Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Summer Learning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Summer learning review finds lower credit-recovery participation; district to evaluate model and return in spring
Summary
District administrator presented results from the summer learning and credit-recovery programs: 63 secondary students enrolled in 91 recovery courses, 80 courses were passed (88% pass rate) and attendance averaged about 81 percent. Elementary summer learning ran six classrooms and served over 100 families; costs were largely staff-driven and the
The Carlisle Area School District reported a drop in participation in this year's summer learning and credit-recovery offerings and said it will conduct a formal program evaluation and return to the board in the spring with findings.
District presenter described the summer program length and staffing: "This year's program was 18 days long at elementary, 14 days at secondary," the presenter said, and noted elementary programming ran a half-day (three hours) while secondary students attended three- or six-hour days depending on courses recovered.
Officials reported the secondary summer program enrolled 63 students in 91 courses; 80 of those course enrollments were passed by the end of the summer window (an 88 percent course pass rate) with an attendance rate around 81 percent. Secondary summer operations cost about $55,000 overall; students paid a per-course recovery fee of $150 this year and the district recouped about $10,000. Elementary summer learning operated six independent classrooms (approximately $35,000 total cost) and served primarily Tier 3 intervention students, district staff said.
Committee members and administrators discussed why middle-school participation remained very low. Presenters said middle-school course recovery is uncommon because retention or promotion is the primary remediation decision at those grades; many middle-school students who fail a course have complicating circumstances (cyber-charter placements, alternative programs) or receive other in-year interventions. The district also cited increased during-year credit-recovery options at the high school and more proactive counseling and grade-monitoring efforts as contributors to lower summer demand.
Administrators said the district used partnerships and staffing models to extend interventions: a reading specialist trained SPY (Supportive Program for Youth) staff to run reading groups in place of sending a district teacher, and Schwartz High School counseling staff expanded grade-level interventions that the district views as successful in reducing summer demand.
Board members asked about cost-sharing and equity. Officials said the $150 fee includes a sliding-scale option tied to free/reduced-price lunch guidelines, payment plans and case-by-case principal discretion; the district said it will not deny students access based solely on inability to pay.
The district said it will examine the summer model'including course eligibility, in-year remediation alternatives and minimum-performance thresholds for summer participation'as part of a thorough spring review that will weigh student outcomes and financial stewardship.
