Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Education Curriculum topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Curriculum committee hears plan for new 8th‑grade STEM course and reviews school ATSI/Title I plans

Kennett Consolidated School District — Policy & Curriculum Committees · May 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Committee heard a proposal to add an eighth‑grade Project Lead The Way‑based STEM course 'Building for the Future' aligned to high‑school engineering pathways, and principals presented ATSI/Title I school plans and local benchmark goals across elementary, middle and high schools.

The curriculum committee for Kennett Consolidated School District met May 18 and heard two central items: a proposal for a new eighth‑grade STEM cycle course called Building for the Future and an overview of school‑level ATSI and Title I plans, with principals presenting local goals and benchmarks.

Anne Perry, chair of the curriculum committee, added the STEM discussion to the agenda and introduced Dean Ivory, the district’s supervisor of innovative programs, who described Building for the Future (BFF) as an adapted Project Lead The Way middle‑level course aimed at giving eighth graders exposure to the trades, and to engineering pathways at Kennett High School.

Steven Parta, a Kennet Middle School STEM teacher, described BFF’s three units: sketch‑to‑structure (foundations of design, floor plans and scale modeling), systems of work (plumbing, HVAC, insulation, passive design and hands‑on mock systems), and a culminating “big build” in which students act as construction managers coordinating trades. The course is planned for fall 2026–27 and staff said it will function as a cycle course students can select in middle school scheduling. presenters emphasized alignment with high‑school engineering sequences and future‑ready experiences — internships, industry mentors and opportunities for industry‑recognized credentials.

Committee members asked how students learn about the offering and how it will feed into high‑school advisement. Dr. Moore and presenters described cycle scheduling, family communications (course descriptions sent home and classroom conversations) and a plan for high‑school students to mentor middle‑school capstones so the course helps with informed high‑school course selection.

The committee also received the required ATSI and Title I school‑level plans that must be submitted to the Pennsylvania Department of Education to secure federal Title I funds. Dr. Barber explained the distinction between the district’s five‑year strategic plan and PDE’s required three‑year ATSI plan and noted that expenditure tables in Title I plans will remain blank until the state releases award amounts later this summer. Middle and high school ATSI plans have already received external consultant feedback and staff said they would incorporate that review before presenting finalized plans to the board next month.

Principals from the district’s schools presented local goals and midyear benchmark results. Highlights included the Mary D. kindergarten center reporting literacy growth from 46% (fall) to 82% (winter) at/above grade level and a reduction in Tier‑3 students from 36% to 9%; Greenwood, Braftoft and New Garden principals described school‑level targets to strengthen Tier‑1 instruction, bolster MTSS protocols, increase math proficiency and sustain literacy gains; Kennet Middle School reiterated its ATSI status and said targeted interventions are embedded in the school day for students below benchmark; Kennet High School reported improved local benchmark growth and described EL graduation rate challenges (a 66.81% four‑year EL graduation rate, short of a 67% target by roughly 13 students) that the school continues to monitor.

Board members asked detailed questions about how I Ready and Ames Webb benchmarks are used to trigger interventions, limitations of computer‑based diagnostics for early grades, the district curriculum‑mapping process and the need to expand math intervention tools. Staff described use of multiple data sources (triangulation), six‑week intervention monitoring, and work to develop consistent elementary schedules and a 90‑minute uninterrupted ELA block in some buildings.

What’s next: The course proposal will proceed through curriculum approval steps (course entered in Atlas and presented for committee feedback); Title I/ATSI plans will be finalized with IU consultant feedback and appear on the board agenda for approval once federal award amounts are known.

Sources: Presentations and Q&A at the May 18 curriculum committee meeting.