l now call to order the December 18th, 2025 meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee. Before we begin, I would like to give my colleagues a moment to introduce themselves. And before I do that, I will introduce myself. Laura Stewart
I am now the chair of the Strategic Planning Committee. I'm very excited to be here. I'm so looking forward to having these discussions to dig into our strategic plan. And I
will start over here to my left. Good morning. Brenda Wolff, district five. Good morning. Rita montoya, board member at large. I should mention I am representing district four. Next, I would like to know if
there are any questions or concerns regarding the informational summary for the September 17th, 2025 meeting. No questions. None. If there are no concerns, we'll begin our agenda this morning. Here is what we will review. The
strategic plan target setting, overview. Goal one and goal two baseline data in mathematics. Goal one, objective four and college and career readiness. Standard goal one. Objective
five. We will look at the baseline data and quarter one results indicating a need for targeted instructional support and review. Msd's new 2025 CCR standard to strengthen math
instruction and equitable CCR access, that is, college and career readiness. With that, if there are no initial questions from committee members, I will invite Doctor Addison and staff to begin with the overview of today's discussion. After each
topic, we will pause to take questions from board members. All right. Thank you and good morning. Keisha Addison, director, Shared accountability. So thank you for the opportunity to share an update on two critical areas of our strategic plan. Both academic
excellence as a goal and future ready graduates as a goal. Today's discussion focuses specifically, as Miss Stewart said on goal one objective for mathematics proficiency and growth, and goal two objective five College and career readiness. You'll hear from our
leaders across shared accountability, curriculum development, as well as college and career readiness as we walk you through baseline data, early performance trends, and how we ♪are aligning our work to new state expectations. This slide grounds today's
discussion in the Strategic Plan for goal one objective for our charges to ensure all students meet proficiency benchmarks and demonstrate growth in mathematics. For goal two, objective five, we are focused on ensuring that all students have access and are
successful in high quality post-secondary outcomes. These two objectives are deeply connected. Strong mathematics outcomes are foundational to college and career readiness. At a high level, there are five key takeaways we want to
elevate up front. First, we must set targets that are ambitious, anable, and aligned to state expectations. Second, the baseline data presented to the full board last week revealed notable gaps in math performance that require focused attention.
Third quarter one mathematics data shows some uneven implementation indicating the need for targeted supports. Fourth MSDS Maryland State Department of Education's updated college and career standard raises expectations
and requires some additional alignment across instruction pathways and monitoring. And finally, our immediate next steps are centered on strengthening math instruction and ensuring equitable access to college and career readiness pathways. This slide outlines
how we are thinking about target setting within the strategic plan. Targets provide clarity, focus, and accountability for the system. Our work is aligned to the Maryland State Department of Education requirements and the blueprint for Maryland's future.
Importantly, our work is and our approach is equity centered. What we engage, we will engage in starting a conversation related to targets and our future ready strategic plan. We need to think about intentionally designed targets to close opportunity gaps. are also going to discuss the
possibility of taking a phased approach, for example, using baseline data to inform our future targets so progress can be monitored and adjusted over time. This slide marks a deliberate pause in our conversation this morning, where I want you to think about
where we are going from, where we are to where we are aiming to go. And so again, target setting is a critical component of the strategic plan because it translates priorities into clear expectations for the system. Well designed targets help us define success, monitor
progress over time, and hold ourselves accountable in a transparent way. Importantly, targets also create coherence across departments by aligning instructional work, professional learning, and resource decisions to shared outcomes. As we think about
targets, not just for goals one and two, but for our entire strategic plan, we want to intentionally balance that ambition with that realism. We want targets that push the system forward, reflect equity commitments, and are aligned again to the Maryland State Department of Education
expectations. At the same time, targets must be grounded in baseline data and responsive to the instructional and implementation realities we see across schools. At this stage, we're not yet identifying any finalized targets. Instead, I'm
going to propose some target setting approaches, and I'm seeking your input as a committee. Specifically, we're considering a phased approach that may include short or long term benchmarks, disaggregated targets as a possibility to monitor equity, and the use of
multiple measures. So this is important moment for your feedback as a committee. And your perspectives will help ensure that targets ultimately adopted are meaningful, understandable, and useful for both governance and system improvement. So to start my
first question for you all as a committee, when you think about strategic plan targets, what balance do you believe is important between that ambition, those ambitious targets, as well as feasibility? That's a
great question. Can one of my colleagues like to chime in on this? Say that again, Keisha, for me, what balance do you believe is important between ambition and feasibility of target setting? Resource
allocation. Equity. What supports what supports might be in place or needed? Those are just some thoughts off the top of my head, but I think resource allocation is a big
one. Okay. I agree, I think that we should think about some of our low hanging fruit. Where can we put resources that will make a big impact, especially
when we look at our gaps? Sorry, it wouldn't turn on. I think I want to just expand on the resource allocation, because I think that when we look at our schools and we look at things
like our equity add on, which we brought last year, and, you know, I personally hope we'll continue again this year and into the next year. I think those are great places to start in terms of what we can do here in the school system. But as a
current parent of very young children, if I just send my kids to school and have them come home and that's it, I don't think my children would be doing as well as they are, and I have the privilege to
have access to the time and the resources and the knowledge and the courage to just ask and not stop asking until I get the answer. But a lot of families, for a lot of different reasons don't have that. And so I really feel like we have these same conversations over and
over, not just here in M.C.P.S. or Montgomery County, but across the nation. Right? For decades and decades before I was even born. And it's because we're not bridging that gap between what happens in the classroom and what happens at home, and figuring out ways, as a society, to make sure that
those resource allocation is not just confined to the classroom, because that's not enough, especially when we're talking about the opportunity gaps and things like that. And there's a reason why we see the same groups of students over and over. It's because we're not going further enough. Right?
And that has to be kind of a community effort, not just here in the school system. So I think I would really like to also figure out knowing that that can have such an impact on the measurable things that we're going to do in this committee and in this school system and this board. How can
we try to bridge that gap? Because without providing that, whether it's, you know, teaching our parents how to do Common Core math so that they can help. I never learned Common Core math. What was that? It took me a while. And now that I kind of get it, the kids
are like, on to the next thing, right? Right. But, you know, if we can do some of those things and maybe capitalize on the time we have over the summer to help with that, then we set up our children and our families for success as well as our educators, because they're just in there spinning their wheels.
If those things are not being, you know, kind of repeated or reaffirmed right at home. To add to that, there's something that I call the tutoring gap. Actually, my son is home right
now from grad school, and he's picked up some students to help them get through their assessments before they go on break. And a couple of them were at risk of failing. But after having a few sessions, they're much better off. It
just came back to me about how that extra time, one on one attention could really make a difference for so many kids. And so I would love to see, as part of our strategic plan, how
can we identify resources and where to aim those resources? Again, I know we track every child. I've been in those meetings where a leaders get together and they look at data
and they look at test scores, and where there are opportunities to improve. And I've never I don't think I've heard about our tutoring program as a system in a very long time, not since Covid. So
that is a place where we could look at how to use that to achieve some of these objectives to. So thank you. So I what you all have shared is very helpful. It's not necessarily the target
conversation, however, it is exactly where we will be heading in our future conversations, which is highlighting what are the intentional strategies and tactics we're putting in place to support ensuring that we are meeting these goals and objectives identified in the
strategic Plan. If the web team could pull up the strategic plan for us, we're going to look at a scorecard. I'm going to ask you my next question. Can I, doctor, before you move on to that. And I appreciate that. You're right. It didn't
completely answer the question that you were trying to get at. But I guess my point with that is that so often I feel like sometimes we set ourselves up to fail because we don't recognize that there's so many more factors impacting this than just what's happening in
that classroom, in that 45 minute class. For students who have 7 to 8 periods. Right. And so when you talk about the ambition, right, well, we're really setting unrealistic expectations for our system, for our educators, for our
students, for our families about what we expect to happen because but we're not because we're not considering all of the factors that go into that. Right. This is not a perfectly theoretical, controlled environment where we gave you a great curriculum. You have a great teacher, you're in a safe
classroom. Well, how come it's not happening? Well, because there's ten different other things going on. Right? And so that's why I just want to make it clear that it's not that. I don't think any of us is meaning to kind of circumvent the goal or the question there,
but it's that this is not happening in a vacuum. And so I think that's where you find that dissonance, right, between what's what we want to be doing and what is actually feasible is because we sometimes are not being realistic about what we're operating in. No. And
please don't take my response to indicate that I definitely wanted you to share your target thinking. Where you all headed is exactly why we have this intentionality of taking our time in terms of establishing the targets we need to recognize what are those intentional strategies and
tactics. And to your point, we don't want to hop out there and identify targets when we do not yet have a full understanding of all the factors that are we need to take into consideration. So there is intentionality around this kind of slow pace and walk through in terms of
identifying what our targets are. So before we go on, just to get a little bit to your point, we should probably see where we have done well. And as
far as growth goes already, to see how far we could push, if that makes sense. Because, you know, if we have, let's just say if there's a particular program that's working really well, particular school and they they really came out on
all cylinders and they were able to show an improvement in one of these areas by 10%. Right? Then we know, okay, maybe that is a goal, right? Or how much more do you want to push beyond that. So just to
kind of look back and see what we have been able to achieve in the past. I know there were some programs implemented way before I was on the board. I think one of them was at Highland Elementary School.
