many indigenous
peoples, past and present, and their dignified nations and cultures, who care for this land with strength and resilience. BBSD recognizes the histories of the land in Colorado and the survival of many nations that carried their oral traditions into the present.
It is BBSD's responsibility to educate ourselves, our community, and our students so that we can embrace the wisdom and knowledge of indigenous peoples and actively stand together to address injustices. [Music]
In offering this land acknowledgement, we affirm and honor the history, wisdom, oral traditions, and resilience of indigenous people, and recognize the responsibility to care for and appreciate this land. Together, I'd like to remind everybody that the
mission of the Boulder Valley School District is to create challenging, meaningful, and engaging learning opportunities so that all children thrive and are prepared for successful, civically engaged lives. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us here. We are glad to have you observe and participate in our meetings. At this time, is there a motion to approve this
morning's agenda? Moved by Beth, seconded by Jorge. Laura, can you please call the role on the agenda >> Chavez? >> Yes. >> Medler, >> yes. >> Nisnik, >> yes.
>> Quinn Linua, >> yes. >> Raj Paul, >> yes. Sergeant. >> Yes. >> And I just noticed Anger has arrived. Anger. >> Yes. >> Motion passes. >> Board members, as I'm sure you've seen,
today we are taking a very indepth look at our state assessment results. Um, and we have a new face this morning. So, I'd like to turn over doc for to Dr. Anderson for introductions. >> Good morning, board president Raj Paul board members. It's um great to be here with you this morning. excited to go
through uh an update for our all together for all students strategic plan where we'll be reviewing our recent u performance framework CAMASS PSAT SAT um strategic plan we'll go through the UIP a little bit some KPIs and then have discussion throughout um with us always
is Dr. Dr. Dea Cruz and Chris. Uh, and we also have today our new executive director for accountability evaluation, Jessica Alen. And you all know Claire. So, we've got the team all here. Very excited. There is a lot of slides. Uh,
no no uh rock left uh was it? No rock left unturned. Unturned. Yeah, we got a lot of slides. So, with that, um, I'll turn it over to Dr. Dea Cruz. I'm hearing a very true theme about many
slides and a lot of content today. Good morning, President Rajpal and members of the board. We appreciate this opportunity to spend time with you this morning discussing outcomes, current state, and what's ahead. And as um Dr. Anderson said, I'm joined by my
outstanding colleagues, the newest of which is Dr. Al Zen, who's been with us since July when she dove right in and got to work with the team. and we're just so glad to have her on the team and here today to share and interpret data.
This morning we'll be discussing a lot uh the district performance framework, school performance frameworks, CAMASS, PSAT and SAT outcomes are all together for all student strategic plan and UIP updates as well as reporting out
on key performance indicator dashboards or KPI dashboards. And of course, we've built in opportunities for questions and conversation, and you are all welcome to ask questions throughout, keeping in mind the caveat that we have a lot of content to work through in our in our
time together. As the board knows, we have anchored our district-wide work in this theory of action that if we increase meaningful opportunities and provide equitable access for all students, then we'll accelerate student growth, which will
improve achievement and reduce disparities. In other words, opportunity will lead to growth, which will lead to achievement. And this theory of action is proving to be our north star that's resulting in more students having more success. and we welcome the opportunity to share
more about that with you this morning. We know we have a lot of work to do. We know we have improvements yet to make and we're never satisfied with the status quo as the board surely knows about us at this point. Um but we're also really pleased that we're at a point in BBSD where more students in
more groups are having more opportunities to grow and achieve. Before we dig into the bulk of the data, we just want to share a few highlevel celebrations looking at multi-year trends. So, looking all the way back to 2014, we see that BBSD now has the
highest percent of students meeting and exceeding standards in English language arts and math for the second year in a row. We also have the fi the highest fouryear growth in ELA and math and six out of 10 content and grade level kind of combinations fourth through eighth
grade growth measures. You know that we're deeply committed to focusing on all student groups and so we're really pleased to see growth across student groups in ELA and more students meeting benchmark in Spanish language arts than last year.
Looking toward our multilingual learners who are also showing progress. Looking at the trends since post-pandemic years uh since 21-22, we see that more multilingual learners are meeting benchmark on CAMASS with an increase in math and an increase in
reading that you can see on the right side of the slide here. And continuing with marking progress for multilingual learners, the access assessment which is the assessment of comprehension and communication in English for multilingual learners and is
given in the spring in the January to February uh window. You can see here two consecutive years of access growth for an 11 point um median growth percentile gain over that time. Moving to students with IEPs, more of
our students who receive special education services are meeting benchmark in a multi-year trend since the 21-22 school year with an increase in students meeting the math benchmark that you see here from 17.3 to 21.6 and an increase
in students meeting the reading benchmark from 25.9 to 31.6. As I mentioned, the team will walk us through the data more specifically. And as I mentioned, we're never satisfied with the status quo and we know we have work to do. Um, but we wanted just to begin with this overview of some
promising outcomes for students. Next up, Chris is going to remind us of the strategic plan and UIP timelines. >> Good morning board members. Thanks for having us. We're excited to celebrate with you today. Uh, just an overview of the schedule that we have to be in front
of the board uh throughout this year. So obviously today, September 16th, we're going to dive into that CMS data as well as review some of the 25 26 strategic focus as a result of our progress being made. We're scheduled to to be with you again on December 16th for an update on
our strategic plan uh April as we work through the development of the new UIP and DAC recommendations and then again at the end of the year so that we can give you an update on uh the final reports of our UIP for this year as well as what we're going to be bringing forth into the fall semester for next year.
This is a reminder slide. Uh this was shared with the board last year as a visual of when data is going to be made available to you. Uh so just wanted to bring that back to the boards for your awareness. Um obviously we're there in September. You're going to see a bunch of different marks checked off for where we're going to be able to present CMS
data, access data, grad plus data. Uh certain things such as out of school suspension, restorative interventions. We have that uh that data available at our fingertips. We can bring that to you at any time. Uh and then obviously there's some things that we will have available towards the end of the year as well in terms of overall PD
participation rates and interimm assessment data. So to dive deeper into all of that great data, I'm going to hand it over to Dr. El. >> Thank you. Um it's a pleasure to be with you all and uh let's just dive in. We
have a lot to do. Um, so my role today is to talk about our district performance framework results and then go into the details of our achievement and growth um, by level. So we'll jump right in. So first off, we have our biggest celebration with BBSD being
accredited with distinction for the second year of a row. Um, not only did we not only did we maintain that, but we increased our score on the district performance framework by 1%. Additionally, we are the only Denver Metro School District accredited with
distinction. Um, what you can see here is not only that increase uh from 24 to 25, but also the red bar helps you make a comparison between ourselves and our neighboring Denver metro school districts. um just really showing a lot of what we're celebrating here in the district
this year. >> Just one other point, uh Dr. Alzine, that that this past year we earned more points, the highest percentage of points on the district performance framework than any district has ever earned in the front range.
That's the that is the quality of the work that happened in our schools. side. I just want to Yes, we did better than last year, but no one has done as well as we did this past year uh in the history of this. So, we're really really excited about that. >> So, what led to that? Uh we have
increases in achievement at elementary, middle, and high school as well as increases in growth for elementary and middle school. So, next we're going to jump into a lot of slides that look very similarly. So before I really go into the details of that, we're going to start off with just some general
orientation. So you're going to see a series of slides that look similar to this one. So as a general idea of what you'll see along the x-axis on the bottom will be a variety of different student groups. We'll see two sets. We'll see all students, our students eligible for free
and reduced price lunch, gifted and talented, multilingual learners, and then students with IEPs. On a different set of slides, you'll see the different racial and ethnic groups along the x-axxis on the bottom. The y- axis on the left side will either be for achievement percent meets exceeds grade
level standards or growth scores. And then the colored bars u will consistently be our scores over time with the year key on the right hand side and that kind of fuchsia colored bar being always the most recent year of data.
So, if we're looking at the details here, what we see is that our elementary English language arts achievement is a steady increase over time overall for all of our students, as well as relatively consistent achievement across these different groups with some um promising improvement patterns for our
students with IEPs. Moving on to growth. Again, just a little bit of orientation. Now, you see growth on the y-axis over on the left hand side. And just a quick reminder of median growth percentiles or growth scores. It's a way for us to think about
how are our students growing compared to their academic peers in the state. So we kind of think of a benchmark of 50 as an average rate of growth across the state compared to academic peers. An a growth score higher than 50 a faster rate growth score lower than 50 of a slower
rate of growth. So what we're seeing here is that our BVSD elementary students overall as well as those in each of the student subgroup groups shown here um increased in their relative growth from last year. In addition, the numbers on top of all of those fuchsia bars are 50 or higher,
showing that um our students are outpacing their academic peers in the state on average in elementary English language arts. Can you remind us when the new ELA curriculum went into place for the elementary schoolers? >> Uh, we had two phases of implementation,
but as of last year, 100% of elementary schools were utilizing the new ELA materials for elementary English language arts achievement. uh we see seeing this as mixed by our racial and ethnic groups here. Um again, this is the first time we've seen the racial and ethnic groups
along the x- axis. So, our Latino and Hispanic students, our students who identify as two or more races and our white students are showing this consistent pattern of increasing over time. For English language arts and elementary, we're seeing the biggest changes for our Asian and our black and African-American students. And we're
going to pause here for just a moment and talk about how sample size influences the way that we think about this through the rest of the presentation. Um, particularly because our black and African-American student group is relatively small. So, just for some context, these additional boxes
here are telling you n equals how many students were in that group overall. And then the plus or minus shows how many students moved in or out of percent meets exceeds that resulted in the percentage change there. So, what I want to highlight is that on the right you're seeing the larger student groups,
Hispanic, Latino, students who identify as two or more races and our white students. And you see that bigger student movement results in smaller percent changes. Conversely, we look at our black and African-American student group. We only have 50 50 students there, 51 students there, and that one
student change caused a 5% drop in our percent meet succeeds. So, just something to keep in mind as we move through these slides, you're going to see more movement for that group of students because the sample size is small and because the movement of just one or two students will cause those
those overall group trends to look pretty noisy. Um, again, obviously not something that we take lightly. We still are h having our eye on what's happening with that student group, but just a different way to think about when you see bounciness for that group of students throughout the presentation.
So for elementary ELA growth, um we're seeing that that increased for most of our racial and ethnic groups um shown here. Um and then just pointing out there's no kind of orange bar for our black and African-American student group in 2022 for that same reason. In that year, there were only there were fewer
than 20 students in that student group that took CMAS and ELA and elementary. And so that's again another way that we're seeing the influence of that small group in how we're looking at results. for elementary math. Uh we see that this is stable overall and for our student um
student groups presented here. Our most notable trend is the increase for students with IEPs. Um this is we saw this also in um ELA at the elementary level. So this is a really exciting pattern to be seeing over time. >> Um just a quick question about that. uh
the remind us where we are with the math uh curriculum roll out and how that might have played into the the students IEP performance at elementary. >> Yeah. Uh we are in year one phase one of new math materials in elementary
schools. So they're using the previous >> So yeah, this data represents the use of the last year of our previous materials. >> For elementary math growth, uh we see that that's mixed across these groups of students. And our our growth patterns are more varied in math and ELA. Um the
biggest changes we see here are faster rates of growth for our gifted and talented students and um our students with IEPs and then a slower rate of growth there for the students eligible for free and reduced price lunch. Um something that I do want to point out
here is I gave the preamble about median growth percentile of 50 being average in the state compared to academic peers. Um the state also gives us median growth percentiles for different groups of students. So in particular as an example here, our free and reduced price lunch students had a median growth percentile
of 48. The state growth p median growth percentile for that groups of student was is 46. So we're outpacing that group of peers specifically within within the state as well. And that's a pattern that um continues throughout as well. >> Question. Sorry.
