Roseville Area Schools Local Literacy Plan for Reading Well by ...

District 623
Roseville Area Schools Local Literacy Plan
This plan describes the Roseville Area Schools’ activities for implementation of the Minnesota
Department of Education’s Reading Well by 3rd Grade initiative. Each section of this report
aligns to required plan elements consistent with Statute 120B.12, as noted below. In an effort
to address specifically every required plan element, the reader will notice redundancy of
information across some sections of the report. This is due to the interconnected nature of
required elements.
This plan describes current practices for the 2011-2012 school year, as well as direction for the
2012-2013 school year. In places, specific areas of future work are noted, as the requirements
of the Local Literacy Plan elements direct us to further develop or extend district work in the
area of literacy.
LOCAL LITERACY PLAN REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED in Statute 120B.12:
The public local literacy plan includes, at a minimum, the following items consistent with
Statute 120B.12: (items listed in bold are plan components specified in Statute 120B.12.)
Statement of goals or objectives defining how reading proficiency will be ensured for ALL
students at each grade level Kindergarten through Grade 3
Roseville Area Schools is committed to ensuring the reading proficiency of all students. Reading
Well by 3 rd Grade is one part of the district’s comprehensive efforts toward this goal.
Description of current K-6 program
In 2010-2011, Roseville Area Schools adopted a new comprehensive reading program. In grades
K-3, materials from the Literacy by Design program form the core of classroom materials used in
our elementary schools.
As with nearly all programs of this type, core program materials serve basic needs well for most
students, but they do not meet the needs of all students. For example, a significant proportion
of Roseville’s English learners (EL’s) is identified as Level I, or newcomer EL’s. These students
speak little or no English, so basic classroom materials are not an appropriate fit for many
instructional needs. Similarly, a significant proportion of our district population reads two or
more years above grade level, and most comprehensive reading programs do not provide a
range of materials that extend that far beyond grade level. Because our district population’s
needs extend beyond what can be addressed effectively by core program materials,
supplemental resources are sometimes required that allow teachers to differentiate instruction
across the needs of all students.
Since the 2007-2008 school year, Roseville Area Schools has been developing systemic
structures and practices that are designed to provide all non-proficient (below grade level)
students with targeted, intensified instruction that is likely to accelerate learning through our
Pyramid of Interventions initiative. This approach is designed to provide increasingly focused
and intensive instruction for students reading below grade level, with the strongest support
targeted for students who read farthest below grade level.

The “pyramid” refers to a series of three tiers of support that are provided for all students who
need it, but as students move through the tiers, support is more specific, often in increasingly
smaller group sizes, and always with the most qualified available teacher.
Tier I instruction is the first and most basic form of support in the pyramid. It includes the
regular daily instruction that all students receive as part of each school’s literacy program. Tier I
instruction also includes differentiated support coordinated by the classroom teacher for
students who read below grade level. In many cases, Tier I support might mean that the teacher
increases the number of times per week she or he meets with students being supported. This is
somewhat like receiving an “extra scoop” of instruction, and we recognize that many students
just need extra time practicing the same things in order to understand what is being taught.
Tier II support is provided in addition to Tier I instruction, meaning students receive all that was
being provided in Tier I plus additional support that is part of Tier II. Tier II instruction is typically
provided in small group sizes of four students or less. Students often are grouped based on
similar instructional needs, and instruction both extends and intensifies beyond Tier I
instruction. An example of Tier II support might be when a teacher notices that a small group of
students are struggling with an area of reading like inference. These students might receive
additional support in the form of specific, targeted instruction in this area.
Tier III instruction is individualized one-on-one instruction for our students most in need of
acceleration. Tier III instruction is intended to be provided in addition to Tier I and Tier II
instruction. Currently in Roseville, Tier III support is provided in limited circumstances. For
example, our district currently implements the Reading Recovery program, which provides
individualized instruction but only for first grade students. Tier III support is the most difficult to
provide because it typically is the most cost prohibitive and/or time intensive. We continue to
explore ways to scale up opportunities for students who need this type of support.
A variety of assessments are used across the year to help identify students who may need
additional support, diagnose specific student needs, and monitor each student’s rate of progress
(as detailed throughout this plan in other sections). When additional support is provided
through the Pyramid of Interventions, accelerated growth is expected as an outcome. Typically
we like to see students receiving intervention support to experience growth that is twice the
national average in order for the support to be considered effective. When double growth is not
seen, teachers often revise their plans to see if another approach can more strongly accelerate
learning.
Interventions are developed, described, and monitored through our district’s Collaborative
Intervention Plans (CIP’s). The CIP is a 6-10 week model for students receiving additional
support. CIP’s are developed collaboratively within grade level team meetings, most often
between classroom teachers and other support teachers who either help to develop the plan
and/or provide some of the intervention support for students. CIP’s include plans for progress
monitoring students at least as frequently as every two weeks. This way, adjustments can be
made within each CIP during the flow of instruction, and in some cases on a daily basis.
Various elements of our core instruction and Pyramid of Interventions work are elaborated in
other parts of this plan.

