Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum And Testing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District presents improvement plan after county review; ELA above state average, science lags
Summary
District administrators told the board the county CUSAC review flagged curriculum and instruction; presentations described a district improvement plan using cross‑curricular ELA/social‑studies strategies, updated K–8 curriculum, MobyMax/IXL interventions, and a new science curriculum; district ELA met/exceeded ~60% versus state ~51 while science was about 22% versus state 24.
District administrators presented results of a spring county review and a district improvement plan aimed at raising student performance across ELA, math and science.
The presenter, introduced during the agenda as the district’s curriculum lead, said the county CUSAC review identified Curriculum & Instruction (CNI) as an area needing work. To respond, the district has implemented cross‑curricular planning (ELA and social studies teachers meeting to align rubrics and standards), a year‑two rollout of a new K–4 ELA curriculum called Collaborative Classroom, periodic benchmarks for grades 1–4, and targeted interventions using MobyMax and IXL. The district also adopted a new science curriculum (Mystery Science) and reported using periodic team time for cross‑department planning.
Key performance figures cited in the presentation: districtwide, 60% of students in grades 3–8 met or exceeded ELA expectations (state average cited at 51%); about 42% met or exceeded math expectations (state 41%); science results were lower (22% meeting or exceeding vs. a state average of 24%). The presenter said some grade‑by‑grade shifts reflected staff turnover or maternity leaves in critical grades and noted that the district’s 3rd, 6th and 8th graders outperformed the state in both ELA and math in the reported year.
Why it matters: The CUSAC review and the district’s improvement plan outline concrete instructional strategies and assessment tools the district intends to use to close gaps and align instruction to state standards. Trustees heard that the district has seen “trending upward” results in several grades but continues to focus on science and some math cohorts.
Board discussion and follow up: Trustees and staff discussed the assessment metric (NJSLA) and whether statewide assessment standards have kept pace with curricular changes. Administrators said they will share the presentation with staff and roll it out to teachers as part of professional development. The board did not vote on curriculum adoption at this meeting; trustees were updated and asked for ongoing progress reports to staff and future board meetings.
Supporting details: The presentation listed interventions (collaborative classroom curriculum in K–4, benchmarks, MobyMax/IXL, SIPs phonics program within RTI, after‑school tutoring called Period 10, and volunteer tutors from High Point University). The presenter noted subgroup reporting thresholds (fewer than 10 students in some subgroups) and that certain data years were marked N/A for COVID years.
Next steps: Staff said they will distribute the presentation to teachers and bring periodic updates on benchmark data and implementation progress to the board.