>> Sure. Um it does seem like uh you know from 23 to 25 we've got an eight-point drop for the FRL eligible students on that. Does anybody have any reflections on why that may be? The only thing that um and and we shared this in in different iterations of
presentations to the board um in and I believe it was in 20 uh 2022 is when the is it the Marshall fires happened? Yep. And so we had a an influx of students that began to qualify for free and reduced lunch because of that. And then
over time, it's the the potential for some of those those students um to no longer qualify for free and reduced lunch or or have moved out of the system um is the only piece of information that I'd have that give any insight on maybe something that could have influenced our free and reduced lunch growth because at
the time we were seeing larger growth and we cite we cited that as this could potentially be an impact on that. I I don't know if that's the reason. I just that's another piece of of of of information to consider. >> All right. Our elementary math
achievement uh increased across most of our racial and ethnic groups and our our trends are showing relatively positive over time since 2022. On average, our elementary math growth is mixed by our racial and ethnic groups here. Again, um we see our biggest changes
kind of happening with that black and African-American group, knowing that that's a small sample. Um and despite this though, we do see again looking the numbers over those fuchsia bars are 50 or higher, showing our students are on pace or outpacing their academic peers in the state.
And then finally for elementary science, uh you'll notice there's only three bars here. That's because there was an assessment change from the 22 to the 23 assessment. So we're only showing patterns across like assessment here. Um also we won't see growth for science because students only take this
assessment in uh fifth grade, eighth grade, and 11th grade. But the trend that we see here is um increased scores overall across these groups of students. And then uh for our racial and ethnic groups, we're seeing some some mixed
patterns here for science. All right, so that's elementary. Moving on next to middle school. >> I just want to say thank you for sharing the science scores. It's not those are scores that we don't often look at, but it is a test that our students take, and I I think it's important that we're
sharing those results similar to similarly to the ways we share math and the ELA. So, thank you for doing that. All right. So, middle school English language arts is a a big area of celebration for us. Um, we'll see a pretty consistent pattern here. So, starting off, we see an increase overall
and across all of the student groups here. Looking at growth again, increases overall and across all of those groups. Seeing those um growth rates being on track or at faster pace than the state averages.
And then across the racial and ethnic groups again increases across all of the groups. And similarly for growth for the our racial and ethnic groups of students seeing those increase as well as being on pace or outpacing the state on average
for middle school math. Uh again seeing increases across our student groups as well as overall middle school math growth is mixed. um we see that students are growing at similar rates or faster than their academic peers on average. Um and again pointing out this
idea of some of those groups we're seeing numbers below 50 but when we look at the median growth percentile for those specific groups of students um our students are outpacing their academic peers within group across the state on average. Uh middle school math achievement is increased over um our racial and ethnic
groups as well. And then our growth rates mixed again. Um but again that same pattern of where we see numbers that are lower than 50, those numbers are still um outpacing similar peer groups within the state on average.
And then finally, science increased across student groups for our different groups here as well as across racial and ethnic groups. So that was middle school. >> Dr. Anderson,
>> I just want to pause and just congratulate our middle schools um achievement growth. You know, when when um I think back to the start of the strategic plan, I'm looking at Nicole because she was on DACK at the time. uh
the very stagnant if any growth ever in middle school. And and you would see elementary school performing pretty well, high school performing pretty well, and middle schools just historically not doing what they're doing now. Uh, and so I just want to
thank our our leaders, our teachers, everybody at our middle schools who have really leaned into this strategic plan, datadriven instruction. Um, you know, high quality instruction in all of our classrooms, high quality curriculum. Want to thank uh board members who were
on the board when we accelerated middle school math curriculum uh because that was such a glaring challenge. And if if you're picking up on a theme here, adopt high quality curriculum, quality professional development, you give our teachers the right resources and
guidance and direction and their talents shine through as educators. And we are seeing that. And so I'm very excited and I'm glad that you asked the question, Beth, around where are we with the middle school um or the elementary school math curriculum implementation and that's coming. So, uh, just just
great work, I think, by everyone here, but just felt like I had to just pause everyone and say, you know, this is not the patterns we were seeing for a very long time. Um, and and just very exciting. >> Okay, finishing up with high school, our PSAT, SAT, evidence-based reading and
writing. We're seeing our achievement is relatively stable across our student groups. um the growth is mixed across groups but that same pattern that we've been seeing of having um growth rates that are similar to or outpacing academic peers in the state.
Uh similarly with our racial and ethnic groups, we're seeing the achievement to be relatively stable. uh seeing noise around that black and African-American subgroup of students which is again around 50 students for uh evidence-based reading and writing
growth. Um this is mixed across our racial and ethnic groups. Kind of a similar pattern that we've seen again seeing those rates of growth being pretty competitive or outpacing. Uh then high school math achievement, again seeing that as relatively stable
over time with a slight drop for our students with IEPs. And then again, that math growth being mixed but mixed at at pretty competitive high levels of growth. >> Oh, sorry. Um this is just out of curiosity. I
mean, I understand that in after the pandemic, a lot of students, a lot of dis colleges were no longer requiring the SATs. And so, I'm wondering if you have any idea what percentage of our students took the SATs over the last few years. I'm assuming that's trending back up. It's just a totally random kind of
curiosity question and if it had has any implications in what we're seeing here, >> I don't know. >> It's just a thought. Yeah, >> we can get you that percentage. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, PSATS, SAT math achievement is relatively stable over time across these
student groups. And then again, that same pattern of growth being kind of mixed. Um, but again being at high competitive levels across our state to peers. And then finally, high school science. Um something to note here is that we have pretty consistent uh low
participation in the science assessment at high school. So this represents a 15% participation rate as opposed to at the middle school was 78% and elementary at 93%. Um but we do see increased in increases in the scores over time for this smaller
group of students. And then lastly seeing that the um achievement in science is mixed across the racial and ethnic groups. Here we're again seeing the um smaller sample size for our black or African-American students. We only see a bar in 2024
because in 2023 there were no students in that group who took um the science assessment in high school and in um 2025 there were three students who took it and none of them met or exceeded grade level standards.
So that was a lot. Uh so I have one slide here to kind of high summary across each of those um groups. So for elementary we saw achievement and growth improvement across both subjects with most of our groups outgrowing their state peers. Science achievement
increased overall. At middle school we saw really strong gains in English language arts achievement and growth surpassing state averages across groups. Our math achievement is up. Um growth is varying but again generally competitive or outpacing academic peers. science
achievement increasing again and then at the high school level um relatively steady patterns in achievement and growth is mixed but competitive and then again science achievement overall rose despite our low participation >> members any questions or comments on the
information presented thus far >> Jason >> um yeah thanks for all this information um just a question on the science the high school science Which exam is that and why do we have such a low participation rate? It's um it's a state-based exam CMass
>> and people just are opting out of taking it >> but not opt do we don't have the same participation rates for the English and math well that's SAT >> no just so you know so so at you know we just have high opt out rates uh in science and 11th grade
>> okay >> there's a PSATS prepare folks for the SAT so I think anecdotally students find more value in that than they do value in the CMAS exam um for personal reasons that plays into it where the SA ACT when
we used to use that as a state that included the science component so a little different Alex >> sorry yeah I was just looking at um uh the PSA PSAT SAT like math growth and and seems relatively unstable for um
like FRL eligible I'm just wondering is our percentage of FRL kids taking the PSAT and SAT going up. So we have a different sample on that. Um and if I guess I am curious if we have um same
for math growth uh by Hispanic and Latino seems relatively unstable like is there something unstable in the uh the N or the population in some of our subgroups because Hispanic Latino seems bigger as does FRL eligible.
So it's not just small N. I was just wondering is the sample. >> I don't have an answer to that right now, but we will definitely look into that. It's a good good thing to consider for sure. >> Yeah. One, if I may follow up, one one of the things I'd be curious about if there's um with everything we do with grad plus in high school as we get more
kids into more higher education, are we introducing more kids to reasons to take the PSAT and SAT? And so what looks like a lower scores might be a different sample and then that might be a clue to us to kids we need to start focusing on
more earlier so that they're prepared uh for the higher education concurrent enrollment kind of opportunities we're presenting later. So I I would like to know that. One other thing I'd be curious about too, um, in general on a lot of the growth and standard ones. I
really like I know there's a lot of data here, um, but I'd be really curious to see those state averages by subgroup like with a line through them so that we know when we're above and below. And maybe that's an extra hundred slides. I know, but um like I really do when
you're dealing with so look at middle school math achievement and you're um you're dealing with percentages like 19.6 on the achievement. So uh of FRL so you're dealing with threequarters of the kids um who are not achieving at that
standard. Let's say slide 28 or students with IEPs when you're dealing with one in 10 students, you know, sort of meeting the math achievement standard. um on its face it's like it's so great that we are improving. That's the only way we can get better. We are the highest performing school in the front
range, one of the highest in the country period. And at the same time we have students in subgroups that are not meeting standards. And so uh we need to celebrate, encourage and then also understand how we improve like the number like what's up with the other 80%
of FRL kids um that aren't meeting that standard. And um yes, the growth reflects that, but it's still there's a growth to standard issue. So, I'm really interested in seeing what those lines look like for the state or for our comparable districts just to get a sense
of um where we still need to keep the pressure on. And I I don't mean pressure in a negative way. I mean pressure like we're just working really hard. Everyone's doing a great job. The district is is getting over the 56 different thiefs, doing whatever they think is best, and having a whole support structure. I mean, it's totally
working and people should be confident that the path we're on is working. And I'm just uh more curious about how the things that on their face look still a little low. Um how that really compares, helps me understand it. >> That's great. >> Yeah, those are excellent observations.
Thank you. And we would be glad to compile additional data in an appendix or a separate report if that would be helpful to the board. And and it might be helpful to report on all five levels, right? Like how many of those kids are like one or two questions
away from or or is there like or you know is the vast majority on them and like in like the the first lowest level or the second level. Uh so I think that we can nuance some of that for sure. It'd be interesting to to know. >> I just want to one last time celebrate
our middle school growth and achievement. When I saw those results for the first time, the word that came to mind was finally like finally our middle schools are not stuck and finally they're approaching the same levels of growth and achievement that we see at our elementary schools and our high
schools. So kudos to everybody at our middle schools for all the work that's been done, for all the changes that have happened there. That is finally we are making progress in a really meaningful way for those students. So kudos to district on that one. Okay. Um, as a final transition from
all of these data slides passing on, um, I have three more slides. Um, they don't have any new information from what you've already seen, but they are instead presenting information you've seen kind of in a little bit of a different way to kind of highlight some things that we're really excited about
and showing some trends over time in a in a different in a different way. So what we're looking at here are is a panel for ELA, English language arts, and a panel for math. Um on the x-axxis now is time. So we're looking at trends over time. And specifically, I have one
slide each about elementary growth, middle school growth, and high school growth. Um and really kind of wanting to to celebrate how we're looking at narrowed achievement gaps across these groups for English language arts specifically. So, it's a little bit
harder to tell. Um, but from the left to the right side of the English language arts panel, if we're looking at the orange, the fuchsia, the blue, and the green, from the left side to the right side, those lines are converging more closely together. We have our black and African-American student group coming in
later again because of that smaller group. Um, but seeing seeing that trend moving both ever so slightly upward as well as those lines coming together as we've already talked about kind of not the same completely consistent pattern in math but where we're moving toward with that math adoption.
>> What? >> Sorry. >> Kitty, did you have a question? >> I'm sorry. I didn't realize my mic was on. No, I don't. I'm trying to get my computer to show me what I want to see. So, sorry about that.