They had some kind of a they had a special program there. It took a lot of resources, but it worked. And how far were they able to improve? So we there should be kind of a look back to see what we have been able
to do, and then use that as kind of a starting point to know what our goal should be. I don't know if anyone else has something to say about that kind of gold goal setting. I do. It's a little bit like what she was going to say, I think, in
that, are we trying to set a target or do we want to set a growth module, so to speak, so that we're looking for growth instead of saying, okay, 95%? That may not be realistic because it depends on where you
started. So maybe we should set a target that deals with just growth. So we see some progression. So at the end of five years we might be at something. But here's my other question. We're talking about a target for this. And they're
getting ready to change the math standard. So how are we overlaying. We don't know what that's going to look like. Is this baseline data even going to be useful or is it just something for the year. And then next year we have to start
over. So these are all great questions. And this is why this is a great conversation related to our district strategic plan. So the first place and I'm going to answer all of your questions and kind of hit on them the first piece. I do want to remind us that this is the
start of this new strategic plan this school year. And so our look back, our starting point, like, where are we starting the school year? We're using our baseline data. How do we end? Last school year, the 2425 school year, as a preliminary understanding of
the performance of our students, because we're focused right now on academic excellence as goal one. To your point, Miss Wolff, there are things that are changing. We recognize that there are some things that are changing. Some, regardless of how they change, we still would be able to compare to our
baseline data. So for example, the state is talking about changing aspects of the Maryland School Report card, but they're still going to have that system of identifying stars. So we would still be able to compare for our first goal and objective. The percent of our students that are doing
four stars or higher. So we would be able to compare in some instances, we might need to reset our baseline depending on how much that performance metric has changed. So when we think about mathematics standards, if there are aspects, for example, of our district
assessments that change so much that it does not, it's not appropriate to compare from one year to the next, then that might be an opportunity where we're going to say for this 25, 26 school year or whatever year we have that shift that we want to reset our norm. So that's
one of the benefits and values of having a public facing kind of fluid and being very transparent in terms of what are we engaging in as it relates to some of these performance metrics? One of the other things I will tell you, as we're engaging in the cross-divisional conversations
related to baseline data is a compliment regarding the scorecards, because as you look at it, sometimes, you know, we talk about it from an educator lens, like you might look at that performance metric and say, well, what exactly does this percentage mean? And so we're going to have a compliment that
helps us, you know, define for the community kind of what we're looking at. And so those instances where we might need to reset baseline, we'll be able to publicly indicate that as well. I guess I was wondering and this is just musings, as they say, if they change the standard in some way,
shape or form, won't we have to allow time for our teachers to be trained in whatever it is is the new model. And so that's why I'm wondering, is the baseline really going to be fair? Let's say, is it going to
be fair to the teachers and the students? And that's just a thought. I know you don't have an answer. No, I'm writing it down. Thank you. All right. So on the screen is our scorecard
for goal one. And if we could scroll to objective four as that's the one we're going to focus on in a minute. I just want you to look at the baseline data that is indicated. You see the MCAT mathematics,
which is the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program in mathematics. And what you see there is the percentage of all of our students across all grades who met the state expectation of proficiency. You also see a percentage for math,
mathematics, and you also see percentages related to required district assessments. Now again, when we're talking about targets, one of the things and again, I want to go back to what Miss Montoya elevated in terms of the number of factors that weigh in on determining
targets. One of the other aspects that we need to think about with our targets is what is our 2030 goal with regard to targets? Because ideally you want to back map statistically those targets incrementally. So for objective one, for example,
when we think of the Maryland school report card, the superintendent said by 2030, all of our schools will be a four star or higher. So that's 100% in 2030. And right now we're at 53.5. And so we could incrementally do that towards
2030. When we think about our state expectations, this is where we want to think about what percentage and 2030 are we looking for our students to demonstrate proficiency and then back map that. Miss Montoya, I see you have your light on. Yeah, just with objective four. But that's
looking at the entire district. Right. So because our strategic plan is the district view and I recognize that. But it just you know I mean one the district is just huge right. This is not a small district where there's like oh, there's ten schools between elementary high school
and middle. Right. And so not that we want to go like school by school or even cluster by cluster, but it just seems like we recognizing I was part of the group that put this together. Okay. And I didn't say this at the time that I just wonder if it would lend
itself to breaking it down, at least by maybe elementary, middle and high school, or even passing out elementary with K through two and three through five. Because, you know, maybe we're doing it really well in three through five, and maybe
we're not doing so well in, you know, nine through 12. And then it kind of really is skewing that data. And that also then allows us to really hone in as a district on, wow, we really need to bump up K through two or something like that. Right. Well still looking at the
overall district of course. But again, when we talk about curriculums and all those things, that does seem to be how we kind of parse things out. No. And that's that is great because it actually addresses the question where I was heading in terms of, you know,
how should we be thinking about that and what you elevated, what you don't see on the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program mathematics roll, you just see the overall district. But for district assessments, we do show overall and then we show it by level. So there is an opportunity for us with the state assessment to
also break it down in that same manner to address, because it would be good to see the comparison and to see kind of if there's any patterns. Are they close enough? Right. We always talk about I know as a parent I see the test scores. And then you want to look at the grades and I kind of want them to be similar. Yes. When
they're not similar, I start to get a little concerned. And so I think, you know, when we're talking maybe a percentage point or two, okay, no big deal. But if you're looking at map mathematics is 48%. And then if the high school is 38%, well that's a little different. But maybe it's not 48% for high school. But we don't know
because it's, you know, again, as a whole. Yes. No thank you. Other thoughts building on that. This is great to have this objectively very plain easy to see one objective, but then to
break that down underneath like almost as a subset of that objective, I mean, it could even I'm just thinking off the top of my head. Clickable, right? Yes. Kind of like the budget that we just got. There's artifacts you can look
at, like maybe we could have something like that also. To see where we can target some resources. Are there particular
groups of kids that we should target to get more resources there? And so that's when we get into disaggregate yes information. And again, it could be kind of part of our strategic plan, but just not
the overlay would be underneath. So yes. No thank you. And when we were in the process of establishing the strategic plan, we talked about the opportunity to be able to see results disaggregated by student groups. And so we definitely need to
enhance and update so that that opportunity is available. That would be really helpful. Okay. I think we can go on. All right. Thank you. If we could go back
to the slide deck please. And all right. All right. So at last Thursday's full Board of Education meeting, we shared baseline data aligned with the various goals and objectives of
