Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Performance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cheltenham SD leaders present cohort-based results and expand small-group interventions
Summary
District leaders reviewed cohort and grade-level assessment data, credited rapid-screening tools and schoolwide small-group instruction for gains among lowest-performing students, and described curriculum and assessment changes including adoption of Reveal and removal of IXL.
Cheltenham School District officials on Thursday reviewed continuous school improvement data and described steps to scale small-group instruction after mixed assessment results in transitional grades.
District staff framed their presentation around a four-question continuous improvement model that uses multiple data domains — performance, demographics, perception and programs — to set state-aligned interim targets. Staff said science assessments were not included because state standards and assessments are changing.
At Cedarbrook, presenter Mr. Metcalfe said the district shifted to cohort-based displays for elementary-to-middle transitions and to year-over-year accountability measures at the high school. He outlined instructional changes designed to give more students access to targeted support: increasing WIN/academic seminar from once weekly to three days, removing the IXL program, using ALEKS for math practice, adopting Writable (an AI–assisted writing feedback tool), and relying on FastBridge for rapid progress monitoring. Metcalfe said those shifts contributed to notable growth among lower-quintile students — for example, seventh-grade lowest-quintile ELA growth of 6.7 points and eighth-grade quintile‑1 ELA growth of 14.8 points — while acknowledging some subgroups (Black students in some grades) remain below growth standards.
Board members pressed for details on student identification for small-group work; Metcalfe said FastBridge screenings and classroom formative assessments funnel students into interventions and that teacher professional development has addressed classroom management required for effective small-group instruction.
The presentation emphasized common assessments drawn from adopted curricula, data-protocol meetings for teachers and administrators, and professional learning communities to improve curriculum alignment across grades 6–8. District staff said these practices aim to translate growth for the lowest-performing students into broader gains districtwide.
The committee did not take formal action on instructional changes at the meeting; the only formal vote recorded was approval of the prior meeting minutes.
