Cobb BriefingExecutive Briefing
Public Consulting GroupCobb County Schools Briefing · PCG internal use · Prepared October 6, 2026

Executive briefing · Cobb County School District

Cobb outperforms Georgia. Reading is the larger retest need.

Cobb is above the state in every available Grade 3–8 comparison, and math improved in every grade through 2026. More Grade 5 and 8 students missed the 2025 reading threshold than the 2026 math threshold, and Grade 8 reading moved the wrong way. The meeting focus is Spring 2027 retest support.

Meeting context
Meeting
Cobb discussion
Internal audience
Evan, Jen, and Irene
Customer context
Assistant Superintendent Kelly Metcalfe and team
Posture
Discovery before positioning

Retest pool · Grades 5 and 8

Performance · Grades 3–8

Four things to know

Reading is the larger retest need

In 2025, 1,892 Grade 5 and 2,100 Grade 8 students were below grade level in reading. The Grade 8 share rose from 19.7% to 26.3%, the largest one-year change on any retest measure. ELA proficiency fell most in Grade 5 (−8.8 points) and Grade 8 (−7.2).

Verified, public

Math is moving toward the promotion goal

Districtwide retest results moved Grade 5 students out of Level 1, mostly into Level 2, which meets the state math threshold. What caused the change is not established.

Verified, public Cause not established

Need is concentrated

Ten of 27 middle schools hold 70% of Grade 8 math Level 1 students. Seven schools rank in the top five for both reading and math in their grade, which makes them natural sites for a combined pilot.

Verified, public

Gaps persist for two groups

Students with disabilities and English learners are the lowest-performing groups in every grade band. Every elementary group except Asian/Pacific Islander students missed its 2025 ELA target.

Index score, not percent proficient
Data correction pending: Grade 8 after-retest percentages total 95.1%. They are withheld until corrected.

Decisions to seek (5)
    Recommendation

    How to read this briefing

    Every material claim carries a status tag. Three different measures appear here: percent proficient (Outcomes), share below the promotion threshold (Retest Need), and CCRPI index scores (Student Groups). They are not interchangeable. Nothing here claims that spending, a product, or PCG support caused student outcomes.

    Verified PCG internal context Recommendation To confirm Requires correction Not available

    Business intelligence brief · October 2026

    Cobb County School District (GA): Spring 2027 Georgia Milestones Retest Support

    ELA and Mathematics, Grades 5 and 8. Prepared by James Curtis, Sr. Communications Coordinator, for the PCG Cobb account team. Internal, not for distribution.

    Reproduced as written. This tab shows the brief's content unchanged. Where other tabs differ: the brief counts six overlap schools (the Retest Need tab counts seven, adding East Cobb MS); the brief's retest, Phase I/II, and vendor items are marked "not reviewed," but those source files were reviewed for this dashboard; small rounding differences (for example Grade 3 math +1.5 here, +1.4 elsewhere) come from calculation method.

    At a glance: the retest pool

    Figure 1. Cobb is below the state rate on every retest measure, but reading is the larger pool

    Cobb readingCobb mathGeorgia rate

    Source: GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files, Spring 2025 and 2026; totals calculated from school records. 2026 reading status not yet released. Verified – public

    Key takeaways

    • Cobb starts from strength. It outperforms Georgia on every Grade 5 and 8 retest measure, and math improved in every grade.
    • Reading is the bigger retest need. More students missed the reading threshold in 2025 than the math threshold in 2026, and Grade 8 reading worsened sharply.
    • The ELA decline was broad. Every elementary student group lost 4 to 6 index points in 2025, so the problem is not limited to one population.
    • Gaps are largest for students with disabilities and English learners, who score roughly half the level of White students in elementary ELA.

    At a glance: score trends by grade

    Figure 2. Math improved in every grade; ELA fell most in the two retest grades (darker bars)

    Change in percent Proficient Learner or above, in percentage points.

    Source: GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files, Spring 2024–2026. Change in percent Proficient Learner or above. Verified – public

    At a glance: student groups

    Figure 3. Students with disabilities and English learners trail in every grade band; every group declined in elementary ELA

    Source: GaDOE CCRPI Content Mastery by student group, 2024–2025. Content Mastery is an achievement index, not percent proficient; reported by grade band. Asian/Pacific Islander students scored 100 in all four areas. Verified – public

    Executive summary

    Bottom line

    Cobb outperforms Georgia on every Grade 5 and 8 retest measure, and its math results improved through 2026. The larger remaining need is reading. The strongest position is to extend the Spring 2026 math support in a targeted form and add a reading component, with clear measures agreed up front.

