Wallingford‑Swarthmore begins K–5 ELA pilot between Benchmark Advance and Arts and Letters

At the March 12 Educational Affairs meeting, district literacy staff updated the board on the K–5 elementary English language arts pilot that is testing Benchmark Advance and Arts and Letters as potential core curriculum adoptions. The pilot involves 26 volunteer teachers across all three elementary schools, administrators said.

Dr. Jess Merzocastini (identified in the record as the presenter for the ELA update) described the multi‑stage selection process: an initial list of 21 programs compiled from external recommendations and neighboring districts was narrowed to 16 using district requirements, then to five using external review resources, and finally to two finalists using a research‑based review matrix and teacher feedback. The Reading League curriculum evaluation guidelines and curriculum navigation reports were used as a point of reference during evaluation.

“The reports are informational to guide instructional decisions. The reports are not endorsements,” Dr. Merzocastini told the committee, repeating guidance from the Reading League and emphasizing that district professional judgment remains central to any selection.

District staff said Benchmark Education Company is revising its materials ahead of a 2026 copyright update; Benchmark representatives are coordinating a Reading League review and have added explicit foundational skills, decodables for K–2 and enhanced word study in grades 3–5 to their new edition. Great Minds, the publisher of Arts and Letters, is finalizing a timeline for Reading League review and recommends pairing Arts and Letters with an evidence‑based foundational‑skills program (for example, the district’s existing foundations program and 95 Percent Group resources).

Literacy staff explained how pilot feedback and implementation needs will inform a recommendation that Dr. Scanlon (the superintendent referenced in the discussion) will present to the board. The district plans to collect teacher, student and administrator feedback during the pilot and to continue frequent, classroom‑based professional learning so teachers can learn program routines and practices. Administrators noted a deadline for procurement: if the district is to purchase and distribute materials for fall 2025 implementation, decisions and ordering need to be completed by spring break.

Board members asked about alignment documents demonstrating program connections to the science of reading and state standards; staff said they will circulate the internal alignment reviews and links to product documents. Committee members also pressed on teacher readiness and the scale of professional development required; staff said implementation will require substantial in‑class coaching and principal engagement, noting earlier district experience implementing foundational programs in K–2 and 3–5.

Public commenters included parents whose children are in pilot classrooms; several praised increased student engagement and cited examples of children explaining new strategies at home. One parent said her child told her, “I’m pretty confident with math this year,” as an example of curriculum changes affecting student confidence—comments that board members linked to the district’s broader work on literacy and numeracy.

Next steps: staff will continue to gather pilot data through spring, provide alignment evidence to the board, plan professional development and return with a recommendation after analyzing teacher and student feedback. Procurement timing was set so that materials could be available to teachers before fall 2025 if the board adopts a program.