Almost every student’s scores go up from one screening window to the next. That’s the norm. But occasionally a score will drop or stay flat. When a parent sees this, two things happen simultaneously: they feel alarmed, and they want an explanation.

This guide gives you both—a clear understanding of why scores sometimes decrease and specific language for the parent conversation. The goal is not to dismiss the concern. The goal is to help the parent understand what the score is actually telling them, and what you’re doing about it.

Every screening score is an estimate of a student’s skills on a given day. No assessment can perfectly capture a student’s knowledge or ability. Many factors influence performance—focus, fatigue, confidence, and the specific content of the test. A single result should never be interpreted as a final or permanent statement about a student’s ability or potential.

This is not a flaw in any specific assessment. It is a property of all standardized measurement. A score of 50 might represent a student whose true performance on that day falls somewhere between 45 and 55. If a student scored at the higher end of that range in the fall and the lower end in the winter, the score drops—even though nothing about the student’s actual ability has changed.

There are several legitimate reasons a score might drop between screening windows. Understanding them allows you to give parents an honest, informed response rather than a vague reassurance.

Every assessment has a margin of measurement precision. If a student scored at the higher end of her range in the fall and the lower end in the winter, the score drops even though nothing about her actual ability has changed. This is the most common explanation for small score fluctuations and it applies to every standardized test in existence.

When a student rushes through an assessment, clicks through items carelessly, or disengages partway through, it is tempting to treat this as a testing problem—bad data that should be discarded and retaken. But that misses something important. The behavior during the assessment is itself meaningful information.

A student who races through a screener in five minutes, or who gives up before finishing, is telling you something about her relationship to the work. She may not see the purpose of the task. She may not feel confident enough to try. She may feel disconnected from the adults who are asking her to do it. She may feel that the work is so far beyond or below her level that effort feels pointless.

These are not testing problems. They are engagement problems. And they are often the same patterns the student shows in the classroom every day.

Screening assessments sample from a range of skills. The specific items a student encounters differ from one administration to the next. A student who happened to receive more items aligned with her stronger skills in the fall may encounter more items targeting areas of relative weakness in the winter. The student hasn’t lost ability. The sample changed.

Screening assessments measure a broad range of grade-level skills, but the curriculum doesn’t teach those skills simultaneously. A student screened in winter may be assessed on skills not yet taught in the current instructional sequence, or on skills taught earlier that haven’t been practiced recently. This can produce a temporary dip that resolves as the curriculum cycle continues.

This is the most important one and the hardest for parents to understand. The screening assessment doesn’t just measure what a student knows. It measures where a student is relative to where she should be at this point in the school year. Grade-level expectations advance between screening windows. A student who is learning—but learning at a slower rate than the curriculum expects—can appear to hold steady or even decline, because the benchmark moved.

Growth often includes periods of consolidation, challenge, and adjustment. As students encounter more complex material, their performance may temporarily fluctuate before strengthening again. A student moving from single-digit addition to multi-digit subtraction with regrouping is encountering qualitatively different demands. A temporary plateau or dip during that transition is a normal part of learning, not evidence of regression.

This is the most important section of this guide. When a score goes down, the natural instinct is to ask: what happened? But a single screening score cannot answer that question by itself. It was never designed to.

What a score decline can do is tell you where to direct your attention. It is a signal to look more closely at the student, to consult other sources of data, and to bring the question to your team. The screening score opens the conversation. The educator’s professional judgment—informed by classroom evidence, teacher observations, and team discussion—is what determines the response.

Schools do not rely on a single test score to understand a student’s learning. Teachers see students every day. They notice growth in persistence, confidence, and strategy use. They observe how students apply skills in real classroom situations. These insights are essential and often provide the most meaningful understanding of a child’s development. When screening data is considered alongside this broader evidence, it becomes far more powerful—it helps educators confirm patterns, identify emerging needs, and adjust instruction in ways that support each student.

The data alone does not determine what to do next. The next step is determined by the score combined with what the teacher observes in the classroom, what other data is available, and what your school’s structures and workflows make possible. Two students with identical score drops might need completely different responses—one might need a diagnostic to find a specific skill gap, and another might need an engagement intervention because the score reflects disconnection, not inability.

The preparation for a parent meeting is not “review the score.” The preparation is: review the score, check it against classroom evidence, determine whether the signal is about a skill gap or an engagement challenge, decide which next step fits this student, and be ready to explain it in one or two sentences.

