Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears detailed curriculum review; ELA pilots and gifted identification changes planned
Summary
District staff told the board the current ELA materials (copyright 2013) do not adequately support early literacy; the curriculum review recommends K–6 pilots for new ELA resources, health/PE adjustments toward life skills, and changes to gifted identification and training.
Mr. Cole provided the board with the district's mandated curriculum-review update, describing a six-year cycle modeled on a Stanford design-thinking framework and outlining work completed in year one. He said English language arts and related English learners reviews showed the district's elementary core resource (copyright 2013) does not adequately support foundational literacy skills, particularly early literacy and word-attack strategies, and recommended piloting modern ELA materials aligned with systematic phonics and authentic texts.
Cole said the review combined thousands of qualitative data points (open-ended surveys, focus groups with students, parents and teachers) and noted the district used AI-supported tools with the technology department to summarize qualitative themes more quickly. The recommended actions include selecting one or two core ELA products for K'6ndash;6 pilot testing, ensuring materials limit unnecessary digital fatigue and support English-language-development (ELD) learners. Cole said the district will meet vendor representatives next week and expects to pilot materials part of next school year.
On health and physical education, Cole said students asked for more hands-on life skills (CPR, first aid, digital wellness) and more choice-driven, lifelong activities rather than traditional assessment-focused tasks such as mile runs. He said secondary scheduling and shared-campus facilities (pool, fields) offer opportunities to expand offerings and job-embedded professional development for staff.
The gifted-program review, informed by an audit from the Montgomery County Intermediate Unit (MCIU), recommended loosening an identification process found to be "a little too rigid," expanding screening tools to reduce linguistic bias, and providing consistent training for teachers and general-education staff who support gifted learners. Mr. Deardana told the board the district uses a matrix combining cognitive tests, achievement measures, teacher and parent input and subtest scores to determine outcomes: gifted, eligible for enrichment, or not gifted; he confirmed the district's nominal IQ cut score as 130 with discretionary tolerance applied case by case.
Board members asked for clarification about pilot scope, the timeline for vendor selection, and how the district will ensure new materials support the youngest readers. Cole said the district's partnership with Penn State's Hamill Center will help secondary teachers modernize reading selections and better reflect the community. The superintendent, in closing remarks on this agenda item, emphasized data-driven adjustments and next steps in professional development and induction to support implementation.
The board did not take a formal vote on curriculum-adoption decisions during this meeting; Mr. Cole framed the presentation as information and next-step planning ahead of pilot selection and implementation.