    • Strong overall results. Cobb's math proficiency is 5 to 9 points above the state in every grade, and the share of Grade 5 students at the lowest math level fell from 22.2% to 18.6% in 2026.
    • Reading is the larger retest pool. In 2025, about 1,900 Grade 5 and 2,100 Grade 8 students were below grade level in reading. The two largest ELA proficiency drops (−8.8 and −7.2 points) were in Grades 5 and 8.
    • Need is concentrated. Ten middle schools hold 70% of Grade 8 math Level 1 students. Six schools rank in the top five for both reading and math in their grade.
    • Gaps persist. Students with disabilities and English learners are the lowest-performing groups in every grade band, and every elementary group missed its 2025 ELA target except Asian/Pacific Islander students.
    • PCG has a track record here. PCG completed the Grades 6–8 math curriculum audit in 2025 and delivered Grade 5 and 8 math reteaching lessons and games before Spring 2026 testing. Internal analysis reports that Cobb declined a Phase I proposal, so new scope should build from the 2026 work.
    • Timing favors a direct proposal. No ELA or math intervention solicitation is open, and the Spring 2027 ELA test will be only the second on Georgia's new standards.

    Recommended opening

    "Cobb's results are above the state in every tested grade, and math improved again in 2026. We'd like to understand where Cobb sees the most urgent remaining needs for students facing the Grade 5 and 8 retest, especially in reading, and what evidence should guide what happens next with last spring's math support."

    Conversation flow: NEPQ-style questions (8)

    Open-ended questions in this sequence let Cobb describe the problem in its own words before any solution is discussed. Use them as a guide, not a script.

    Decisions to seek (5)

      Detailed analysis

      Evidence standard used in this brief (4 labels)

      Every figure is labeled by source type. Items that could not be confirmed appear as questions, not as facts.

      How students qualify for the retest

      Georgia rule. Under State Board of Education Rule 160-4-2-.11, Grade 5 and Grade 8 students must show grade-level performance in reading and mathematics on the state test to be promoted. District guidance describes the thresholds as a reading status of Grade Level or Above (a Lexile measure of at least 830L in Grade 5 and 1010L in Grade 8) and a math result of Developing Learner (Level 2) or higher. Students who miss either threshold may be retested. Verified – public, via district publications citing the rule

      Why this matters. The retest pool is defined by reading status and by the share of students at Beginning Learner in math, not by percent proficient. This brief measures the pool directly. Cobb may apply additional local criteria, such as course grades, which should be confirmed.

      The retest pool: Grades 5 and 8

      Figure 4. Share of Cobb students in the retest pool, by grade and subject, 2023–2026

      Reading: below grade levelMath: Beginning Learner

      Source: GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files, Spring 2023–2026; Cobb totals weighted by students tested. Verified – public

      • Reading is the larger pool. In 2025, 1,892 Grade 5 and 2,100 Grade 8 students were below grade level in reading, compared with 1,413 and 1,060 students at Beginning Learner in math in 2026.
      • Grade 8 reading moved the wrong way. The share below grade level rose from 19.7% to 26.3% in one year, the largest change on any retest measure.
      • Math is improving. The share at Beginning Learner fell in both grades in 2026 and is well below the state rate.
      • Combined pool is a range. Some students miss both thresholds, so the subject counts cannot be added. Using the latest year for each subject, roughly 1,900 to 3,300 Grade 5 students and 2,100 to 3,200 Grade 8 students may miss at least one threshold. The years differ by subject, so this is an estimate.
      • Accelerated students are excluded from Grade 8 math. About 2,068 Cobb middle schoolers took the Algebra end-of-course test in 2025–26 instead of the Grade 8 math test.

      Achievement trends by grade

      Mathematics: steady gains, above the state

      Figure 5. Percent Proficient or above in math, Cobb 2024 to 2026 vs. Georgia 2026

      Cobb 2024Cobb 2026Georgia 2026

      Source: GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files; Georgia figures weighted from all reported schools. Verified – public

      Math proficiency rose in every grade from 2024 to 2026. Grades 6 and 7 are now the lowest in Cobb (48.2% and 50.4%); Grade 5 is third lowest at 52.9%, up 4.1 points from 2025. Grade 8 held nearly flat (55.0% to 55.4%). Cobb exceeds the state by 5 to 9 points in every grade.

