Board approves CTE and K‑3 literacy materials amid debate over access and Act 20 compliance

The Pewaukee School District board approved two curriculum purchases and a revision to the district’s curriculum renewal schedule after public discussion and questions from board members.

At the meeting, administration presented Career and Technical Education (CTE) curriculum updates budgeted at $47,987.57 and a K‑3 literacy curriculum package budgeted at $66,426.70. “That is all of the materials and everything we need to deliver the curriculum for all of those courses,” a staff member identified in the meeting as Anthony said about the CTE materials.

Many board members asked for more specific, itemized information about what the district would buy with those amounts and whether the physical resources could be made available for public inspection before purchase. In several exchanges Anthony said curriculum outlines were posted online and that physical resources could be reviewed in his office by appointment. A board member expressed concern that the public sees a tall packet of materials with limited time to review; another described past problems with library materials and asked for greater transparency.

K‑3 literacy prompted additional questioning because of state law changes. A board member asked whether the district could become compliant with Act 20 without buying the $66,426.70 package. Anthony responded that the district recommended the purchase as the best fit for student instruction and that starting from scratch would require substantial work; the administration said some prior materials were no longer allowed under Act 20 and that new adoptions were needed to align with the law.

The board also voted to change the curriculum renewal cycle from a five‑year schedule to a six‑year schedule to give staff more time to develop proficiency scales and summative assessments and to allow an additional year of classroom implementation before next review.

Nut graf: board members pushed administration for clearer public access to the purchased materials and itemized cost detail; administration said draft curriculum materials are posted online and physical resources are available by appointment, while citing Act 20 as a driver for the K‑3 literacy decision.

Quotes from the meeting illustrated the tension: “The resources are available to come review in my office,” Anthony said when asked whether physical items could be inspected. In response to whether the district could comply with Act 20 without spending the $66,426.70, Anthony replied, “To start from scratch, square one, … that would be my position. Yes.”

Board votes: the CTE revision was approved after a motion and a single recorded opposed vote. The K‑3 literacy adoption likewise passed with one opposed vote. The board approved the change to a six‑year curriculum renewal cycle after discussion and a recorded opposed vote.

Administrators said district and community members had opportunities to review drafts online during an earlier two‑week window; the board’s discussion focused on whether that window and in‑office review opportunity were sufficient for public transparency.

Ending: Anthony and other administration representatives invited board members to schedule in‑office reviews and to request more granular itemization of purchases; the board did not delay the approvals and directed staff to continue with implementation and public‑facing information.