Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Literacy Numeracy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee proposes adding numeracy to literacy goal, debates grade-level checkpoints
Summary
Staff recommended adding math (numeracy) to the board's literacy focus, proposing a seventh-grade math checkpoint; members debated whether single-grade checkpoints are too late and whether goals should be set annually or as three-year targets.
At the Sept. 29 Strategic Planning Committee meeting, staff proposed revising the board's literacy focus to explicitly include numeracy and to add a seventh-grade math goal as a critical checkpoint for state progress measures.
Brianna Summers, Director of Policy and Academics, said many stakeholders urged the board to add math and suggested a seventh-grade benchmark because "seventh grade is most likely the last point in which you have students all taking the same level or same coursework before it starts to split or diverge." Summers also reported that respondents generally recommended line-item edits rather than wholesale elimination of existing goals.
Committee members questioned whether a single grade checkpoint is sufficient. Committee member Bob asked why the board would not add earlier intermediate checks in math, arguing that waiting until seventh grade risks missing students who fall behind earlier. Chairman Holt and others noted the intent of grade-level checkpoints is to provide "dipstick" measurements that summarize broader trends while staff and the board continue to review year-by-year data.
Members discussed alternative approaches, including averaging outcomes across grades, keeping multiple grade checkpoints, or retaining the existing approach but improving alignment with state assessment and partner initiatives such as SCORE's Tennessee 2030 goals. Sarah said the board should continue to examine data for every grade and subgroup annually while using one or two "dipstick" measures in the Master Plan to communicate high-level progress.
No formal vote was taken on the proposed language; staff will draft several options (annual increments versus a three-year target, single-grade checkpoints versus multi-grade measures) and bring them back to the committee for review.