Below are common next steps following a score decline or flat data, along with example language for explaining each one to a parent. Not every step applies to every student. Choose the one that fits the situation. Your school may have additional steps based on your own workflows and structures—space is provided at the end for those.

Not every score decrease is a signal that something is wrong. But some are. Here is how to tell the difference.

Below are specific phrases organized by situation. These are not scripts to read verbatim. They are frameworks for an honest, professional conversation. Notice that each one ends with a next step—because the parent will ask, and you should be ready.

Say: “Screening assessments have a built-in range of precision, the same way a bathroom scale gives slightly different numbers each time you step on it. A shift of a few points in either direction is within that normal range. What I pay attention to is the overall trajectory across multiple windows—and your child’s trajectory is [on track / consistent / heading in the right direction].”

Say: “I want to share something important about how your child approached the assessment. [He rushed through it very quickly / She disengaged partway through / He didn’t appear to invest effort in the way we’d expect.] We distinguish between a score that reveals a specific skill gap and a score that reveals a challenge with engagement. In this case, I believe the assessment is signaling to us that engagement is the issue—and that’s consistent with what I’m seeing in the classroom as well. The score may not tell us exactly what he knows, but his approach to the assessment tells us something equally important: that the conditions for learning need attention. Here’s what I’m going to do to help with that…”

Say: “This is something that can be confusing about screening data. The assessment isn’t just measuring what your child knows—it’s measuring where he is relative to grade-level expectations, and those expectations advance between each screening window. So even when a student is learning, if the pace of learning is slower than the pace of the curriculum, the score can hold steady or dip. That doesn’t mean he’s going backward. It means the target moved. Here’s what we’re doing to close that gap…”

Say: “I want to be straightforward with you. The score is lower than we expected, and I’ve also been noticing [specific observation] in the classroom. A single score can’t tell us exactly what’s happening—but when I put it together with what I’m seeing daily, it’s a signal to look more closely. Here’s what I’m going to do: I’m bringing this to our team so we can review the data together and determine whether we need [a diagnostic assessment / a closer look at the specific skill area / an adjustment to the current support]. I’d rather investigate now and find there’s nothing to worry about than wait another three months.”

Say: “Your child has been receiving [specific support] and the screening data isn’t showing the movement we want to see yet. I want you to know that doesn’t mean the support isn’t helping or that your child can’t make progress. What it tells me is that we need to look more closely at the approach—whether we’re targeting the right skill, whether the intensity is sufficient, whether something else is getting in the way. I’m bringing this to our team so we can adjust the plan rather than continue with something that isn’t producing results.”

Say: “Thank you for telling me that. What you’re seeing at home is important information. When a parent’s observations align with a change in the data, that’s a stronger signal than either one alone. I want to take what you’re describing seriously and bring it to our team alongside the screening data so we can look at the full picture together.”

When a parent asks about a score decrease, the conversation has three parts. Do them in order.

Do not begin by explaining. Begin by hearing. The parent is worried about her child. That worry is legitimate regardless of whether the score decrease is meaningful.

Example: “I understand why that caught your attention. Let me walk you through what I think is happening.”

Name the specific reason you believe applies to this student. Do not give a generic list of reasons scores can fluctuate. Pick the one that fits and explain it clearly. If you believe the signal is about engagement rather than a skill gap, say so directly. Then describe the other sources of evidence—classroom performance, teacher observations, work samples, effort patterns—that inform your interpretation.

Example: “In this case, I believe the most likely explanation is [specific reason], and here’s why I think that. When I look at what I’m seeing in the classroom…”

Every parent conversation about data should end with what you are doing, not just what you think. This is the moment the parent has been waiting for. Be specific. Name the action, explain why it’s the right one for this student, and give a timeline for when you’ll follow up.

Example: “Here’s what I’m going to do. [Specific action from the next steps table.] I’m doing this because [one-sentence rationale]. And I’ll follow up with you by [specific date] to let you know what we find.”

If scores can vary and don’t capture the full picture, why do we bother with assessments at all?

This is an important and thoughtful question, and it deserves a direct answer.

The value of screening assessments does not come from any single score. It comes from the process of tracking scores over time and coordinating those results with other sources of information. When schools look at patterns across multiple testing windows, they catch things early that might otherwise go unnoticed until a much larger gap has developed.

Screening assessments are not meant to replace professional judgment. They are tools that strengthen it. They give educators a systematic reason to ask: is this student where we expect her to be? And if not, what do we need to learn, and what should we try?

Use this when reviewing data before parent conferences.