Wissahickon district reviews 2019–24 state assessment trends; math dip draws board concern

Wissahickon School District officials presented an annual overview of state assessment results Jan. 27, saying the district continues to outperform peer districts and the statewide average in English language arts and science but that mathematics proficiency—particularly at the middle‑school level—has declined and requires targeted action.

The presentation, led by district staff and co‑facilitated by Dr. Schmidt, the district’s Director of Teaching and Learning, framed results across 2019–2024 and explained reporting conventions such as the Keystone exam banking policy and the 2020 statewide testing cancellation. “We do continue to score better than our peers and the statewide average,” Dr. Schmidt said of elementary ELA scores, while also noting a slight decrease in 2024 and the district’s desire to raise trend lines.

Administrators described findings by subject and grade band: elementary ELA proficiency near the mid‑70s percentage range, secondary ELA and literature proficiency remaining relatively steady, strong elementary science results (about 90% proficient/advanced in grade 4), and more mixed results in mathematics—roughly 76% proficient/advanced in grades 3–5, a drop to about 53% for grades 6–8, and approximately 62% proficiency on Keystone mathematics for the cohort reported in 2024. Presenters cautioned that the 2020 assessment pause and subsequent Keystone waivers affect sample sizes and trend interpretation.

The presentation emphasized the district’s multi‑tiered system of supports (MTSS) as the organizing framework for action steps. For ELA that includes reinforcing core instruction, differentiated and small‑group instruction, instructional coaching and professional development focused on text‑dependent analysis and writing in response to reading. For mathematics the district said it is increasing professional learning to shift classrooms to student‑centered instruction, refining K–12 math standards alignment, creating a K–12 framework that identifies high‑priority skills, and preparing a new math curriculum for rollout next year. Science actions highlighted adoption of Pennsylvania’s new Science, Technology, Engineering and Environmental Literacy (STEM/STEEL) standards and an emphasis on phenomena‑based, hands‑on instruction supported by curriculum kits.

Board members and other participants pressed for specific details about the math decline and next steps. Board member Amy asked for follow‑up data after schedule changes that add instructional time; one parent pointed out a concern that fifth‑grade math placed late in the day might reduce learning. District staff said some middle‑school schedule changes add time for math and ELA and that buildings are drilling into grade‑level and skill‑level patterns to direct professional learning and interventions.

On testing preparation, the district said it does not practice the state tests verbatim but helps students build stamina and test‑taking strategies, and it has expanded exposure to online testing platforms as the state moves assessments online. Staff also noted teachers and principals can access student‑level reporting from the state that breaks results into sub‑skill areas and identifies strengths and needs for individual students and classrooms.

Administrators described how assessment data feed continuous improvement: teachers use data to reflect and adapt instruction; principals set school goals and identify skill‑level needs; and district leadership uses aggregated evidence to guide curriculum review, professional learning and resource allocation. The district posted its comprehensive plan for public review and said it will return to the board for approval in March.

Board members repeatedly described the middle‑school math proficiency level as unacceptable and asked whether the district is exploring curricula and practices piloted in higher‑performing districts. Staff said the curriculum review process includes outreach to peer districts and pilot work with instructional materials, and noted the Montgomery County intermediate unit and other partners provide professional development resources.

The presentation closed with staff pledging continued monitoring and building‑level interventions, and an invitation to the public to review posted materials. No formal board action on policy or curriculum was taken at the Jan. 27 meeting; several budget, personnel and contract items were listed for review or future approval.

Looking ahead, district leaders said work this spring will focus on implementing the prioritized math resources and supporting teachers with targeted professional development and instructional coaching, and on using MTSS processes to align interventions to student needs.