Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kennett committee shows achievement‑gap data and launches multi‑year curriculum mapping in Atlas
Summary
Curriculum leaders presented PA Future Ready index snapshots that reveal subgroup achievement gaps, highlighted algebra as a high‑priority weakness, and described a multi‑year, teacher‑led curriculum‑mapping effort (Atlas) covering 374 courses and 70 scopes underway to strengthen Tier‑1 instruction.
The Kennett Consolidated School District curriculum team presented achievement‑gap data and a multi‑year curriculum‑mapping plan designed to strengthen core instruction and reduce subgroup disparities.
Chair Anne Perry opened the committee meeting and handed the presentation to district instructional leaders, who used the Pennsylvania Future Ready index and district screening data to highlight strengths and weaknesses by grade and subgroup. Presenters reported above‑average performance on some elementary measures (noting growth in fifth‑grade ELA and third‑grade math) but persistent subgroup differences that require targeted intervention. At the secondary level, presenters identified algebra as a priority area for improvement and said the high‑school algebra keystone scores are affected by the fact that many higher‑performing students take algebra in middle school.
Curriculum leaders described their planned response: a teacher‑led curriculum‑mapping process built on backward design, vertical and horizontal alignment, and an MTSS (multi‑tiered system of supports) framework for Tier‑2 and Tier‑3 interventions. They explained that the district has prioritized courses and is using the Atlas platform to document scope, sequence and unit plans. Staff provided a heat‑map snapshot showing 374 district ‘courses’ that require curriculum writing (the district’s definition includes grade‑level course entries), with 70 courses having an outlined scope and sequence and 21 finalized and moving into unit writing.
The team described quality‑control practices: facilitator training, a 16‑step checklist, peer review by the teaching & learning team, diary mapping (a teacher reflection tool that compares planned versus actual instruction), and scheduled board reviews for finalized maps. Leaders also described professional development investments, including a cohort of 22 staff trained for literacy instruction, and said additional training on numeracy and targeted interventions is planned.
Board members praised the staff’s work, asked for public access to presentation links and materials, and pledged support for the sustained, multi‑year effort. Staff said the next batch of finalized course maps will be presented for board approval after the March 20 inservice day.
