Leander ISD trustees hear plan for 'scorecard' of leading measures to track student growth

Leander ISD administrators on July 8 presented a proposed ‘‘scorecard’’ of leading measures intended to give the board frequent, actionable updates on progress toward long-term board goals and to inform the superintendent evaluation.

Angela Hodges, the district lead for strategy and accountability, described the scorecard as a set of interim measures—norm-referenced and regularly updated metrics—that complement the board’s lagging goals. Emily Gray, a district data presenter, told trustees the intent is to ‘‘bring bite-sized chunks’’ of data to the board throughout the year rather than a single large presentation.

The presentation stressed differences between norm-referenced measures such as MAP (which compare students nationally) and criterion-referenced state assessments such as STAAR, noting those tools answer different governance questions. ‘‘Our expectation is that each and every student in Leander ISD grows a year’s worth in a year’s time,’’ Emily Gray said when describing the interim growth focus.

Administrators proposed prioritizing economically disadvantaged students as a high-leverage subgroup because many other at-risk groups overlap with that population. Staff argued that accelerating growth for that subgroup would, over time, reduce achievement gaps across multiple student groups.

Trustees asked detailed questions about reliability and frequency of the measures, the alignment between MAP and STAAR predictions, parent communication about accommodations for college-board tests, and how a board-level dashboard would display the data. Staff said some metrics (PSAT and SAT) are available on a fixed schedule; others will require building internal systems and walk-through tools to ensure fidelity. Staff also said the first full year of implementation (2026–27) is expected to be a learning year and that the board will revisit the scorecard design in the July 23 governance meeting.

Why it matters: the scorecard is intended to give trustees more timely evidence of student progress and to connect board priorities, instructional implementation (PLCs and essential standards) and the superintendent evaluation to a concise set of lead indicators.