USD 231 officials roll out guaranteed, viable curriculum and common formative assessments for ELA and math

District curriculum leaders told the Board of Education Monday that English-language arts and mathematics curriculum guides are finished and ready for teachers to implement this school year as part of a districtwide "guaranteed and viable curriculum" initiative. The presentations outlined a nine‑step curriculum-development process that designates core elements as nonnegotiable and builds teacher agency into other elements, and leaders said the work includes embedding the science of reading into foundational early‑literacy units.

The curriculum and assessment work matter because district leaders said it sets consistent expectations across the district’s buildings: students in the same grade should be taught the same priority standards regardless of school or teacher. Dr. Jason Jones, leading the presentation on curriculum, told the board the district is using a "tight and loose" framework in which steps 1–5 (identifying priority standards, sequencing learning progressions, stating learning intentions, articulating success criteria, and specifying language expectations) are tight (nonnegotiable), while steps 6–8 (relevance, assessment opportunities, and learning experience) allow teacher discretion. Step 9—mastery of standards—relies on common formative assessments (CFAs) that teachers will administer and discuss in professional learning communities (PLCs).

District staff emphasized that the product—the written curriculum—depends on ongoing teacher use, district data and annual refinement. Jones said curriculum writing teams worked across the last two years on ELA and math and that teacher writers produced curriculum guides that were shared with staff. Jennifer Moore and Sierra Hartshorn, kindergarten teachers who served on a math-writing team, summarized changes they piloted for kindergarten math assessments: shorter, more frequent assessments tied to specific standards with mastery scales instead of lengthy front‑and‑back tests. Moore said teams consolidated large units into five units, moved to one‑page checks tied to the unit’s big ideas, and provided a mastery scale and a Google Sheets tracker to help teachers and families see student progress.

Mandy Hodo, described in the presentation as a district reading specialist and an author of the kindergarten ELA foundational unit, said the curriculum embeds the science of reading, including a structured scope and sequence for foundational skills (phonics, phonemic awareness and high‑frequency word instruction) and instruction for the "top rope" (vocabulary and background knowledge). Hodo said the foundational skills component now has a more systematic, explicit sequence than the district’s previous practice.

District leaders addressed how assessment data will be used this year. Jones said data from CFAs and interim measures will be used within PLCs and at the building level; to build teacher trust, the district is keeping CFA data at the building level this year rather than reporting it centrally in Educational Services. The presentation said that PLCs supported by early‑release time will be the primary venue for reviewing assessment results and deciding instructional responses.

Staff acknowledged the curriculum is not a fixed product. Jones and other presenters said the district will solicit teacher feedback, review data each year, and refine materials each summer. They also told trustees that state standards may change and the district’s process is intended to allow ongoing adjustments. The presentation included a live demonstration of the district’s GVC (guaranteed and viable curriculum) web link and examples of a sixth‑grade year‑at‑a‑glance showing eight‑week segments and where CFAs fit into unit sequences.

During board discussion, trustees and staff discussed family supports and interventions. A board member asked whether supplemental materials could be provided for parents to use at home and whether the district would consider mandatory summer school for students who show they have not mastered standards; staff replied that summer school decisions involve district policy and external funding, and referral on that question would fall to other administrators. Math specialist Rhonda Wheedle described intervention practices at Sunflower Elementary, including preemptive family packets and frequent short assessments that trigger targeted small‑group or one‑on‑one support.

The board was told there will be minimal report‑card changes this year: elementary report cards received a "face lift" and were adjusted to reflect priority standards where necessary, while secondary grading reporting is not changing this year. Leaders said the expectation is that grades and standards will become more comparable across teachers as common curriculum and CFAs mature.

The district scheduled follow‑up briefings: curriculum leaders will return next month to present a deeper review of the science of reading and structured literacy work. The board and presenters emphasized this is an ongoing process that requires teacher professional learning and yearly adjustments rather than a one‑time rollout.

Sources: Presentation and on‑record remarks by district curriculum staff and teacher writers at the USD 231 Board of Education meeting; district materials shown during the meeting.