our future strategic plan. Under goal one academic excellence, specifically objective four, which is related to proficiency and growth in mathematics. This includes the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program, or MCAT proficiency results, as well as some early progress monitoring data from
district assessments. Together, these data provide insight into where students are performing well and where there are challenges. We also examine differences across grade levels and student groups. These baseline data help us identify both system wide strengths and
priority areas for targeted intervention. So this slide serves as a transition. It's a zoom in on our objective for emphasizing that baseline data are not simply descriptive but actionable. And these anchor our target setting that we just
talked about in terms of where we're heading. They guide our instructional priorities and help inform decisions about where to deploy supports. They also establish a common understanding of where we are starting as we implement this strategic plan. This slide
provides a detailed look at Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program mathematics proficiency across grade levels over multiple years. And so we see incremental gains in several grades. And to miss Montoya's point, when you look at it separately instead of all
in one overall, you see differences across different grade level and grade level spans. At the same time, our overall proficiency rates remain an area of concern, particularly when you look at some of those middle school
grades. These results underscore the cumulative nature of where we see instructional learning and the importance of early and sustained instructional supports. On this slide is what we provided as part of our progress one monitoring data
for high school mathematics overall. And this shows a comparison of marking period one from last school year to marking period one of this school year. And overall we see improved improvement compared to the prior year, including gains among several student
groups. However, there still are some disparities in performance for some of our student groups, particularly our emergent multilingual learners or recently exited multilingual learners. Our students receiving farms services. And so I am now going
to turn it to Doctor Stephanie Brandt to share more about secondary mathematics strategies in alignment with our strategic plan, goal and objective related to mathematics. May I ask for a quick clarification about the mathematics by grade tested? Yes, because, you know, once you start getting into the
upper level math, it gets tricky because there's like three different maths your sixth grader could be in, depending on are they in grade level math. Did they on ramp to accelerate in elementary. Did they on ramp to accelerated in middle. And so it's really confusing because I know that because I have a sixth grader,
when I see math six, I'm like, well, what does that even mean? I have no idea what we mean when we say math six, seven, and eight because there's so many different ones. And then even with algebra, geometry, and algebra two, that's what's going to end up getting mixed, I think to Miss Wolff's point, right. That's going to become two classes instead of three, I
think. So can you just explain that just a little bit so that I know who's being tested when I look at that number, and I appreciate you asking that question for clarity, because I definitely should have taken some time to identify that these are the labels and naming
convention from the state. So while we and M.C.P.S. have multiple courses that a student in the sixth grade can take, the state says, if you're in the math six, you're in the sixth grade. This is the state assessment you take that are grounded in the Common Core standards related to
mathematics for students in grade six. Okay, so the kids that took compacted math in elementary, and now they're in that accelerated course in sixth grade, the kids that just started accelerated. What is it six plus in sixth grade. The kids that may be are already in
algebra, but they're in sixth grade. They're all going to take the the M cap at the end of the sixth grade year. And that's that number. Almost all of those students take it. The students who are in algebra would take the algebra state assessment. So when would they have taken the sixth grade.
They just skipped that. Oh that's interesting. And how does that that maybe that's a whole different meeting conversation. But the way I'm just wondering about the impact of that on the data. Yes. In terms of being reflective. Because really, if those kids did who were in algebra took
the sixth grade test, let's presume they would score high and perhaps our data would be, yes, higher and more reflective of the kids that are actually in grade six. And we definitely will need to engage in that more detailed conversation. We'll come back about that.
Thank you. Yes. I just wanted to add on to that. It makes it particularly confusing because math seven, you see a pretty big drop. So. The I know
seventh grade is the start of the bigger cohort taking algebra. Yes, very few sixth graders take a couple right. So it might affect it some. But then seventh you have a bigger cohort. Then eighth you have even a bigger cohort. Right. And you see that precipitous
drop. So that is what you see on this slide. And while on this slide we don't have numbers, we can send that to you. But there is definitely an impact in terms of particularly in the middle school, the number of our students who are enrolled in algebra, who are
taking that algebra state assessment. And we have, you know, you know, our district historical approach to algebra by grade eight is a lot of where we have much fewer, many fewer students enrolled in that
grade eight course to take the state math eight assessment. I think what might help us is to know how many children actually took the tests in each of these levels. Yes, and we can send that to you. That would be great. Is it possible to just
update the slide with that, and then we can just post it on board docs so that the community can also see, just to update it with how many students took the test. Just that one slide. The only reason I was pausing is because we have three years there, so it
might be better to add in a separate slide for each of the because we might see real estate. But yes, we can definitely do that. It doesn't have to be urgent or anything. Obviously we're all getting ready to go in for the holidays.
Good morning, Mrs. Stewart, Miss Montoya and Miss Wolff. Thanks for having us here today. This slide highlights why mathematics is such a critical leverage point in our strategic planning work. High school math in particular, has an impact on student outcomes because these
courses are both required for graduation, but are foundational for college and career readiness. We're certainly encouraged by the upward trends we're seeing in both the FY 25 M cap results and the FY 26 quarter one district assessment data. While
the gains are uneven, they indicate that targeted instructional efforts can move performance when they are implemented with fidelity. Mathematics is also cumulative, you know, by nature. And so gaps that emerge early tend to compound over time. And that
actually really speaks to, you know, Miss Montoya, your your last comment, you know, which is why consistent instruction and timely intervention are so important, especially when you consider those students, you know, in courses like algebra one. Another key point here is
the role of district assessments. They are not just accountability measures. They are tools we can use to establish baselines, monitor progress throughout the year, and guide instructional support at the school and classroom levels. Taken together, this
slide reinforces that advancing mathematics proficiency is not a single initiative. It requires sustained focus aligned instruction and ongoing monitoring to ensure students are building the skills they need for post-secondary success.
Next slide please. This slide visually represents how we're organizing our instructional priorities and accountability structures to improve all academic outcomes. But for the sake of this conversation to improve mathematics outcomes,
Doctor Moran actually spoke to this last Thursday during our time together here with you all at the center is a continuous improvement cycle that connects what happens in classrooms to system level support. You know, we begin with classroom
instruction and student learning. That's where really the work lives. Through observations, m cap and formative assessments and student work, we're really identifying pattern instruction and learning. Those patterns then inform coordinated supports through
cross-functional teams, ensuring that schools receive aligned guidance rather than disconnected interventions. Professional learning is intentionally embedded in this cycle. It is responsive to what we see in classrooms and assessment performance, and
really grounded in the curriculum and instructional expectations. This includes supports for teachers, instructional leaders, and administrators so that everyone is working from a shared understanding of high quality mathematics instruction.