Overall and disaggregated elementary (K-6) reading trends
Overall K-6 reading trends are positive over the last four years, with last school year (2010-2011)
being one of our best years ever for elementary schools based on proficiency (MCA-II Reading)
and growth (MAP) results. According to the MAP Reading test, Roseville elementary students
(K-6) experienced the highest rates of growth ever seen at the elementary level. MCA-II Reading
results for the same year reflected district proficiency rates for reading that were among our
best ever.
Disaggregated data show two trends significant to Reading Well by 3 rd Grade. First, within the
tested grades in our elementary schools (grades 2-6 for MAP, and 3-6 for MCA-II Reading,
respectively), grades 2 and 3 historically have performed below our upper elementary grades in
terms of growth. This may suggest some relative need for improvement in our lower
elementary grades. Second, a large, historically persistent racial achievement gap has existed
for Roseville students, with white students significantly outperforming students of color every
year we have tested. We have seen a slight decline in racial predictability across our elementary
schools in the last four years (a reduction of about 4% in proficiency disparity between white
students and students of color) and specifically in grade 3 (also about a 4% reduction), but race
remains a powerful predictor of student performance in Roseville.
Roseville Area Schools has selected as its district-identified proficiency measure the Benchmark
Assessment System (BAS), a one-one-one assessment delivered by a teacher to an individual
student. During the assessment students read a book with their teacher, and then have a
conversation with the teacher to determine the student’s level of comprehension. Through
BAS, each student is assigned an instructional reading level, which is the reading level that best
matches each student’s current abilities.
One advantage to using BAS as our district measure is its accuracy in predicting success on MCA-
II Reading beginning in grade 3. Instructional reading levels in BAS are set to national average
performance in each grade (50 th percentile). Local and national evidence tell us that typically
between 80% - 90% of our district’s students who score at or above the 50 th percentile using
other valid and reliable assessments go on to pass MCA-II Reading. Sampling of recent BAS
scores suggests that the BAS is likely to give us similarly high rates of accuracy in predicting
performance on MCA-II Reading.
Given Roseville’s positive trends in reading (including a reduction in our racial achievement gap
as measured by MCA-II Reading), our strong core program and Pyramid of Intervention work,
and aligned assessments, we believe we are well positioned to help all of our students read
proficiently by the end of their 3 rd grade year.
Statement(s) of process to assess students' level of reading proficiency including assessments
used, when administered, how proficiency is determined, and when and how results are
communicated with parents of students in Kindergarten through Grade 3
Roseville utilizes the Benchmark Assessment System (BAS) to identify students in grade K-3 who
need targeted assistance to achieve grade level proficiency in the fall of each school year. The
Benchmark Assessment System allows us to evaluate student reading and comprehension ability
with a reliable and robust universal screening, and to determine each child's instructional level
for guided reading according to the Fountas & Pinnell A-Z Text Level Gradient for guided

