Coventry officials review 2023–24 test scores; district shows small districtwide gains, science growth strongest

Coventry Public Schools officials presented the district’s 2023–24 state accountability results to the school committee on Jan. 9, reporting modest overall gains in proficiency and sharper improvements in science while warning that growth varied by school and subgroup.

Assistant Superintendent Anzalone, who led the presentation with district staff, said the district’s overall English language arts proficiency was 45.1% for the year and described the change as incremental. “Our current progress after these scores in the 23, 24 is 45.1% proficient,” she said. Officials highlighted a roughly 6.8% districtwide gain in science and singled out middle-school science as the area with the largest year-to-year improvement.

The report explained how the state accountability system assigns star ratings based on multiple measures — school quality and success, English-language proficiency, and achievement and growth — and then assigns each school the lowest of its component ratings. Presenters stressed that Coventry’s composite ratings are rooted heavily in achievement and growth measures, which combine many weighted indicators in a state index. “The rating is assigned based on their lowest score, not an average,” a presenter said while walking the committee through how the model works.

School-level results varied. Coventry High School’s composite rating was three stars: strong graduation and school-quality measures but lower achievement-and-growth marks. High-school ELA proficiency remained above the state average at about 52.6% meeting or exceeding expectations, while math proficiency lagged (about mid-20s percentage points meeting or exceeding), and science at the high school rose substantially (from roughly 36% to nearly 43% meeting or exceeding). At the elementary level, Washington Oak continued as a five-star school overall, with a 10-point-plus jump in math and a large increase in students exceeding expectations in ELA.

Assistant Superintendent Anzalone tied the results to the district strategic plan and curriculum work underway: the district began the plan with 38.5% proficiency and is targeting about 58.5% by the 2027–28 school year. She said Coventry is “moving in the right direction” with current progress at 45.1% and called out stronger gains at the elementary and middle levels, where new curriculum implementations have been in place longer. “Our elementary change was a 5.6% growth, and our middle school change was a 2.3% growth,” she said. She also said the district saw a 6.8% overall gain in science and noted the middle school’s science increase of 10.6%.

Director of special education Fred told the committee his office had run a three-year trend analysis and that, while district staff are not satisfied with all results, the three-year progress gives cause for cautious optimism. He and Anzalone said steps ahead include continued curriculum adoption and implementation, targeted supports for students with disabilities and other struggling groups, improved multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) and attendance work.

Committee members pressed for clarity on the differences between the school-quality rating (attendance, suspensions, percent exceeding) and the achievement-and-growth measures. Member John Cambio asked why a school such as Hopkins Hill could have a five-star school-quality rating but a two-star achievement score; presenters said the two categories measure different sets of indicators and that low growth for specific subgroups can depress an otherwise good school-quality number.

Members also asked how top-performing schools’ approaches might be shared across the district. Anzalone and staff described district-level principal collaboration, shared schedules across elementary schools, and teacher committees that spread best practices; they noted targeted examples — for instance, vocabulary work and a strong science teacher at Washington Oak — that have informed district planning.

Officials repeatedly emphasized a distinction between achievement and growth, and the need to examine subgroup trends when setting school improvement priorities. The committee received the presentation for discussion and asked for follow-up data screenshots and school-specific subgroup breakdowns.

Ending: District staff recommended continued focus on curriculum rollout, differentiated supports for students who are not meeting standards, and strengthening attendance and MTSS processes. The committee said it will review additional school-specific data and the district’s next steps at future meetings.