The meeting began with a detailed presentation on the importance of expanded preschool programs and professional development for teaching staff. The speaker emphasized that students who remain in the system for extended periods demonstrate significant growth and success. This “Getting Back to Basics” approach involves professional learning communities (PLCs) that employ data, including formative assessments, to inform instructional decisions. The speaker stressed the critical nature of time for teachers to analyze data and adapt instruction to meet student needs. Various directors and staff members were acknowledged for their ongoing support in these initiatives.

A board member raised concerns regarding the assessment of kindergarten English Language Learner (ELL) students, questioning the validity of testing given potential language barriers. The speaker responded that ELL students receive targeted instruction through pull-out programs. However, challenges arise when students who speak different languages must be grouped together, especially when bilingual programs are not feasible due to low numbers of speakers of a single language. The state mandates that if more than 20 students speak the same language, a bilingual program must be offered, but waivers are filed when this is not possible.

Discussion then turned to special education enrollment. A board member noted a trend of decreasing numbers and expressed concern about the younger students who experienced the most disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of the pandemic on foundational literacy skills was acknowledged. Structured literacy approaches have been adopted to address these gaps, and the need for progress monitoring of students was highlighted. The focus was on how students who were kindergarteners during COVID-19 are now in third grade and how their performance data should be analyzed over time to assess growth. The speaker emphasized the importance of tracking progress rather than just summative data.

The presentation on student assessments included updates on the New Jersey Student Learning Assessments (NJSLA), ACCESS for English Language Learners (ELL), and New Jersey Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM). Dr. Jennifer PS, the Director of Student Services for Special Education, discussed the DLM assessment, which is limited to 1% of the student population. She noted that students eligible for this assessment often perform below grade level when evaluated traditionally. Dr. PS explained that the DLM data reflects the progress of these students who are instructed using a curriculum different from the general education curriculum, often in self-contained settings. She highlighted the small number of students tested in each grade level, with examples such as three students in third grade and five students in both seventh and eighth grades.

Miss Betty Napoli, the Director of Curriculum, provided information on the ACCESS assessment for multilingual learners, emphasizing a change in terminology from English as a Second Language (ESL) to multilingual learners. Napoli reported that approximately 120 students across all grades speak around 35 different languages, with Spanish, Portuguese, and Gujarati being the most common. The assessment evaluates reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills. Napoli detailed the expectations for students in the program, stating that most remain for three to five years. She also mentioned that even students who join the district shortly before testing must participate, although they may not achieve passing scores immediately.

Dr. Gri discussed the NJSLA scores, particularly in English language arts. He outlined the performance expectations and comparison data available, noting that the state had a passing rate of around 50%. Dr. Gri presented the overall passing rates for the previous year’s assessments and highlighted the importance of looking at both grade-level and cohort data to understand student progress over time. Data from grades three through eight were shared, showing trends in passing percentages. The presentation included comparisons of how each grade performed over the years, providing insights into curriculum effectiveness and areas needing improvement.

The meeting featured discussions about the different tests administered and the performance of students across various assessments. The data presented served as a foundation for strategic discussions regarding curriculum adjustments and support mechanisms for students at different levels of proficiency. The administration is committed to continuous improvement, utilizing various data points throughout the school year to monitor student progress and identify areas needing support.

In addition to these topics, the board addressed several policy votes, particularly focused on items requiring second readings. A board member expressed concerns regarding the timeliness of receiving policy materials. Another board member responded by asserting that the items up for vote had been available for review since the last meeting held in August. The policies included citations to relevant statutes and administrative codes. After a roll call vote, the majority approved the second reading of the policies, with a few dissenting votes noted.