eading. This assessment is conducted in the winter and spring for students in kindergarten, in
the fall, winter and spring for students in grade one, and is conducted at minimum in the fall and
spring in grades two and three.
Teachers use established district expectations to identify which students are predicted to be
below grade level expectations by the spring of that school year based on assessment
information from the BAS. This data is shared with parents during winter conferences in grades
K-3.
For students in kindergarten, teachers conduct a series of assessments that measure student’s
letter name and sound recognition and sight word recognition in the fall and winter, as well as
phonemic awareness assessments. These assessments identify students for whom we suspect
reading difficulty so that Tier II support can be offered to those children. This assessment data is
shared with parents during the fall conference time. In first grade, 20% of the lowest
performing first grade students are assessed using the Observation Survey by Marie Clay. These
students are assessed in the fall and again in the winter. This data is used to determine which
first grade students will receive Reading Recovery, a Tier III intervention, typically lasting for 12-
14 weeks, that is supplemental to Tier I and Tier II instruction. This assessment data is shared
with parents when their child begins Reading Recovery instruction. In second and third grade
students take the NWEA-MAP test in reading in the fall, winter and spring. Teachers use the
information from the MAP test to identify students who score at or below the 33% in reading.
Those students are then targeted for Tier II and Tier III intervention support. MAP testing data
is sent home with students in the fall, and shared with parents at winter conferences.
Once students have been identified as being as risk for not reaching grade level proficiency,
Collaborative Intervention Plans (CIP’s) are created which are designed to establish shared goals,
intervention plans, progress monitoring and communication between all teachers involved in a
child’s instruction. The intervention plans target specific reading skills and behaviors that
teachers need to accelerate in order for the child to achieve proficiency. These plans are
collaboratively developed by teams of teachers at that grade level. Progress monitoring is a
critical element of the intervention plan, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the
interventions. The CIP is reviewed every 6-10 weeks, and progress monitoring data is used to
determine if the interventions are successfully accelerating the student’s reading progress at a
minimum of double growth.

Specific information on how elementary schools within the district will notify and involve
parents accelerating literacy development for their children in each grade Kindergarten
through Grade 3
In the Collaborative Intervention Planning process, teachers identify one or more areas of
student strengths and needs based on the screening/diagnostic data. Teachers then establish
goals based on students’ areas of greatest need. Potential goals are established in one or more
of the following areas: phonemic awareness, word identification, comprehension, fluency,
vocabulary, or the affective domain/motivation. Short term goals are set in order to accelerate
the child’s achievement to two times typical growth, and long term goals are set to grade level
performance in each area. Progress monitoring is conducted at least every two weeks to
determine whether or not the intervention is resulting in the desired acceleration.
As identified by the Collaborative Intervention Plan, a home school connection is made by a
member of the intervention team, including a “home practice” element and an intentional
communication point with the parent/guardian. The intervention plan directs the team to
specify when the communication will occur, who will plan/prepare the communication and
home practice element, what resources will be used, and who will implement or follow through.
Reading is multidimensional. In order to accurately determine if students are adequately
profiting from instruction and are in need of intervention, we triangulate our data from three
sources (as available): MCA-II Reading (which provide useful information on reading
proficiency), NWEA-MAP (which provides a description of students’ academic growth) and
Benchmark Assessment System (which provides essential information on students’ reading
behaviors and processing). Criteria for students in need of reading intervention are defined for
each of these three assessments, according to risk of reading difficulty for each.

Currently, most of the resources and tools available to parents of children who are not reading
at or above grade level are communicated by their children’s teachers. Communication for all
families occurs during regularly scheduled events such as parent-teacher conferences.
However, as noted elsewhere in this report, individualized parent notification is expected
whenever a student reads below grade level and/or the student is receiving reading intervention
support through a Collaborative Intervention Plan. Classroom-specific resources and tools are
communicated by each child’s teacher as part of the CIP planning process.
Parent/caregiver/community resources and tools are among the areas of this plan we would like
to develop more strongly during the 2012-2013 school year.
Explain for a public audience what interventions and instructional supports will be available to
students not reading at or above grade level in grades Kindergarten through Grade 3 and how
these interventions will be based on learner data, including how services will be provided, and
how parents will be informed of student progress
Interventions and supports are provided to students based on each student’s specific needs.
The Collaborative Intervention Plan details the broad areas of support typically considered when
assessing student need and designing intervention support:
● Phonemic awareness
● Word identification
● Comprehension
● Fluency
● Vocabulary
● Affective domain/engagement/motivation
● Other (specify)
The CIP also defines for each student a specific academic goal, the specific support instruction a
student will receive, the method of monitoring progress, and a description of who will provide
support (often a shared plan among multiple teachers).
All students receive core instruction that is primarily drawn from the district’s core K-6 literacy
program, as described in the introduction to this plan. While teachers are encouraged to use
core materials flexibly and supplement the core when students’ needs fall outside of the range
of materials provided in the classroom set, district administration communicates a clear
expectation that core materials be used as the basis for instruction whenever appropriate.
Essentially, the district’s core program is expected as the framework for instruction in our
elementary grades.
In grades 1-6, schools implement a literacy block of about 2 hours with slight variation across
schools and classrooms occurring due to occasional scheduling obstacles. However, the amount
of time provided for literacy is relatively consistent across all elementary schools. Because our
district kindergarten program is a half-day program with options for all-day extension and
enrichment, kindergarten students typically receive about 75 minutes of literacy instruction
each day. Daily literacy instruction includes a mix of whole group and small group instruction.
Whole group instruction often establishes a common theme within a class, while small group
instruction allows students to apply skills within a common theme using texts at their individual
levels.