      ELA: declines concentrated in the retest grades

      Figure 6. Percent Proficient or above in ELA, Cobb 2024 to 2025 vs. Georgia 2025

      Cobb 2024Cobb 2025Georgia 2025

      Source: GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files. 2026 ELA results have not been released statewide because of the transition to new ELA standards. Verified – public

      Context. The two largest ELA declines are in the two retest grades. Statewide, Grade 5 and Grade 8 ELA proficiency each fell about 5 points in 2025, so part of the decline is statewide, but Cobb's drops were larger. The Spring 2027 ELA test will be the second administration on Georgia's new K–12 ELA standards, and 2026 scale scores were delayed for additional test development.

      Student groups

      Detail behind Figure 3. Scores are CCRPI Content Mastery index values for Grades 3–5 ELA.

      • Every elementary student group missed its 2025 ELA improvement target, except Asian/Pacific Islander students, including White students.
      • Students with disabilities are the lowest-performing group in every grade band and subject.
      • English learners grow well in math but not in reading. Elementary EL math growth (Progress score) was 92.0 in 2025, compared with 82.1 in ELA, which points to language access rather than math reasoning as the main barrier.
      • Grade-level detail is not yet available. GaDOE subgroup results for single grades would sharpen this section.

      Where need is concentrated

      Grade 8 need is concentrated in a small set of middle schools, which favors a targeted school model. Grade 5 need is spread across many elementary schools, which favors a districtwide resource model.

      Source: GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files; counts = percent × students tested. CSI status: GaDOE CSI school list, updated December 2025. Verified – public

      Overlap. Campbell and Pearson middle schools and Mableton, Brumby, City View, and Dowell elementary schools appear in the top five for both math and reading in their grade. These are natural sites for a combined reading and math pilot.

      PCG relationship and prior work

      Figure 7. PCG–Cobb engagement timeline, 2021–2026

      Source: PCG proposals (2023, 2024, January 2026), audit storyboard, project meeting notes (February 2026), business development notes (June–September 2026). Verified – internal

      Grades 6–8 math curriculum audit (completed May 2025)

      • Alignment was weakest in Grade 8. The share of cited learning objectives that matched the day's content was 77% in Grade 6 Unit 1, 54% in Grade 6 Unit 2, 24% in Grade 7 Unit 1, and 17% in Grade 8 Unit 1.
      • Grade 8 lessons drew mostly on below-grade material. About 61% of Grade 8 Unit 1 lesson sources came from Grade 7 content and only about 14% from Grade 8 content. None of the 17 days built from Grade 7 sources aligned to Grade 8 objectives.
      • Support for struggling students and English learners was rated weak. Support for students needing additional help was weak in three of four units reviewed; support for diverse linguistic backgrounds was weak in all four.
      • Two recommendations remain open. The audit recommended developing or adopting a Grades 6–8 curriculum from one primary source and reviewing Quarters 2–4, since only Quarter 1 was audited.
      • Link to the 2026 lessons. The audit found Grade 8 standard 8.FGR.5 aligned on only 29–50% of cited days. The Spring 2026 Grade 8 lessons targeted 8.FGR.5–7.

      Source: PCG Curriculum Audit Report, Cobb County School District, Grades 6–8 Mathematics (2025). The audit reviewed the written curriculum for Quarter 1 only and does not explain test results. Verified – internal

      Spring 2026 Grade 5 and 8 math support

      PCG delivered Cobb-customized Grade 5 and Grade 8 reteaching lessons (a seven-day program) and Elevation Station math game kits, with an in-person training on March 20 and virtual sessions on April 1 and April 15, before testing began April 21. Cobb distributed the lessons through its CTLS platform. Grade 5 lessons targeted Numerical Reasoning (5.NR.1–5); Grade 8 lessons targeted Functional and Graphical Reasoning (8.FGR.5–7, 8.GSR.8). Verified – internal