>> That's okay. >> Uh for middle school here, we see a pretty clear picture in again English language arts, narrowing of the uh dis more disperate growth rates in 2022 to 2025 for English language arts.
And then for high school, while the story isn't quite as clear, we can celebrate the fact that by and large these these growth rates are um above 50 for our different groups of students and consistently so over time. So with that,
I will pass this back. I don't really have a question. I just again want to linger in how incredible this is. Um, huge congratulations to all of the the staff across the entire district that's worked very very hard to
see these kinds of results. I mean, it's it's incredible. It really is. I Googled what other districts have um with extin with accredit with distinction in the in the state and we're what one of four I think total incredible
>> 14 across the state. Uh the only other large district is Academy 20. Uh but uh um and then the others are are Aspen, Telluride, Cheyenne Mountain, places that look probably a lot different than we do.
>> Jorge, >> thank you for all the charts and tables. You know, like Alex on my call, this is great. It's a lot a little bit more context is is helpful, I think. Um, and I think the questions that have really helped out from the rest of the board about where are we investing our resources in terms of our reading
curriculum, when are we doing the math curriculum because you because you see the progression on the charts, right? You see what we've invested the growth has happened there and and I know it's going to it high school is such a mixed bag. It's a very different sort of context for students and and so I think um as we move forward and and and focus
on that more as we're doing those changes in terms of the different opportunities expanding access being finding a way to kind of link those better to say hey here's what we've done and here's where we're seeing the changes here's how many more kids are getting access opportunity especially because like Alex I'm looking at that going wow 30% 20% are meeting or
exceeding and I know relative to other schools that's a positive position to be in but it's striking um how much more work you need to too. So, if I'm finding ways to kind of connect those, I think and give that context, I think is would be really useful. >> One of the things I'm excited about and
board members, as as you'll know, I served on the statewide accountability task force. Um, and I was was um I selected to be part of the post-secary workforce readiness group that really thought about how do we measure
specifically for high schools, what does that look like? And our recommendations were less PSAT, SAT focused and more focused on things that align to what we're doing with grad plus. How many kids are earning, you know, getting college credit before they graduate? How
many kids are earning industry certifications? You know, you know, what are the things that we're doing in high school to prepare kids for their future and how are we seeing them metriculate beyond us to uh, you know, to four-year universities. Right now our metriculation rates around 60%. Um and
our percentage of students that uh graduate with a college credit is is 82%. Four out of five kids who graduate already have college credit. So to the ex so it tells a different a differing
story than the PSAT SAT for who but by by the way you know the seriousness that you take the PSA PSAT if you don't feel like that's what you need to do or if you take it or I mean I think that there's variability you know post pandemic around those things especially as uh state universities right they
don't require it in Colorado I mean it's not like other univer like University of Colorado does not require it uh it's optional Colorado State optional, you know, our state universities where the most kids apply and and and most kids go
to, right, are amongst those that have waved that as a requirement. So, um I do feel like when as as we transition as a state to our new accountability system that uh a it's going to be great for our state, uh that that these are the things the opportunities that you're providing
for kids that and there's being successful in at at postsecary. I I fully believe and it aligned with recommendations from the 1241 uh task force. Um I think that was it was it was 1448 1241 something like that. Uh there
was another task force we agreed um and move forward with that. Uh but uh again, you know, as we share some of that grad plus data with you, it just, you know, it just shows these opportunities that kids are being successful in. And so just wanted to kind of give that give
that um context. And actually that made me think the other interesting thing about PSCT is those that are going places that they might feel having positive results is more personally beneficial and they have the means they are you can take h you can have hire tutors you can hire have additional
supports for the PACT if that's something that you feel like you need that that is privatized in a way that leaves some kids out as well and that you don't see that the same way in a cass data too. So all those little asterisks on why and questions around what does the data mean, what does it
not mean, who's included, who's not, I think are important things to elevate. Alex, >> yeah, I would um amongst the kudos that are due, I would give kudos to Superintendent Anderson for participating in the state level discussions about this and I um I know
we have senior staff participating their work groups too. So that is great that we are uh not just sort of up to date on it but also having a voice in how it moves forward because I do know like coming out of the accountability task force we're going to have participation
rate issues that'll change some of the district accredititation stuff that will make it harder or not going forward. And so some of these things are moving things over time and they can get highly political. And I just I think as a district that is taking the accountability data seriously, not just
because it makes us look good, because it helps us do good, um is really pretty key. And there's a movement in the state to undermine the transparency for people about it, which actually undermines the ability to use it for improvement. And I encourage uh Dr. Anderson, our board,
and our staff to continue to participate to protect transparency, to protect an evidence-based approach to this because it's how you get people to make difficult change. It was one of the key parts is to feed back and say, "Here's a mirror. Here's how we're doing." And there's certainly a lot of effort in
this state to undermine that transparency um for different reasons. And that's something we shouldn't resist because it helps us and it'll help the future administration, future board, future teachers continue to keep working on improvement. So I think that's not it's not extra work. That's part of what
we do to protect our ability to use this to make progress. Okay. Moving forward, board members, as you know, last year we launched these strategic plan support teams with cohort one schools and looking specifically
um at the work of the schools within that first cohort. The intention of the what we call the SPST teams um has been to accelerate the implementation of the strategic plan. And what we see here is uh definite celebrations and also we
want to talk about continued support. First of all, eight out of 10 of the schools in cohort one of SPST increased the percent of students who met or exceeded expectations in ELA and six out of 10 increased that percent of students
meeting grade level benchmark in math. While we're in year two and we have 10 more schools onboarded into cohort two, um all of the schools in cohort one continue to have support on a on a different frequency, a less frequent
basis from the SPST team. However, they have ongoing consistent and frequent support from their executive director and director of teaching and learning and of course um district personnel. So, the coho cohort one schools who um are
not in either the eight out of 10 or the six of 10 that you see here are receiving some capacity building guidance this year in the form of our executive directors and directors of teaching and learning having weekly visits. uh very tight monitoring of 90-day
plans, classroom visits, continuing the focus on specific student groups and their learning experiences, data analysis through the school strategic school improvement process, use of walkthroughs, um increasing the frequency of datadriven instruction at
the schools, monitoring progress of all of the data and actions at the schools, and parent engagement of student groups and families at the schools. Uh we do want to amplify the work of two SPST schools in particular, Aspen Creek
and Manhattan. Their outcomes show that focusing on student groups along with using data intentionally to enhance teaching and learning leads to big payoff in the form of student success. So Aspen Creek, as you'll see on the left, increased the number of Hispanic Latino students who met benchmark in ELA
by 10 students. No small feat. and Manhattan increased that number by 15 students. So, we're just incredibly proud of the work at the schools and we know that this kind of precision and focus on students, really knowing them
by name and need and addressing um them through support is an excellent example of how in BBSD we're leading the way in providing more opportunities that lead to more students being successful. We're really proud of the success at the SPST
schools and the work of course goes beyond just implementation of DDI and instructional coaching. Schools have set intentional goals um aligned to our strategic plan and um what you just saw were two incredible examples. We're excited about cohort 2 schools which you
see here on the screen that are fully engaged. They got more of a head start than cohort one schools in that they learned that they were in cohort two back in the spring. They were able to jump right into 90-day planning, go very
deep on 90day planning during the summer and um really just got a jump start on some of the deep work and the cohort's progressing well already. So, as we wrap up and move toward um our next segment of information that we want to share with you, I just want to call
out some promising proficiency that we heard in what uh Jessica shared with us and what we discussed. As noted in Dr. Alzine's comprehensive review, we see more student groups reaching proficiency in many student groups are more students
reaching proficiency in many student groups. And in CMASS achievement, that promising proficiency looks like overall increases in grades three through eight. At elementary and ELA increase overall and for students with IEPs, stable math
overall and increase across most racial uh and ethnic groups. And at middle school, which we've all celebrated, and they certainly deserve it, math and ELA increases and ELA increases across racial and ethnic groups. and other student groups.
Some of the noteworthy growth that we discussed um involved overall increases in grades three through eight at the elementary level. ELA seeing an increase overall and in student groups and most racial ethnic
groups and a one point decrease in math. We've also discussed that we are onboarding new math materials now and last year was the last year of some um very old math materials in our elementary schools. At middle school, an ELA increase across all racial ethnic
groups, an ELA increase overall and across student groups and math was stable overall and mixed across student groups. As we progressed toward looking at postsecary readiness, We see that um with that measure of PSAT
and SAT outcomes that we've talked about, achievement is stable overall and as um Dr. Aline mentioned, highly competitive still achievement and growth along with mixed results in students meeting benchmark across student groups and mixed growth growth across
evidence-based reading and writing and math with some improvements um in some groups. Some of the celebrations and opportunities that we're contemplating are we are excited about the celebrations in our data with all schools being at performance level with the exception of one elementary and one
middle school. um with growth ga gains across student groups on CAMASS and shrinking those ELA growth gaps between um student groups and uh the opportunities that we're digging into which I'll expand on just a little bit
in the next slide is that you know as I've said more than once we're always looking for opportunities to improve and where we can continue driving toward uh we want to make sure that we are driving toward more proportionate growth across student groups um as board members
Chavez pointed out, while we're while we're pleased with growth and achievement increases, we know that we have um a lot of room for continued growth and we want to continue reducing those disparities and we want to continue to advance standardsbased
learning in every school with a greater focus on high schools which has been certainly mentioned in this conversation. We'll continue with >> think >> sweet Laura. Okay, >> want to finish that thought and then
I'll let Kitty ask your question. >> We will continue with a focus on consistent implementation of standardsbased curriculum. We've talked about how elementary has new math materials. Uh schools are in year one phase one of implementation. um and
um second year of reading new reading materials at elementary and then we're in the second we're we're entering the third year but we've just had the second really robust more comprehensive implementation year math middle school implementation and last year we did
implement standardsbased um curricular expectations with at middle school with the common lit 360 standardsbased unit. So, we're definitely seeing payoff there and we know that we have continued uh focus in front of us. So, we can pause
for kitty questions Kitty. Kitty, do you want to mute your microphone? There's some interference. Maybe you can try again. >> There's a high degree of um pulsing interference, Kitty. So, we're going to
have to pause on your question for now. We can't hear you. >> One question I had. Um can you speak a little bit about some of the interventions that are used for evidence there? The reading and writing and the math at secondary schools
particularly in our high schools. >> Um our high So did you say interventions in evidence-based reading, writing and math? >> And math. Yeah. >> Yeah. So our high schools let's talk about math. What we know for sure is that um the most important instruction is that universal instruction happening
at tier one and our academics team is diligently focused on assessing the current state at high schools. Um as I mentioned earlier, we are turning our focus to high schools just like we turned our attention to middle schools when that was needed and um looking at
tier one instruction. The the assessment that's happening over the landscape at high schools is looking uh carefully at the implementation of new math materials at high schools as well as the landscape of what um what materials are being used
to teach quite a variety of courses in evidence in reading and writing and and then from there um looking at we don't want to jump too fast to interventions. We really want to set a strong tier one universal instruction foundation as we
have done at elementary, as we have done at middle school. We're seeing that payoff. Um, but we do have interventions in place for instance in math at secondary schools. Um, math 180 and read 180 are used for those interventions for
reading and math. And um we have regular check-ins with not only the team but also the um the publishers of those interventions to for those data check-ins so that our team the academics team deploys to provide supports to
schools to ensure that tier one instruction is in place and strengthening but also that interventions are in place. And you know when we see a school for instance at the secondary level whose data is not showing up as their peer or as other schools are we look at what is the usage
of this intervention and where does it need to be shored up and then uh work carefully with both the team and the principal at the school to ensure that um the intervention is being used with fidelity. And so, um, looking first at tier one and then you using now
evidence-based, uh, reading and math interventions. >> No, that makes a great deal of sense. I was just thinking about the kiddos that may have started to make their way through the system before we had consistent tier level one instruction and that might be in high school or kind of making their way through the system
um, as we are also progressing through the system. So, thank you for that. Kitty's question was, let me find it. Do we give the ACT to juniors? >> So, not not part of the of the um
statewide testing uh program. Kids are able to sign up for the ACT and take the ACT. And there's like the it's called the plan, I think, is the ACT version of the PSAT. Um, but that's self- selected family sign up. Um, we do most of our
like, you know, for the SAT, we'll give it during the school day. Um, ACT is typically after school or on weekends, not after school, on weekends at sites that are signed up to provide the the ACT. So, as somebody who spent a lot of time last fall driving around finding
ACT sites for my son who's going to college, uh, so yeah. So, they do give it, but here's the thing. the state every five years does an RFP to decide what is the test that they're going to use and it could be the ACT at some point in time if they decide that that's
a better measure of of um state standards and postworkforce readiness they could switch from the ACT to the SAT um at any point in time but I believe they just like last year renewed on the PSAT SAT for another so we'll have that for another four years at
least Any other questions, board members? Thanks. Summing up um the conversation thus far, we we are building on momentum. We have some strong evidence-based practices in place that are taking root and we're
building momentum with these such as 90-day plans and that short cycle improvement, refining and expanding datadriven instruction, refining multi-tered systems of support, um consistent expectations across the K12
environment, standardsbased resources, uh coordinated and differentiated support to schools and targeting support for schools. with an improvement rating and who have specific needs as well. And um you know it's it's pretty incredible how our
academics department, our executive directors, our directors of teaching and learning deploy with very specific support for schools and are are very agile in providing that support based on what the current needs of the school are.
