Colonial SD principals report strong K–3 proficiency, outline school improvement plans and assessment changes

District instructional leaders told the Colonial School District curriculum committee on Monday that multiple elementary buildings are exceeding Pennsylvania—uture Ready Index interim targets and that school improvement teams are using benchmark and classroom data to shape targeted interventions.

Dr. Phillips, a district curriculum staff member, opened the presentation by placing the district ata in federal and state context, saying the Future Ready Index satisfies Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) accountability requirements and sets interim targets through 2033. She said the state—aseline (2017) and the extended statewide target (to 2033) aim to reduce the share of nonproficient students by about 50% by that date.

Principals summarized how local benchmark systems (LinkIt and DIBELS) and classroom assessments guide small-group instruction and school improvement planning. Denise Marks, principal of Country Hocken Elementary, and other principals described routine use of three benchmark administrations (beginning, middle and end of year), item-analysis reports and —ubble—ategory monitoring to identify students at risk of slipping from —ompetency into lower bands. Marks emphasized that benchmark Form A scores are lower by design early in the year and that the buildings focus on growth as well as proficiency.

Presenters gave several specific data points from the district—enchmarks and state reporting: a Form A ELA proficient/advanced rate of about 54.7% for the current third-grade cohort (district benchmark snapshot), a Form B midyear ELA rate near 77.3% in some cohorts, and end-of-year predictions from last year—orm C showing roughly 75.8% for a referenced cohort. Principals said one diagnostic discrepancy in math showed a Form C prediction of about 92% proficient for a cohort, while midyear Form B data was nearer 77%; item analysis identified fractions as a not-yet-taught area explaining the gap.

Principals described instructional shifts and resources tied to those findings. Examples named in committee remarks included Spire (for reading intervention), foundations (previous curriculum elements now in general education), Delta Math (a screening/tool being piloted), DreamBox (adaptive math tool), and Illustrative Mathematics (a math curriculum the district is adopting, with pilot classes reported in fourth grade and some fifth-grade sections). Staff said Illustrative Mathematics lessons emphasize student discourse and conceptual understanding, and they noted how the resource can free teachers to pull targeted small groups.

The presentation also covered subgroup reporting and English-language-learners (ELL) supports. Principals said the number of students whose primary home language is not English has increased and that the district uses the WIDA framework and the PASA alternate assessment (for students meeting alternate-assessment criteria) where appropriate. District staff cautioned that Future Ready Index subgroup reporting requires an N of 20, so some K–3 cohort subgroup figures are marked s insufficient data t the state level, even where local diagnostic reports are available.

Principals described school improvement team (SIT) practices: continuous, data-driven revision of SIPs, use of real-time data warehouse reports (identified in presentation as MCLAS/MCAS-style fingertip reports), and emphasis on social-emotional supports (Second Step), positive behavior supports, family engagement, and multilingual access at school offices. Several principals noted improvements in special-education outcomes tied to new resources and to targeted interventions.

Committee members asked about combining K–3 data across elementary buildings for reporting; presenters explained that state tools do not always permit K–3 aggregation across buildings for the Future Ready Index but that local systems can and do run cohort and cross-building diagnostics to inform instruction.

The presentation closed with principals escribing school-level highlights: No Place for Hate activities, Great Kindness Challenge events, student leadership teams, and library purchases of bilingual materials. Leaders asked board members and central office staff to recognize building staff for the work on growth and targeted instruction.

No formal motions or votes were recorded in the committee presentation portion; presenters described ongoing implementation steps and curriculum adoptions rather than board decisions.

Ending: The committee moved next to summer programming and operational items after the instructional presentation; principals and district staff said they will continue to report implementation status and assessment milestones to the board as the year progresses.