Accountability is built into the cycle through progress monitoring and the use of school improvement plans. Schools use multiple data sources to reflect on progress, adjust instruction, and refine supports throughout the year. Overall, this visual reinforces
that improving mathematics performance is not about a single action or program. It's about creating a coherent system where instruction, support, professional learning and accountability are tightly connected and continuously
informing one another. Next slide please. This slide really captures what we're learning from our cross-functional teams. Work with schools. Over the course of this year, a significant number of math
related support incidents have been documented, and we're documenting them through our use of Kickup, which is a monitoring tool, particularly at the high school level. In response, the system has provided extensive hands on, really instructional assistance
and support to schools. As we look across the work, several instructional patterns stand out. We're seeing challenges related to pacing, especially in content heavy courses. There's also some variation in how instructional materials are being used and in the level of
student engagement with grade level content. These insights have helped us focus our support in a key and a few key areas. We're prioritizing stronger mathematics instruction you know, better
integration of English language development within math classrooms, and professional learning that's directly tied to classroom practice. The most important takeaway from this slide is that these learnings are they're not theoretical. They're grounded in real
classrooms and real requests for support. You know, the cross-functional teams coaching and school based collaboration are really enabling us to respond strategically and consistently, using what we learned to refine our instructional approach
continuously. Next slide please. This slide extends the cross-functional team learnings by showing how we're responding Instructionally, particularly in core mathematics courses, classroom observations,
especially in algebra one, have given us a clear picture of what students are experiencing day to day. One consistent strength we're seeing is student engagement. Students are participating, classrooms feel supportive, and there is a
strong sense of belonging. At the same time, the observations really have shown that there are some areas where instructional practices really need strengthening. In many classrooms, we see inconsistent use of, you know, the adopted curriculum and limited evidence
of instruction being driven by true intended learning outcomes. In some cases, the focus shifts to task completion, rather than ensuring that students develop a deep understanding of mathematical concepts. Our
response is targeted and actionable. We're refining and implementing an illustrative math curriculum observation tool to capture better you know what high quality mathematics instruction looks like. We're also working to align
instructional expectations across schools to ensure shared understanding of effective practice. Finally, we're using the observation data intentionally to guide coaching, conversations and professional learning. The goal is not
evaluation, but growth. Supporting teachers and instructional leaders to strengthen core mathematics instruction in ways that directly improve student learning. Next slide please. Earlier, Doctor Addison spoke
to strategies and tactics. You know in this slide really brings together the concrete actions we're taking in response to what we've learned from the data classrooms, observations and the work that cross-functional teams are currently doing. The strategies outlined here are already
underway and are focused on improving both instructional practice and student outcomes. On the instructional side, we're emphasizing coaching, collaborative planning, and purposeful observations. These actions are designed to support teachers in strengthening
lesson design, pacing, and the use of instructional materials aligned to grade level standards. At the student level, interventions are being more intentionally aligned to diagnostic and progress monitoring data. This ensures
that supports are timely, targeted, and responsive to student need rather than reactive. We're also strengthening teacher and leader capacity through professional learning that is directly connected to school improvement efforts. This includes instructional
leadership development and opportunities for teams to analyze data and refine practice together. Finally, we are deepening our progress monitoring structures, data cycles, checkpoints, and feedback loops are helping schools continuously assess,
impact and adjust instruction throughout the year. Family engagement is included as a key strategy, recognizing that support for mathematics learning extends beyond the classroom, which really relates to what Miss Montoya shared earlier. Overall, this slide
emphasizes that improving mathematics performance requires coordinated, sustained action, not isolated strategies, and that, you know, really, the system is aligning its resources to support that work. I'll now turn things over to Doctor Genevieve Floyd. Next
slide please. Thank you. I think this is a good place for questions because these were some really meaty slides, actually, and I appreciate everything that you've shared. My first question. And then
we'll go on to my colleagues are. We talked about slide 13. A couple questions I had. You
talked about math interventions. What can you describe those interventions. And then also with family engagement, a similar question, what particularly what particular strategies have we tried. Yeah. Thank you for that question. So
when it comes to the interventions we are currently in a place especially around math. So we will release a pre-K to 12 mathematics intervention RFP, just like we did for literacy in the last couple of years. So the
interventions that we are providing to teachers for really it's it's really around, you know, adapting classroom instruction and really providing some reteaching opportunities for students. It's more the tier one instruction is what all
students receive. It's more of that tier two instruction for students. What can you do with those small groups? You know, when I use the word intervention, I'm really thinking about how we use our current curricular products to reteach, to use that assessment data so that we ensure that more students are meeting those
standards. We will have more intentional interventions that we can, you know, really put into place for our secondary learners. We have some that we currently put into place, but they're more for students who are receiving special education services currently. So I do appreciate that question. So
when I think of interventions now, we're being really strategic in coaching around that tier two time for the small group Reteaching. And or when we notice a pattern of a student, you know, or a group of students making the same error, right. And so, you know, teachers are really spending a
little bit more time in that, in that space. And that's often discussed during that collaborative planning time that I mentioned as well, when it comes to the family engagement, I can specifically speak to even just as recent as last night. So I was actually toggling between the budget
presentation and the NAACP parent meeting, and it was at that meeting that I was joined by a parent who's doing this work in her community, and also our IXL representative, and we presented to our families the way in which they could support their students over winter
break. There is a parent on that committee who really has done an incredible job. I should really connect you all with her. She's a model parent of using Excel at home, and so we know that all of our secondary students during mathematics, you know, have
Excel as a supplement. And so we were encouraging families to continue the usage of Excel over winter break and really just asking them, do you see it as homework? Do you you know, and so that's the engagement where you mentioned tutoring earlier. And while Excel is not tutoring it, certainly, you
know, we intentionally have student math scores, you know, within Excel so that a student profile is created and a plan for individual students is then created to really address any gaps in their learning that they have around the standards.
Classroom teachers can also, you know, create opportunities for them in Excel to, you know, really practice some of what's being taught in classrooms. And so that is certainly just one instance of a conversation that we've had. You know, we're also
going out into the community. We just two weeks ago, I believe it was we had our second math policy community meeting. And really that is centered around the, you know, MSD math policy. But the impact on parents and what that means
for them. So there are a couple of different ways we're engaging families in a unique and really intentional way. And so to me, that purpose really does support a strategy of really just engaging in a different way. So just as a quick follow up, I guess for
both of my questions, I would love to have in the future, maybe someone come to a meeting and talk about a particular intervention that showed some
improvements, right? That we can learn from them because I think there's so much good work being done in individual classrooms, individual schools, and we don't as a board always hear about it. And then we could think about that as we're
working on our budgets, right. Where can we accelerate some of our interventions, our engagement practices, so that we can, you know, spread the wealth. And I would love to do
some of that work with this committee. And so I really appreciate you letting me know about some of the interventions. And also that we are going to have RFP so we can have this
across all of our schools. So I appreciate that. Go ahead. Oh go ahead. Thank you for the presentation so far. My question is you talked a lot
about what you're doing for the teacher. It's not clear to me what we're doing for the actual student. So you know, Laura just asked you about the instructional strategies. I'd like to know if you had to name
one, which one is really showing promise, because I can't tell. I mean, we're doing a lot of work with the teachers, but we're not seeing any improvement. So somewhere we've got to identify a strategy that
actually works. Do we know which one? Because if a teacher has 23 kids, how are they focusing on any one kid? Thank you for that question. You know, I do believe that a true instructional strategy right
now is the work of those cross-functional team instructional specialists in mathematics. And the reason that I say that is because they are in schools every day on the ground modeling for teachers, right? So when we think about, you know, that student, while
we can consider the conversations that we have with teachers, you're exactly right. It's hard to know if those conversations truly translate into classrooms. And so when those cross-functional team instructional specialists are in the classroom side by side, it's that feedback loop that I
spoke to during that visual, right where they're in classrooms doing observations, modeling, providing, yes, it's feedback to teachers, but it's truly with a student sitting right there. So it really when I think about a strategy, it truly is that side by side work.
And it could really look like modeling right where they're modeling for a teacher. But truly, then teaching the student during that time. But it's not translating into improvement. I'm trying to see whether or not the team has identified any strategy that
they could carry across other schools. I do want to just add, as a reminder, related to our cross-functional teams that this is our first year, so we have that opportunity to continue to learn and understand. So we're not yet at a place to say kind of, what
are those intentional things we're seeing early promise in terms of their implementation. But I do know that we are seeking to obtain feedback and understanding more in terms of what are those intentional supports and strategies. And then as we get to the end of this year, I think we have the
opportunity to see what has impacted our outcomes for students, particularly in mathematics. So you talked about uneven implementation of math instruction. What's your evidence for that? What what are you looking at? How do you
know it's uneven instruction? Thank you for that question. That truly is those those observations, those purposeful, purposeful observations that are being done in classrooms. And so we're really looking at the evidence of those observations. And that's how we are designing professional
learning for both school leaders and teachers. And also even the time that we spend, especially at the high school level with our content resource teachers. So the math resource teachers really designing that monthly time with them as a result of what we're seeing in classrooms. Okay. My final
question is if you don't have the same team going to every school, how do you how are you comparing uneven? Do you understand what I'm asking? Yeah, that's a great question. So while we don't have the same team going to each school, we have been really intentional with the time we spend with
those teams. And so every single Friday, those cross-functional teams are getting together. They're getting together with the division of school support and leadership with that, that cross-functional team. So if I were a director that supported schools, my entire team's getting together, which
includes all of the contents, you know, special education, DMA, but then also in the afternoons, I can tell you I'm a part of those content. Then, you know, instructional specialist team meetings. And so we get all of the math instructional specialists
together, you know, on Friday afternoons. And we really talk about the work that they're doing in classrooms, what they're seeing. And so while every single team isn't, you know, isn't exactly the same because the instructional specialists are all different, we do have some real
intentional, you know, time with them to decrease variance in the work that they're doing. Thank you. I'll look forward to hearing about the promise and strategies at the end of the school year. Got it. So first, I just want to say thank you
for all of this work that you've put together here, because I was eagerly awaiting to figure out what is the plan for math. In addition to facilities, math scores keep me up at night because they are not good and they have not been good for black and Latino children for quite some time
before my kids were even in the school system. And again, as having two little kids, I know how much work it takes for them. You're basically reteaching the math lesson sometimes in the evening, right? And so just know that all of my questions are kind of in that context of
like lived experience. And so I guess a couple things I just want to first clarify for myself. So at the elementary school level, you're saying that we do have math interventions through the curricula available to teachers,
because I've heard from some teachers that they've tried to get that, but M.C.P.S. maybe didn't buy those. And I unfortunately, that happens sometimes here at M.C.P.S. So I just want to make sure that if we do have that available that our teachers know. So we do
have math and we do have them at the secondary level, it's just a little bit different in the programing. We do have math interventions that are available. There are not as many of them. And so, you know, we have a lot more literacy options just as a result of that RFP that we did, and then
the contracts that we currently have as a result of that, that we did procure at the end of last school year. So we will have, you know, our hope is to have more robust and just more of those math interventions. You know, we do have that fit time right now that every
single elementary school is implementing for this school year. And that's that 30 minute chunk of time where students are receiving some of those interventions. But I do believe that you're going to hear that they're receiving more literacy interventions during that time, because we have a lot more literacy interventions available. But I think I'm talking about the math
curricula, like there are tools with, you know, when you buy the curricula, right? It comes with, yes, your books. But there's then these little like add ons, perhaps, right. Did we not purchase those at the elementary school level in terms of the curriculum based interventions or tools we do within Eureka, there is an
intervention that we have purchased. I think that who you're hearing from are a variety of teachers who are looking for another layer, right? So more of like a tier three intervention, the tier two intervention that comes from Eureka is more for the small group. Reteaching. So I
do believe what you're hearing is tier three and we're hearing the same thing, which is why we really are releasing that RFP. But there is so there is going to be for. So we recognize that this is an issue. And then now we're taking an action. There's an RFP either coming out or is going to. Okay great. That's
all I want to know is that we're doing something about it. And then just for the community's clarification, because I love IXL, my kids do it at home and I'm like, oh, you want screen time? Great, let's get on IXL. You know, nap
time is coming up, right? I the reason I love IXL is because it's tied to the curriculum. Right. And I think that was something that I know, I know, you know that. And that's why we use it in all of those things. But the community may not realize. Right? It's not just another math app or something like that. It's if
you move, you can change your state and it will tie it to your state's curriculum for a variety of subjects. So it is a really great tool. And the question I have, and perhaps you don't know or this might not be your area, is why don't we have it available to elementary schools? Because
again, in my lived experience, if they're not have if they don't have a strong foundation and grasp of the concepts at that age, I mean, they're just it's just all back piling then, right? Once they get into middle school and even upper elementary, really, when things start to get more complex. And
I know that some elementary schools have access to it from, like their PTA, perhaps maybe buys a contract. And I have to wonder if that's why some elementary schools have higher scores than others. Not all. That's not all of the factors, of course, but I'm just wondering why we don't have it
for elementary and if we can get a cost estimate for including that. And again, perhaps not from you, but if we can just request from staff to follow up on that, please. Sure. Thank you for that question. It's a great question. You're exactly right. I Excel is
directly connected to the standards and to the grade level standards. And I can get you a quote. I am the contact person that could do that at the elementary level. Our elementary instructional block is a little bit different than the secondary instructional block. There's a little bit more flexibility at the secondary level when you get
into to middle school. You know, I was not in this position when we procured IXL years ago, but I certainly can can get you more information because I hear a lot about a lot of other zurn and all these things. And so we're obviously letting the kids use math apps, which, you
know, whatever, whatever gets them across the finish line. But if we are, then why not use something that could actually perhaps translate into some growth, right, in terms of our testing? And then I have to wonder, we talk about class
sizes, and I admittedly am doing my own research on the impact of class size reductions or increases and what's meaningful, what's not right. But I also know from my lived experience that my children, one of them specifically had an opportunity because of the makeup of the class. There was
the teacher, a special education teacher, and a paraeducator, and it was like the best class they were in in their whole life because they were able to parse out into groups and rotations and all of these things. And it was almost like a college, you know, level
size class. Right? Those seminar groups we all had where there's like ten people. And so I just have to wonder, and perhaps maybe not at the elementary level, I don't know. But at these higher levels where things are much more complex, is that a space where
we should be looking at? Perhaps there would be a meaningful impact with class size reduction in our math courses, especially if we have children who are still also trying to learn how to speak English, while also taking some of these advanced math courses. And I'm just wondering whether
that has been explored, what that could look like to explore. So I think I'm also looking to my staff to see about class size reduction in the sense of math specifically. And then sorry, my final question,
because I am also on the Special Populations Committee, and obviously we see the scores and things as well. There's that overlap. Is there at any point where we, whether it's formally or informally, almost
screen for things like dyscalculia or ADHD, where children can sometimes have a hard time with the spatial organization, whether it's geometry from actual shapes and angles or just lining up your numbers correctly so you can multiply them properly, you can know the formula, but if the
numbers are jumbled in your head, you're never going to be able to get where you need to be. And I just have to wonder if some of that may be reflected. And then those are those factors where no matter what plan we set, no matter what goals we set, how much we instruct the teachers, that
child is never going to be able to get what they need, because there's another significant factor there. That's a great question there. Not that I know of. Is there a space where we formally I mean, I'm sure that there informal, you know, observations of students. I do
know that as a result of the MSD literacy policy, there is now a screener that's put into place that really does look at dyslexia. So I wonder about that math policy that's currently being rolled out by the state. I can certainly do a little research on my own, you
know, and get some information back to you, but it certainly is something that we could explore. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And I'm very aware of the the new requirements, you know, for literacy. I have some arguments about whether it should be at third grade or earlier, but that's separate. But yeah,
there isn't anything for math. And we just as a society seem to kind of just accept that, like, oh, I'm just not good at math. Well, no. If you said you weren't good at reading, we wouldn't say, okay, well, you're just not good at reading, right? Thank you. Thank you. Plus one on the not good at
math comment. I think we all can be good at math. I'm a true believer at that of that. And so just quickly I wanted to go back to slide eight. That had
some of our progress data. And. Thinking about to our last meeting, I just wanted to see this is comparing marking period one 2024 to marking period one 2025. Is that apples
to apples? It's not apples to apples because it's not the same exact student. However, it is the exact same assessment. Okay, so exact same assessment but with different. Right.
Exactly. Okay. So there are some interesting points on here. And I just wanted to know from staff, is there any learnings from this particular slide
about maybe where we had some success and why you think that was, or do you think this is not enough data to really determine success or not or some success? Yes. If I could
just I want to make sure I understand what's on here first. So this is the grades the kids got after the first marking period for each year, not test scores. This is district assessments. I just want to make sure assessment. And so in
our district we have an expected target score that we want students to hit, to say that they are achieving the expectation that we would want them to achieve for the district assessment. So this slide represents what percent of those students across the grade levels are hitting that
expected score in the course that they're in on that required district assessment. Right. But what are they doing so that someone knows if they got the score? Like if I'm in math class, right. This is not a map. This is not M cap. This is my end of my quarter one end
of quarter test or how or is this my grade? Like I got a B. This is not the grade. So that's what I'm trying to figure out when someone's looking at district assessment. So if I am in algebra one and there is a required district assessment and marking period one for algebra one and end of
module five and whatever. Yes. And then let's say the expected score is a 75. What percent of those students were in that course hit that 75? Okay. So some kids in this group got an A, some got a B, some got a C C-plus but they all met this
proficiency okay. So and the reason I asked was because in 2025. So this would be this first quarter. Yes. Okay. So and the reason I ask is because we also have the new grading regulation. Yes. So I just want
to be clear here too that the kids that are meeting it, because we do see some increases in some groups. And they did that under the new grading guidelines, which arguably may have been more challenging depending on how they treated some of these last year. So let me just in terms
of growth, right, that we're seeing an increase, but also that potentially it was a more how can I say like rigorous grading. Yeah. So I just necessarily for the district assessment and we didn't bring that we didn't bring the grades
performance here as part of the progress monitoring. But that is in our progress monitoring document from the strategic plan presentation we did, where you can see the performance of students actual grade earned in that course. So that is what I'm hearing you share, which
would be more reflective of the impact of the grade. So this would be like the end of module test okay. Great. Thank you. So we I need to get to my colleague I have this question. So if we could just do one example and then we can dig
deeper in another time. Well on this slide I do notice the increase in success for our emergent multilingual learners. And so I do I do wonder, right? I do wonder around some of the work that's being done. And I do wonder about some of those
instructional specialists. I know I continue to kind of hammer on, but, you know, I know that when they're in classrooms with teachers, they're often focused on some of our students in those special populations. Okay, great. Because I do want to hold up when we do have some
success. It's really important that we acknowledge that and so that we can realize, oh, this might be a strategy that is working, but I want to make sure that this data is telling me what I think it's telling me, because often it's there's something else going on. So I'd
like to dig into some of those opportunities as we move on in this committee. Absolutely. And when I looked at that kick up data, I did see a pattern of support to our emergent multilingual learners. So I did notice that. And so I do believe, you know, it is it is
still really early right. It is only December. We've only implemented these teams for, you know, almost two marking periods but really one marking period. So we'll continue to bring you updates okay. Great. Okay I have two questions. A lot of this focused on the
cross-functional teams. I want to know how we are evaluating the cross-functional team. That's the first question. And the second one is how are we understanding the return on investment. That's a great
question. So not only are we having those cross-functional teams, instructional specialists give us really the input of how they spend their time through the use of kickup. But we're also asking schools, right about the effectiveness of their time in the work that they're doing with them. And so coupled together, we really
should, you know, have an understanding of of the quality of the work that they're spending and the impact. You know, we're constantly asking those instructional specialists around impact, but we're also speaking to principals around that as well. You're asking the school of which they are attached to, right? In other
words, they're self-evaluating, right, right, right. And we're also going in and observing as well those purposeful observations. So members from from our team, and, you know, a couple of other teams are working collaboratively together to go in and observe
as well. So shouldn't part of the evaluation be if math grades are going up? Absolutely. You know, okay, I'm just trying to understand the return return on investment here. And just to bridge the return on investment
aspect, because it's been cutting across a number of the committees fiscal management, policy management as well as here. And while evaluation of cross-functional teams is not an official project on our evaluation program evaluation agenda, we do have an
opportunity to leverage and use that information to be able to bring it to different groups around that ROI framework that we're in the process of developing. Thank you. I just wanted to be sure they're not self-evaluating that somebody on the outside is looking in.
Okay. I think we're ready to move on. We have about 50 minutes. I think we can do it. Good morning. Board members, if you go. Yes. Thank you so much. I am Genevieve Floyd. I'm the director of the Department of
College and Career Readiness. And under that heading, there are a variety of programmatic opportunities for our students, such as career and technical technical education, as well as dual enrollment. And there's the responsibility to make sure, as it relates to blueprint legislation, pillar three
specifically, that information is shared, that our work collaboratively with colleagues in the Office of Shared Accountability, Curriculum, Technology Office and Counseling to make sure that we are all aware in schools are supported as it relates to the requirement under this
legislation. With that, you can go to the next slide in the next couple of slides. What we hope to do is share with you an overview of the blueprint legislation. Pillar three specifically, as you know, it's a massive legislation. So we're not going to do a deep, deep
dive, but certainly want to level set to make sure that we understand the objectives therein, which includes a overview of the newly revised CCR standards that have just been approved by Msde, which incorporates a variety of assessments, career and
technical education opportunities, college credit, and the alignment with the pathways that we have to offer in schools. Next slide. So at a very high level, pillar three is considered the North star of the blueprint legislation. And
there are four primary objectives. Objective one really relates to the instructional system curriculum and ensuring that across the state that there is rigorous curriculum in place, as well as standards to determine if students are college and career
ready or not. It is the standards part of this objective that we're going to focus on in the next few slides. However, I do want to mention objective two, which focuses on monitoring and supporting students towards progress to
being CCR, as well as being on track to graduate high school. And the two are not the same. Many of our students or students can, across the state, graduate high school without being deemed college and career ready. Objective three focuses
on support and post CCR pathways. Those post CCR pathways I'm sure you're familiar with include Advanced Placement, IB, CTE, or Career Technical Education, and dual enrollment. It is the expectation that if students are deemed to be college and
career ready by the end of grade ten, that they are to provide it, be provided access to those post CCR pathways at no cost. And then finally, the fourth objective within pillar three focuses on high quality CTE programs and career
counseling. We within M.c.p.s. We provide 51 different CTE programs of study. That work is going to be redesigned based on some decisions that have been made by the state. And there is going to be a redesign that's
implemented in 27, 28. The latter part of that objective, career counseling will the the language in the blueprint legislation says counseling. We say advising. Initially when we began to socialize this work, individuals would confuse
counseling with counselor. And this work is not that their work. So we use the term advising, and it is the expectation for this objective that all LEAs partner with their local Workforce development Board. For us, that's work Source Montgomery
as well as their community college. And for us that's Montgomery College to implement a counseling or career advising opportunity to all secondary students. So grades six through 12, an individualized career advising program. So we have
partnered with Worksource and with Montgomery College. And we have implemented Moko Cap or Montgomery County Career Advising Program. And at a later date, we'd be happy to come back and share updates as it relates to career advising. But for the purpose of this
session, we're going to focus on the College Career readiness standards. And with that, you can move to the next slide. So this is a very colorful slide. And hopefully you can see it clearly. I'm going to try to
walk you through it so that you and our stakeholders who are viewing, understand the robust opportunities that are provided to us to provide to our students as it relates to college and career readiness standards. Initially, the types
of college career readiness standards that were provided there were narrowly focused and it focused only on the MCAT, the SAT, and after hearing from many, many stakeholders across the state, we now have multiple
measures that can be used to identify whether students are deemed college career ready or not. So in that first section under the red heading, this focuses on academic excellence and math mastery. So at the end of grade ten, if students have
a 3.0 and they have achieved an A, B, or C in algebra one, or they have a score, a proficient score on the MCAT, they are deemed college and career ready under the blue heading right beneath that, and these
assessments can be given any time between grades nine and 12. They have a variety of assessments that they can take, and if they score proficient in both English and math, they are deemed college and career ready. So these assessments include
the SAT, the Act, the MCAT, the PSAT, and it also includes the alternative assessment for PLM and Ela and math. So either one in either of those assessments, but both in math and English, a
proficient score is needed in order to be deemed college and career ready. Moving to the right side of your screen in the middle section, when we're looking at the top GPA in grades 11 and 12. So this continues to be a focus on
academic excellence and math mastery. So if students receive a 3.0 not cumulative, but during the 11th grade year or doing the 12th grade year, as well as earning an A, B, or C in any of their high school
math credit courses, they would be deemed college and career ready. In that same column, going down to career aptitude, what is new is the opportunity for students to take the Asvab test or the Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery Assessment. And this is a career aptitude assessment. And if they score at least 50, they will be deemed college and career ready. There's also an opportunity to take the Act work keys. However, we don't
offer that here in M.C.P.S. but we do offer the Asvab across our high schools, so that is an opportunity that we can lean into moving forward on the far right. Under career technical education, the opportunities
for students to earn a high school or to complete a high school level of a registered apprenticeship, or to earn an industry recognized credential. This is not the same as completing a CTE program of study. So the option there is either one a registered level
of apprenticeship or an industry recognized credential will provide them the opportunity to be deemed college and career ready. Next college courses. So if students are taking college courses, if they earn an A, B, or C in a
math course, as well as an A, B, or C in an Ell science, I'm sorry. Ela science social studies course they would be deemed college and career ready. And then finally, if they're taking the AP exams or the IB
exams and they earn a three or higher, they would be deemed college and career ready. So a smorgasbord, if you will, of opportunities for students to be deemed college and career ready. The hope is that they will be deemed so by the end of
grade ten. But certainly prior to high school graduation. Next slide and I'll turn it over to Doctor Addison. Thank you. So on this slide, we really want to provide you with an
opportunity to see the impact of the updated CCR college and career readiness metrics compared to what we were using. And so I failed to include it on this slide. But this slide represents data from the end of
the 2024, 2025 school year. And so the left two columns show the interim college and career readiness approach that the state had in place. And I don't have it in front of me, but we can definitely get to you what
those metrics were. But you'll notice, for example, at the end of grade ten, 22.2% of our grade ten students using the previous Maryland State Department of Education interim CCR metrics met with the
expanded metrics that Doctor Floyd just walked us through. The same students. You see a much higher percentage of students who are indicating as meeting college and career readiness standards. And so, as Doctor Floyd shared, that opportunity and our advocacy
around expanding the metrics that are included to identify whether or not students are college and career ready, definitely shows positively for our students. And so you'll notice at the end of grade ten and now increases to 59.4% of
students being deemed as college and career ready. When disaggregated by race ethnicity. The updated metrics reveal increased college and career readiness again across all groups. And so you'll see for
our Black or African American students using the interim metrics. Previously it was 12.4%, but that increases to 38.6% with the updated college and career readiness standards. Similarly, for our Hispanic Latino students, using the
interim metrics, which were more narrow, 7.9% of students were identified as meeting, whereas with the expanded metrics we have 30.9%. And again, for all of our student groups, you see an increase of the percentage of students who
are designated using the expanded metrics. Finally, when we look at our students receiving services such as emergent multilingual learners and our students receiving farms and our students with an IEP, again, the updated
standards show an increased opportunity for students to demonstrate that they are meeting college and career ready. And while the expanded definition definitely captures more students, it also signals the importance of our continued monitoring and support to ensure success. And I'll now
turn it back over to Doctor Floyd to share our efforts in supporting students college and career readiness standards. Thank you, Doctor Addison. And so, in collaboration or in conjunction with the work that's happening in the curriculum department, our work is really to intensify the
career advising opportunity, CTE options and develop the six year plan. The six year graduation plan is actually something that the state is mandating that we incorporate from grades nine through grades 14. In addition, enhancing the
promotion of AP, IB, dual enrollment and CTE opportunities so students are aware of these varied pathways that they can pursue and the opportunity for them to be deemed college and career ready by participating in these options to strengthen and early
high school monitoring, work very closely with our schools and the monitoring of college career readiness from grade nine to ensure students are on track to meet one of these measures in order to be deemed college and career ready, and then certainly to make sure we
begin to work with our schools to educate them on the newly revised standards so that students can be reassessed, not only assessed in grades 11 and in grades 12. Next slide. Oh, I
think that concludes. Thank you. Thank you so much. I will start on my left. I just want to be sure that I'm understanding what I'm seeing. So where you have the metrics it's page 19
in mind but it's yeah where you have new CCR, the CCR that you're referring to is this complicated one that you which was put in place in September. Right. Yes. So does this
reflect first quarter grades. Is that what that is? No. So while the state updated kind of the what they call the business rules around this new metric, a lot of it. And if you look back
at that graphic on slide 17, what you'll notice is that the majority, a large number of the measures are assessments. And in the interim approach, there were assessments to but a more
narrowed view of which assessments counted. So they expanded the assessments. And we have data for our students for a number of assessments already. So we applied the new rules to our prior year data. So you didn't use grades. No.
Okay. Well the reason I ask is because we changed the grading policy. So I wondered if you were going to end up showing us apples and oranges when you come back to talk about it. Do you understand what I'm asking you? Yes. And I think we can
see we so the grades piece and I now that I can see it better the algebra one course in terms of the A, B or C that is calculated into this as part of one of the metrics, or if they met the algebra one proficiency. I do think we have an opportunity to see what it would look like by the end of
this school year with the updated grading policy, because it would seem to me this is inflated. These numbers are inflated if it's based on grades that are currently in existence. You don't have to answer that, because that's how I see that. Yeah. Sorry. Just you mean do you mean the prior
years because they were based on the prior grading, based on grades that are already there? Yeah. Versus this year's, which is based on this first quarter with the new grading. Exactly. Which would actually speak. Well then for our students. Right. Because even under the new grading regulation, let me not say policy under the
grading regulations, we seem to have more students who are able to meet this standard. Right? Mind you, there's various ways they can meet it. I mean, am I thinking about that correctly? So we do I don't we're not yet the data shown does not yet
include what's happening this school year with the new grading. Okay. And so that's what I was trying to figure out okay. So that's what I see what you're saying. Yes. So let's look at this. So we kind of have to take this with a grain of salt with a grain of salt. Exactly. Okay. And then my
second question is well two questions more these I'm looking at these SAT numbers. Who decided that those were numbers for career and college readiness. I can have a whole meeting about that in itself.
Miss Wolff. You know, that is my problem with this, because I know lots of people probably, that have graduated from college with lesser numbers. So I just wanted to know who set those numbers. So it is set by the state as part of their blueprint work. They did some
research around what are those SAT scores that would be aligned to demonstrating college, and they took into account bias in the SAT. Right. My last my last question is what are the specific strategies and supports that
you have in place for students who are not meeting the college and career readiness standard? At the end of the 10th grade, so various schools are doing various things, and when it comes to the math and the
academic components, I'm sure Doctor Brandt can speak to the interventions that are being in place. But with these new opportunities, it really is about making sure our staff is well informed of opportunities
such as the Asvab, such as the value of an industry recognized credential. And students don't have to be in CTE in order to complete an industry recognized credential. They don't have to go to the military in order to sit for an Asvab test. So our
work with schools is to make sure that staff, the coaches, the career advising coaches, the parents, students and counselors are well informed of the variety of opportunities that students can pursue in order to be deemed college and
career ready. And I do want to lean into the statement you just made Miss Wolff around students graduating and not meeting some of these assessment levels, and emphasize and perhaps re-emphasize that whether students are deemed college and career ready by this standard
does not negate their ability to go forth after high school and not only be great, but do great things. This is a standard that has been determined by research based practices for the state, but it does not in any way speak to the caliber, nor the quality of
students that we are graduating every single year. Well, I would agree with that because, you know, my feeling about a lot of testing, but also I would be concerned and I'll be looking for you to report on the future about how you're going to ensure equitable
access across our schools. When you start talking about coaches and counselors, I'd like you to tell me how you're going to ensure equitable access across the schools and for all of our student groups, and you may or may not be able to talk about
that today, I understand that. I just want to clarify your question. When you say equitable access, you mean to the CTE program. What I'm talking about is you're talking about people providing coaching, counseling. How do you ensure
that all of our students are receiving good information, solid information, the same information. And depending upon what group they fall in, that they are not being shortchanged? Absolutely welcome the opportunity to come back and
share more. Thank you. I just have what I think are two quick questions. When will this year's grades be incorporated into something where we can kind of get a temperature check, right, recognizing obviously,
we wait till the end of the year to say who's ready or not, but is there a way to kind of do a check in so that now you know, that maybe you're not on the path versus, oh, at the end of the year? And it's like, well, they win a year. Yes. So what we can do is build a
semester, end of semester one mid-year, check around this. And as part of our progress monitoring. Right. And so historically with college and career readiness around January, February, we would say, here's what we look like right now as it relates to the interim metric. And so we can plan to
do that. We're using this new metric as well. Okay. I think that would be great both for students and families so that they know if they need to be doing something for the system. And then also because I think it will give us an idea about how things are working out with the new grading regulations. So
to see kind of how that's impacting things or not, I hope not. And then my other question, and recognizing that the state is the one who sets what it means to be ready, it's not you, it's not us, it's the state. I
don't see GED in here anywhere. And I know that for some of our students, they may be had lapses in their education. They're entering in in upper grades in high school or, you know, their goals are a little different. We also had a great
bill from Delegate Wims in this past session, where students can take the GED in Spanish, and not just all in English. We were the last state to do that, and that allows them entry into a lot of really great CTE programs like the trade programs. And so I'm just
wondering, I mean, doesn't that make them college and career ready? And I know it's kind of similar to the testing and, and whatnot, and we're measuring by the state. But do you know if there's any conversation about about that anywhere? There is
not to my knowledge. However, I will say, because many of our students who are accessing the GED are participating in some of the CTE courses, they do have the opportunity to earn an industry recognized credential in some cases, but not in all
cases. But to your specific question around the GED, it is not my understanding that that will be included or conversations around including them. Okay. And so then maybe, you know, with what you said in terms of that, some of those students are going to be in positions where they could earn
an industry recognized credential. But then maybe we need to recognize that as well as the state is not paying attention to this issue, at least not yet, because we have not brought it to them. Or we can bring it a little harder, but we can then really gear those students so that they do come out with something that
then that also helps to demonstrate. We are preparing students in the ways the state would like to see versus just saying, okay, let's do a GED. And that gives them something that they can hopefully, you know, professionalize when they get out. Thank you. I'd just
like to ask a couple questions about the difference between initial determination and demonstrating readiness in 11th and 12th grade. So if we don't meet the 10th grade initial,
there's more chances to get determination. And how does this. What's the result on our district at each checkpoint if
we don't meet what the state would say that we should meet, right. Like what's the consequence? There are no consequences. Okay, great. So these are goals. These are
aspirational goals. And it certainly is the desire that our students will meet these standards. It is data that is reported and shared with the state, but there are no consequences. It doesn't prevent students from graduating. There's no consequences to the district. It is just another data point
that the state is collecting. Okay, excellent. Because a couple of years ago I had heard about some kind of financial consequences. So I'm glad that that is not the case. I can add,
when students are deemed college and career ready, there is a financial contribution that each district receives based on each student that is deemed college and career ready. So the more students that are deemed college and career ready,
the more funding we can receive from the state. But we are not deemed or dinged if we don't. Thank you for clarifying that. Appreciate it. And. Again,
there's multiple bites at the apple. So if it doesn't happen in 10th grade it can happen 11th. Or it can even happen in 12th. Absolutely. Yes. So one more question. Actually this is
something I was thinking about at the first part of your presentation, but also applies to this one. We do have disaggregated data, but there is something that I have heard, but I've never seen it laid out.
And that is some of the difference in between genders and also by gender and the other subgroups. So I don't know if this is something we
need. We should look at because we want to make sure that we're not missing a pattern, especially when it comes to college and career readiness. There are some data that less boys are going on to college in
comparison to the percentage of girls, and I know there's also other genders. But if we could maybe look into a way to check in on that, that would be great
for us. So we're not missing something. And I think that's all my questions for now. Any others? My only question is if if they graduate, which they can and not and not be college and career ready and yet they
go on to college. Do we have a way of measuring whether or not they will have to take remedial courses or not? At this time?
No. I know a few years ago we used to obtain data from our students who went to Montgomery College to get an understanding of enrollment in remedial courses, but I do see that as an opportunity for us. I don't
know, Doctor Floyd. I can add that there are students who are not deemed college and career ready by these standards, who are taking college courses, not remedial courses. They need a
2.75, not a 3.0 if they're a senior and they need a 2.5, not a 3.0. So again, this metrics does not hinder them from going on. And then the college also have other metrics that they use to determine if a student
is college ready or not. So the short answer is probably no. But I'm sure there are some students that graduate from schools across the country that might need to. I think it would be interesting if we could capture some of that. I don't know if we could capture it, capture it beyond Montgomery
College, but it just seems to me that we have a lot of money invested in this program. And the only other thing I would wonder is, do we even have an evaluation metric for this? Because this is a very large contract with Workforce
Montgomery. So you think you're talking about the Cap program? No, I'm just talking about are they supplying the counselors and the advisors and all of that. Do we have an evaluation system to see whether or not,
you know, it's a pretty large contract, whether or not we're getting our money's worth. So the state is implementing or sharing some metrics that we have to use across the state, because every Lea has to have these contracts, and the state is providing the funding for
this. So they too are interested in the success. So we expect to receive an evaluation template from the state soon. That's very interesting that they are funding a program that has no real consequence. That's what
it seems like. But I think it's very important. But I'd be interested in the metrics that they come up with. So I look forward to you sharing that in the future. Thank you. You're welcome. Yeah, I do think it's interesting as well that there's this very elaborate program, but there's no
consequence at all. I mean, I grew up in California and we had similar testings that you had to do, but you didn't get to graduate. So it was like, if you don't and you could make arguments for that as well as to why that's not okay. And so that's I guess in some ways where I'm going with this, I'm not a great test taker. I'm
actually a very poor standardized test taker. I'm not barred in more states because I'm not good at taking standardized tests. And so I get really worried when I see that most of the ways that you can be college and career ready have to do with taking a test.
And so I just am wondering if we teach kids how to take tests because it's not easy. And now I'm in one of my own children just told me, well, mom, we have to take it on the computer and you have to go in order and you can't go back, so you can't
do another. You know, when I had it on paper, I could go, well, my brain can't do that right now. Let me go do this section and I'll go back. Well, they can't do that now. So I just there's so many issues with that in terms of the way that people and children think and work and don't do it all
the same. And so I'm just wondering if we have any moments, not that we don't have enough to try to teach these kids in a day, but where we're teaching them just those basic things of how to navigate those tests, or finding out that for some children that is not going to work taking it on a computer,
they need a paper test. I'm happy to answer that question. In fact, it's a really good one. So when we think about teaching kids how to take tests, we are really intentional with looking at. And I'm going to go back to those district assessm. And they're currently not in every course at the high school level,
but in elementary school, certainly in Ela and math, we look at the actual assessment items, and we're really looking to see how well they do mirror some of those standardized testing, you know, assessments themselves, really, so that students do have the opportunity to practice, just
as you said. And we are we are doing a much a much better job at that, even this school year. But it's certainly a dialog that we're continuing to have. That's a great question. So I just want to get this straight,
because I was curious how we compared to other districts, other LEAs in the state as far as the updated metrics. But we're we don't know that yet, do we? Okay. And so we'll when
they send this template, will that help us see where we're fitting in the puzzle. So just to clarify the template related to the expectation of all LEAs to provide individualized
career counseling or career advising. And then the CCR, since it was a new standard just released in September, we anticipate that at the end of this school year, all districts will have data, and then we can
compare. Data from district to district. Yes, because I would like to know how we're doing compared to other districts and college and career ready is actually important. This seems
very complicated looking. I had to really squint to see this slide, actually, because there's so much there and different ways. Again, it does seem very test heavy, but let's see how this will. I'll be
interested to see how we look at the end of the year. I appreciate all the feedback we got from you today for answering all of our questions. I'm looking forward to more work and going through this strategic plan. The strategic
plan that was lovingly crafted. Thank you, Miss Wolff, for helping to lead some of that. And to my colleague Miss Montagna, who has who has been on this committee. I'm new to the committee, so I'm learning.
But it was a really informative and productive meeting, so I appreciate that. Thank you. And I think unless we have other questions, do any members of the committee have questions.
Yeah. Okay. Because this was a discussion. No action is needed at this time. We look forward to continuing the discussion or February 18th, which is interesting because that actually is my birthday and I believe today might be someone
else's birthday. It's Rita's birthday day. Thank you. So meetings only on people's birthdays. So very exciting. And we will be reviewing access
to diverse workforce. So looking forward to that. And I think that adjourns our meeting
today. Thank you. Thank you all.