So, board members, we we've been having conversations um over the past year and a half around um around our budget and where are the dollars that we're investing in our budget, where are they how are they aligning to uh the outcomes
that we're seeking and the results that we're getting. And so as we think about budget presentation, these are the types of things that the that we've invested in with dollars made by just, you know, direction and leadership from this board and from our team where we're really
getting the payoff. And so as we as we move towards budget conversations, it'll be my job to make sure that I'm bringing these forward to you all. So if you look at this, thinking about our investments with the training, the executive training and leadership that we've done with University of Virginia and how many
schools we've brought online with that program and how many of those schools have made significant progress. You saw the progress that we're making with the investments of our strategic plan support teams, which is a reminder was one-time investments over multiple years
to be able to give that extra e um focus and attention. Uh you we've already talked about the importance of high quality curriculum and support and implementation. Uh we've talked about the the district level supports and some of these weren't new investments. They
were repurposed investments on um our DDI leads and folks were doing that work. um MTSS uh um and then just the the entire investment in the academic scheme and how they're spending their time and
focused on the mission and vision of the school district. So, I just wanted to point this out that there's dollar amounts that we can estimate on these investments to know and understand and and that, you know, in our in our budget process, sometimes it just comes across that we're we're just looking at new
dollars that have that are coming in. And because there's new dollars not coming in, our our budget presentations can maybe be a little bit shallow on what we're investing in and and what the impacts of that are. But I just felt like this is a really good slide to give this board and give the public like what
are the moves we're making that we feel like are helping us to continue to improve even though two years in a row it's the best we've ever been. We're not satisfied with that. We're proud definitely not satisfied until every kid gets everything they need out of our school district. So, um, I just wanted
to point that out as a place where we can do I can do a superintendent a better job of showing our our board and our public how the dollars that we're investing are are are relating to the results that we're seeking. >> Yeah. Yeah, I just I want to say how
grateful I am for drawing those connections because I think that's um uh not just for the board, but I'm thinking about our DAC and our Sachs when they're having discussions about data, about strategic plan, about the budget, about policies, it's really hard to connect all the lines, but that's like during mo
most of our budget discussions, I'm always like, okay, so tell me what's the important thing that's making a difference, not the difference from one fund to another. and you're getting exactly at the stuff I'd like us as a board to be, you know, familiar with and then, you know, it works its way down through the DACK, through the Sachs to
that same way. So, like one piece of information I think would be helpful when we think about the cohorts. Um, I think about the strategy is to expand to more schools in those cohorts and additional cohorts. I think we have the data before us if we're showing the
strong results of the schools that are in cohort one to do some comparisons of cohort one to the other schools that aren't getting that intervention and have the other schools go oh how soon can we get that in our school and you know what is the difference between the eight schools in this cohort which one's
knocking it out of the park and what's a little different um those are the kinds of questions that if I was on a sack now I'd be really curious about and so this is we already have a hundred slides it's ton ton of data. We're talking about normal everybody with a busy life trying to figure out what to do. But we are
have an amazing story here that people uh should be able to see. And I think with a little bit of curation, we could probably make the tell the story of the intervention from the cohorts and show the changes in growth and achievement over time from those schools versus the
others and even show the mix of it, but still have people go, "Oh, I understand why we're doing that. I understand why I need to defend differentiated um funding, why I need to defend the money for X, Y, or Z as part of that. So, I would just try to curate it a little bit
more for uh us on the board, but also for the DACK and the Sachs and the everybody in the schools. >> One thing I just want to elevate too, the this 90-day plan, talking about 90day plans is a little bit new, but um we have a strategic plan that's a longer
term, five years roughly. We have UIPs that are two-year cycles and we have these 90-day plans all of which are related to each other just to get that little those tighter maneuvers. Is that correct? >> Absolutely. You know, the short cycle improvement.
If all you're looking at is a five-year plan, the urgency to do something within the next 90 days, right? as as we man manage and navigate our strategy for improvement and what we're referring to as the whirlwind of things that happen
in a school and in a community and and you know we've seen a lot of those happen within the past week that can be overwhelming if you don't have the structure guidance directions and support around your improvement efforts. And so 90 days,
two years, five years, and then there's a waterfall and a through line for all of those things. Uh we feel like has has created an excellent rhythm for improvement and actually seeing significant changes at at the school site, but then also navigating that and
everybody being on the same page within the district on what those things look like. You know, as we started out, it was just our high support schools and it was just Sanchez and Coline who had 90-day plans. But then that started working and folks are like, well, what's going on? What's going on at Sanchez? And then we started to expand and we
started to grow. Then we formalized that growth with the strategic plan support team cohorts. Um, and the team all throughout our district team has been building high levels of capacity around these big ideas. Um and so you know part of it is the support and resources, part
of it is the actual strategy and the accountability of having a plan that in 90 days you have to say whether you did it or didn't do it. Um and then aligning the UI piece to the strategic plan which I mean for for long times were like different things but again we had strategic plans without measures. So, it
was like a bunch of ideas versus like, okay, these are the things we want to do. This is what the here's how we'll be accountable to our public, to our board, to ourselves on whether or not these things are actually working. And now we have these short cycle, more nimble types of plans that we're rolling out to
our cohort schools in ways that are they're just moving the bar. We we are and and we're doing it across the district uh for our subgroups. That's why you're starting to see those things move because more folks are on board and in tune. And and finally, and we can't forget this, we have awesome teachers
and leaders, right? But uh and I and I've shared this, you know, bad systems beat good people all the time. If you don't have the right systems, structures, supports, resources, uh you can have the best people in the world, the system eats them up. So, we've built these systems and structures. We've
always have had amazing people. We're giving them the right conditions, and we're starting to see the results. really really proud. >> And that's an excellent segue to Chris Bre who's going to take us on a deep dive into strategic plan and UIP updates. I do want to highlight
something that Dr. Anderson pointed to which is that we've actually scaled out 90-day plans and short cycle improvement to 100% of our schools with the exception of two comprehensive high schools. Our high schools were um able to opt in this year and all of them did.
All of them did, but there are two comprehensive high schools that are in a development year with their 90-day plan. So, we are we have um we know that this is a very promising practice short cycle improvement and are so pleased that every one of our schools is engaged.
>> Thank you. So, uh we got the high level view, we got the major celebrations across the district. And so, I'm going to take an opportunity now to walk us through the really specific and intentional steps of our strategic plan. Uh just like Dr. Anderson mentioned, he said it in a much better way than I ever
could. So, I I won't won't be too redundant, but I will walk through uh some visual representation of how all of those things connect and how we're able to get to that level of intentionality of uh ultimately hitting some of these these great benchmarks that we've set. So, first we'll scale out um that five
years define success by 2029. That increase in achievement and growth overall and for our historically underrepresented groups. Appropriate growth of students receiving academic interventions. Proportional rate of students identified for special education and gifted and talented.
Increased percentage of students who graduate and obtain at least one grad plus recognition. Increase fidelity to the BBSD discipline framework. And decrease out of school suspensions while reducing disproportionality. We've already made great strides towards
many of these. Uh but the power of the strategic plan is that we're able to get to the level of specificity that we know is going to move the needle for the large work. So starting out with our four major objectives, no limits around grade level standards, next best step
around tier supports to find the destination that's our post-secondary readiness and valued and included around cultural competency. So what I'll do is I'll walk us through this a little bit. Um, but first, again, not to be redundant of what's already been talked about, but how do we get to a level of
where the the the school UIPs can identify specific actions that help us meet our large goals as an entire district? So, it starts at the top. It starts with those four strategic objectives and the all together for all student strategic plan. We then develop a district UIP, which is comprised of a
student performance priorities. We identify the major areas of improvement as a district that we want to attack. Then we identify major improvement strategies to meet those goals. All of those are aligned to those four strategic objectives. Then we create action plans on a two-year cycle as a
part of a district UIP. So we are entering into the final year of this first UIP from fall 2024 to spring of 2026. And then we will begin development of our next two-year cycle of fall of 2026 to spring of 2028. As we work with
schools to develop their UIPs, their 90-day plans, it's taking those specific student performance priorities and major improvement strategies and having schools identify what within their specific school they can do, what performance priority they have that they can align and then identify short cycle
improvement strategies to help meet us to help meet those targets. As a district, for the first time, we can now have a holistic view at all of our schools, identify where their priorities are, what specific actions they're taking, and how we can wrap our arms around those schools to help meet those goals. All of those goals align to those
four strategic objectives at the top. So, this is our uh strategic plan scorecard. So, the board has obviously worked in the development of this scorecard. It's our commitment that we set very um challenging goals, aspirational goals for the reasons that we've already talked about in order to
meet the needs of all students. Uh that's why you'll see us walk through um our progress towards each one of these specific targets for each one of these student groups. So what I'll do here is I'll give you kind of a billboard snapshot where we are within each of those objectives,
what the major implementation strategies are, and then we will show you where we would fall on that strategic plan scorecard. So within no limits, all students are experienced grade level standardsbased instruction. Our implementation strategies are professional learning on on grade level standards, the implementation of datadriven
instruction, and the support of our district administrators and high quality observation and feedback around all students accessing grade level standards. For the UIP targets, you'll see here on this table that we have baseline that was set in 2024. That middle column you'll see is the
target that we have hit that we've set. And then the far right column colorcoded is the district spring actual numbers. So this is of math achievement. And what I'll do here for no limits is we'll go through math achievement, math growth, then we'll go through ELA achievement, ELA growth. So this is percentage of
students meeting or exceeding expectations. Each one of those student groups has been a priority for us. So you'll see that we have made progress towards the majority of each of those. We have met or exceeded our targets for our black student population as well as Asian students and two or students of two or
more races. And we did not meet targets for Native Hawaiian students and American Indian students. >> Chris, >> yes. Um previously we talked about how uh our students some of our students the end size is so small and that can create some look fors or considerations in the
data. Yes. >> Are we the same considerations apply here? >> So it's it's a really great point. Um the end sizes here we have left the targets there for transparency. We set the scorecard. We want to make sure we're tracking it appropriately. Those end sizes can be very small. for the
American Indian students population, that's 31 students for reference for you on where we are with that. Um, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students would be 20. Uh, so we again, it is a very low end size. Uh, because we want to be transparent and meet the meet the
purpose of a of a scorecard, we want to make sure we're including it all in there. And and we'll reference that a little bit too on how the end sizes are small across some of these targets. Uh just for context within math growth, you'll see there that we have uh met our targets for
students of two or more races as well as gifted and talented students. We made progress for white students and that we did not meet our targets for those remaining groups. Something that is important to point out here is something that I actually think I'm very proud of is the fact that we were not afraid to set very ambitious targets within this
objective. Uh if you look at that district spring baseline, all of those numbers are above 50. Uh and I will leave the technical explanation of of how MGP is calculated to Dr. Alz, but I will tell you that having those numbers where they are, setting growth targets
above that is a very ambitious goal and one that we're not going to apologize for, but one that we feel like is very warranted on here. Uh and we're going to continue to pursue this. Alex. Yeah. >> Yeah. On that front, I mean, I'm familiar with the MGP uh process
roughly, but it does take a lot to increase those by those percents. And I think it might be good um for us internally um I I we want to set aspirational goals, but it's good to know like what it would actually take substantively in
terms of test score increases to achieve those. Yeah. because I think uh some of those may be entirely unrealistic and I'm not sure as smart goals that they make sense um if they're not a for attainable. So like I would do the math
and find out uh like what percent of schools could achieve that increase to get to those mgps in that time frame because I'm kind of dubious that some of those are smart goals. >> Yeah, it's a very good point. We can
certainly u run those numbers and identify what that is. And and to further your point on that, one of the conversations that we've had is when we look at that district spring baseline data and those numbers of uh you know some of them are uh you know 59 60 55 58
56 um of where are the where are we in in the in an average of the last three years of median growth percentile? How do we set targets maybe based off of those averages rather than improvements upon our our previous successes just because specifically around median growth percentile? Uh that does allow us
to make a more smart goal. So it's a a very valid point and something we're going to consider as we develop the next UIP. >> And and I haven't done any math so I don't know they they could very well be smart goals. They could be really totally set right. I just know that sometimes people will who aren't familiar with them will set goals and
you're like oh like no district has ever done that in the last decade. So, is is that really helpful? >> Yeah, definitely. >> All right. Within language arts achievement, uh you'll see that we've made great progress across the majority of the groups with the exception again of American Indian students and Native
Hawaiian students. Um again, those are low end sizes. again for reference. Uh but you'll see that we were able to meet targets um for um our black student population, multil- language learners, students with IEPs, um Asian students, and students of two and more races.
