The RSU 52/MSAD 52 School Board heard a presentation on proposed mathematics standards and the instructional‑materials selection process but postponed a formal vote after members said they needed more time to review the materials and the committee's selection rationale.

Theresa, the superintendent, and Theresa's curriculum staff summarized the standards review: a standards team and an instructional‑materials team met this year to prioritize the state's main learning results into locally designated "essential" and "supporting" standards, with the essential standards designated for common assessment and monitoring. The teams used Atlas (the curriculum management platform), surveyed teachers, reviewed vendor materials, visited other districts and taught sample lessons within the committee to evaluate ease of planning and implementation.

Committee members described the process as aimed at ensuring greater consistency across grade levels K–12 so students in different schools encounter the same expectations at each grade. Theresa said the public‑facing version of the standards will be built into Atlas and staff plan to finalize the structure by fall.

Why the board postponed

Board members said they appreciated the work but that the packet was dense and they needed time to digest the proposed essential‑standard lists and the connection between standards and the chosen instructional materials. A motion to postpone the vote to the April 10 meeting passed; the board asked administration to provide more detail on how instructional materials were selected and to summarize the percentage of standards labeled essential versus supporting.

How the standards will be used

Staff said essential standards will drive common assessments and intervention planning; supporting standards remain part of instruction but are not the primary targets for districtwide common assessment during initial rollout. Administrators emphasized that adopting essential standards is intended to help teachers focus and to provide clearer data for intervention and curriculum alignment.

Implementation and next steps

District staff will return on April 10 with additional materials requested by the board, including a clearer description of the selection process for materials (vendor reviews, EdReports/EdWorks checks, school visits), a representation of how many standards were designated essential at each grade and samples of proposed common assessments. The board will revisit the standards for a vote at that meeting.

Provenance

The curriculum committee presentation and the board discussion appear in the meeting record; the transcript documents Theresa's presentation of the timeline and committee work and the board's decision to postpone the motion to April 10 (see provenance segments).

Ending

The district will provide the supplementary documentation requested by the board ahead of the April 10 meeting; the board postponed the approval vote to allow members time to review the materials and the committee's selection reasoning.