East Penn presents 2025–28 comprehensive plan after review of 2023–24 student data

East Penn School District staff presented a draft 2025–2028 Comprehensive Plan at the board’s Jan. 13 meeting, summarizing 2023–24 student performance data and proposing districtwide goals on instruction, intervention and school culture, administrators said.

The plan responds to the Pennsylvania Department of Education requirement that school districts submit a comprehensive plan every three years and is intended to guide measurable action steps for the next three years, school officials said. The district will post the draft on its website for roughly a month for community feedback and tentatively plans to return the plan to the board for possible approval in February; the district must submit the final plan by the end of March.

District presenters said the 2023–24 data show widespread growth even where interim proficiency targets were not yet met. "Every school exceeded the statewide average in every tested subject area," said Dr. Michalak, a supervisor in the district’s Office of Teaching and Learning. Speakers highlighted both proficiency and growth measures from the Future Ready PA Index and PBVA/Value‑Added reports and emphasized that growth and proficiency together guide planning.

Key data points presented include building scores and growth measures for elementary, middle and high schools. Presenters noted that several elementary schools exceeded state targets in multiple subjects and that both Lower Macungie Middle School and Eyer Middle School posted building scores of 78.6, placing them near the top among demographically similar schools in Lehigh and Northampton counties. The high school cohort data include a caveat for algebra scores: the algebra figures exclude some students with non‑numerical proficiency scores tied to prior testing cohorts, the presenters said.

The comprehensive plan centers on two primary themes: - Instruction and intervention: The district’s stated goal is to ensure students have access to rigorous, evidence‑based core instruction and intervention so that state proficiency and growth measures improve. Michael Billman, technology director, summarized the goal as focused on equitable practices, equitable grading and assessment, and evidence‑based instruction. Action steps include expanded interventions, common planning time, professional learning communities (PLCs), common assessments by course or grade band, learning walks and coaching cycles. - Culture for learning: The plan aims to increase building scores tied to attendance and to strengthen social‑emotional learning (SEL) and student well‑being. Planned actions include consistent SEL lessons, expanded counseling and partner‑run group sessions (for example with Valley Youth House), calm‑down spaces, student mentoring for grades 9–12, refinements to the district’s SWPBIS (school‑wide positive behavior interventions and supports) practice, and targeted attendance interventions such as attendance improvement conferences and personal plans.

Presenters described several implementation details and near‑term steps. Equity‑focused changes include work on equitable grading (clarifying late work, makeup work and second‑chance learning), more consistent use of universal design for learning (UDL) and professional development tied to evidence‑based strategies. The district plans a phased rollout for literacy work aligned to the science of reading and said middle and high school staff are at different points in that multi‑year implementation. The district also noted an initial professional development sequence addressing appropriate use of AI tools for students and staff.

Board members asked for clarifications about how common assessments are used and where administrators can see those data, the district’s approach to field‑trip scheduling and how UDL and common assessments will be balanced in practice. Presenters said common assessments are standard across courses or grade bands and are reviewed in PLCs and tier‑1 data meetings, and that field‑trip guidelines have been tightened in some windows to limit instructional loss.

The district characterized the presentation as informational; it will accept public feedback before any final vote. Dr. Campbell and other administrators invited community review of the posted draft and signaled that the February board meeting would be the likely opportunity for final action after public comment and any revisions.