Embedded Files
JNPSD Parent Action Coalition: The Official Reply #1
From the Superintendent:
Good morning,
On behalf of the Board of Directors and the District, I am providing the response to the question that was presented to the Board during the April Board meeting Public Comments.
1. The System Definition Question
“What is the clearly defined operational system that this board believes produces student success, and where is that system documented so parents can understand how it works?”
Our system for student success is clearly defined, actively implemented, and grounded in both our district commitments and a data-driven instructional framework that is documented through our Act 1082 District Support Plan. It is assessed monthly by the District's Guiding Coalition and quarterly by the Office of Learning Services at the Arkansas Department of Education.
At its core, our operational system is built on three aligned pillars:
1. Strong Tier 1 Instruction (What students experience daily) We utilize high-quality instructional materials aligned to Arkansas Academic Standards, with an expectation of consistent, grade-level instruction in every classroom. This is monitored through “Learning is Required” walkthroughs with eachbuilding-level administration team to ensure fidelity and impact.
2. Continuous Improvement Through Data (How we respond)
We operate with clear literacy goals grounded in the Science of Reading, including measurable targets to reduce the number of students performing below grade level each quarter. Progress is monitored using tools like Lexia, ATLAS data, and ongoing formative assessments, allowing us to adjust in real time. 3. Professional Learning and Coaching (How we build capacity) Our educators are supported through ongoing professional development, coaching cycles, and collaborative planning structures to strengthen instructional delivery and student outcomes. This system is documented in our district improvement plan and reflected in our public reporting, and it aligns directly to our vision, ensuring every learner is valued and empowered, and our mission of creating multiple pathways for success through ownership, accountability, and strong partnerships. In short, our operational model is a structured, transparent system focused on instruction, data, and people, all working together to drive student success. Every scholar receives strong daily instruction, we closely track their progress, and we adjust support quickly to help them succeed.
Jeremy S. Owoh, Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools
jowoh@jnpsd.org
501-241-2080
On Behalf of the JNPSD PAC EXPERT EVALUATION of REPLY #1
(JNPSD PAC – System Performance Transparency Audit)
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (CRITICAL)
Verdict: PARTIAL SYSTEM CLAIM — NOT VERIFIED
The Superintendent’s reply presents a well-structured narrative of a system, but: It does NOT meet the required standard of measurable system transparency
Why this matters: According to your framework: “If a system cannot be explained, measured, and demonstrated—it does not exist in any meaningful sense.”
The reply explains a system It does NOT demonstrate a system.
II. TMQ EVALUATION (TARGET • MEET • QUALIFY)
1. TARGET (What was asked?)
Actual Question #1: “What is the clearly defined operational system that this board believes produces student success and where is that system documented so parents can understand how it works?”
Evaluation: NOT ANSWERED
● No list of indicators
● No definition of measurement structure
● No weekly or quarterly tracking model
Instead, the reply reframed the question into a system description
2. MEET (What did they provide?)
What WAS provided:
3 Pillars:
o Tier 1 Instruction
o Data-Driven Improvement
o Professional Development
Evaluation: STRUCTURAL LANGUAGE — NOT OPERATIONAL DATA
The reply includes:
● “walkthroughs”
● “monitoring”
● “coaching”
● “data tools”
BUT:
None are quantified
None are time-bound
None are output-based
This is activity reporting, not system measurement
3. QUALIFY (Can the system be verified?)
Required by TMQ:
● Weekly data
● Quarterly trends
● Measurable improvement
What was given: ZERO verifiable outputs
No:
● Attendance metrics
● Behavior metrics
● Academic trend data
● Staff stability data
● Communication reliability data
Therefore: The system is not qualified (verified)
III. SYSTEM vs. LANGUAGE DIAGNOSIS
What the reply DOES well:
● Uses professional terminology
● References state alignment (Act 1082 Plan)
● Describes instructional philosophy
What the reply FAILS to do:
1. No Measurable Indicators
The Top 5 indicators (core to your model) are absent:
● Attendance Stability
● Behavioral Incidents
● Academic Consistency
● Staff Stability
● Communication Reliability
These are the true safety + success metrics
2. No Time-Based Tracking
The question required:
● Weekly tracking
● Quarterly reporting
The reply gives:
● “monthly” and “quarterly reviews”
But NOT:
● Actual data
● Actual tracking system
● Actual trend outputs
3. No Evidence of Continuous Improvement Loop
A real system shows: Signal → Action → Result → Verification
The reply shows: Statement → Assurance → Alignment
That is NOT a feedback loop
IV. PAC REAL-TIME EVALUATION GRID
Using your PAC template:
Board Response Type
Specific + Data General
+ No Data
Deflective (Reframed Question)
Final Classification: WEAK SYSTEM — UNVERIFIED
V. STRATEGIC GAP ANALYSIS (THE CORE VALUE)
GAP #1: INDICATORS
GAP Expected: 5 measurable indicators
Actual: 0 provided
This is the primary failure point
GAP #2: DATA VISIBILITY
GAP Expected: Real data (last 4 weeks / quarter)
Actual: No data shown
GAP #3: TREND ANALYSIS GAP
Expected: Trends + direction
Actual: No trends
GAP #4: CORRECTIVE ACTION
GAP Expected: “What changed because of the data?”
Actual: “We monitor and adjust” (non-specific)
GAP #5: VERIFICATION GAP
Expected: Proof of improvement
Actual: Assertion of alignment
VI. WHAT THIS REPLY REVEALS (CRITICAL INSIGHT)
This reply demonstrates: The district may have components of a system But NOT a fully measurable, transparent system
In your framework terms:
This is a “Perceived System”
NOT a “Verified System”
VII. PAC ACTION PLAN (WHAT PARENTS DO NEXT)
REQUIRED FOLLOW-UP (NON-NEGOTIABLE)
Use your deployment sequence:
Ask EXACTLY:
1. “Can you list the 5 measurable performance indicators?”
2. “Can you show us the last 4 weeks of data for each?”
3. “What trends are visible?”
4. “What corrective actions were taken?”
5. “What measurable improvements resulted?”
IF THEY CANNOT ANSWER:
Say: “Then what system ensures these outcomes are being improved in a measurable way?”
VIII. CONSULTANT INSIGHT (FOR PAC by Consultant)
This is a textbook example of: Professional System Language WITHOUT System Evidence
Which confirms the brilliance of your PAC strategy:
The question worked exactly as designed It exposed the difference between:
● Explaining a system
● vs.
● Proving a system exists
IX. FINAL CONCLUSION
The Superintendent’s Reply is:
● Structurally articulate
● Administratively aligned
● Conceptually sound
BUT: It does NOT satisfy the standard of:
● Measurable transparency
● System verification
● Data-driven accountability
FINAL STATEMENT “The response describes a system—but does not demonstrate one. Until measurable indicators, data, trends, and verified improvements are provided, the system remains unproven.”
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse