The DLI program emerged as a focal point of discussion, with teachers voicing concerns about the lack of resources and overwhelming workloads. Katherine Grath, a first-grade teacher, explained the difficulties in acquiring necessary materials for both Spanish and English instruction, resorting to using Google Translate for communication. She emphasized the burden of assessing up to 50 students daily, resulting in approximately 450 data points that teachers must manage. Grath and other teachers conveyed feelings of being overwhelmed and unsupported, with one veteran educator describing the current system as unsustainable without adequate compensation for the additional workload.

Further comments from Missia Duncan highlighted the disconnect between the program’s theoretical framework and its practical application, noting that teachers often felt their logistical questions were ignored. She stressed the importance of involving the community and parents in program discussions, warning that without this engagement, expected growth in student outcomes would not materialize.

During public comments, concerns were also raised about the DLI program’s impact on students, with reports of large class sizes and a lack of bilingual teachers contributing to inequitable educational practices. Teachers described managing extensive student groups with insufficient resources, which hindered their ability to provide effective instruction.

In addition to the challenges with the DLI program, the meeting addressed student performance on standardized tests. A presentation of assessment data showed mixed results, with a slight increase in English Language Arts readiness but stagnant math scores for the 2024 cohort. Concerns were raised about students not meeting graduation proficiency standards, especially in math, where many questions are geometry-related, a subject not always adequately covered before assessments. The board discussed the importance of a spiral curriculum to reinforce key skills and ensure consistent exposure to essential content.

Board members and educators emphasized the need for better instructional strategies and intervention methods to support struggling students. However, there was an acknowledgment of the challenges posed by limited data availability for science assessments, requiring enhanced professional development and instructional approaches to align with the Next Generation Science Standards.

Concerns about teacher support extended beyond the DLI program, with testimonies about inadequate preparation time, insufficient resources, and the abolishment of learning loss positions that provided vital intervention for students. Teachers expressed frustration over the lack of input into professional development topics and questioned the allocation of Title One funds, comparing the immediate support provided in neighboring districts to the persistent achievement gaps in Trenton.

Safety was another significant issue discussed, with reports of insufficient security personnel at schools and unresolved work orders for broken locks and doors. A teacher from Cadwalader Elementary highlighted the anxiety students faced due to these security concerns, emphasizing the need for a secure environment to focus on learning.

The meeting concluded with discussions on improving communication within the district, including the suggestion of implementing service level agreements to ensure timely responses to inquiries. There was a call for a systematic approach to address the multitude of challenges faced by educators, with an emphasis on collaboration and institutional support.