      Internal intelligence – not independently reviewed

      • Retest results. Another PCG analysis reports that the Grade 5 share at Beginning Learner fell from 18.6% to 13.2% after the retest, with most students moving to Developing Learner. The starting figure matches GaDOE data; the post-retest figure comes from a results file not reviewed here. The Grade 8 post-retest data reportedly totals only 95.1% and needs correction.
      • Phase I and Phase II. The same analysis reports that Cobb declined a Phase I proposal and that Phase II components (year-round intervention, data-review cycles, leadership development, KPI reporting) remain discussion options. Do not re-propose Phase I.
      • Vendor spending. A procurement analysis estimates five-year vendor spend of about $36.4M for ELA and literacy and $18.7M for math, naming products such as i-Ready, DreamBox, Reading Wonders, and Amira. Purchases do not establish current use or impact.
      • Why it matters. If the retest movement is confirmed, it is evidence that the 2026 support met the promotion goal in math, since Developing Learner meets the state threshold.
      Internal – not reviewed

      Procurement signals

      Source: RFP dataset, Cobb County records reported September 2025–October 2026. Verified – public

      Implication. No competitive intervention solicitation is open, so 2027 retest support can likely proceed by direct proposal, as the 2026 work did. Whether the 2023 ELA intervention award is still active is an open question.

      Opportunities for additional work

      Recommended positioning

      • Start with Cobb's strengths. Lead with results above the state before discussing remaining needs.
      • Make reading the new element. The data case is clear, and the new standards make aligned materials more valuable.
      • Build in measurement. Offer to define success measures with Cobb so any continuation can show results.

      Points to avoid

      • Describing Cobb as underperforming the state; it outperforms Georgia in every tested grade.
      • Claiming the 2026 math support caused district results; the evidence does not show that.
      • Re-proposing the declined Phase I scope.
      • Calling CCRPI index scores "percent proficient."

      Additional discovery questions

      Spring 2026 results (3)

      • Which students participated in the Spring 2026 math support, and how were they selected?
      • How many Grade 5 and 8 students missed the math or reading threshold in Spring 2026, and how many passed the retest?
      • Which elements of the lessons and games did teachers use most, and what did they report?

      Spring 2027 scope (3)

      • Is reading in scope for 2027 retest support, and how does Cobb expect the new ELA test to affect the retest?
      • What does Cobb consider success for retest support: passing the retest, moving off Level 1, or something else?
      • When must materials be in CTLS to be ready before the testing window?

      Resources and capacity (3)

      • Which reading and math intervention resources are active now, and is the 2023 ELA intervention award still in use?
      • Who will deliver retest instruction: classroom teachers, interventionists, literacy coaches, or tutors?
      • Which funding source would support this work?

      Data gaps and items to confirm

      Methods and sources (7)

      • Retest pool and achievement: Cobb district totals calculated from GaDOE Georgia Milestones EOG school-level files (Spring 2023–2026), weighting each school by students tested. Suppressed school records (fewer than 10 tested in most cases) are excluded and affect fewer than 15 students per grade. Georgia figures use the same method across all schools and match GaDOE's published statewide rates within rounding.
      • Accelerated math: Count of Cobb middle-school Algebra: Concepts and Connections testers from the GaDOE 2025–26 end-of-course school-level file.
      • Student groups: GaDOE CCRPI Content Mastery and Progress files, 2023–2025.
      • Statewide context: GaDOE Georgia Milestones state releases (2025, 2026); GaDOE CSI school list (December 2025).
      • Promotion rule: State Board Rule 160-4-2-.11 as described in published Georgia district guidance.
      • Procurement: RFP dataset, Cobb County records.
      • PCG internal: Grades 6–8 Math Curriculum Audit Report (2025); proposals (2023, 2024, January 2026); project meeting notes (February 2026); business development notes (2026). Items marked "not reviewed" come from another PCG analysis whose source files were not available.

      Spring 2027 retest · Grades 5 and 8

      About 4,000 Grade 5 and 8 students missed the reading threshold; math need is smaller and falling

      The retest pool is defined by reading status and by the share at Beginning Learner in math, not by percent proficient. Lower shares are better on this page.

