Board hears detailed curriculum briefing on ‘Understanding by Design’; members press on standards, assessments and computer science timeline

The New Canaan Board of Education on May 19 heard a detailed presentation on the district’s curriculum design, centering on the Understanding by Design (UBD) framework and how the district aligns standards, assessments and instruction.

Dr. Cari, who introduced the curriculum update, explained UBD’s three stages: identifying desired results (stage one), determining assessments (stage two) and planning instruction (stage three). "The framework helps us to focus curriculum and instruction on the development and deepening of student understanding," Dr. Cari said, adding that the district uses UBD to avoid treating a textbook as the curriculum and to ensure assessments and instruction align to chosen standards.

The presentation used a second-grade social studies unit on Connecticut as an example. Dr. Cari described how units list standards, transfer goals, enduring understandings and acquisition targets; she said units also embed performance-based assessments and formative checks so teachers can "assess along the way" and differentiate instruction.

Michael Fersuchi, the high school social studies department chair, described the district’s benchmarks and how skill-based assessments emphasize reading comprehension and critical thinking rather than rote content recall. "Our freshman benchmark asks students to read a secondary source and apply a concept such as geographic determinism to both secondary and primary sources," Fersuchi said, describing the approach used to assess skill mastery across grade levels.

Board members pressed for specifics on several fronts. Matt Wexler asked whether district expectations exceed state minimums and how teachers’ learning plans are audited; Dr. Cari said that while stage one lists comprehensive standards, the teaching and differentiation that occur in stage three allow teachers to extend beyond minimums and that administrators, coordinators and coaches conduct walkthroughs and common planning sessions to monitor implementation.

On computer science, Dr. Cari said the district is farther along in K–4 and has identified gaps in grades 5–8 driven primarily by scheduling. She outlined a pilot-focused approach with the aim of broader rollout by the 2026–27 school year: "We're in a really good place K–4...5–8 scheduling issues mean we need another year of planning," she said.

A contentious exchange arose when a board member observed that some Connecticut social studies sample standards and EG (example) items "present a certain viewpoint," noting, for example, that World War II standards as shown did not explicitly mention figures such as FDR or events such as Omaha Beach. Michael Fersuchi and Dr. Cari responded that the district uses the approved textbook as a baseline and that teachers bring additional examples and viewpoints into lessons: "We rely on the expertise of our teachers and their degrees to present additional information and viewpoints," Fersuchi said.

The presentation also covered practical matters: the Curriculum Leadership Council’s role in recommending and reviewing units, professional learning cycles for teachers and a rubric-driven review process. Dr. Cari noted the district posts stage-one outlines publicly but withholds full assessment documents to avoid students gaining prior access to assessments.

What’s next: The board was told curriculum updates, unit revisions tied to newly adopted state strands and a chemistry textbook proposal will return to the board for review in upcoming meetings.