We were also able to make progress towards those goals for our white student population, students who qualify for free and reduced price lunch, as well as our Hispanic students. And then here's our language arts growth. Um obviously a lot to celebrate
here across the board across all student populations there um with either meeting exceeding our target or making some progress towards those target in all of those groups. All right. As we transition to the next best step, this is that our administrators and our educators can
implement and track tiered supports and instructional strategies to engage and grow all students. Our implementation strategy around this are a really high quality MTSS system, a multi-tiered system of support specifically applied to academics. You'll hear us reference it applied to behavior as well. Um, as well as datadriven instruction, right?
Our tier one uh universal instructional practices that we can uh support student growth. So, we identified very specific targets within this as a part of this UIP and that was the identification for special education and how proportional we were
within that. Um, so you'll see that we met that target for multilingual learners. We did not meet that target for black students and Hispanic students. Our students qualify for free and reduced price lunch. Um, again, this is another example of where uh the end sizes here are very small. Uh, the
example for the top row there on black students uh would be um a very small number in terms of how we would be able to meet that target of 1.9%. Uh this is again going to be a consideration for us as we identify uh again our our commitment to meeting these targets, but are they the right targets for us as we
develop the next UIP and how are we identifying what those targets are over time specifically for the groups that have a very small in size >> I'm trying to understand um how to read this particular chart. So this is
we want to have so in 2024 there's 2.2% of black students who are non IEP and we want to have less black students on IEP a year later. >> Is that is that is that how we read this goal? Because I'm trying to understand if students on IP it's about a student's
need, right? And so is it reasonable to ask the students to be off of an IEP in the course of a year or is it more about the kind of what students bring in that we've trying to address and is that the appropriate target? So I'm just trying to wrap my head around what that means and what we're trying to achieve with
this. I think the number represents new students who are being identified, right? So it doesn't take consideration the students that are correct me if I'm wrong, Chris. I mean the idea here is you know the big idea is that um we
don't want to disproportionately identify certain you know subgroups for special education services if the issue or challenge is something different than they actually have a disability. um we want every kid to get the support that they need, right? But for kids who just
need that support within a classroom, right? Because maybe the tier one instruction hasn't been um as deep as it needs to be, you know, there's there's lots of reasons. And I think that, you know, back to Laura's point earlier on intervention, right? You start with good
tier one instruction before you start identifying intervention because then intervention becomes the fix for poor tier one instruction, right? I think this this this goes as well, but maybe Chris, you could speak a little bit to the numbers. My my understanding was it's the kids that are being identified.
>> Yeah, it's it's a great question. These numbers are us tracking our pursuit towards proportionality for each of those groups and representations. So, our theory of action with this is that if we have a high quality MTSS system all the way through prior to the identification of special education that
they would be able to meet their proportionality percentage for that. So that's why that proportionality number for multil- language learners is much higher than for black students. Uh so we want to be able to say that we are meeting 1.9% of it to be proportional with the rate of of how other students are identified from all other groups.
Um, so it for for context of that it for the end size there um there would be 108 students identified uh in order for us to or 108 black students excuse me be identified um in order for us to meet that target that would be roughly about 90 students would be identified within
that that would be representative of the of the proportionality for that student group in BBSD. >> So what I said was wrong. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yeah. For the record, just a note for the record, I was completely wrong. >> Yeah. And I think that's the context I
was kind of grappling with, like what does this mean? And and some of that maybe some of those process numbers would be helpful to understand in terms of >> how we're meeting this and making sure that we're doing the appropriate intervention for the population to avoid that disproportionality in terms of, you know, whether it's language or
opportunity or or whatever it is. Um because this is tricky to wrap my head around and I'm sure probably for the public would be as as well that that context kind of helps a little bit. >> Yeah. And and happy to provide any of the number the end sizes there as well
to help provide context for what those goals actually would look like although the proportionality would change uh along with our student population year-over-year. >> Uh yeah, I totally agree. I was doing a similar exercise trying to figure out how this works. I think this I and I
understand that we've set our UIP targets this way, but I don't think we need to do our communication this way. Like so as I understand it, um to get to proportionality, the number of new people being identified would be equal to the percent of the population that
that subgroup is. So why not show us the number and percent of students in that subgroup and then show us the number and percent of students that are identified in that subgroup and then the disproportionality would be I think more visually or intuitively available to the
audience if that makes sense. So tell us that the African the black students make up you know 2.4% 4% of our population which is 300 kids and if we had special ed identification proportionality that would be identifying 90 kids. So that
makes it make sense intuitively the way this doesn't like I'm left thinking oh 44% of our FRL kids are on IEPs like that no that's not right at all but 44 what you know the percent of kids on IEPs that are FRL should be equal to the
percent of kids that are FRL and that's what's lost here. It's a really good suggestion. I really appreciate the the conversation around this. I think that uh because then you can you show end size, you can show population because proportionality would change as your
proportionality as a district changes as well, right? I'm just checking myself because I was so wrong when I said anything before. So, so I really appreciate uh I appre I appre I think we can do a lot with this feedback. So, thank you >> Beth. Just want to add one little point.
Thank you so much for raising this. I think cynically, if you're looking at this chart, and I think what Alex stated is a great idea. I think if you're looking at this in a more cynical way, you could go, "Oh, well, they're underidentifying students who need it." And as you said so eloquently, students with special needs, the goal is not
about getting to a percentage that we identify. The goal is about meeting whatever their individual needs are. Right. Of course. And I know we all know that, but I want to make sure that's obvious in the data that we're sharing with the public that we're not trying to artificially identify less students to meet a
percentage goal. Does that make sense? >> It absolutely makes sense. Yeah. >> Okay. Uh as we move on to define the destination, uh this is um important context here is that we state define the destination. Our long-term goals is that
throughout their PK12 career, all students access career exploration opportunities and are at least one of the following industry certification, college credit, workbased learning, or syllabi literacy. Uh and I'll explain a little bit why it's important context for that. Uh so our implementation is is
career exploration opportunities at all levels that we're creating very clear course pathways for students based on their career interest and that students academic experiences align to their post-secary goals. So as we look at our UIP targets for post-secary preparation uh the context that I would would um
provide here is that we we know we have great success across the entire grad plus framework. Uh you may recall a presentation from Dr. OS in the spring where we talked about the expansion of all uh an increase in opportunities across all four quadrants of the grad plus framework. Uh what you see here is
a representation of specifically workrelated academic experiences for the graduating class of 2025. And the reason that's important is that while we are increasing and we know we are increasing those opportunities PK-12, we are only representing a lag measure here as a
part of this scorecard that says of the students who are graduating this year, how many of them would receive this um this recognition as a part of grad plus. So uh it doesn't tell the entire story of all the success within grad plus. It's why we have very specific targets within the UIP uh so that we can we can
try to make very specific actions toward them. but wanted to provide a little context for where we are within that. >> Alex, >> yeah. Um, when we've discussed the strategic plan before, I've I've raised this issue, but I think this is one in particular with N sizes is really
necessary because we were dealing with super low numbers in the first place and uh we're dealing here with changes, I believe, in these populations of like one student or two students. So um that's why I don't think this is actually the best measure of the grad plus stuff in the first place because it
would take such small ends to like change the percentages um based on what we had before. So um I think presenting this one without the ends um uh shows us like we need to increase the whole thing but I'm still not sure this is the most important measure of the grad plus uh
programs. All right. Finally, the last objective undervalued and included that all students feel valued and included in their learning environments. They engage in restorative practices with students when appropriate and schools consistently apply recommended resolutions for specific disciplinary events. That's the discipline framework
at BBSD. So, our implementation around this has been a cultural competency focus. the implementation of that discipline framework, the increased use of restorative practices and MTSS applied to behavior. So, our scorecard here uh will again I
we've said this across all of these topics, but there are some lowend sizes here for these groups as well um that really make a difference for those groups that you see that we did not quite meet the target that very much can be the difference of one student. And then the very bottom row there,
you'll see that the rate of restorative interventions. We do continue to increase that rate of restorative interventions across the system. So our next step is to although we know we have great success across the strategic plan, uh we have so much to celebrate. we know that we have
opportunities for improvement given within these specific targets that we set within the UIP. Uh so our task is to identify what those opportunities are and figure out what specific short-term goals we can do to support these goals uh before the end of the school year as well as what goals we might propose to
take forward into future UIPs. So one opportunity for improvement that we saw within no limits was the inconsistency around our math growth. Uh so again those are some high MGP numbers starting from a baseline but we do want to see more consistency in that. Um so regardless of what our final uh targets
are for our future UIP we do feel like there's opportunities for improvement there. Um as we've talked about that comes in uh along with the implementation of new curriculum. So the implementation of illustrative math at elementary and at cross K12 we are at
some form of implementation of of high quality math materials uh either year one two or three across all levels within BBSD and then in addition to that the ongoing implementation of DDI. So, uh, as we adopt new curriculum and as teachers become more comfortable with
the use of new curriculum, it be makes the use of datadriven instruction all that more valuable as we focus in on math to help support the growth areas for our students in that. And that applies for middle school and high school as we have specific math teams obviously that are going to be narrowly
focused on math not just whereas in elementary it could be math as well as literacy. And the final thing that I'll say here is that the use of short cycle improvement uh is really going to be critical for us as we as we align our supports of students or our supports of schools. So um as I mentioned
previously, we're able to now identify where schools see that they have opportunities for improvement. They're able to look at their school specific data um and then set specific targets around that. We're now able to support them in that as well. I just want to see there was a little of
that funny sound interference. I was wondering if Katie had a question again. Oh yeah, your mic still making that funny noise. Kitty, if you have questions, you can just send them to me and I will elevate those for you. Okay.
