Clinton — Clinton City Schools’ accountability director reviewed the district’s 2024–25 test results Tuesday, showing mixed outcomes across grade levels while highlighting progress on English‑learner supports and college readiness programs.

Cheryl Kimbrough, the district’s accountability director, told the board that some elementary and middle grades posted percentage gains in reading and math while other grades fell; the district’s cohort graduation rate remained near 77 percent for the four‑year cohort and about 80 percent for a five‑year cohort.

Why it matters: State test results and school performance grades drive district planning, federal and state program targeting, and local public expectations. The board also discussed AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination) — a district initiative aimed at college and career readiness and study/organization strategies — as a systemic support to improve outcomes.

Assessment highlights and program notes
- ELA and math: Kimbrough reported increases in some grades and declines in others; math and reading trends varied by grade and school. Science assessment results were the district’s first under new state science standards and the state advised not to compare them directly to prior years.
- English learners: Access testing and EL progress were emphasized; Kimbrough said roughly 473 EL students were tested, 126 met progress benchmarks and 55 exited services under the revised exit standard.
- AP performance: The district reported 83 AP exams administered; 62 of those exams earned a score the district classified as “proficient.”
- AVID and local strategies: The board discussed AVID as a system‑wide strategy to teach organization, study skills and college/career aspiration; principals described career exposures, PLCs and targeted interventions for tier‑2 and tier‑3 students.

Board discussion and context
Board members asked how Clinton compares to peer districts and what specific school‑level practices produce marked proficiency gains. Administrators said local implementation fidelity, curriculum pilots (ELA and math), targeted remediation, use of iReady and PLC‑driven interventions and early college exposure are among the levers the district is using. The accountability director and superintendent said they will continue drilling down to individual student data and refining interventions where gains lag.

What’s next: District leaders will follow up on specific subgroup growth questions and on a data‑validation inquiry the accountability team raised with DPI about subgroup aggregation. The board indicated interest in visiting exemplar AVID sites and in continued reporting on year‑to‑year growth measures as implementation continues.