State standards in English language arts drive our district’s instruction. Currently, Roseville uses
the 2003 English language arts standards, but in compliance with direction from the Minnesota
Department of Education will transition into implementation of the state’s new (2010) English
language arts standards. A district team of K-6 teachers helped develop and lead training in our
elementary schools this spring, in anticipation of this transition. Training included an overview
of the new standards, district-created alignment documents that detail specific activities in each
grade’s curriculum that align to all grade level benchmarks, and an overview of proposed
changes to the district report card, which will take effect next school year.
A range of assessments, as described elsewhere in this plan, is used to identify students who
need additional reading support. The Collaborative Intervention Plan document guides teachers
through the planning process and includes specific references to communicating with families
and describing appropriate home practice suggestions. Roseville Area Schools recognizes that
traditional modes of communication (formal letters, official mailings) often are not read and/or
understood by many of the families whose students are being served as part of a CIP. For this
reason, the form of communication is flexible as part of a CIP, but the expectation for
connecting with families is firm. Many teachers use phone or personal contact with families to
both communicate information about reading support and to establish better relationships
between school and home. Informal communication can sometimes work better for families
because personal interaction allows for questions and discussion, while formal notification may
only serve to document student performance without allowing for authentic communication
between school and home.
Roseville Area Schools continues to experiment with new and innovative types of
communication, such as translated letters, translation services through our district Language
Line, support from cultural liaisons, etc.
Describe how elementary teachers will participate in, and benefit from professional
development on scientifically-based reading instruction
Elementary teachers who have been continuously employed in the district have been part of
professional development (PD) on scientifically-based reading instruction for the last four years,
and professional development support will continue as we begin implementation of our Reading
Well by 3 rd Grade plan. More recently hired teachers have been part of ongoing training and
often receive supplemental training in the most essential areas of literacy instruction (e.g.,
training in the use of the Benchmark Assessment system) in addition to the district’s ongoing
professional development.
A specific district-level focus for professional development has been equity, addressing the
longstanding racial achievement gap that has existed in our school district. Our historical
performance data indicate that over a period of several years leading up to 2007-2008, the
racial achievement disparity in reading between white students and students of color doubled
from 14% to 28% according the MCA-II Reading proficiency. As of 2010-2011, the district-wide
racial disparity has been cut by 4%, with more significant progress in our elementary grades.
While the reductions to the achievement gap are encouraging, performance data suggest that
focus in this area continues to be an intense need.

Equity professional development has been focused on two broad areas: teacher mindset and
teacher skillset. Teacher mindset PD addresses the teacher beliefs, attitudes, and dispositions
associated with accelerated student learning in general and the reduction of the achievement
gap in particular. Equity skillset PD provides training in the methods and strategies associated
with the same outcomes. An intended outcome of equity professional development is to help
teachers understand that neither mindset nor skillset alone are sufficient, but that highly
effective teachers tend to have strength in both areas. Consequently, equity PD sessions have
been scheduled across the school year so that participants can continue their learning and
connect experiences across both types of professional development.
Over the past four years, the following PD activities have been provided for elementary
teachers:
● District-wide training in the use of the new K-6 literacy program
● District-wide training in implementation of the new (2010) English language arts
standards
● District-wide training in the implementation of our Pyramid of Interventions initiative
● District-wide equity training related to teacher skillset (effective practices, strategies)
and mindset (effective attitudes, beliefs)
● Regular work sessions that allow teachers to develop, monitor, and review Collaborative
Intervention Plans for students needing support in every elementary school
● Access to coaching from a site-level or district-level reading specialist or literacy coach
● Efforts to systematize practice by embedding intervention planning as part of each
school’s regular meeting schedule (e.g., once-a-week grade level meetings to check in
on CIP’s and student progress)
● Efforts to provide past training to new hires
● Teacher-specific, customized data reviews of student performance
● Six of our seven elementary schools participate in the Alternative Teacher performance
Pay System (ATPPS), which is Roseville’s merit pay system. For most buildings during
most years, improvement in reading has been the goal. Teachers select professional
teaching goals based on Charlotte Danielson’s Framework for Teaching. A target group
of students is selected for intervention based on data gathered by the district
assessment measures.
In addition to the formal training provided above, all elementary teachers have access to
informal professional development through the support of reading coaches, intervention
specialists, and/or district curriculum coordinators. This support includes, but is not limited to,
opportunities for teachers to observe demonstration lessons, release time to work with other
district teachers, chances to receive personalized coaching related to effective reading practices,
access to additional teaching resources, or other services related to the improvement of reading
instruction. Coaches also play a supporting role in the gathering and organization of student
data in each school.
Specifically describe how comprehensive scientifically based reading instruction consistent
with section 122A.06, subdivision 4 is consistently implemented throughout elementary
grades

