Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Performance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Westchester SD 92-5 primary school reports steady enrollment, mixed assessment results and expanding behavioral supports
Summary
Westchester Primary School leaders told the district board that enrollment has been stable, math growth exceeded projections across several grades, and reading outcomes for second grade fell after a testing change; the school described interventions, social‑emotional supports and follow-up data requests from board members and parents.
Westchester Primary School leaders presented a detailed "state of the school" report to the Westchester SD 92-5 board on March 19, highlighting steady enrollment, notable math growth and challenges in second‑grade reading tied to a change in the assessment used.
The presentation, delivered by Principal Laura (first name recorded in the transcript) and instructional staff, said enrollment has remained fairly stable this year, with the largest single class in second grade (36 students) and kindergarten enrollment at about 17. The school reported that 24% of students at Westchester Primary are English‑learner students and approximately 25.5% of the school's enrollment has Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), figures the presenters used to explain subgroup and intervention planning.
On assessments, school leaders noted that winter MAP and FastBridge measures showed stronger‑than‑expected growth in math for several grades. "We've exceeded the grade‑level norms for projected growth," a math specialist said, citing percentile gains such as a rise in first‑grade achievement percentiles between fall and winter. By contrast, second‑grade reading scores were described as lower (near the 40th percentile) after the district used a "two‑to‑five" reading test this year rather than the K–2 assessment that includes a read‑aloud accommodation. Presenters said the two‑to‑five instrument does not provide the read‑aloud access and therefore can depress scores for some young readers; the team said they will use that result to target classroom instruction and interventions.
School staff described the district's tiered supports (MTSS): reading and math Tier 2/Tier 3 interventions, the use of Orton‑Gillingham (OG) materials for phonics and small‑group instruction during designated instructional time, and progress monitoring cadences (Tier 3 monitored at least every other week; Tier 2 at least monthly). The presentation reported that 49 students receiving reading intervention and 33 receiving math intervention met growth targets from fall to winter, and staff noted more personnel delivering reading support than math support as a contributing factor to service levels.
Leaders also reviewed discipline and social‑emotional services. The school reported that 98% of students have one or fewer referrals and that 90% have zero referrals since adopting a discipline matrix; seven students out of 360 had five or more referrals and receive individualized supports such as token economies, targeted social‑work check‑ins and parent conferences. Principal Laura described lunch‑detention conversations as restorative: "We have a think‑sheet discussion: What happened? Why did it happen? How do you make it right?" she said. Presenters described partnerships with outside consultants and regional BCBA resources when more intensive supports are needed.
Board members and parents asked for additional disaggregated data. Requests included the demographic breakdown of students receiving interventions and the racial composition of students receiving discipline referrals; presenters agreed to supply those follow‑up data. Several attendees also asked about implementation fidelity for OG and whether intervention frequency met program recommendations; the school replied that intervention students generally receive OG four to five times per week and that Tier 3 students may receive daily sessions.
The board and presenters flagged next steps: more parent‑facing materials on areas such as measurement and word problems, further disaggregated intervention/discipline data to be delivered to the board, and continued monitoring of the effects from the test‑type change in second grade. The board did not take formal action on the presentation; administrators said they would return with requested analyses.
Context and spelling: the district name is reported in district materials as Westchester SD 92‑5. Monetary and program figures were quoted from the presentation slides and board remarks.
