Carlisle Area SD presents K–12 math review, cites strong elementary gains and uneven state results

District instructional leaders gave the Carlisle Area School District board a detailed K–12 briefing on Wednesday outlining assessment practices, recent curriculum work and steps the district is taking to boost math proficiency across grades.

"What we bring to the board, the PSSA and Keystone tests, are really the tip of a much larger iceberg," said Dr. Gojoy, summarizing the presentation’s organizing metaphor. Presenters said the district combines statewide summative tests with a wide set of benchmark, diagnostic and formative tools — including a PDE pilot called Firefly, Acadience benchmarks, Reflex fluency checks and common assessments created and used across schools — to inform instruction and interventions.

Elementary staff described a 90‑minute daily math block (whole‑group instruction, a roughly 15‑minute classwide Spring Math fluency routine, plus 30 minutes of small‑group instruction and individual intervention). Tatum Steinauer and Monique Wallace said the consistent structure and classroom coaching from partners such as PaTTAN helped nurses the initiative from curriculum adoption toward fidelity and sustainability.

"When we think about students who entered fifth grade in 2024 ... you went from 7.3% to 32.2%" in mastery of multiplication and division, one presenter said, citing spring benchmark cohorts as an example of measurable gains after the spring math implementation.

The presentation also noted uneven signals across measures: Carlisle students often scored higher on multiple‑choice than on open‑ended PSSA items, and some high‑performing subgroups (for example, students passing Algebra I and AP exam takers) are outpacing proficiency reported in other assessments. Dr. Gojoy flagged several contributing factors: historically heavier district investments in ELA than math; limited math‑specific intervention staffing compared with reading; a prior lack of a consistent districtwide fluency program (now addressed by spring math); and changing student demographics that increase need (the district reported economic disadvantage rising from ~40% to ~55%, a large increase in English‑learner counts, and IEP numbers exceeding 1,000).

As next steps, staff recommended several continuing priorities: expand common assessments into grades 6–12 next year, extend data‑analysis time for teachers (turning two half‑day data days into full days), scale MTSS‑aligned interventions (the district is joining an integrated MTSS cohort with external partners for cross‑tier planning), and continue coach‑led classroom supports and targeted PD on differentiation and productive struggle.

Board members asked about equity and literacy: members said common assessments could support consistent expectations across neighborhoods, and presenters agreed reading comprehension is a limiting factor on open‑ended math tasks. "To tackle an open‑ended question from start to finish, it's reading," Dr. Gojoy said, noting the combined reading, calculation and written explanation demands of those items.

The presentation concluded with staff noting budget and staffing implications for sustained expansion of math interventions; administrators said those requests will be considered during the upcoming budget process.

The education committee did not take any formal vote; the board will fold recommended budget priorities and staffing needs into the fiscal‑year planning timeline.