MSDE charrette spotlights early-warning tools, flexible scheduling to boost middle-grade outcomes

State education leaders on the evening charrette presented proposed flagship strategies to improve middle-grade outcomes and asked stakeholders to help prioritize them.

State Superintendent Mohammad Choudhary outlined the strategic-planning timeline and said the State Board and the Maryland Department of Education are moving into Phase 3 — attaching flagship strategies to the priorities and metrics established in earlier phases. “We set out to do strategic planning in November of 2021,” Choudhary said, and described Phase 1 (mission/vision/values), Phase 2 (metrics and goals) and Phase 3 (implementation strategies). He told participants the Blueprint involves a multi-year funding phase-in, saying the plan will invest “3.8 to be exact over the next 10 years” to phase up per-pupil allotments and other supports.

Why it matters: Choudhary emphasized middle school as a make-or-break period and cited statewide test results that shaped the discussion. He reported combined grade 6–8 English-language-arts proficiency of about 43 percent statewide and math proficiency of about 13 percent, noting wide local variation. “In math, not so pretty,” he said, adding that cohort analyses show ELA gains over time but declining math growth in middle grades.

Proposed flagship strategies: Choudhary presented six priority strategies the department is considering and asked attendees to prioritize four for public ranking. The chief proposals discussed were:
- A statewide early warning indicator system (AWS) that uses daily-updated, integrated student indicators (attendance, behavior, course performance) to identify at-risk students and trigger tiered interventions; Choudhary framed the ABC indicators as attendance, behavior and course credits, with attendance defined as below 90 percent and one example behavior trigger as one out-of-school suspension.
- Flexible or master scheduling that creates a common intervention block so students do not lose access to specials while receiving remediation or enrichment.
- Interdisciplinary/team teaching and common planning time so educators can coordinate supports for individual students across subjects.
- Expanded enrichment and advisory periods to support social-emotional learning and student engagement.

Community input and examples: Participants from multiple counties described on-the-ground barriers and local solutions. James Lamont of Howard County urged earlier, better tools to identify students’ needs; school counselors and principals stressed a lack of time and staff to pull students for intervention and warned that pullouts can remove students from engaging related-arts classes. Several educators described a dedicated intervention block used in some districts that synchronizes schedules across a grade level so personnel can be redeployed and both remediation and enrichment can occur concurrently.

Data and equity concerns: Choudhary highlighted disproportionate suspension rates in middle school for historically disciplined subgroups and the need for restorative approaches implemented with fidelity. He cited research (including work by Bob Balfanz) showing the ABCs' predictive power and said interventions must be rapid, monitored frequently, and modified when ineffective.

Public engagement and next steps: Facilitators ran a Slido ranking exercise during the session. Preliminary results reported at the close showed flexible scheduling top-ranked, followed by tools to identify at-risk students, supports for enrichment, and classroom/staffing organization. Organizers encouraged attendees to complete the strategic-plan survey (the survey had topped 30,000 responses and the presenters set a goal of 50,000) and said the input will inform Phase 3 of the strategic plan. No formal votes or policy actions were taken during the charrette.

Quotes that capture the discussion: “By tenth grade, all students are to be college and career ready,” Choudhary said in framing the Priority 3 goal. On the need for a system to flag students early, a participant summarized, “The earlier intervention is… the earlier we can identify the needs of our students, I think the better we’ll be.”

What remains unresolved: The charrette gathered preferences and local examples but did not adopt specific statewide policy language or a timeline for procurement and rollout of the proposed early warning system. The department will consider collected feedback as it refines flagship strategies in Phase 3 and publishes materials and Slido results on the strategic-plan website.