      How students qualify. Under State Board of Education Rule 160-4-2-.11, Grade 5 and 8 students must show grade-level performance in reading and math to be promoted. District guidance describes the thresholds as reading status of Grade Level or Above (at least 830L in Grade 5 and 1010L in Grade 8) and a math result of Developing Learner (Level 2) or higher. Students who miss either may be retested. Cobb may apply local criteria. Verify current rule

      What the pool shows

      • Reading is the larger pool. 1,892 Grade 5 and 2,100 Grade 8 students were below grade level in 2025, compared with 1,413 and 1,060 at Beginning Learner in 2026 math.
      • Grade 8 reading moved the wrong way, from 19.7% to 26.3% in one year.
      • Math is improving. The share at Beginning Learner fell in both grades in 2026 and is well below the state rate.
      • Cobb is below the state rate on every retest measure.
      Verified, public

      Reading the counts

      • Counts can't be added. Some students miss both thresholds. Using the latest year for each subject, roughly 1,900 to 3,300 Grade 5 and 2,100 to 3,200 Grade 8 students may miss at least one. This is an estimate because the years differ.
      • 2026 reading status has not been released. The reading pool uses 2025.
      • Grade 8 math excludes accelerated students. About 2,068 Cobb middle schoolers took the Algebra end-of-course test in 2025–26 instead of the Grade 8 math test.
      Combined range is an estimate

      Georgia Milestones · Proficient plus Distinguished

      Math improved in all six grades; ELA fell most in the two retest grades

      Cobb results compared with Georgia state-level results. ELA covers 2024 to 2025 because 2026 ELA results have not been released statewide during the move to new ELA standards.

      Filter outcomes
      View

      High school end-of-course results

      Reported by tested course, not by grade. The 2025 Cobb file is spring-only while Georgia's is full-year, so 2025 comparisons are not like-for-like.

      CCRPI Content Mastery · 2023–2025

      Students with disabilities and English learners trail in every grade band; every elementary group declined in ELA

      These are achievement index scores reported by grade band, not percent proficient. Do not compare them with Outcome Trends values.

      Grades 3–5 ELA index by student group, 2025

      Bar shows the 2025 index score; the dark marker shows 2024. Every group listed missed its 2025 target.

      2025 indexLowest two groups2024 index
      View data table
      Verified, publicIndex score, not percent proficient

      What the group data shows

      • Every elementary student group missed its 2025 ELA improvement target except Asian/Pacific Islander students, who scored 100 in all four areas. White students also missed.
      • Students with disabilities are the lowest-performing group in every grade band and subject.
      • English learners grow well in math but not in reading: elementary progress scores were 92.0 in math and 82.1 in ELA in 2025. That points to language access, not math reasoning, as the main barrier.

      Still not available

      • Grade 5 and Grade 8 results by student group (only grade bands are available)
      • Numeric values for other grade bands and math: the BI brief shows them in a chart only, so they are not reproduced here
      • Matching Georgia group results
      Not available
      Ask Cobb: Which student groups are the priority for retest support, and can the district share Grade 5 and 8 results by group?

      Spring 2026 retest and PCG math support

      Districtwide retest results show movement out of Level 1, not into proficiency

      The retest file appears to cover all Grade 5 and 8 students, not only students who received PCG's Spring 2026 math support. Who received that support is unknown.

      Why "districtwide": the file's first-test Level 1 shares (Grade 5: 18.6%, Grade 8: 13.8%) match Cobb's districtwide 2026 Beginning Learner shares (18.6% and 13.7%). Confirm with Cobb whether the file covers all students. To confirm

      Grade 5 achievement levels, first test and after retest

      Level 1
      −5.4 pts
      Levels 3 + 4
      +0.1 pts
      52.8% to 52.9%
      Achievement score
      78.5 → 81.3
      Definition not supplied
      Verified, public

      Grade 8 achievement levels

      Requires correction. The after-retest percentages total 95.1%. The full distribution is withheld until the missing 4.9 points are explained. The achievement score moved from 85.3 to 89.4, but how it is calculated is not documented.
      Requires correction

      What this shows

      • Fewer Grade 5 and 8 students at Level 1 after the retest
      • Grade 5 movement went almost entirely into Level 2, which meets the state math promotion threshold
      • Achievement scores rose in both grades

      What this does not establish

      • That PCG's math support caused the change
      • Which students received the support
      • That the same students were measured both times
      • Attendance, dosage, or fidelity
      • Lasting effects or scalability

