School board debates using FastBridge versus statewide MCAs for site goals; discussion moved to January work session

Summary

Board members clashed over whether site improvement goals should be anchored to internal FastBridge screeners or the statewide MCA. Some directors called FastBridge too internal to be publicly comparable; others said its repeatable data is more useful. The board agreed to continue the discussion in a curriculum/work‑session in January.

Directors spent an extended exchange arguing how the district should measure and report school improvement goals. One director said FastBridge is an "internal" tool that the public and board cannot easily compare across schools or to statewide results. "FastBridge is an internal thing…for the public, I don't think that's a fair assessment," the director said, urging that at least one goal be tied to a statewide or comparable metric such as the MCA for reading or math.

Supporters of FastBridge noted it can be administered multiple times a year and can show growth trends that a single annual MCA cannot. A director argued FastBridge "is something they can use three times. They can use it 100 times if they want." Several directors said the curriculum committee or a January work session is a better forum to study whether the district should require one common, comparable metric across sites.

The board did not adopt a policy change at this meeting. Several members asked administration to provide additional trend data and to bring the topic to the curriculum committee/work session in January for fuller community and staff input.