Roseville’s core literacy program in grades K-3 is Literacy by Design. Literacy by Design is a
standards-aligned, research supported program that addresses instruction in reading, writing,
and oral language development (speak/view/listen). Except in rare cases (e.g., special education
students who qualify for full replacement curriculum), all students in grades K-3 participate in
the district’s core program. The program provides a mixture of whole-group and small-group
experiences that allow for social inclusion of all students but also allows for differentiated,
targeted instruction in small group settings so students can apply skills at their own
developmental levels.
Through ongoing assessment as described in other parts of this plan, student performance data
is regularly reviewed. No more than every 6-10 weeks, teachers review classroom intervention
plans to determine if below grade level students are making accelerated growth and/or to
screen for additional students who may need to be added to intervention groups. The Literacy
by Design program includes bi-weekly theme tests that give teachers feedback about student
performance compared to intended outcomes. This way, students who are not receiving
support services are also monitored, preventing students who might “slip through the cracks”
during the school year.
Support for students is provided through a tiered system that intensifies and extends support
for students if initial efforts are unsuccessful.
● All students receive core instruction through the district program. Most students meet
or exceed grade level expectations through core instruction only.
● Tier I support: Students who are not responding as desired through the district program
receive additional support as coordinated by the classroom teacher (Tier I support). In
most cases, students receiving Tier I support continue being instructed in core
instruction, and receive Tier I support in addition to the core.
● Tier II support: Tier II support is provided for students who receive Tier I support but are
not responding as desired. This level of support incorporates smaller student group
sizes than in Tier I, and instruction is further targeted to specific areas of literacy
acquisition. Tier II support is intended to be in addition to core instruction and Tier I
support.
● Tier III support: Tier III support is individualized, one-on-one support provided by the
best qualified teacher(s) in a school. Currently, district resources (specifically, budget)
allow us to provide very limited Tier III support in grade 1 through the Reading Recovery
program. Individualized support of this nature is not yet available across grades K-3.
Teacher training designed to support staff in the implementation of these practices has been
ongoing over the last four years. During that time, district-level training has been scheduled
during multiple professional development days each year. Over the last two years, as practices
have become standardized across our elementary schools, training and support have shifted
from district professional development days to site-level meeting times (e.g., all-staff meetings
to review students’ academic progress, grade-level team meetings, etc.). Annual district
timelines ensure an ongoing process to review data and use updated findings to shape decisions
for each subsequent year of professional development. This not only helps to provide continuity
of support across years, but as part of a broader planning process it helps to ensure that our
support work in literacy is balanced against other district needs.