      What PCG delivered before testing

      • Cobb-customized Grade 5 and 8 reteaching lessons (a seven-day program)
      • Elevation Station math game kits
      • In-person training March 20; virtual sessions April 1 and April 15; testing began April 21
      • Distributed by Cobb through its CTLS platform
      • Grade 5 targeted Numerical Reasoning (5.NR.1–5); Grade 8 targeted Functional and Graphical Reasoning (8.FGR.5–7, 8.GSR.8)
      • May intervention camp, listed in earlier internal notes
      Verified, internal Camp to confirm

      Why it matters

      If the retest movement is confirmed, it is evidence that students met the promotion goal in math, because Developing Learner meets the state threshold. The Grade 8 lessons also targeted 8.FGR.5, the standard the 2025 curriculum audit found aligned on only 29–50% of cited days.

      Evidence needed before expanding: participant definition and schools, aggregate attendance, expected and received dosage, matched-student rules, retest replacement rules, and how the achievement score is calculated.

      Public and procurement context

      Resources are identified at every layer; current use is unconfirmed

      Purchases show buying activity, not current use, student exposure, fidelity, or effectiveness.

      Math and literacy resources by layer
      LayerMathematicsLiteracy
      Procurement and public recordsCurrent use to confirm

      Questions for Cobb

      • Which resources remain active?
      • Is the 2023 ELA intervention award still in use?
      • What triggers entry to and exit from intervention?
      • How are frequency and duration set?
      • How are attendance and dosage recorded?
      • How often are progress reviews held?
      • Which schools and groups drive the trends?
      • What did custom-development contracts produce?
      • Where is implementation support needed?

      Procurement evidence

      ELA buying peaked in 2025; no intervention solicitation is open now

      Bars group purchase orders by calendar year, while Cobb's fiscal year runs July to June. Read the overall shape, not individual bars as fiscal-year totals.

      Cobb solicitations, 2021–2026

      No competitive ELA or math intervention solicitation is open, so Spring 2027 retest support can likely proceed by direct proposal, as the 2026 work did.

      Verified, public2023 ELA intervention award holder unknown

      Reading these figures (5)

      • Purchases do not prove implementation or impact.
      • i-Ready's math versus reading split is unresolved.
      • Education Incites' total includes Spanish-language course work that can't be fully separated.
      • Approved vendors with no matched purchases are unverified, not zero.
      • Some vendors appear in more than one area. Don't add the four totals together.

      Meeting use

      Ask how resources fit together, what remains active, and where Cobb sees gaps. Don't open by suggesting duplication or waste.

      Recommendation

      Largest identified vendors

      Relationship and opportunity

      PCG has a five-year record with Cobb; new scope should build from the 2026 work

      Completed work, proposals, a declined Phase I, and Phase II options are kept separate. Phase II options are not an approved scope.

      Grades 6–8 math curriculum audit (completed May 2025)

      • Alignment was weakest in Grade 8. Matching learning objectives: 77% in Grade 6 Unit 1, 54% in Grade 6 Unit 2, 24% in Grade 7 Unit 1, 17% in Grade 8 Unit 1.
      • Grade 8 drew on below-grade material. About 61% of Grade 8 Unit 1 lesson sources were Grade 7 content; about 14% were Grade 8.
      • Supports rated weak for struggling students in three of four units, and for diverse language backgrounds in all four.
      • Two recommendations remain open: a single-source Grades 6–8 curriculum, and review of Quarters 2–4.

      The audit reviewed the written curriculum for Quarter 1 only and does not explain test results.

      Verified, internal

      Recommended positioning

      • Start with Cobb's strengths. Lead with results above the state before discussing remaining needs.
      • Make reading the new element. The data case is clear, and the new ELA standards make aligned materials more valuable.
      • Build in measurement. Offer to define success measures with Cobb so any continuation can show results.
      • Don't re-propose Phase I.
      Recommendation

      Opportunities for additional work

      Delivery models for discussion (3)

      Grade 8 need fits the selected-school model; Grade 5 need fits a districtwide resource model.

      Internal strategy

      Let Cobb describe the retest need in its own words before discussing any solution

      Leave with priority grades, subjects, and schools; Cobb's view of last spring's math support; whether reading is in scope; success measures; and the decision owner.

