East Brunswick board hears declines among multilingual and special-education students; parents press for targeted supports

The East Brunswick Board of Education received a presentation on the district ssessment results, and parents and board members pressed administrators for clearer benchmarks and more targeted supports for multilingual learners and students with disabilities.

Dr. Boley, who presented results for ACCESS for ELs, the Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM) alternate assessment and the New Jersey Graduation Proficiency Assessment (NJGPA), said the district serves students who speak dozens of home languages and described how the state ssessments are used to determine exit from English-language services. "The ACCESS is administered by WIDA...the students are evaluated across 6 performance indicators," she said, noting a 4.5 minimum score is required to exit ESL services. She told the board that "about 66% of our students are concentrated in the developing and expanding categories," which fall just below the 4.5 exit threshold.

The presentation included several numeric points: the presenter said ESL enrollment rose to 410 students last year and that multilingual learners represent multiple cohort measures discussed in the slides. The administration also reported that, for last June lumni, "639 students or 90% of the students met the graduation requirement" through the NJGPA pathway. Administrators warned the board that changes in who is eligible for the DLM (an alternate assessment) make year-to-year comparisons difficult: they said 122 students who previously took the DLM were required to take the NJSLA in 2025, and that difference affects proficiency-rate comparisons.

Board members pressed for specifics. Li Wu Hong asked the administration to show the underlying pools used to compute percentages and highlighted that ESL exit rates have declined from roughly 25% (2022) to around 20% (2025), while enrollment in the program rose. The presenter said the state does not publicly report district exit-rate benchmarks and that cohort composition (age, entry proficiency, year of arrival) affects outcomes.

Concern was not limited to the dais. During public comment several parents and residents said the district—ould do more to serve students with IEPs and economically disadvantaged students. Antoinette Evola said she felt insulted that poverty was singled out on a slide and voiced frustration about access to special-education staff and information: "Not a single one of you mentioned that the black and brown children are only at a 50% advantage for graduating," she said. Another commenter, Rachel Botnick, asked whether students moved from the DLM into the NJSLA had been given supports and said the DLM and NJSLA are "night and day different." Don Scafani urged the district to address basic facilities needs ("Can we please pave the parking lot?").

Administrators described supports already in place: classroom differentiation, diagnostic data to identify unfinished learning, high-intensity intervention periods, Orton training for ESL teachers, and follow-up with parents who decline services. Dr. Boley said the district monitors students for two years after they exit ESL services and that common accommodations for state tests include extra time, small-group testing, frequent breaks and text-to-speech.

Next steps and follow-ups were specified: the district will present NJSLA results when they are available (the presenter said those results will be presented in September), staff will supply additional numbers on particular subgroups on request, and the board asked administration to assemble clearer benchmarks and plans so the public can better understand proposed interventions and outcomes.