October 2026

What would student improvement goal setting look like if it began with the learning students need and gave educators room to choose meaningful ways to measure their growth? That question is at the center of Delaware’s Student Improvement Component (SIC) redesign.

The current SIC is being redesigned to create a more meaningful connection between student learning, instructional practice, and educator growth. At the heart of the redesign is a simple shift: identify a specific student learning goal based on evidence of need, then determine meaningful ways to measure progress and growth.

This year, 39 leaders across 15 schools are participating in the pilot from Brandywine, Milford, and Woodbridge school districts; Academia Charter School, Positive Outcomes Charter School, and Sussex Montessori School. Together, they are testing a goal-setting process designed to be credible, useful, fair, and practical. What they learn will help shape the guidance and supports for statewide implementation in 2027–28.

Learning Leader Digest will continue to connect this work to the priorities of the Delaware Department of Education’s 2025-2028 Strategic Plan. Its promise – Start with Students. Build for Impact. – captures what the SIC pilot is working toward: goals grounded in student needs that help educators make purposeful instructional decisions.

The new Student Improvement Component connects to Building Block 2: Safe, Supportive Schools by giving teachers and leaders a reason to discuss student needs and instructional next steps. It supports Building Block 3: Great Teaching and Learning by using student evidence to guide goals, instruction, and professional growth. And it advances Building Block 4: Fair Opportunities for Every Learner by allowing educators to choose goals and measures that fit their students and subjects.

The redesign aims to make student improvement more flexible, more meaningful, and more comparable: educators have room to select relevant goals, while clear quality criteria help make the process fair and consistent across Delaware.

Brandywine High School: Leading with Curiosity and Purpose

This month, we recognize the Brandywine High School staff, led by Principal Sterling Seemans and Assistant Principals Robert Holt, John Norton, Eryn Smith, and Jahsha Tabron, for volunteering to participate in the second year of Delaware’s Student Improvement Component (SIC) pilot.

The team is approaching student improvement goal setting with curiosity, care, and a forward-thinking mindset. School leaders are creating space for teachers to examine student data, identify what their students need, and develop goals that are meaningful for their classrooms. They are also bringing together district and state expertise, partnering with Brandywine’s instructional technology team and DDOE’s Digital Learning team to explore how AI can serve as a thought partner in the goal-setting process. The focus is on using AI intentionally to help educators draft, refine, and strengthen goals while keeping educator expertise and professional judgment at the center.

Just as valuable is the feedback Brandywine High School educators are providing to the Department. Their questions and experiences are helping us see how the process works in a high school setting and what needs to be clearer or better supported before statewide implementation. We appreciate their willingness to step forward, think creatively, and help build something better for educators and students across Delaware.

Know an educator doing great work? Nominate them to be spotlighted in a future issue by completing this nomination form. 

Start With the Student Need

In the SIC pilot, educators review student data and other evidence to identify strengths and needs. That evidence drives a conversation with their administrator about what students should learn or how they should grow. Together, they develop a goal that fits the students and the educator’s role, choose a way to measure progress, and define what success will look like.

They also decide when to review progress and how they’ll use the evidence to adjust their approach along the way. Pilot teams are helping us test whether this process produces goals that are credible, useful, fair, and practical—and what support educators will need for statewide implementation in 2027–28.

What Does This Look Like in Practice?

Illustrative third-grade example:

Data: Beginning-of-year responses show that 8 of 20 students can determine the main idea of an informational text and explain how key details support it.

Goal statement: Students will improve their ability to determine the main idea and explain how key details support it.

Measure: Students will read a grade-level informational text and write a response naming the main idea, recounting key details, and explaining how those details support it. Responses will be scored with a four-point rubric.

Success criterion: By January, at least 16 of the 20 students will score 3 or higher on the rubric.

Monitoring plan: Every two weeks, the teacher will review a new student response, track student progress on the rubric, and use the results to adjust instruction.

Timeline: From the start of the year through January.

Bring the Goal Back to Student Learning

During an existing check-in with a teacher or team, revisit a current student improvement goal and the evidence behind it. Ask: What does the evidence tell us students need? How will instruction respond? What student work or assessment results will we review next, and when? Agree on one follow-up point within the next 30 days.

Strategic Plan Connection

This challenge advances Building Block 2: Safe, Supportive Schools through collaborative instructional leadership; Building Block 3: Great Teaching and Learning through the use of student evidence to guide instruction; and Building Block 4: Fair Opportunities for Every Learner by focusing support on what students need.