Tewksbury administrators report literacy gains, flag continued gaps for English learners and students with disabilities

Tewksbury Public Schools administrators on April 15 told the school committee that work under the Student Opportunity Act (SOA) is showing early signs of improvement while underscoring persistent gaps for some student groups.

Dr. Milligan, who led the presentation, said the SOA plan — drafted in 2024 and monitored this year — focuses on three evidence‑based practices: comprehensive tiered supports, high‑leverage practices for students with disabilities, and an emphasis on universal screeners to guide instruction and interventions. "We intend this to be a transparent process about both our successes and the next steps in our plan," Dr. Milligan said.

Felicia Rawlinson, the district’s literacy lead, described reading measures the committee reviewed. She said the district’s DIBELS universal screener showed 71% of students were at or above benchmark at the start of the year compared with 61% two years earlier, and that students at the highest risk category fell from 19% to 13%. "These trends suggest that instructional systems, our intervention supports, and our use of data are translating into improved literacy outcomes," Rawlinson said.

Rawlinson and other presenters cautioned that MCAS and single-year snapshots do not tell the whole story: English learners showed stronger student growth percentiles (SGP) in the data presented, but proficiency benchmarks for ELs remain below target. The special‑education review found full implementation for many standards, while a prior corrective action tied to language acquisition remains open and is being addressed through tier 1 instruction and embedded language objectives.

Jason Stamp, who led the math portion of the briefing, said the district is in the second year of universal math screening for K–8 and has added 1.5 math interventionists in Title I schools. He reported early improvements in student growth percentiles and said the district has begun tightening scope and sequence and intensifying coaching for teachers. "While we are only 1 year into this specific data set, the trend is positive," Stamp said.

Presenters emphasized social‑emotional screening as part of MTSS. The district uses a DESA screener aligned to CASEL competencies to identify students needing supports; staff reported identifying 193 students for SEL supports in the year under review and described plans for tiered intervention, a district SEL steering committee and a digital intervention playbook.

Committee members asked how individual students identified by SEL screeners are tracked and supported. Rawlinson explained an internal app and the SST (student support team) process are used to monitor progress and ensure information transfers as students move between schools. On high school math accountability (an accountability slide that produced a low score for TMHS), administrators said the SOA funding focused on K–6 screeners and that a multi‑year math curriculum council will examine K–12 needs and why targets at the high‑school level were missed.

The presentation named near‑term actions: piloting a DESE‑supported progress monitoring tool for ELs, continuing targeted professional development on language objectives and UDL, expanding coaching, and aligning screeners and common assessments to guide instructional decisions. Administrators said larger purchases (for example, curriculum adoptions on a six‑year cycle) will be coordinated with town budget planning.

The committee praised the work and asked for follow‑up details on specific screeners, the planned progress‑monitoring pilot and the high‑school accountability slides; administrators said they will return with clearer documentation and additional data in coming months.