In February 2019, Montessori For All’s leaders brought CoPilot a question that went beyond a score: why had the accountability projection changed between fall and winter, and what did the Flight Plan suggest they should do next? The immediate challenge was interpretation. Before deciding how to respond, the school wanted to understand what the report meant.
That is a useful place to begin a data conversation. A projection and a classroom assessment answer different questions. One estimates performance against an accountability framework; the other gives teachers evidence about the learning sampled by a particular task. Reading them together requires attention to the assessment, the time of year, and the assumptions behind the result.
CoPilot’s A–F Reports give today’s school leaders a way to examine that broader accountability picture using supported assessments, including MAP and local benchmarks. Filters for grade levels, departments, and teachers help a leader narrow the discussion. A team can bring a grade-level projection to its meeting, then use classroom evidence to investigate the learning behind it. Explore A–F Reports.
In their 2024 reflection on ten years at Magnolia Montessori For All, leaders Sara Cotner and Sarah Kirby Tepera described a wider assessment challenge. At the Austin public Montessori school, they wanted to understand academic development and the broader experience of children and families. Collecting more information, however, competed with teaching time and the staff’s capacity to make sense of it.
Their reported solution gave different assessments different jobs. Normed academic assessments came at the beginning, middle, and end of the year. Elementary math included ten-question unit checks every six weeks. More frequent reading checks focused on children below the typical developmental window. Staff and family surveys supplied a view of school culture at the beginning and end of the year. The leaders described that balance as the result of years of trial and error.
For a team examining TEKS, the useful lesson is to define the question before adding another assessment. If a short check suggests difficulty with a standard, teachers can inspect the questions and student work first. Did the task ask children to calculate, explain, or apply an idea in an unfamiliar setting? Which part needs another lesson? A percentage helps locate a concern; those details help determine the response.
CoPilot’s Aviator supports that focused inquiry during a PLC today. A teacher might ask, “How did fourth-grade math perform on this TEKS in our latest assessment?” Its conversational interface and TEKS-level analysis make the available data easier to reach while the team is thinking about the question. Colleagues can bring those results into the discussion, then return to the tasks and student work that will inform their response. Explore Aviator.
A useful assessment plan can say what each measure is for, who will examine it, and when a teaching decision will follow. Magnolia’s leaders described finding a workable balance over time. Their account offers a reason to examine the demands of the assessment calendar as carefully as the results it produces.
This Data Journeys article includes CoPilot research and editorial commentary. Product examples illustrate practical applications for school teams.