Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Westerville board reviews course updates and removes attendance‑based retention language after state change
Summary
At the June 8 meeting, the Westerville Schools board heard first readings on K–5 counseling, financial literacy, American government and AP Statistics curriculum updates and an updated promotion/acceleration policy that removes the state’s former 10% attendance retention requirement following House Bill 96.
District curriculum staff presented multiple course of study updates and a policy revision to clarify acceleration procedures and remove attendance‑based retention language.
Miss Toba described three high‑school course updates: a financial‑literacy course aligned to Ohio Department of Education workforce standards using NextGen Personal Finance as the primary resource; an American government course adopting TCI’s Government Alive to improve vertical alignment with grades 6–8; and an AP Statistics revision to meet updated AP requirements. For elementary grades, she presented a K–5 counseling curriculum aligned to a responsive counselor approach that ties into morning meeting structures and social‑emotional learning standards.
Board members asked how the district will monitor whether new curricula produce intended outcomes. "It varies based on what the course is," Toba said, pointing to end‑of‑course exams, state tests and teacher‑collected data as monitoring tools. She said her team is working to align courses across schools to enable comparisons and shared learnings.
Mr. Cooper presented revisions to policy 5410 (promotion, academic acceleration, placement and retention). He said the district is adding language that codifies current practices for subject‑area and grade‑level acceleration and recommended removing attendance‑based retention language after the state legislature’s passage of House Bill 96, which eliminated the prior 10%‑absence retention trigger.
Board members pressed for detail on how the district ensures acceleration is appropriate, who monitors students after acceleration, and what social‑emotional safeguards are in place. Cooper and other administrators described an evaluation process that typically includes referrals, testing (often gifted identification), possible written education plans or transition plans, a team meeting including parents and teachers, and a common review window of roughly 45 days following acceleration to reassess placement. Special‑education considerations and IEP requirements remain in place for students receiving services.
No policy votes were held at the June 8 meeting; both the course changes and the revised promotion/acceleration policy were presented for first reading and will return for subsequent consideration.