>> Uh the other area that for improvement that we see around next best step is around special education referrals and how we address that um proportionality rate there. So we have established an MTSS action team. Uh the purpose of that is to identify and address um any barriers to meeting this target that we
might have as a district system. Taking a very deep dive into what that data is telling us and what it is that we can do to impact it. Um we also have brand new MTSS implementation data for the first time. So uh at the end of last school year, our MTSS team was able to meet
with all schools in BBSD to identify where they are within their MTSS implementation. Uh so that will impact our decisions from that action team on how we best support where schools are with the uh highest quality MTSS that they can have in their building. Um and then this new action here is again like
I said being able to identify what can we do more urgently. This isn't just in preparation for the next version of the UIP but what can we do to impact schools as they prepare for their next version of the 90-day plans which would be in the spring. Um and how can we give them um more resources, more support uh in order to help meet some of those goals.
So, as we identify strategies that we feel like might be able to impact some of those numbers, uh, we will then see how they play out in the spring. The things that were working really well, we will then expand that use into other 90-day plans in the upcoming year, as well as the upcoming UIP.
>> Just a quick comment, I really appreciate the work the district's doing around MTSS. Um we speak often on this board about differentiation and this is one way in which I feel districts are able to kind of meet that need as as the hopefully the public understands you
know MTSS is greater and greater uh differentiation essentially for students you know it doesn't work at tier one so we we go tier two tier three and so on right but um I'm really happy to see this I would I look forward to seeing the MTSS implementation data um and what kind of factors we're looking at for
that sounds really exciting so thank Yeah, thank you for that. I It's We're very excited to be able to have some baseline data for us to be able to to further support schools in their implementation of that. >> Uh oh, I'm sorry. >> Oh, I I just really appreciate that because I feel like we can Beth, we can
so fall into the acronyms and stuff and I really do think this translates into the district has a system to support schools. So, the schools have a system to make sure all their kids get the support their particular child needs. Like that's what this turns into when we're done. And the more we can do it, the better we get at it. And then what
do you know? Our results get better. It's not that the results get better and our graph looks better. It's that your individual child in Boulder Valley will get services that are better, more tailored to their need. And that we have as a district are making sure the schools have a system to try to make that happen, which again is leveraging
the fantastic teachers that we have in our great schools, but giving them like the support they need to do something different. And I'd love to see the implementation of that. And I'd also like to see as we get the data on the implementation of that, um, Ry's team
help us figure out how to tell that story. Again, letting parents see what that looks like in real practice, um, I think would be really helpful. >> Yeah. >> Uh, similarly, where we see these an opportunity for, uh, improvement within
are valued and included and increasing that proportionality of suspension rates. So um we are going to take on a similar task where you have a district working group to identify what if any potential barriers we have at a system level to support schools in that in meeting that target. Uh and then this is where MTSSB comes into place. So I said
we talk about MTSSA when we think about interventions and we think about uh special education referrals and portionality with that but also how are we applying those tiered supports to the behavior interventions that schools are dealing with as well. So that implementation data is going to impact both of these initiatives greatly. We also have uh some high quality
recommendations from be well uh from our partners at Crown Institute to uh help inform this team as well with some action steps from mental health aspects as well. Uh so you'll be getting some additional information on that in the coming weeks and months uh to outline how all of those things play uh play
together. And then we're going to continue to build on the success of restorative practices. So we have continued to see an increase in restorative practices across uh the system. Um, this is not in addition to MTSS. It's a part of MTSS. And that's why I have outlined here what we're
talking about in terms of what's the universal practice, the targeted practices, and the intensive practices there. What are we doing to prevent and promote good behavior within that? What are we doing to respond and repair when damaging behaviors takes place? And then how do we intervene within that? So, it it it very much does fall within the MTSS framework there. And we're going to
continue to build on the momentum that we have around restorative practices. >> Thanks, Chris. Jorge. Thank you for the detailed plans on all this. It's great that I feel like we're moving in the right direction. We're focusing on the right stuff. I'm curious to what degree um the disproportionate
discipline suspension rates, restoative justice transition is part of the curriculum conversation. Um because the groups that are high on disproportionate in terms of suspension are the exact same groups that have really small ends that are in our kind of underachieving groups as well, right? Who need the most
help and supports. um their rates are double the average, probably three times the the non-groups, right, in terms of suspension. That's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of other incidents that are happening in schools. And it's tied up with things like climate, class disruptions, being pulled out of the classroom, which is going to clearly affect their ability to perform well in
school. And and so we're do we've done for a long time a lot of things at the district level in terms of are we counting the right things? Are we using the are we training people to have the rights of implementations? But is it possible for us to use these cohorts to also look at this as well in terms of
what is the climate in the classroom? How are these kids being addressed in the classroom before it gets a suspension? it it um I feel like it's time to maybe start moving towards more targeted things to think about at the ground level what does this look like and where can because it's I think I feel like it's intertwined with our
curriculum and our results and I'm and I'm feel like this has been lagging and continues to be there and I'm it's dropped from where we were six years ago tremendously but I feel like it's kind of stalled out since that time and I'm I'm trying to grapple with how we get around some of that and and I know it's
I don't have an answer for it I guess it's more questions about possibilities. >> I appreciate that, Jorge. Um, you know, the idea that uh small numbers but disproportionate numbers are not okay. and uh largecale improvement
efforts versus potentially looking and and and doing some um just really deep dives on what's actually happening on the ground like how do we put eyes on it and and what does it look like and um there's something to to learn from there. I don't I don't know what the
answer is just I mean I I do think that there's an opportunity for us to think about um what we could do there. Um but you know I you know the more you improve right if you're not and the smaller the you know
the numbers get I do think that we're going to have to be thinking about different things that to so we can kind of not stall out improvement efforts and say well this is the best we can do because we can always do better. So I really appreciate that perspective. >> Um I appreciate that. I feel I feel the
same way. Okay. I mean, if you look historically at the long-term data, we had such a a big drop once we made the actual policy change of stop doing this um that the that the end size of the suspensions went way down. So now we're dealing with a pretty small tail of the
curve. Not to minimize it, but one thing I think to think about and again not to get ahead of ourselves, but as we measure our current strategic plan, our current UIP targets and we deal with our 90, two-year, and you know, five-year targets, I think this is an area where we want to start gathering the
information that informs the next strategic plans target and and uh just saying we want to decrease proportionality of suspension is probably not the high leverage thing um in the next few years to Jorge's point and there's more leverage to be gained by the next level of analysis. Um
because we could focus on this proportionality and be missing the classroom climate issue that's more impactful. So that's why I'd love to think about as we gather data on this one in particular and on the the well-being and the climate stuff like what what are the measures that are high
leverage moving forward because this one may not be driving as much change as it should in terms of the actual in the classroom practice. I really appreciate all those comments. What I what I will say is that uh as a as a district team and how we're structured in in having those
conversations, we have very much came to the same conclusion that that we're talking about here today. Uh previously, we would have looked at what are the systems and structures we have in place to track these appropriately. Do we have the discipline framework in order to see if we're adhering to it in a proportional way? Are we are we doing the right responses to it? Those
conversations are very much rooted in today are very much rooted into root cause. what's happening at the classroom level, what's happening at an academic level that's impacting a discipline data set. Right? So, the root cause and the action steps that we are now going to be able to build into the next upcoming
UIP, I'm incredibly excited about I think our team is incredibly excited to be able to take that next step. Um, we we've built that opportunity for ourselves to to get to that level this this upcoming year. And then add our our um executive directors and directors of teaching and learning, assistant
superintendent of schools are they're working very diligently um alongside our um one of our directors of student support services who's focused on um behavior restorative practices and interventions to look very specifically
at what are the classroom incidents, what are the playground incidents, what are the interventions that are needed, how can we um promote classroom level strategies around uh prevent prevent, promote, and respond and repair alongside classroom expectations. So really looking at exactly what you just
indicated, which is what are the classroom and school level sweeps and views to support through interventions, through support and strategies and professional learning that are needed at the school level. Um, and so that's exactly where the school's team is
taking this next. Okay, good morning. Um, I think I'm going to take us through to the end of our day of much data. Um, so, um, this morning I'm happy to share that we have updated our strategic plan key
performance indicator dashboard. Um, it's been updated with the school year, um, 2425 results. So, what I'm planning to do is just go over some of those highlights, um, some of the drill downs, trends over time that you can also now
go and see in the dashboard. Um, that's linked in the slides. So, I'm not going to go to it live, but a couple things I just wanted to point out and remind about that dashboard if you um, when you do go and visit it online. Um, one new feature that was added is a data
glossery. So glossery of terms because I know there is um quite a lot of information some technical information in this dashboard. So we're just trying to always increase the supports and resources around that. You also have access to this snapshot
dashboard. Um a reminder here and I will show some screenshot examples. Um a lot of the numbers are shown on this top level but you it's also interactive so you can go in and hover get more explanation more information and then
there is also that drill down tab within the dashboard as well and of note there you can access any of our school level data um as well. So just a lot of features there uh and it's all updated so please take a look at it when you can. One other reminder about what is
contained in the dashboard is that these are all lagging measures. So these are um kind of longer term student outcomes. I will talk a little more about this especially with Grad Plus, but that's a good example to keep in mind. With Grad Plus, we're looking at graduating
cohorts. So students who are achieving the highest level once they graduate. So within this dashboard, we don't uh necessarily directly see a lot of those implementation numbers, kind of what we're tracking along the way, which you've seen a bit of that so far this
morning. Um, so just keep that in mind. These are really those long-term summitive yearly outcomes that we're looking at for our students. So the way I've organized this, I'm going to have a few slides per quadrant of the strategic plan. That's also how
that KPI dashboard is organized. So um first and this will be this one will be a little bit of a rehash of what you saw earlier um but focusing on student achievement. So the difference here is for our KPI we are combining together
elementary, middle and high so that we have one kind of uh global indicator of that but again the trends are going to be similar to what Jessica had presented to you earlier. So I'll a little bit quickly go through this and then we'll get into some more BBSD specific
metrics. So overall this is what we're seeing for our KPIs around achievement. Remember with our KPIs we are focusing on three focus groups um at the high level and again you have drill down to all other student groups as well. But
for what I'll be showing at this level we've got all students our students who are FRL eligible and students who are Hispanic Latino. So um as we can see kind of the trend here is uh relatively higher achievement percentages in
reading and writing compared to math and that uh gap that we are always watching and talking about uh between our student groups. Um we can also look at the trend over time. So, um, whereas we just saw a
snapshot of 2025, the dashboard also has the ability to drill down to a three-year trend. And what I'm going to highlight in my slides here is a year-over-year change. So, going from 2024 to 2025. Um, and so in general with achievement across all levels, we see a
couple point increase across the board in student groups and across content areas. So >> yeah, >> I just wanted to elevate a comment from Kitty that she said it would be good to show what percentage of students
participated. I think it might it shows it in the dash live dashboard, but I think your numbers may have covered it up. Your bubbles covered it up on this one. >> The participation >> participation numbers. >> Yeah. >> Shows the numbers tested, but not the percent of people that
>> I see. total population I think is what she's asking. >> Okay, thank you. Yeah, that's good feedback. I think it's in the hover over on the dashboard, but that's a good feedback for the presentation. Thank you. So, just a few trends to lift up here.