      Recommended opening

      "Cobb's results are above the state in every tested grade, and math improved again in 2026. We'd like to understand where Cobb sees the most urgent remaining needs for students facing the Grade 5 and 8 retest, especially in reading, and what evidence should guide what happens next with last spring's math support."

      Recommendation

      Conversation flow (8 stages)

      Open-ended questions in this order let Cobb describe the problem first. Use as a guide, not a script.

      Decisions to seek (5)

        Spring 2026 results (5)

        • Does the retest results file cover all Grade 5 and 8 students, or only students who received the math support?
        • Which students received the Spring 2026 math support, and how were they selected?
        • How many Grade 5 and 8 students missed the math or reading threshold in Spring 2026, and how many passed the retest?
        • Which lessons and games did teachers use most, and what did they report?
        • How is the retest achievement score calculated, and did retests replace original scores?

        Spring 2027 scope (4)

        • Is reading in scope for 2027 retest support, and how does Cobb expect the new ELA test to affect the retest?
        • What counts as success: passing the retest, moving off Level 1, or something else?
        • When must materials be in CTLS to be ready before the testing window?
        • Does Cobb apply local promotion criteria beyond the state rule?

        Resources and capacity (4)

        • Which reading and math intervention resources are active now, and is the 2023 ELA intervention award still in use?
        • Who will deliver retest instruction: classroom teachers, interventionists, literacy coaches, or tutors?
        • Which funding source would support this work?
        • Which student groups and schools are the priority?

        Evidence to request (7)

        • Corrected Grade 8 after-retest distribution
        • Retest file scope and participant list definition
        • Internal 2026 reading data
        • Grade 5 and 8 results by student group
        • Aggregate attendance and expected versus received dosage
        • Which purchased resources remain in active use
        • What the custom math curriculum contracts produced

        Avoid saying or implying (8)

        • Cobb is underperforming the state; it outperforms Georgia in every tested grade
        • PCG's math support caused district results
        • Re-proposing the declined Phase I scope
        • Calling CCRPI index scores "percent proficient"
        • Multiple vendors are duplicative or wasteful
        • A purchase proves a product is in use
        • Phase II is the only solution
        • District averages describe student groups

        Owners and next actions

        No confirmed owners or next actions were found in the supplied sources. The current Chief Academic Officer is not named in the BI brief; confirm from Cobb's leadership page.

        Not available

        Notes: ____________________________________________

        ____________________________________________________

        Methods

        Sources, definitions, gaps, and corrections

        Every number traces to a source listed here. Missing evidence is shown as missing rather than estimated.

        Source inventory (9)

        Definitions and methods (6)

        • Proficient or above = Proficient Learner + Distinguished Learner.
        • Retest pool = share below grade level in reading (Lexile) and share at Beginning Learner in math, from school-level files weighted by students tested.
        • Student-group values are CCRPI Content Mastery index scores by grade band, not percent proficient.
        • Georgia values on Outcome Trends come from the state-level rows in the performance trends workbook.
        • Grade-level and high school course results are never combined.
        • Values are calculated at source precision and rounded for display.

        Data gaps (9)

        • 2026 reading status and ELA results (not yet released statewide)
        • Grade 5 and 8 results by student group
        • Retest file scope and participant definition
        • Grade 8 after-retest distribution totals 95.1%
        • Level Up attendance, dosage, and fidelity
        • Status of the 2023 ELA intervention award
        • FY2027 budget and staffing
        • Cobb local promotion criteria; current Chief Academic Officer
        • No K–2 state assessment results; 2025 Cobb high school file is spring-only

        Corrections and changes in this version (7)

        • Overlap schools counted as seven, not six as stated in the BI brief (East Cobb MS is top five in both Grade 8 lists).
        • Spring 2026 retest results relabeled as districtwide; participant scope to be confirmed.
        • Georgia comparison values now come from the workbook's state-level rows. The earlier calculated estimates were not available for this rebuild; in the one value checked earlier, the difference was 0.02 points.
        • Largest math gain +3.7 (Grade 5) and largest ELA decline −8.8 (Grade 5) carried forward.
        • Lowest 2026 math grades: Grades 6 and 7.
        • Grade 3 ELA tested counts: 7,556 (2024) and 7,529 (2025).
        • Minor differences with the BI brief (for example Grade 3 math change +1.4 here, +1.5 in the brief) come from rounding and calculation method. This dashboard keeps workbook values.