Dover officials present NJSLA results, emphasize year-to-year growth and local benchmarks
Loading...
Summary
District academic leaders presented New Jersey Student Learning Assessment (NJSLA) results and internal benchmark data, highlighting strong I‑Ready growth even as proficiency rates remain below state averages; administrators said they are prioritizing growth metrics and targeted supports for students new to the district.
Rory Karl, Chief Academic Officer, and Joshua Chubin, Administrator of Student Performance and Strategic Planning, presented NJSLA and local benchmark results at a Dover Board of Education meeting, focusing on student growth across grades 3–9.
Karl told the board the NJSLA reports proficiency as levels 4 and 5 and pointed to the district’s comparison with state figures: “The state was at a 38%,” he said of students meeting or exceeding expectations on the math assessment. Karl described the district’s emphasis on growth rather than single-year proficiency snapshots.
Chubin reviewed district-level comparisons and internal benchmark work, saying the district uses I‑Ready (grades K–8) and other benchmarks at the high school. He noted the district’s science proficiency was markedly below the state: “As a state, only 27 percent of the students who take this assessment are proficient in science. At Dover, we are at 11 percent,” Chubin said. He also summarized subgroup reporting the state requires and said the district uses those subgroup breakdowns to target supports.
Administrators emphasized growth measures in response to questions from board members. Chubin described how cohort-to-cohort comparisons (tracking the same students year to year) change how the results look: comparing the third-grade cohort from 2024 to the fourth-grade cohort in 2025, he said, “you will see the increase.” He offered to provide a deeper cohort analysis at a future meeting.
Presenters showed internal benchmark gains reported from I‑Ready: Chubin said reading benchmark counts of students three or more grade levels below dropped from 336 to 207 over a single year and that average growth on I‑Ready for math was about 116% (with the district goal being 100%). He said similar gains in math translated to an average 119% growth in one report. Karl and Chubin framed these as evidence that classroom instruction and targeted small-group interventions are producing measurable year-to-year growth.
The presentation included demonstrations of dashboard tools that correlate I‑Ready benchmarks with the NJSLA (presenters said correlations were often around 0.82) and examples of how attendance and other variables are viewable alongside academic benchmarks to inform real-time classroom adjustments. Chubin explained the district stores incoming students’ prior state assessment scores and other records in its student information system so receiving teachers can plan appropriately.
Board members asked for more detailed cohort-level comparisons at a future meeting; Karl and Chubin agreed to share those analyses. The presentation prompted questions about how proficiency and growth measures differ and how the district plans supports for students who arrive mid-elementary school.
The district did not present a single new policy or budget change tied to the results during this presentation; administrators said the data will guide building and district-level planning and resource allocation going forward.
