EXCELSIOR SPRINGS, Mo. (November 11, 2025) – An academic update meant to outline district progress and challenges quickly became the most contentious moment of Tuesday night’s School Board meeting, as board member Traci White pressed Assistant Superintendent of Academic Services Dr. Melissa Miller on declining scores, curriculum alignment, and teacher turnover. The exchange came after it was revealed that Excelsior Springs fell below the state’s accreditation threshold in its most recent Annual Performance Report.
District Falls Below Accreditation Benchmark
Miller began her presentation with the district’s APR score: 69.5 percent, below the state’s 70 percent threshold for full accreditation. Although the district remains accredited due to the state’s three-year averaging system, Miller acknowledged the seriousness of the decline. She told the board that this year’s results should be viewed as “a wakeup call,” pointing to attendance, inconsistent academic growth, and structural issues across grade levels.
Miller said the district’s curriculum is more robust than it was when she arrived. “When I got here five years ago, we didn’t have a written curriculum. Teachers showed up and went to Teachers Pay Teachers and tried to find things,” she said, noting that formal curriculum adoption and instructional coaching are now in place.
Yet even with those structures, Miller admitted the district is not seeing the academic lift it should.
View or download a copy of Miller’s report below:
White Presses Miller on Alignment and Consistency
The exchange intensified when White asked whether the written curriculum is truly making its way into classrooms and whether students are being taught and assessed at the level required to succeed on state tests.
Miller responded that she could not say for sure that classroom instruction matches the rigor of the district’s written expectations. She told the board, “What I cannot tell you for sure and what warrants further investigation on my part is what is being taught in the classroom truly what was written. Are we assessing that written curriculum in a way that the state is asking so that when they get to the state assessment, the questions aren’t too difficult for them because they never really got that deep into it?”
White pushed again, asking whether inconsistent instruction across grade levels and buildings was contributing to the district’s performance slide.
Rather than address alignment directly, Miller repeatedly returned to the issue of teacher turnover. She told the board, “When you have the turnover and you are dealing with new teachers constantly, that is something where you’re going to see it affect overall academic performance. You just are.”
White did not dispute that turnover is a factor, but her questions pointed toward larger systemic issues: whether the district’s strategies and supports are strong enough to withstand typical staffing changes, and whether the district is monitoring classroom implementation closely enough to guarantee consistency.
Miller’s Explanations Show Tension Beneath the Surface
Throughout the exchange, Miller acknowledged gaps but often framed them as the product of circumstances outside the district’s control. She cited the complexity of state requirements, the strain of legislative mandates, and what teachers describe as “more minutes per day in our curriculum than we have minutes in the classroom.”
She also noted the challenge of evaluating new teachers. “I can look at scores and based on the scores without seeing the teacher there, I can tell you who’s a first- and second-year teacher,” she said, emphasizing that early-career teachers face a steep learning curve but are not to blame individually.
White’s line of questioning, however, emphasized that parents want to know whether the district has a plan to ensure stability, coherence, and measurable improvement.
Underlying Issues: Attendance, Growth, and Cohort Stagnation
Miller presented several data trends that contributed to the district’s APR drop:
- Elementary literacy: Cohort data showed students “aren’t growing” at the expected rate. Miller explained, “Our kids are really not moving from one band to another. It is a minimum expectation that every teacher gets a full year of growth from a student no matter where they start.”
- Math performance: Both eighth-grade algebra readiness and high school Algebra I remain areas of concern. Miller said the district “really needs to focus more on critical thinking and problem solving” beginning in the early grades.
- Attendance: Miller and Superintendent Mark Bullimore both noted that attendance is now one of the district’s biggest academic obstacles. More than 20 percent of students are missing over 17 days per year, a pattern Bullimore said places students “behind for a week” in subjects like math and science after even a single absence.
Board Signals Expectation for Stronger Academic Oversight
The tension between Miller and White reflected broader concerns from the board about academic coherence and urgency. At one point, Miller told the board that the APR score should motivate “fine-tuned looks” at curriculum delivery and assessment practices, and she referenced the newly formed academic task force as one path forward.
White’s questions made clear that the board expects deeper and more concrete analysis. Parents, she implied, will not accept explanations that point only to turnover or external pressure.
The exchange marked one of the most direct and substantive academic discussions the board has held publicly in recent years. As the district moves into a state-required monitoring phase, board members indicated they expect regular updates, clearer metrics, and consistent implementation across all classrooms.
If you appreciate the value our local journalism brings to the community, please consider making a recurring contribution to the Excelsior Citizen!
