Salisbury Township SD reports K–8 testing gains, flags gaps for ELL and special‑education students

Salisbury Township School District officials told the Curriculum and Technology Committee on Dec. 17 that K–8 assessment results show overall improvement after recent curriculum and intervention changes, while underscoring persistent gaps for English language learners and students with disabilities.

Zach Grama, the district presenter, said the district’s elementary English language arts results are roughly 10 percentage points above the state average and that the share of students scoring Proficient or Advanced rose 18 percentage points over three years. "We shifted our core curriculum and we've also really been focused on English language arts and our MTSS process," Grama said, citing structured literacy work and a first‑grade UFLI (University of Florida Literacy Institute) pilot as contributors.

The committee was shown multiple measures — PSSA, PVAS and the Pennsylvania Future Ready Index — and staff noted caveats. Grama and other staff pointed out that subgroup data reflect different student cohorts year to year, which complicates straight comparisons. "Those percentages reflect a different group of students," Kelly (staff member) said, urging caution in interpreting year‑to‑year shifts.

The presentation highlighted subgroup shortfalls: the district did not meet the state’s interim benchmark for all students (70.3 for ELA in 2024) and reported lower interim benchmarks for specific groups (IEP subgroup benchmark 42.1; English language learner benchmark 31.3). Grama noted that English language development can take six to eight years and that some PSSA accommodations allow directions to be read but not the prompt itself, which can disadvantage ELL students.

Middle‑school presenter Mr. Parliament said the middle school is "above the state average in ELA" but continues to lag in building‑level math and eighth‑grade science relative to statewide targets. He added that every middle‑school grade exceeded the state growth standard this year. The district is using tools such as IXL, a learning lab and partnerships to build a cohesive K–8 curriculum; Parliament said the board will consider adding a middle‑school math interventionist in the coming budget process.

Board members pressed for explanations of the gains and for ways to make district data more precise. "Do you see any — it looks like from the pandemic year on there was a sharp dip and then a recovery," one committee member said, prompting staff to describe investments in a Linkit data warehouse and plans to add enrollment date fields so transient student effects and non‑taker zeros can be isolated.

The meeting also included an exchange about how to encourage student participation ethically during testing windows; staff described positive signage, raffles for attendance and post‑test celebrations while stressing that participation remains students’ choice. A board member characterized the statewide assessment as flawed: "Oh, the test is terrible," she said, reflecting frustration some members voiced about how tests measure academic skill versus test‑taking vocabulary.

District staff listed next steps: analyze winter benchmark data, continue MTSS and targeted interventions, review the UFLI pilot results before wider adoption, refine math pacing, and complete Linkit/SAFIRE integrations to enable longitudinal cohort and non‑taker analyses. The committee adjourned; the next meeting is scheduled for Jan. 22, 2025.

Sources: Remarks and slides presented at the Salisbury Township School District Curriculum and Technology Committee meeting, Dec. 17, 2024. Quotes attributed to speakers who spoke at the meeting.