Des Moines ISD board accepts monitoring report after review of Black male math outcomes and attendance challenges

The Des Moines Independent Comm School District board on April 2 accepted a monitoring report on Goal 3 — an effort to raise the percentage of Black male 11th-graders proficient in the state math assessment from 17.7% in June 2022 to 45% by June 2026. The board voted 6–0 to receive the report and directed staff to return with more detailed counts and budget specifics.

The report and ensuing discussion centered on interim Goal 3A: increasing the percentage of grade 6–8 Black male students meeting the Fastbridge math benchmark from 15.7% in June 2023 to 45% by 2026. Board members pointed to a recurring fall-to-winter decline in the Fastbridge screener — for example, a drop reported in winter to about 16% meeting benchmark after an earlier fall reading near 21% — and asked staff to explain the cause and the raw student counts behind those percentages.

Superintendent Dr. Roberts and district staff attributed the dip to multiple factors, including the transition from fifth to sixth grade (a change in instructional model and scheduling), chronic absenteeism and gaps in vertical alignment between grade bands. Dr. Roberts said the district has seen “chronic absenteeism for Black males at about 42%” and called sense of belonging, culturally responsive pedagogy and restorative practices central to improving outcomes.

Board members pressed for specifics on interventions and resource allocation. Dr. Roberts outlined a multi-tiered response: targeted reteaching and differentiated instruction when assessments identify gaps; stronger vertical alignment so elementary teachers and middle-grade teachers coordinate expectations; expanded use of community partners to maintain continuity of instruction during out-of-school suspensions; and investments in professional development tied to the GLEAM framework. She said the district is finalizing hires — including a middle-school director, two curriculum coordinator positions and a chief academic officer — intended to give additional capacity and support to middle grades.

Trustees asked staff to return with the underlying student counts for each percentage and a clearer accounting of current and planned investments. When one board member asked whether the district could supply the exact end-number of students referenced by the percentages, staff agreed to provide those figures and a more detailed funding breakdown to show how much has already been spent on the goals and what is budgeted for FY25.

Dr. Roberts also acknowledged variation among schools in how fully the GLEAM framework is being implemented, describing GLEAM as “in its infancy” (about eight to nine months in) and noting that differences in schedules and time availability affect fidelity.

The board’s acceptance of the monitoring report followed a lengthy exchange in which trustees repeatedly sought clarity on the causes of the academic dip, how discipline practices and disproportionality affect achievement (Dr. Roberts cited higher suspension rates for Black males and emphasized restorative approaches), and what concrete next steps the district would take. The superintendent committed to returning with: disaggregated counts behind published percentages; a scope and budget for planned GLEAM professional development; and a timeline tying personnel and resource requests to measurable interim benchmarks.

The vote to accept the monitoring report was moved by Alonzo and seconded by Campos and passed unanimously. The board will continue to track progress through regular monitoring and expects staff to report back with the requested data and funding details.