Also, training frequently happens as en embedded part of regular school activity. For example,
each school has developed its own schedule that allows teams to plan and write Collaborative
Intervention Plans, as well as monitoring those plans across the year. These meetings are very
often facilitated by a reading specialist or district coordinator with expertise in developing
reading support. Consequently, training occurs as part of the planning process. Over the four
year period of professional development described above, each school has embedded districtlevel
training into regular, ongoing meeting schedules so that processes and training are
integrated.
A good research base exists supporting this professional development and the structures and
supports we have created in recent years. A good starting place for readers of this report less
familiar with the research is the RTI Action Network (www.rtinetwork.org), which provides links
to studies and summary findings.
Explain how training and support will be provided so that all district elementary teachers can
effectively recognize students’ diverse needs in cross-cultural settings and serve the oral
language and linguistic needs of EL students
The Roseville Area Schools utilize a number of resources and methods for the continued growth
of our staff related to the unique instructional needs related to our English Learners. The
method of staff development takes two forms for K-3 staff related to reading staff development.
The first method of staff development is combined large group training on the reading process.
Over the course of the past two school years, the EL teachers have worked as partners and coteachers
in the domain of reading. These trainings have focused on the five elements of
reading (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension) and direct
instruction, which supports growth in these areas. The second method of training consists of
staff development of classroom teachers related to WIDA standards in the language domains
(Reading, Speaking, Listening, and Writing). One application of this implementation for staff
development is the consistent use of Can Do descriptors by all K-3 education staff. These Can
Do Descriptors encourage common professional language related to increasing student
proficiency through aligned staff effort.
A second layer of the staff development for all instructional staff related to the needs of English
Learners is training on methods of instructional delivery. Two common methods of instructional
delivery are used in our district with K-3 students and staff; pull-out EL instruction and coteaching.
The staff development for pull-out instruction rests primarily with the licensed EL
teacher. Staff development outcomes for this method rest primarily in communication of
instructional outcomes and progress. The second method of instruction is much more staff
development focused with the classroom and reading teachers. All buildings and staff
implementing co-teaching methods will have targeted staff development and planning time
related to the unique forms that this type of EL instruction can take in a school.
District-wide professional development in the areas of equity mindset and equity skillset work
complement the more EL-specific types of training described above. Equity mindset training
refers to the teacher beliefs, dispositions, and orientations that are most associated with
reductions in the achievement gap. Equity skillset work refers to the learning of new techniques
and instructional strategies that reduce the achievement gap. All teachers participate in both
mindset and skillset sessions across the school year. Currently, district professional

development activities are being planned for 2012-2013, but early discussions suggest that a
strong focus on equity mindset is likely to continue, with equity skillset being presented on
various topics from which teachers might choose.
Finally, one Roseville school (Central Park) has received extremely intense support and training
around the needs of English Learners. This is due to Central Park’s student population, which
has our highest concentration of “newcomers”, or students who are new to English. Central
Park has been developing a sheltered content model in which EL newcomers are clustered
within single classrooms in each grade, and the teachers in these classes implement aspects of
the Shelter Instruction Observational Protocol (SIOP) model, an instructional model specific to
English Learners. The model was first implemented this school year (2011-2012), with plans to
continue the plan next year. Initial results have been promising, with academic growth as
reflected through MAP testing indicating the English Learners at Central Park are enjoying some
of the highest rates of growth in our district this year.
Post assessment methods and data that is submitted to Commissioner annually including
objectives of assessment program, names of tests, grade levels of administration as part of
local literacy plan on district webpage for all students in Kindergarten through Grade 3
As required through Reading Well by 3rd Grade, a central objective of our assessment program
in grades kindergarten through 3rd grade is to determine with a high degree of confidence if
students are trending toward grade-level proficiency in 3rd grade as determined by MCA-II
Reading. District summative results are submitted to the Commissioner annually; other types of
assessment (screening, diagnostic, progress monitoring) are used as check points across the
school year to determine if groups of students and/or individuals are on track.
Roseville has selected the Benchmark Assessment System (BAS) as our district proficiency
measure for all grades K-3, as part of our local literacy plan. BAS yields an instructional reading
level for each student, which is a composite measure, derived from a combination of reading
accuracy, fluency, and comprehension. Roseville has selected end-of-grade reading targets that
are set to approximately the 50th percentile in each grade. We have seen locally that around
90% of our district’s students who perform at or above the 50th percentile on various normreferenced
assessments also are proficient on the MCA-II Reading in tested grades. This high
degree of predictability is a preferred quality of our district proficiency measure.
End-of-year BAS assessments are completed during May of each school year. Teachers enter
results into our electronic reporting system (the same system used to generate report cards).
District results are exported in spreadsheet form for reporting purposes.
Because district results are compiled literally within days of the end of our school year, districtwide
sharing is not possible in an organized way until fall of the following school year. Also,
because some of our district processes are new this year (as a result of Reading Well by 3rd
Grade), some district-wide sharing of this nature will happen for the first time next school year.
It is anticipated that organized district-wide sharing may occur during our district’s data camp in
August and continue into the first weeks of school.