Um, achievement in ELA and math increased overall and among um students in those focus groups that we just saw, there were some notable increases. And I'm calling two or three percentage points notable here among FRL eligible
black, Asian, and two or more racist students in both math and ELA, as well as Hispanic, Latino, multilingual learners, and students served through an IEP in ELA. moderate increases. That's like one percentage point increase. Um we're
seeing among white students in both content areas as well as Hispanic Latino, multilingual learners and students served through special education in math. And we did observe declines in achievement among American Indian and Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander students.
Okay. So, I know this one's a bit of a rehash, but any questions here? Okay. So now we'll get into um some more of our BBSD specific metrics. So for next best step we're looking at student growth and the new part that we are
offering through the dashboard is specifically looking at student groups uh tied to interventions. So we have again the growth numbers median growth percentile for our three focus groups and additionally for this metric students who had a documented
intervention in the aligned content area. Now this is also a visual in the dashboard where you can drill in by hovering on the data points and that's where I'm going to show some examples here.
So um this is I tried to approximate this with my slide but this is what the drill down kind of looks like. So if you hover over those groups for all students you can see a direct comparison between the students who received an intervention last year and those who did
not. Um and so here's the comparison for all students in reading and writing and math. Just something I want to lift up here is if you look at that reading intervention group, the median growth percentile overall for that group is 53.
So those students um you know one thing we know is that they have been identified because they were achieving at a lower level. That's why they got identified for intervention and we are seeing their growth outpacing peers across the state. So that's a really
promising number to see that go over 50. Um, in general, you know, again, we know these are students whose achievement numbers are lower and we would just hope that we see some elevated growth for them. So, that's sort of the pattern we're looking for. Um,
yeah, not not the same direction for math, but yeah. >> Yeah. Can you back up to the previous slide? >> Yes. So for all students in reading and math the median growth percentile was 57%.
Or is that of the people who got tiered interventions or didn't get tiered interventions? >> Yeah. So the all students those blue bars that's um all students intervention or not inclusive of everybody. >> So that's sort of a baseline for median
growth percentiles. And then you go to the next slide and that's where we see that the those that received a reading intervention are four points behind those that didn't get a reading intervention in terms of their growth. Right? Is that what that's telling us?
>> Correct. >> So um what does that tell me? Because um I'm still not sure that using median growth percentile is the right way to capture the tiered interventions. I mean, it's the median. So, it's the
people in the middle. And our tiered interventions are dealing with people farther out from the median. Sort of by definition, they're going to have performance issues that mean they need more interventions. So, you could change everything below the median and everything above the median. And the median wouldn't change because it's the
50th percentile of the kids in the middle for the growth percentile. So, I'm still, this is one where I'm like, I don't think this measures what we want it to. and I still can't even understand what what it's getting at. So, like if you if you have a kid who has a reading intervention, you've identified that
they're behind in reading and they're getting extra time with a teacher and they're way behind, they could make tons of growth and you wouldn't see that reflected in the median because the median is the 50th percentile. So, it's I'm still I have a disconnection on this
one for how we're getting at what we want to measure or even understanding what it's telling us about the population that we are trying to talk about. And I understand that growth captures everybody. But if we had if someone told me the growth of the bottom quintile or decile of students um and
the change in that, then I think I might have an understanding of reading interventions. or if someone told me the growth by the top decile then I don't have an understanding of interventions for gifted and talented or accelerated kids but this median just doesn't make any sense to me and can someone speak to
why how this works >> and just to clarify I mean is your question about kind of the baseline or the the reference number that we would want to be looking for >> I guess my my question is about like the hypothesis or the theory behind this on
like that's where I just I just don't get how median growth percent or I haven't before and now I I'm still more confused by what I'm seeing. >> So the way that Colorado measures growth is different than in other places that I've seen measure growth. Um
it's all about comparison, right? Versus how how much are you growing based on what you know around the curriculum. It's how much are you growing in comparison to people that look the kids that looked like you the previous year. Right? So, it's tricky. Alex, I hear what you're saying. So,
median growth percentile is the is the growth measure that everybody uses and sees, right? Uh I hear what you're saying around the median growth percentile. Um, you know, you would you would I think that the
like Claire said, the pattern that you would hope is that if a kid is growing above 50%, they're growing above their like peers. If they're growing below 40, if they're below 50%, they're growing less than their like peers.
what it doesn't you know the limitation of median growth percentile is um you know how much how closer are they getting to um to meeting standards right I mean see so uh and and our state
doesn't calculate the growth that way when I was in uh a principal in Florida that's how they every year they said okay if you got you know appropriate growth is this many points improvement from the last year and there's lots of calibration it was just a lot more money invested in at the state level to kind
of think about those things. Um, and I don't want to and and this is where I think sometimes it can get tricky, you know, accuracy versus understandability, right? Because when we say, oh, every kid gets a growth score, right? And if
you start to think about growth in a different way, then that growth score is then is then reported. Um, but maybe we should get offline a I mean, I I hear what you're saying. I just I'm not really sure I'm not really sure how we would how we
would get there unless it was just a more nuanced like if you were to take like certain like the bottom quartile kids was their average growth then then the second quartile the third quartile the fourth quartile and would you and you would have to align it I guess based on achievement like some kind of
achievement growth alignment which is not something that the state does. I'll have to think about it. >> Yeah, I I'd be delighted to follow up offline. I just um uh I continue to have concern that this one's difficult to
understand and I'm not sure it's capturing what we want it to. So, I'd love to talk offline about it in the long and again I think it's one where we could learn from it for what we do in the future in terms of metrics uh to get better at understanding the impact of our interventions. For me that the
question really is even when you compare them I I understand that the student is being uh their growth is being compared to a student who's in that same class who had the same original score. So as things go up it does improve but you're still dealing with the with the medians of
that and not the and you could reflect the distribution with other measures too. So that's why I'm not sure median is the right way to go. All right, thank you. Um, we'll just continuing on a few more slides of this metric as we have it now. So, here's the
drill down with um, students who are FRL eligible um, across content areas and within that group um, that comparison between our intervention and no intervention group. And then here's what that looks like for
our other focus group of Hispanic Latino students. So that's the state of things for the 2025 results and then um to lift up what we are seeing for that growth over or change over time. Um so here I've just
highlighted again those two-year changes. This is in our three focus groups and then our additional intervention groups here. Um so kind of again following the trends we saw earlier for our focus
groups. We're seeing some upticks in the growth numbers for reading and writing and some declines in the growth numbers for math. Um I think interestingly here this pattern um as we're looking at it here was even more pronounced among those students with an intervention
groups that we're looking at. Um, so a higher increase for reading and writing and more of a decrease in math year-toear. So I think, you know, also looking at this, I think it's going to lead more of our followup and questions. Um, uh, and I appreciate some ideas of
different ways that we might dig deeper into it. So just noting the trends here. Um, growth is strong overall. Again, if we step back and do that comparison to the 50th percentile, we are seeing strong growth, but of course, we are digging
into groups and seeing where we can keep pushing improvement. Um, growth was stable or increased across all groups in reading and writing. Just when I was looking through the drill down results, a couple standouts I saw um in reading
and writing were among multilingual learners and black students. Um, and then growth was stable or decreased for most of our groups in math with the exception of students identified as gifted and students who identify as two or more races. Um, and then that BBSD
specific metric around students who received an intervention, positive trends with the reading interventions and uh bringing up questions to guide our follow-up around math interventions. Okay. So, um moving along to our define
the destination quadrant. Um for this metric, we are looking at a snapshot of grad plus medals and pins among the class of 2025. Just one very quick caveat when I say class of 2025, that is at this time preliminary. We will be
getting finalized graduating cohort um graduation graduation statistics um later this school year, but we have a good set of data to start with for that. So just know these might change a little bit later in the year as we finalize that cohort. Um also note here I
mentioned again how we're looking at lagging measures and this really I think hits home with the grad plus metrics. Um so this is the culmination uh the culminating out outcome for student work that happens across their time in BBSD but it is a snapshot of what we see when
they graduate um and that plus piece what are they getting in addition to a diploma. Um so of course keep in mind that the grad plus framework also includes opportunities leading up so prek through 11 um that really support students in reaching
these highest levels of achievement um in each of these areas. That's not necessarily some of the work in those initiatives will not necessarily show um in this data set until future cohorts of students are graduating. So, um I think
on one hand we already do have a lot to celebrate and I think we're going to hopefully for years um future years to come see more of the impact of the great work that is happening now. So, um I think the there's a lot of information here. So, what we're
breaking down is um each row is one of our focus groups and then each column going across is looking at the pieces of grad plus. So, grad plus overall represents percentages of students who achieved in one or more of the areas of
the grad plus framework. And then the next four parts of this chart show what those areas are. So those are industry certification, seal of biiteracy, workbased learning, and earning a college credit um in high school.
So I think what tells the the story here is looking at that change over time. Um, and so that's what I'm highlighting on this slide is the percentage point change among each of our groups in each of those areas of grad plus.
Um, so we do see increases across groups for grad plus overall. Um, a little bit more modest change in industry certifications and work-based learning. a little bit more notable increase in seal of by literacy and strong increases
in students achieving college credit. >> Kitty, >> can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yay. I'm on my third piece of technology logging in. I just want to comment on how impressive the grad plus um numbers
are. In just two years, we have so significantly increased the number of students and percentage of students who've achieved one or more of the um grad plus elements. So, I just want to
really give a shout out to everybody who's been working on this because it's excellent work. Thank you. Yeah, this was a fun slide to put together and look at these results. Definitely a celebration for um a lot of
us here. So, just to um to name some of these trends and lift up a few really promising trends, um we did see that increase in our graduates achieving in one or more areas overall and among our
student focus groups. And that was really a lot of that was um bolstered in the area of earning college credits. Those increases are very impressive. Um and then a few trends as I looked at the drill down and looked at um different student groups that I just wanted to
lift up. Multilingual learners earning the seal of biiteracy increased by six percentage points. Students served through special education achieving in work-based learning increased by seven percentage points. and Hispanic Latino students earning a college credit
increased by 12 percentage points. So, good numbers. Um, okay. And then finally, in the area of valued and included, we're looking at both um climate survey results and suspension rates and rates of restorative
interventions. Um so just to quickly recall our KPIs uh have that climate survey composite. So that's looking at percent of favorable responses across three of the questions in our student climate survey that's given every year.
Um a suspension rate, we've touched on that earlier. And our restorative intervention rate. So uh students who um have a behavior incident, how many um had a restorative intervention as some part of that resolution?
So here it is for our three focus groups and then let's take a look at the trends over time. So the um climate survey uh percent positive responses that stayed really quite stable um over time and in
the last two years in particular. Um our suspension rates we shared a little bit of that around our targets but that has some very also some small variations yeartoyear. Um, generally on the three-year trend, we're moving in the right direction and as we've noted, there's still work to do
here. Um, and then our restorative intervention rates also, you know, a couple percentage points up and down. So, pretty stable at this time. So, to bring that all together, um, our climate survey responses were stable for
most groups. I did note some decreases in favorable responses among American Indian and black students. So, that's something we will be looking into and following up about. Um, I noted that our suspensions continue to trend downward
in our three-year trend. Um, despite that slight.1% um, increase year-over-year. Just a trend within that is our suspension rates remain highest at the middle level compared to elementary and high school. Um, we're, you know,
watching that throughout the year. Um and then our restorative interventions are holding steady relative to a bigger jump historically. So if you remember last year um when we launched the KPI dashboard we saw like a really big jump in our now four years ago trend of
restorative intervention that was related to just focus on the work having FTE support for um really diving into that work and so it's it is nice to see that that jump has held steady now over time.
