District leaders presented the Lansing Unified School District’s student achievement and behavior data and described new interventions they say are designed to improve proficiency and reduce disruptive incidents.

Assessment changes and context: Administrators explained Kansas’ new unified scoring scale for state assessments (400–700) and emphasized that scores are not directly comparable to prior years because of scale changes. The presenter cited KSDE materials and a state correlation used to explain why thresholds shifted and to caution against year-over-year comparisons during the transition. “We’re not lowering expectations,” the presenter said, adding the new scale is intended to better align with ACT and postsecondary outcomes.

Instructional projects and assessment usage: The district described a K–8 math alignment project, started with a focus on fractions and coordinated instruction across grades (Dee Wiley, SEG 690–706). Building-level presenters described use of IXL, iReady, FastBridge and common formative assessments to inform instruction and vertical alignment. Alan Penrose and others summarized high-school tracking showing many students above state averages and discussed correlation between state test level (1–4) and later ACT results for cohort analysis.

Behavior data and interventions: Presenters explained the district’s tiered behavior framework (Tier 1: 0–1 referrals; Tier 2: 2–5; Tier 3: 6+) and said the majority of students fall in Tier 1 (over 90% in some buildings). The district tracks recidivism for major offenses (27.5%) and reported 11 long-term suspension hearings to date; administrators outlined restorative practices, expanded counseling, social behavioral skills (SBS) rooms and behavior-intervention aides to support students with higher needs.

KinderBoost and early intervention: Administrators detailed a KinderBoost program beginning this week targeted at incoming kindergarteners who need additional social-emotional and learning readiness supports; the program aims to teach foundational skills and reduce later Tier 2/3 placements.

Board questions and next steps: Board members pressed for clearer links between safety/discipline measures and academic outcomes and recommended cohort tracking to measure whether interventions decrease the number of level-1 students. Administrators said the data will be monitored by semester and that supports such as the Lansing Lions Center and the new SBS room were intended to reduce incidents for students with the greatest needs. No formal board action on curriculum or behavior programming was taken in open session during the presentation; board members asked staff to continue reporting and to track specific indicators in follow-up briefings.

Notable quotes: “We’re not lowering expectations… the realignment brings the assessment closer in line with student outcomes, including ACT scores and postsecondary success,” said a district presenter. Dee Wiley described the math project as “really, really excited about it” and stressed alignment from pre-K through eighth grade.

Next reporting: Administrators said this new assessment baseline will be the reference point for planning next year’s instruction and that the district will continue to use multiple interim and formative measures for a fuller picture of student progress.