Bev Henderson presented results of spring Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) scores compared to fall scores and to scores as far back as 2006. I was not convinced of a clear trend of improvement for math or reading but would need copies of the slides to study before making a verifiable conclusion. I will ask whether that data is available to the public.
Ardis Sparks presented results of K-2 Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA). Again, I was not persuaded the data showed meaningful growth and would want to study the information presented before making a verifiable conclusion.
A budget update was given by Vic Roberts. Regardless of state budget cuts the district’s goal is to keep all staff. Vic’s data was thorough and well presented. The district is solvent and has come a long way from the fiscal and bookkeeping problems of several years ago.
Dave Bond continued with the second part of his report about high schools with a brief review of factors leading to students’ dropping out before graduation. That was followed by a list of strategies known to encourage students to stay in school until graduation. Two points caught my attention. First, 25% to 40% of Kennewick ninth graders need reading remediation. With the district’s emphasis on reading for more than a decade how could this be? It is claimed that 90% or more of third graders meet the goal of reading at grade level. What happens after third grade?
Second, Bond emphasized the need for doubles, reading, math and science classes to be more “engaging” to students. This is a point my colleagues and I have argued for years. This appears to be an opportunity to develop middle school exploratory classes that support math, reading and science goals effectively and meaningfully. Students from middle school exploratory classes are more likely to transition to high school elective classes. Bond also stated the need to utilize Tri-Tech better.
Fielding commented about changes to high schools being based on what works and not cost. He believes that through reform elementary schools look much different now than ten years ago. Similarly, high schools will have to become much different.
Chuck Lybeck was allowed 10 minutes to present the science adoption that had been tabled at the last school board meeting. He related that a notice had been published in the Tri-City Herald and 58 community members had participated in reviewing texts. Lybeck commented about parent issues and about each of the 11 science texts. All objections had been resolved. Board member Heather Kintzley moved to approve the adoption and Lynn Fielding seconded. It passed without discussion.
Before offering her motion Kintzley exclaimed that Lybeck’s presentation was just what she had been looking for and she felt so much better about it now.
I question whether any meaningful information was added to the discussion of the science texts and curriculum or if this was largely an exercise inappropriately using board power.