We'll go to Elenia since you haven't participated in Jorge. Uh on that slide we have the decrease in favorable responses among American Indian and black students. Um and you say we're going to follow up. What are
we doing in terms of the followup? >> Yeah. Well, I think for now just understanding what that trend was. Um, I think what I would like to do as a next step too is look at that um, at the school level and see if we can start to
I think you know school level, grade levels and just try to pinpoint more what's driving that. >> Yeah, >> thank you. I would appreciate that very much. I'm always concerned when I see um specific demographics
having a reduction in that favorable response and if it's at particular schools with particular administrations that we really hone in on it. So I appreciate that. >> I I would add into that too. We we do have quarterly vortex meetings uh in which uh our directors are leading uh
collaborative conversations with building leaders around those specific data and identifying what root causes are of those as well. And we are also asking that as they identify where those gaps are that those are part of their 90-day plan action steps as well. >> Thank you. Um, as a follow-up to that,
um, in terms of administration of that survey, um, do you look at response rates as well? Because especially for a population that small, if few students don't respond, that could really throw the numbers off, but that also might be a reflection of them not feeling connected as well. So, >> yes, >> that's an important one to kind of key into. Again, I'm trying to interpret
some of the numbers on the previous slide. Um, percent with restorative interventions. So, there it's right around 48 for all students as a part of that. So does that mean of all the kids who had to have some kind of disciplinary incident, 48% received a resortative intervention and the remaining percent received some kind of
more serious intervention or a less serious intervention or how do how do I interpret that 48%. >> Yeah. So the um the group of students that we're looking at is all the students who did have some kind of you know documented behavior incident. So that's kind of our pool that are that we
are drawing from. It could have been one incident. It could have been multiple over the year. We're not actually looking at that part. It's just that group of students. Um and then across all of the um resolutions that were documented um was at least one of them a
restorative practice resolution. >> Yeah. So it is pretty broad at this time and we've had different ways and we do um at those vortex meetings I think that's a good venue where actually our administrators can go in and look incident by incident to review what was
done. Um we look at you know the level of response appropriateness of response and kind of debrief all of those pieces. So this is a very um I'd say pretty high level metric of that and then internally we are definitely drilling into that
with more detail. >> Alex, >> thank you. Um I have on that one following up on the restorative justice. Do we have can we like do the cross tabs of the percent favorable responses from
the climate survey of the students who are participating in restorative justice versus others and find out how those people are feeling about their school and their climate. And then the second part for me is and the I assume the the students with the
inter uh restorative intervention the the the sample of that does that include the kid who's re the one who's found that did the action or the kid that is um involved in a disciplinary action by being on the receiving end of something unfortunate. And so, uh, I know as a
schoolboard member, um, I hear from people who've had a dissatisfactory experience on either end of that. Um, and I don't know how to put that within scale or perspective other than the trauma and the anxiety that the individual students and their families
are facing. So, I'd like to know if the restorative justice is restorative, then ideally the people who are participating in it end up with a higher view of their climate of their school when they're done. So, I would love to connect those two somehow. And maybe these aren't the
data to do that, but like the exit interview of the families involved in disciplinary proceedings would be really quite helpful. And that'd be something you could track over time that would get at do people feel restored? Do people feel included? Do people feel safe? Um,
and what's the proportion of that 1323 students compared to the 11,000 of all students who have a favorable response? how many of them are having a favorable response when they're done. And I I don't know how I don't know whether that's methodologically possible with
the data sources or or how to do it, but I know that we as board members at least uh and I know the school administrators deal with folks who had dissatisfactory experiences with it and that's um something that we're trying to get at substantively.
>> Yeah. Um yeah, I think that's a good question and I think worth exploring what we can do there. Just to clarify what's in the KPIs that is um specifically students who were who did the action um both for suspension rate of course and for restorative practices.
>> Yeah. Because if um if there was like a uh you know somebody was impacted by somebody, we wouldn't put in a behavior incident for that person on their record because it would be like a false negative just, you know, so we could
track it and and and measure it. But you know the you know the theme here is is you know think about the levels of data and conversation and um you know that that we're now able to start talking about where uh you know four years ago I
couldn't tell you whether how many kids actually had a anything remembers that right like we had a system that was everybody was kind of cooking up their own system there wasn't a consistency so you know these these are great problems to have that we've actually been able to create some really
good systems and structures and then how do you nuance and look at it differently uh to to begin to you know continue to improve. So I really do appreciate the conversation. Well, first of all, this has been a very robust conversation and we are so
grateful for your input, for your engagement. You've given us some um excellent feedback for us to take to next step. So, thank you. I want to anchor us back to our theory of action here on this slide, which really
culminates a lot of work. It not only links to our theory of action, but also to progress in opportunities, growth, and achievement in BBSD. Just looking back to 2022 when the path was mostly cleared for progress after
the pandemic. Um the opportunities that have been created since that time are many and what rise to the top are just a few here. Purchasing and implementing seven new curriculum that are curricula that are standardsbased. Adherence to an
assessment framework. the creation of an assessment framework behind that. Uh utilizing differentiated funding to expand supports at schools based on need and advancing that to a structured and consistent focus. The
development of re and refinement of um and implementation of a discipline framework districtwide, scaling out DDI across all schools and continuing to refine and expand this. launching in earnest the grad plus framework as um
board member Sergeant named it's really just been a couple years since we launched that to incredible success. Short cycle improvement planning in all schools through 90-day plans consistent instructional expectations across the K12 landscape just to name a few. And as we
take a look at growth, again, just looking since 2022, we've consistently outpaced metro districts and state and the state in math and reading. Our students are uh surpassing and well above the state average. And while we're not there yet, we're not satisfied with
where we are. Our growth gaps have narrowed in English language arts um for students in K kindergarten through eighth grades. and and then finally the culmination of achievement. So the opportunities and growth leading to achievement. The
percent of students meeting benchmark in math and reading have increased as you see here. And although the grad plus framework was born just a little over three years ago, we really began recognizing students for their achievements in the four quadrants just
two years ago in 2023. And in that time, we've seen a 20% increase in recognitions with the graduating class of 2023 having 67% of students receiving a recognition and last year 87%
receiving a GRA plus medal in pins. And as the board knows, we've been very focused on decreasing disproportionate discipline. And as you've heard in this conversation, we have seen a decrease in out of school suspensions for um student groups and overall
a a small but overall decrease in out of school suspensions. And as Dr. Anderson said, we're proud of our outcomes, but we're not satisfied. Um and having said that we are pleased to present this summary of the how the
all together for all students strategic plan has elevated opportunity growth and achievement in BBSD and across students. I want to just share a little bit about our change process or the or how we've managed change in BBSD. We've really
focused on three process timelines development implementation and results. And so during the initial stages of the all together for all student strategic plan, we were focused on the development of resources which eventually became delivered through our instructional
playbook and are still delivered through our instructional playbook which is quite robust. Um, our focus then shifted to the strategic implementation or identifying the right intentional steps to take and a collaborative approach to ensure success for our
teachers so that we could have success for our students and the implementation of strategies that created the opportunities for students. And since 2022, we've been focused on um we've and have seen the results of this strategic work through growth across our system,
through narrowing gaps um in student groups and unprecedented achievements in Boulder Valley School District, making the theory a reality that opportunity leads to growth, which leads to achievement. >> I think that's a great slide.
In fact, it might be my favorite slide just to really concisely show our how our theory of action is really impact or is being implemented to really impact the growth and achievement of our students and supporting our our instructors that are elevating those experiences. Board members, any final
questions on this incredibly thorough presentation from our team? Jason. >> Um, yeah, thanks very much. Actually, in the two years I've been on the board, uh I've kind of thought about like is there something that really summarizes this work? And this is to Nicole's point, this is um a really great way to end
this conversation. And I feel like something we should continue to highlight and show whether in budget conversations or to the public. Uh for me at least, this really kind of puts it all together like these are the things that have been done. Um the these are the budget decisions. The these kind of drive our budget decisions and here are
the results. And obviously, Dr. J L Cruz, to your point, there's more work to do, but um I hope we can kind of continue to come back to this slide, add to this slide, update it. Um but for me, this really was a great summary of of the 95 slides uh put into one, but also
just all the work over the over the last few years. So, thanks very much, >> Kitty. Kitty, you might be muted. Beth, hey Kitty, we're getting more interference from your microphone again. Sorry about that. Beth,
I'm going to jump in because I I have a feeling Kitty, you and I are thinking some of the same things. As uh Dr. Daily Cruz was presenting on this final slide, I snapped a photo of it. What am I going to do with this? I don't know. I'm just really, really, really proud of BBSD and all the work that's happened on this in
in the time that Nicole and I have been on the board and Kitty's been on the board and obviously with our newer board members. I'm honored to have been part of the a very small part of this, but I'm just so proud of you guys. This is incredible. So, thank you for sharing that,
>> Alex. Yeah, I would echo the kudos and just how excited I am to be on the bandwagon for the the the progress that the district's making. And um and I know I have more nerdy questions and I can talk offline about specifics, but they're all
in the spirit of like, well, are we measuring the thing that will help us make the most difference going forward? Not we're wrong or that's not the way we're doing. It's like, well, what's what's actionable for more people that helps us understand it? And I I just have to say the other thing that I think is um Dr. Dr. Anderson, his leadership
team, everybody in the schools are making a lot of change happen and it's having the positive results and it's being intentional. And I I just want to reinforce one of the things I've seen from observing the district for the 33 years I've lived around here. Like the
degree of transparency that we now have and the openness to actually have this discussion is one of the things that has changed culturally in the district over the last couple of decades. and um uh that that it's not just that they're that we're willing to let people see
what's going on. We're we're using that information to make positive change and we're letting people see how we use the information to make positive change. Like that is just a sea change um from previous decades in the district. I know that's a long timeline, but I just want
to salute uh the the vision of our leadership and our leadership team and working with people and and getting to a point where like the data can help us helps us figure out where to go. It helps us figure out where to dig deeper. It helps us bring people along who we're trying to get to change what they do and
then we figure out how to help them do it. I use we as if I'm doing any of that, which I'm not. I'm just so grateful to see the transparency and I want to and keep us encouraging to have that. It's just great. >> Thank you again for all your efforts, not only this presentation, but in
making the work happen behind the scenes and in the day-to-day. Um, there are no final board questions. >> I think Kitty has her hand raised. >> Kitty, >> can you hear me? >> Yes, now we can. First, I apologize for all my technological problems. I don't know
what's going on, but I did want to I'll just briefly say how proud I am of the work that's been done and especially looking back to when I first joined the board in 2017 and the huge progress we have made, not just in our achievement,
but also in our systems. And and um I want to give a huge shout out to Dr. Anderson and the staff because you all have done a excellent job. I have one suggestion for the strategic plan and
that is next best steps sounds like second best steps. So I suggest that we put it best next steps so that it's perfectly clear and this is my last time hearing about the strategic plan and you
know in any depth so I just wanted to get my two cents in there because you know I can't resist. >> Thanks Kitty. A lot has changed in your tenure that's for sure. Seeing as there are no further questions, board members, we are
adjourned for today.